Laserfiche WebLink
Comments to <br /> Soil Quality Investigation Report <br /> Stockton Crosstown Freeway <br /> o The report fails to provide sufficient background <br /> information that links activities to potential areas of <br /> contamination. <br /> o The workshop needs to be addressed since contaminants could <br /> be either in the building or have released to soils beneath <br /> the building. For instance, spills have been observed below <br /> the degreasing unit. <br /> o The Surveillance and Enforcement report states there was <br /> standing oil. Was this located on the CalTrans Property? <br /> o The dirt piles were not located on the map. How were the <br /> piles generated? The piles need to be characterized to <br /> determine the level of contamination. <br /> o Using the PID is not acceptable for analyzing for volatile <br /> organic, although it is useful when screening for high <br /> levels of contamination. <br /> o TTLC' s are used to characterize hazardous waste and should <br /> not be applied as cleanup criteria. When residual <br /> contamination must be left in place, cleanup numbers need to <br /> be health based. <br /> o Soluble levels of lead are necessary to determine the <br /> mobility of the contamination as well as for disposal <br /> purposes. <br /> o While the levels for trichlorofluomethane are low for sample <br /> location 13 and 14 , this area requires additional <br /> investigation before assuming the solvent was a result of <br /> laboratory contaminant. <br /> o The sample arrangement appears to be based on a systematic <br /> approach. This is acceptable as long as all potential areas <br /> of contamination (observed as discolored soil) are also <br /> included in the sample plan. <br /> ! o Activities occurring after the sampling activity, such as <br /> storage of the rolloff dripping with oil, may require <br /> additional soil samples to be collected. <br /> 1 <br /> i <br /> 4 <br />