SITE INFORMATION AND CORRESPONDENCE

Home Browse Search

would not work with the soils in the North Depot Soils Area. The total cost associated with the entire ESD process and subsequent remedial action would be a more appropriate value to compare against the original cost estimate for the asphalt cap. Please provide the requested information, in addition to the numerous additional other cost discussions required by the Guidance in Section VIII, Summary of Project Costs, and Appendix A, Cost and Performance Summary, in the next version of this Remedial Action Report. 8. Section 8.0, References, Page 8-1: The ESD is referenced for a detailed discussion of institutional controls, but the Remedial Action Report should also reference the Final Remedial Action Report for Institutional Controls at SWMUs 7 and 33, Building 30 Drum Storage Area, and the Northern Depot Soils Area(Radian International,July 2000). Please add this reference to Section 8 and cite it where appropriate in the next version of this Remedial Action Report. 9. Figure 2-2,DSERTS 67 Pre-Construction,Site Layout: The boundary of the Northern Depot Soils Area is not defined or,&beled on Figure 2-2. Please clarify the pre- construction site layout by illustrating the DSERTS 67 boundary. 10. Appendix A, Field Work Variances: Field Work Variances 70559-005, 70559-006, 70559-007, and 70559-008 were initiated for the remedial action and are presented in Appendix A. Field Work Variances 70559-007 and-008 do not have the approval signature from an appropriate U.S. Arany Corps of Engineers representative. None of the four variances bear an approval signature of a regulatory representative. Please provide copies of the field work variances that have all required approval signatures in the next version of the Remedial Action Report, or alternatively,provide a discussion that clarifies which signatures were necessary for approval of the variances. 3