Laserfiche WebLink
U.S. ARMY ENGINEER SACRAMENTO DISTRICT CORPS OF ENGINEERS <br /> DESIGN REVIEW COMMENTS Project: CA ARNG Site Investigations—Stockton AASF <br /> ❑ SITE DEV&GEO ❑ MECHANICAL ❑ SAFETY ❑ SYSTEMS ENG REVIEW Final Work Plan—Former USTs <br /> ❑ ENVIR PROT&UTIL ❑ MFG TECHNOLOGY ❑ ADV TECH ❑ VALUE ENG DATE 27 Julv 2007 <br /> 13 ARCHITECTURAL ❑ ELECTRICAL ❑ ESTIMATING ❑ OTHER <br /> ❑ STRUCTURAL ❑ INST&CONTROLS ❑ SPECIFICATIONS NAME Marcus Pierce—RWOC13 <br /> DRAWING NO. <br /> ITEM OR REFERENCE COMMENT ACTION <br /> 4. Page 9, Section The last sentence in this section is unclear and appears to refer to sampling This sentence should not have been included in the report <br /> 6.6 methods that are not discussed. Revise this sentence to identify which sampling and has been deleted. <br /> methods will be used if the HydroPunch technique is unsuccessful. <br /> 5. Page 9, Section This section states that"a trip blank,temperature blank, and equipment blank may Text in Section 6.7 has been revised as follows: "A trip <br /> 6.7 also be added to the list of QA/QC samples submitted for analysis, if applicable blank,temperature blank,and equipment blank will also <br /> during the field investigation." Please explain why these samples would not be be added to the list of QA/QC samples submitted for <br /> applicable or revise the Work Plan to state these samples will be collected. analysis.". <br /> I <br /> CESPK FORM 7 (Revised) PREVIOUS EDITIONS OF THIS FORM ARE OBSOLETE PAGE 4 OF 4 <br /> 15 Apr 89 <br />