Laserfiche WebLink
Review of the Response to Comments on the <br /> Draft Five-Year Review Report <br /> DDJC-Tracy Site, <br /> Tracy, California <br /> August 2005 <br /> The response to comment table provided electronically on August 2, 2005 was reviewed. Most <br /> of the responses concurred with the comments made by U.S. EPA and addressed all the concerns <br /> raised by the comments. Comments are included below for the exceptions. Review of the next <br /> revision of the DDJC-Tracy Five-Year Review Report (the Report) will be needed to verify that <br /> changes are appropriately incorporated. <br /> GENERAL COMMENTS <br /> 1. Response to General Comment 1: The response states that the summary form will be <br /> res ised to indicate that "remedial actions are being performed." The summary form <br /> should also clearly indicate that the type of this five-year review is "post-SARA", and the <br /> text should note that it is a statutory review. <br /> 2. Response to General Comment 3: The response does not fully address the comment <br /> because the signature page provided does not include a signature line for the Department <br /> of Defense (Dol)), as does a signature page for the ESD or ROD Amendment. The <br /> signature of the preparer could be moved to the title page as suggested by the Guidance. <br /> In the next revision of the Report, ensure that the signature page includes a signature line <br /> for DoD and that it follows the site-wide protectiveness statement. The signature line for <br /> U.S. EPA is as follows: <br /> U.S. Environmental Protection Agency <br /> Kathleen Johnson, Chief <br /> Federal Facilities and Site Cleanup Branch <br /> 3. Response to General Comment 4: The response indicates that Table ES-1 will be <br /> relocated but states that the last column will be deleted as indicated. The comment did <br /> not ask for the last column to be deleted as it provides useful information on actions <br /> needed at each side. It merely requested that the last column be modified so that the <br /> actions needed at each site are not identified from the delisting perspective. In the next <br /> revision of the Report, ensure that this table is revised as suggested in the comment. <br /> SPECIFIC COMMENTS <br /> 4. Response to Specific Comment 2: The response partially addresses the comment. The <br /> response indicates that the triggering action date and due date will be entered in the <br /> Summary Form. However, the response states that no further construction activities are <br /> 1 <br />