SITE INFORMATION AND CORRESPONDENCE_FILE 1

Home Browse Search

Mr. Steve Johnson July 1, 2005 Page 2 collected from areas that have not been impacted by agricultural or industrial chemicals. If other properties in the area have gone through similar site investigations, it may be possible to use data from these sites for establishing background metal' concentrations providing that soil types are compatible. This may only be done in consultation with the DTSC Project Manager. • The HERD memorandum indicates that Appendix B (Health and Safety Plan) should be reviewed by a DTSC IHSS professional. DTSC IHSS can review the Health and Safety Plan if requested. However, employers are responsible for providing a safe and healthy workplace, and for complying with applicable regulations. Please note that the Workplan prepared by MACTEC was not signed by either a California Professional Geologist or Professional Engineer as required by State statute and regulation. DTSC views the primary intent of the submitted report was to constitute a comprehensive Risk Assessment Workpian and that the supplemental site assessment was to support the RA. However, the supplemental site assessment should be reviewed, conducted and reported under either a California Professional Geologist or Professional Engineer as appropriate. A letter from the San Joaquin County Environmental Health Department (SJCEHD) dated May 5, 2005 provided information regarding groundwater impacts associated with the Site. Based on the May 5, 2005 letter, it appears that continued monitoring and additional investigation will be required by SJCEHD prior to Site "Closure" under their oversight. DTSC understands that American Forest Products Company (AFPC) is the responsible party for the former underground storage tanks and groundwater releases. However, the chemicals of concern being monitored in association with the groundwater impacts need to be addressed within the RA. Specifically, the sources to groundwater should be determined to establish they are not a health risk. Including the potential source of tetrachloroethene (PCE), that is undetermined. Additionally, a figure showing the groundwater monitoring well locations needs to be included to help establish contaminant source and impact areas. Again, in the professional opinion of MACTEC, "No Further Action" areas may mean that no further assessment work is needed, if the appropriate analytical data (data which meets the data quality objectives) is available. However, those areas still need to be addressed to the satisfaction of DTSC HERD. if you should have any questions