PR0535342 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

LFR Inc. Sample Identification. According to Section 7.4.2 of the RAP, soil samples were to be labeled according the criteria presented in the RAP. However, several samples were collected that did not meet the specific criteria anticipated to be encountered in the field. For example, the sampling scheme was proposed for metals-affected soil only for tracking the number of samples collected from each burn pile area; however, often soil samples were collected in areas outside the burn pile areas (such as stockpiles) or in areas not identified until after the RAP was approved. Each sample was given a unique identification and was plotted on a scaled figure (as appropriate). Therefore, although the sample ID scheme was slightly different, the essence of the unique sampling ID was maintained throughout the project. Quality Assurance/Quality Control. According to Section 7.4.4 of the RAP, generally, one co-located sample will be collected for every 10 samples collected (i.e., 10 percent). Co-located samples were not collected during soil confirmation sampling due to the difficulty of acquiring two separate soil samples that are homogeneous. Analytical Methods. According to Section 7.4.5 of the RAP, "all soil samples will be analyzed by a California state-certified environmental laboratory for CAM-17 metals (antimony, arsenic, barium, beryllium, cadmium, chromium, cobalt, copper, lead, mercury, molybdenum, nickel, selenium, silver, thallium, vanadium, and zinc) by EPA Method 6010, or as appropriate. Soil samples visibly affected with pyrolytic oil, or collected from areas directly beneath locations where pyrolytic oil had been observed and removed, will be analyzed for SVOCs by EPA Method 8270 and VOCs by EPA Method 8260 in addition to CAM-17 metals." Soil samples in areas where metals-affected soil was removed were initially analyzed for CAM-17 metals. However, after multiple sampling results indicated that primarily zinc and sometimes lead concentrations were elevated, the sampling regime was reduced to zinc and lead only as a pragmatic measure. Likewise, in areas affected by pyrolytic oil, initially SVOCs, VOCs, and CAM-17 metals were analyzed, but based on preliminary results, the sampling regime was modified to include TPHd, TPHmo, SVOCs, and VOCs. Site Restoration. According to Section 7.5 of the RAP, the Site will be restored by grading exceedingly steep slopes and hydro-seeding where appropriate following future investigations and/or remediation. The Site was graded appropriately, but as discussed in Section 5.10 of this report, 1,000 pounds of dry grass seed was distributed across the Site rather than hydro-seeding. The grass seed was distributed on moist/wet soil during early January 2006. The grass took root and has been growing successfully across the Site. Burn Pile Area 14. BP14 was anticipated to contain metals-affected soil due to melted tires based on evaluation of aerial photographs. After conducting a field reconnaissance examination of BP14, it was determined that the area defined by BP14 was only a large tree shadow, and not a tire burn pile area. No soil samples were collected from BP14 and no further investigation at BP14 is warranted. rpt-RA—summ-Nov06-final-09025 Page 35