2.
Response
to
Comments
2.9
Individual
Responses
to
Comments
from
Organizations
authority
for
remediation
of
has
not
approved
any
specific
remediation
technologies
to
date.
The
text
in
the
Draft
EIR
referred
to
in
this
comment
makes
no
reference
to
any
regulatory
approvals
other
than
an
interim
approval
from
the
RWQCB
in
2004.
The
Draft
EIR
also
clearly
indicates
that
because
the
currently
proposed
land
uses
differ
from
those
proposed
in
2004,
alternative
remedial
measures
are
being
considered,
and
will
be
finalized
in
a
remedial
action
plan.
Such
a
remedial
action
plan
will
require
review
and
approval
by
the
RWQCB,
which
has
regulatory
authority
for
such
remediation.
Mitigation
Measure
4.G-2a
ensures
that
the
remedial
action
plan
will
be
reviewed
and
approved
by
the
RWQCB,
setting
remediation
objectives
that
the
RWQCB
will
ensure
are
met
prior
to
initiation
of
physical
development.
Potential
remedial
activities
that
may
be
considered
by
the
RWQCB
are
described
in
Draft
EIR
Section
4.G.
No
factual
basis
is
provided
in
this
comment
to
support
the
stated
opinions
that
more
studies
of
groundwater
are
required
or
that
the
area
in
question
“may
act
differently”
than
other
areas
of
the
landfill
due
to
differences
in
depth.
See
for
discussion
of
the
adequacy
of
site
characterization
for
use
in
the
Draft
EIR.
Title
27
closure
of
the
portion
of
the
landfill
within
the
Recology
site,
including
methane
collection
and
extraction
and
vapor
intrusion
mitigation
to
protect
future
buildings
will
be
required.
See
for
discussion
of
the
adequacy
of
existing
hazardous
materials
studies
for
use
in
the
Brisbane
Baylands
EIR.
The
investigations
of
soil
and
groundwater
at
the
Recology
Solid
Waste
Transfer
Facility
portion
of
the
site
focused
on
the
release
of
TPH
to
the
media
from
the
seven
former
underground
storage
tanks
that
were
removed
in
the
mid-1990s.
Current
remedial
activities
consist
of
extracting
free
product
from
the
groundwater.
No
data
is
provided
to
support
the
opinions
stated
in
this
comment.
A
database
search
for
hazardous
sites
in
the
site
vicinity
was
conducted
and
the
results
are
summarized
on
pages
4.G-55
through
4.G-65.
No
violations
by
the
San
Francisco
household
hazardous
waste
facility
were
determined
to
exist.
Mitigation
Measure
4.G-2a
requiring
compliance
with
remediation
objectives
prior
to
initiating
development
will
apply
equally
to
all
portions
of
the
landfill,
including
the
portion
owned
by
Recology,
and
will
ensure
that
impacts
will
be
reduced
to
less
than
significant
levels.
See
for
discussion
of
the
adequacy
of
existing
hazardous
materials
studies
for
use
in
the
Brisbane
Baylands
EIR.
Brisbane
Baylands
Final
EIR
2.9.1-54
May
2015