Over-Reliance on Expertise of Personnel

The District of Columbia was also concerned that the Remedial Investigation is dated June 1,1995, whereas the Record of Decision recommending no further action was first presented to the public on March 23,1995. This creates the appearance of a rush to judgment. The risk assessments did not include the FRA soil sample data. Moreover, there was no mention of the FPA s extremely high arsenic readings. Because the FPA and the Army analyzed different samples, not including the FPA data in the risk assessment for all chemicals was fundamentally flawed. 

A representative of the contractor on the Spring Valley site acknowledged to the District of Columbia on January 23,1997, that he was never told that they tested arsenicals at the site. The District was therefore concerned 

As previously mentioned, the background samples were taken too close to the test areas given that part of the concern is the deposition of chemical agent breakdown products (e.g., arsenic) settling out as the result of open air tests. Again, the District of Columbia was concerned that the contractor may have lacked complete information on the site prior to performing critical judgments. 

2 Concerns about Remaining Unexpioded Ordnance and Chemicai Containers 

---