Laserfiche WebLink
t 46, <br /> MEMORANDUM! <br /> TO., ED PADILLA, UNIT II <br /> FROM! LAURIE COTULLAr UNIT IV <br /> DATE: APRIL 9r 1990 <br /> RE: CONTAMINATED SOIL TREATMENT/HANDLING <br /> FORWARD LANDFILL <br /> I reviewed the Analytical Results for contaminated soil accepted at <br /> Forward Landfill during the 4th quarter of 1989. <br /> The following are my comments on initial review. <br /> 1) The form used by . Forward does not require identification of the <br /> generating facility site address. This should be required in order <br /> to verify the source location. <br /> 2) There is also no address indicated for the generating company. Since <br /> this is often different from the generating facility address, it is <br /> important to have this information in case it is necessary to send <br /> correspondence to the generator. <br /> 3) With regard the particular analytical results submitted for the 4th <br /> quarter of 1989, it is curious that the laboratory samples were <br /> collected and analyzed in February and from apparent soil borings <br /> and the material was received by Forward in September (200-300 c . y . ) . <br /> We would suggest that a properly completed chain of custody form be <br /> submitted along with any laboratory samples. A description should <br /> also be provided on how samples were collected and whether composite <br /> sampling was done. This would greatly influence interpretation of <br /> the analytical results. <br /> I talked to APCD about their regulation of the soil treatment at Forward <br /> and they indicated they were not aware of this particular batch of soil. <br /> I think a form should be developed which EH, APCD and possibly RWQCB could <br /> sign off on, or some other type of coordination. <br /> As we dicussed on Friday, it is important that someone review the <br /> confirmation sampling performed after treatment if this is a condition of <br /> use as landfill covert <br /> SOIL.FRM <br /> 4/9/90 <br />