Laserfiche WebLink
Review of the Response to Comments on the Memorandum <br /> Results Summary for Simulations of 11 Scenarios with <br /> DDJC-Sharpe Groundwater Flow Model <br /> DDJC Sharpe Site, Lathrop, California <br /> September 2006 <br /> GENERAL COMMENT <br /> Response to General Comment 1: The response appears to address half of the comment; <br /> however, the definition for containment is not fully understood. It is stated that"Containment <br /> refers to the conditions under which groundwater with VOC concentrations exceeding aquifer <br /> cleanup levels will not continue to migrate indefinitely away from DDJC-Sharpe." It is not <br /> understood why "indefinitely away from DDJC-Sharpe." is included in the definition for <br /> containment. According to the Remedial Investigation/Feasibility Study at DDR W-Sharpe Site <br /> Record of Decision Operable Unit I (USATHAMA, 1993) on page 41, one of the primary <br /> objectives of the remedial action for groundwater is"to mitigate potential long-term <br /> contamination migration". Please consider removing "indefinitely away from DDJC-Sharpe." <br /> from the definition of containment for this Memorandum or explain why the definition of <br /> containment is so qualified. <br /> SPECIFIC COMMENTS <br /> Response to Specific Comment 1: The response appears to address the comment. <br /> Response to Specific Comment 2: The response appears to address the comment, however, not <br /> all the quoted text from the response was placed in the Memorandum. The last sentence in the <br /> response states both"capture/containment must be evaluated"but the text in the Memorandum <br /> only states "capture must be evaluated." Please be consistent with what the response states and <br /> what is placed in the text of the Memorandum. <br /> Response to Specific Comments 3: The response appears to address the comment. <br /> Response to Specific Comments 4: The response appears to address the comment. <br /> Response to Specific Comment 5: The response appears to address the comment, however, not <br /> all the quoted text from the response was placed in the Memorandum. The last part of the <br /> sentence in the response "and the path of that particle appears to trend toward capture at EWC4." <br /> was not found in the text of the Memorandum. Please resolve this discrepancy. <br /> Response to Specific Comment 6: The response appears to address the comment. <br /> Response to Specific Comment 7: The response appears to address most of the comment. <br /> However, in Figure 32 (Scenario 8, Layer 2, Central Area) one particle is not"originating from <br /> 1 <br />