Interagency Coordinating Committee (ICC) mtg minutes, 3/25 ... · Technicolor in North Hollywood,...
57
POOR LEGIBILITY ONE OR MORE PAGES IN THIS DOCUMENT ARE DIFFICULT TO READ DUE TO THE QUALITY OF THE ORIGINAL
Transcript of Interagency Coordinating Committee (ICC) mtg minutes, 3/25 ... · Technicolor in North Hollywood,...
POOR LEGIBILITY
ONE OR MORE PAGES IN THIS DOCUMENT ARE DIFFICULT TO READDUE TO THE QUALITY OF THE ORIGINAL
"^ ' M^SFUND RECORDS CTR
~""~ "! SFUND RECORDS CTR
INTERAGENCY COORDINATING COMMITTEE 88134299
for Implementation of the Groundwater Quality Management Plan
San Fernando Valley Basin
MEETING MINUTES
March 25, 1986
The Interagency Coordinating Committee (ICC) held its regularmeeting at 9:30 a.m. on Tuesday, March 25, 1986, in Room 1571 ofthe Los Angeles Department of Water and Power (LADWP) General OfficeBuilding. Mr. Laurent McReynolds, Chairman of the ICC, conductedthe meeting. The meeting agenda and attendance list are attached(Attachments 1 and 2 ) .
II. APPROVAL OF MINUTES
Minutes of the January 21, 1986 meeting were approvedafter several corrections were noted by the Committee members.These corrections were made and the minutes will be reissued.
III. PROGRESS REPORT OF SUBCOMMITTEE ACTIVITIES
A. Public Education Program; W. Zeisl (LADWP)
W. Zeisl reviewed the Groundwater brochure and theNorth Hollywood/Burbank Aeration Facility Background brochurewhich were mailed to Committee members prior to the meeting.All requests for copies of these brochures for use as publiceducation material should be directed to W. Zeisl.
Another program under development is an educational programfor email businesses. The program is under the direction of theCalifornia Safety Council and is being coordinated by CaliforniaPartnerships. Tentatively scheduled are several 4 to 6 hourseminars for small businesses dealing with the problems of hazardouswastes. The first seminar is set for late May in the North Hollywoodarea. This program may eventually become statewide. The initialcost of $25,000 has been provided in part by ARCO, Southern CaliforniaEdison, Los Angeles County, Los Angeles City Department of PublicWorks (Bureau of Sanitation) and the Department of Water and Power.
B. Regulations of Private Disposal Systems! R. Van Ark
(LA Bur/Eng)
The Los Angeles Bureau of Sanitation (Bur/San) has -completeda field survey of 2,800 addresses that have no record of a sewerconnection. Thus far, 1,500 have been logged into the Bur/Sancomputer system. About 30% of these parcels were found to be
00060
n
- 2 -
vacant lots, parking lots, deserted buildings, etc. or werealready connected to sewers. The remaining 70% will be informedof the Private Sewage Disposal System (PSDS) program and will begiven an opportunity to respond to the requirements. P. Aliwalas(Bur/San) reported difficulties in finding the legal owners ofsome parcels. The Bur/San is presently manually checking recordsto determine land ownership.
R. Van Ark discussed the minutes of the January 29 subcommitteemeeting on PSDS (Attachment 3). At the meeting the subcommitteedecided to resample the original 12 PSDS locations sampled by theLADWP as possible sources of contamination. Three of these sourceswere no longer in business. Two others, found to contain trace amountsof VOCs in the septic tanks, were issued notices to pump immediatelyand were required to provide waste manifests showing disposal ata hazardous waste site. In addition they were required within 10days to notify the Bur/San on future plans to prevent the reoccurrenceof contamination in their PSDS. One other location, a gas station,has connected to the sewer since the initial survey was conducted.The remaining locations were not found to contain any VOCs.
C. Regulation of Storage Tanks, Sumps, and Pipelines;
J. Hall (LAFD)
J. Hall reviewed the minutes of the last subcommittee meeting(Attachment 4). Be reported on the 3-year program to implementthe guidelines for underground storage tanks (UST) and thesubsequent report due at the end of the 1986 to the State Departmentof Health Services (DOHS). The subcommittee will meet with theRegional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) to discuss a Memorandumof Understanding. A hearing regarding hazardous liquid pipelineswas announced for April 21, 1986.
Since the State DOHS guidelines for cleaning UST have not beenissued, the county engineers are currently drafting requirementsfor UST cleaning and dismantling. However, there are still noclear guidelines of how or where to dispose of these tanks oncethey are removed from the ground.
Current monitoring requirements for the average tank ownerincludes continuous electronic monitoring for motor fuel, monitoring'wells, and'vadose monitoring if appropriate. Of the 9,000facilities identified within the City of Los Angeles, over.1,000facilities have complied with the monitoring requirement. Althoughthe Fire Department has tried to use the State identified tank list,there have been problems. The list is grouped according to zipcodeswhich do not distinguish city and county boundaries. Thisseparation is being done manually. A completed list should beavailable in 12 months and will identify unlisted/unregisteredtanks according to the Cortese Bill (AB 3901). These facilitieswill be notified of the requirements that are expected of them.This is a three-year program in which the first year will be used
In- - 3 -
to gather data/ the second year to identify all tanks and thethird year to enforce compliance. It is believed that 100%compliance will be achieved.
H. Yacoub (RWQCB) inquired about LADWP's own undergroundtank inventory. Thus far, the LADWP has reduced the number oftanks in use by 1/3 to 1/2. However, contracting for the removalof tanks has been difficult. J. Hall commended the LADWP on itsconsistency and follow-through of the monitoring of its undergroundtanks.
Rockwell International has completed its on-site assessment.The RWQCB has issued a letter to Rockwell concerning its off-siteassessment and interim clean-up plan for its leaking USTs. TheRWQCB has approved the Phase II site assessment for Centralab.Their groundwater clean-up plan is due by April 18. Othercontamination cases resulting from leaky USTs in the San FernandoValley include Lockheed in Burbank, Riker Labs in Northridge,Technicolor in North Hollywood, and Universal Studios inUniversal City.
H. Yacoub also distributed three items of general interest:1) the latest State underground tank program summary by county,2) Lockheed press release on their groundwater monitoring plan, and3) letter to Rocketdyne on the Scope of Work plan for their siteassessment program. (Attachments 5, 6, 7, respectively)
D. Regulation of Landfills, Groundwater Monitoring Program;G. Coufal (LADWP)
Landfills
Monitoring continues at several of the landfills in theSan Fernando Valley. The RWQCB has requested additional monitoringof all wells in and around the Sheldon-Arleta landfill. Thisrequirement stems .in part from the requirements of the Calderonbill (AB 3525) in which the Sheldon-Arleta landfill is listed.The solid waste assessment (SWAT) report is due by January 1, 1987.The requirements of AB 3525 and the guidelines for the SWATreports were distributed by R. Humphreys (Bur/San) (Attachment 8).
The result of the Condensate Redisposal Evaluation Programrevealed that condensates can be very-hazardous. High levels ofacetone, benzene and toluene have been detected in Class II landfillcondensates. The RWQCB has recommended halting reinjectionpractices at three sites. It may become necessary to disposeof these condensates at dump sites that can accept liquid hazardouswastes.
The design report for the Bradley West Extension Landfill hasbeen approved by both the RWQCB and the Los Angeles County SolidWaste Management committee.
n- -' The drilling of the observation wells at the Forest Lawn
landfill has commenced and will be completed in a few weeks.
The State DOHS has given site approval for five new wellsto be located in the Rinaldi-Toluca Power Transmission Right-of-Way.Drilling was initiated by the contractor Lane Western, and-shouldbe completed in a few weeks.
The contractor for the packer project will begin work onthe 13 North Hollywood wells in a few weeks.
AB 1803 Groundwater Monitoring Program
The State Department of Health Services has prepared a routinemonitoring program for wells in the San Fernando and Sylmar Basinsas required by the AB 1803 program. The LADWP will implement themonitoring programs after reviewing the details of the plan.
E. Aquifer Management and Groundwater Treatment Program;G. Coufal (LADWP)
The reports were covered elsewhere in the minutes.
IV. SUPERFUND STATUS - SFV BASIN
A. Remedial Investigation/Feasibility Study: P. Cleary (US EPA)
P. Cleary reported that Congress has approved a two-month,$150 million extension to the Superfund Program which will carrythe program through May 1986. From that fund, $1 million is beingrequested for the SFVB.
On March 13, EPA mailed the Cooperative Agreement to the LADWP.The LADWP Board of Commissioners has authorized $300,000 as advancedmatch to begin the Remedial Investigation. With the additional,initial $1 million, there should be sufficient funding to carrythe study through the first year. It is believed that Congresswill reauthorize the Superfund Program in the meantime. Anyamendments to the Cooperative Agreement will include any amendmentsto Superfund. R. Van Orden (LADWP) reported that a contractor hasbeen selected and negotiations are in progress at this time.
B. North Hollywood/Burbarik Aeration Facility; J. Enzmann (LADWP)
On January 10, the LADWP submitted a model of emissions anda health risk assessment report to the South Coast Air QualityManagement District (SCAPMD). The SCAQMD forwarded the reportsto the State DOHS on January 21 for their evaluation. The StateDOHS replied to SCAQMD by requesting additional informationdetailed with such items as concentration isopleths, water quality,and population data. The LADWP submitted a response package onMarch 7 using the latest revised EPA risk values. The StateDOHS is currently reviewing the information.
rr
- 5 -
The SCAQMD cancelled the February 4 public hearing on theaeration facility and does not plan to reschedule until theState DOES finishes its evaluations.
On January 31, a Draft Environmental Initial Study was issuedby the LADWP for comments from regulatory agencies. The reportwill be redrafted when all comments have been received. The LADWPplans to file a Negative Declaration for the proposed project.
H. Yacoub reported that the SCAQMD has received 90 applicationsstatewide for aeration facilities from industrial facilities.Rockwell International plans to use a combined aeration and carbonabsorption process for their cleanup.
C. Community Relations Plan; T. Vendlinski (US EPA)
T. Vendlinski made available more copies of the CommunityRelations Plan for the San Fernando Valley. He and S. Tanaka(LADWP) will be working together on a fact sheet describing theRemedial Investigation. The fact sheet will define thecontamination in the SFV, the Superfund process and the stepsthat will be taken to mitigate the problem. Two general publicmeetings are tentatively being scheduled to coincide with thestart-up of Superfund activities.
D. Status of Citizen's Advisory Committee; T. Vendlinski(US EPA)
T. Vendlinski suggested that the committee be renamed tothe "Citizens Participation Group" since an advisory committeeis a more formal and technical distinction that would be undera different authority than the EPA. He would like to see thisgroup established when the Remedial Investigation begins.
NEW BUSINESS
There was no new business.
VI. ADJOURNMENT
The meeting adjourned at 12 noon. The next meeting datewas set for May 13, 1986 at 9:30 a.m. in Room 1571 of theLos Angeles Department of Water and Power General Office Building.
r (mt!57)
r
REVISED 3/25/86
INTERAGENCY COORDINATING COMMITTEEGROUNDWATER QUALITY MANAGEMENT PLAN
SAN FERNANDO VALLEY BASIN(GWQMP-SFVB)
MEETING MINUTESJanuary 21, 1986
The Interagency Coordinating Committee (ICC) held itsregular meeting at 9:30 a.m. on Tuesday, January 21, 1986, inRoom 1571 of the Los Angeles Department of Water and Power (LADWP)General Office Building. Mr. Dale Kile of the City of Burbank wasacting Chairman. The meeting agenda and attendance list areattached (Attachments 1 and 2).
An announcement was made that Mr. Norm Koontz, the ICCrepresentative from the City of Glendale, had recently passedaway.
II. Approval of Minutes.
The minutes for the last meeting were reviewed and thefollowing corrections were made:
Section B. Delete East in paragraph 1. Program coversentire Valley.
Section E, paragraph 1; insert "by telephone" beforeinformation.
[; Section F; M. Blevins was seeking a verbal agreementwith the parties involved. He was not writing an amendment.
n
n
nn
Article IV paragraph 2; Judith Ayres is RegionalAdministrator, not contractor.
Clarification: Information was requested by MWD butnot at the meeting.
_ III. Progress Report of Subcommittee Activities
A. Public Education Program; M. Gensemer (SCAG)
W. Zeisl reported that this subcommittee has finishedthe design of the public informational brochure. It will beprinted within a month's time. Copies of the brochure willbe circulated to ICC members prior to public distribution.
B. Regulation of Private Sewage Disposal Systems;R. Van Ark (LA Bur/Eng)
R. Humphreys passed out one updated set of threesanitation fact sheets previously distributed. (Attachments 3, 4and 5). An additional fact sheet pertaining to private sewagedisposal systems was also handed out. (Attachment 6) Therewas some discussion on a "toxic squad" enforcement unit forhook-up requirements.
R. Van Ark reported that the Public Works Section isdeveloping working procedures for sewer connection requirementsfor small businesses. The first notice to the public requiringsewer connection will be mailed in April 1986.
The Crescenta Valley County Water District has hadsuccess with its sewer connection program. Only 45 of 5,800properties still need to be connected to sewer lines. The problemnow is lack of plumbers for main hookup. One hundred percentcompliance is expected by end of March 1986.
The sewer construction program is moving along slowlydue to a manpower shortage and. City requirements. At the presentrate of progress, the construction program will not meet itsoriginal completion date of 1991.
The question was asked, "Are Private Sewage DisposalSystems routinely monitored?" R. Van Ark was not aware of anymonitoring, although he has heard of initial studies conducted bythe LADWP that showed positive results. Nothing on a regularbasis is currently being conducted.
R. Van Ark was asked to bring Carl Tripp (Bureau ofSanitation) to the next ICC meeting to address the issue ofillegal dumping and the timetables for this subject. -Anadditional meeting will be held with the RWQCB prior to the nextICC meeting and results will be reported at the next ICC meeting.
R. Humphreys commented that there are only 20 inspectorsavailable citywide and that illegal dumpers will dump regardlessof enforcement procedures.
• "H. Yacoub .added the concern that we have a 3-4 year lagtime between design and construction and that something should bedone in the meantime. He believes interested parties shouldgather to discuss the scope and extent of this problem and decideon a plan of action, be it a monitoring program or something else.
The Interagency Coordinating Committee went on record tostrongly support and recommend the hiring of additional personnelto expedite the scoping and design of the sewer projects and todevelop a self-monitoring program.
C. Regulation of Underground Storage Tanks;W. Lebeck (LAFD)
There was no report from this subcommittee.
D. Small Quantity Generator Hazardous Waste Disposal Program;M. Gensemer (SCAG)
Subcommittee disbanded - No further reports.
E. Regulation of Landfills, Groundwater Monitoring Program;M. Blevins (LADWP)
P. Rogalsky reported on Sheldon-Arleta Landfilldevelopments. The LADWP has provided information it has onspreading operations at Tujunga Spreading Grounds to the RWQCB.
LADWP received a request by the Los Angeles FloodControl District to use land near the Pendleton Landfill forspreading operations. There is no objection from LADWP WaterQuality Division due to any foreseeable impact on water quality.
Centralab, Lockheed, and Rocketdyne will be submittingupdated reports to RWQCB on their groundwater monitoring programs.
The Assembly Bill 3525 by Calderon was passed. Itrequires all landfills statewide to be ranked each year due totheir probable impact on water quality. The Sheldon-Arletalandfill is one of 150 Rank One Landfills on the 1986 List.
H. Yacoub reported further on the Calderon Bill whichencompasses statewide ranking of landfills, comprehensive siteassessment reporting and developing remedial action plans.
A memorandum of understanding (MOU) between the RWQCBand the Ventura County Health Department regarding undergroundtanks was circulated (Attachment 7) . This agreement isconceptual. Six cities are targeted for similar agreements. TheRWQCB would like to develop similar agreements with the cities ofLos Angeles and Long Beach. The Ventura MOU has been under reviewfor the past month by Los Angeles County Department of Public Works.
.!•
• The goal of the MOD is to give guidance to cities untilnumerical standards are developed statewide. The target date isJune 1986 for the development of these agreements.
A second handout by the RWQCB (Attachment 8) reports onthe status of underground storage tanks. These findings will bereported at the January 27, 1986 board meeting. The handoutincludes a section on RWQCB achievements in the area of under-ground tank operations since October of 1983.
H. Yacoub pointed out that the RWQCB has responsibilityfor groundwater contamination problems. Soil contamination thatthreaten groundwater quality falls within its jurisdiction. Minorspills are to be dealt with locally.
The RWQCB is trying to formulate numerical standards tohelp cities regulate underground tanks. The standards will beopen to public inquiry and comments.
F. Aquifer Management and Groundwater Treatment Program;P. Rogalsky (LADWP)
P. Rogalsky reported that LADWP is continuingdevelopment of the Rinaldi-Toluca well field. One newly developedwell has shown good water quality.
The LADWP has received 3 bids on contracts to install wellpackers. The contract will be awarded soon. The State DOHS madea verbal request for further information on the proposal toinstall well packers.
M. Blevins has had a discussion with Judge Foster andother parties in the SFVB and has reached a verbal agreement toallow pumping and clean-up operations to proceed.
IV. Superfund Status; P. Cleary (US EPA), B. Straub (LADWP)
North Hollywood/Burbank Aeration Facility; J. Enzmann (LADWP)
The North Hollywood/Burbank Aeration facility will needtwo new permits. The permits concern water treatment facilitiesand air pollution requirements. Water Quality Division has agreedto assist J. Enzmann in obtaining the necessary permits from theState DOHS.
Design work by James M. Montgomery/ Consulting Engineers(JMM), has been 70% completed. This past December, JMM's preliminarydesign drawings were reviewed by LADWP Water Engineering DesignDivision. LADWP Water Operating Division began design of thecollector line. Well drilling specifications are now beingprepared.
_**"
•' The LADWP held a public workshop conducted on November26, 1985 on the Aeration Project. Of the 60 people attending,about 20 were thought to be residents. The rest were media,special interest groups, and public representatives. The mainissues of concern were health effects, health risks, andalternative technologies.
A petition with 43 signatures of local residents thatopposed the Aeration Facility was presented at the workshop. Oneletter has been received in support of LADWP policy and two otherswere received from people who wanted further information.
rr
' AQMD has received eight letters requesting a publichearing on the Aeration Project. The hearing is tentativelyscheduled for February 4, at 6:30 p.m. in North Hollywood.
D. Kile requested that a memo or letter with thespecific information on the upcoming hearing be sent to allCommittee members. The LADWP will prepare a Negative Declarationrather than a Categorical Exemption for this new site.
Remedial Investigation/Feasibility Study
P. Cleary reported that a cooperative agreement betweenthe LADWP and EPA should be finalized soon.
The EPA is about to send out evaluations for "fasttrack". There is enough information so far to justify anaccelerated plan for the San Fernando Valley.
Community Relations Plan
The Community Relations Plan for the San Fernando ValleyBasin Site has been finalized. T. Vendlinski introduced the planby talking briefly on its three main goals - to inform, to involve,and to influence. These three steps should eliminate delays inimplementing the clean-up operation by involving the community inthe process. For a copy of the report, write to Ms. PatriciaCleary or Mr. Timothy Vendlinski at 215 Fremont Street,San Francisco, California 94105.
V. EPA proposed VOC regulations.
The LADWP distributed two handouts on proposed VOCregulations (Attachments 9 and 10).
VI. New Business
There was no new business.
VII. Next Meeting
The next ICC meeting will be Tuesday, March 25, 1986,9:30 a.m. in Room 1571 at the LADWP General Office Building.
r
ATTACHMENT 1
INTERAGENCY COORDINATING COMMITTEEFor Implementation of the
Groundwater Quality Management PlanSan Fernando Valley Basin
AGENDA
Date: March 25, 1986Time: 9:30 a.m.Place: Los Angeles Department of Water and Power
111 North Hope Street, Room 1571Los Angeles, CA 90012
I Introductions
II Approval of Minutes
III Progress Report of Subcommittee Activities
A. Public Education Program Miriam Gensemer
B. Regulation of Private Disposal Robert Van ArkSystems
o Report on meetings with Bureau ofSanitation and RWQCB
C. Regulation of Storage Tanks, Sumps, William Lebeckand Pipelines
D. Regulation of Landfills, Ground- Mel Blevinswater Monitoring Program
E. Aquifer Management and Groundwater Laurent McReynoldsTreatment Program
IV Superfund Status - SFV Basin
A. Remedial Investigation/Feasibility Study' Patti Cleary
B. North Eollywood/Burbank Aeration Facility Ernie Wong
C. Community Relations Plan Patti Cleary
D. Status of Citizen's Advisory Committee
V New Business
VI Next Meeting Date May 13, 1986
Time 9:30 a.m.
Room 1571
ATTACHMENT 3
-N
r
r
MINUTES
REGULATION OF PRIVATE SEWAGE DISPOSAL SYSTEM'SSubcommittee to the Interagency Coordinator Committee
Subcommittee Meeting - January 29 1986
Chairman: Robert J. Van Ark
General Topic: MONITORING PSDS's
GWQMP - SFVB Recommendation No.2
Van Ark referred to the July 1983 DWP GWQMP-SFVB Report:
Section 3.2.1.2 Required Action (in part) page 22.
1. Inspection and monitoring of the effluent discharging from
these-(identified) PSDS16 should be conducted to thoroughly
assess the impact of each PSDS site on groundwater quality
during the phase out of these systems.
Section 3.2.3.1 Recommended Actions (in part) page 24.
2. Provisions should be made for regular testing of PSDS/'
.*
effluents to insure the proper utilization of the PSDS.
ATTACHMENT 2
ICC MEETING ATTENDANCEMarch 25, 1986
NAME
Dale KileStephen BergerHank Yacoub
Mike HopkinsMark NeelyJonathan HallRon MaranoCarol Kawamoto
Ray Marsden
James AcevedoBaldwin TomTom BradyPatti ClearyTim VendlinskiPublic AliwalasJohn IvascynRichard HumphreysSteve TakahashiRobert Van ArkTom GibsonArt Van OrdenSandra TanakaWalter ZeislJeff DobrowolskiMelinda ThunJoe EnzmannPete RogalskyJim KingGene CoufalErnest WongArt Saginian
Ken KasnerLaurent McReynolds
AFFILIATION
City of BurbankLA County Dept. Public WorksLA Regional Water Quality
Control BoardCity of GlendaleState DOHS, Toxics DivisionLA City, Fire DepartmentLA City, Fire DepartmentLA Regional Water Quality
Control BoardCrescenta Valley County Water
DistrictAssemblyman Richard Katz's OfficeLA County Haz. Waste & OccupationLA councilman Braude's OfficeEPA/SuperfundEPA/Super fundCity of L.A.-SanitationMetropolitan Water DistrictCity of L.A.-SanitationState DOHS, Sanitary EngineeringCity of L.A.-EngineeringLADWP - WQDLADWP - DesignLADWP - Public AffairsLADWP - Public AffairsLADWP - WQDLADWP - WQDLADWP - Wedd Water PlanningLADWP - Aqueduct DivisionLADWP - WQDLADWP - Aqueduct DivisionLADWP - WEDDLADWP - Environemtnal
and Governmental AffairsLADWP - WQDLADWP Water Executive Office
Industrial Waste Control Ordinance No. 157676
Los Angeles Municipal Code Section 64.30 B.3 has been in effect
since June 12, 1983 and states in part:
"No commercial or industrial facility which maintains, uses or
disposes to a private sewage disposal system,..., shall dis-
charge wastewater to said system without an Industrial Waste-
water Permit".
Carl Tripp stated 111 Industrial Waste PSDS permits have been
issued in the 7 zip codes areas of North Hollywood (91601, 2, 4, 5,
6, 7, and 8) with most in 91605. These 111 PSDS's receive only
domestic wastewater and are not fcnown to receive any industrial
wastewater. These 111 PSDS's were discovered during a door to
door survey performed in 1983 based on the Industrial Waste
Control Ordinance and concern over groundwater contamination DWP
discovered in their wells in that area.
Private Sewage Disposal System Abandonment Ordinance No. 160388
This ordinance which became effective in October 21, 1985 amended
r-| L.A.M.C. Sec 64.30 B.3 so that it now reads in part:
"No person who owns, uses or maintains a private sewage disposal
p system shall cause the discharge of industrial wastewater to
said "system without an Industrial Wastewater Permit".nBecause of this amended code section, the 111 PSDS Permits are
I now being maintained on a no fee basis. Any new PSDS permits will
— be issued at no fee. It is the position of the Industrial Waste
^ L^ Section of the Bureau of Sanitation that industrial wastewater
f should not be discharged to a PSDA and no permit is or will be
n -2-
issued to do BO unless the State RWQCB gives permission or indi-
•s cates in writing that they are not concerned about a specific
industrial waste discharge to the underground.
Ordinance No. 160388 also amended L.A.M.C. Sec. 64.25, Investi-
gation On Private Property, by adding subparagraph (g). This
section as amended reads in part as follows:
"The Board of Public Works or any of its authorized represen-
tatives may make such inspections or investigations as said
Board deems necessary at any reasonable time, in any building,
premises or lot for any of the purposes set forth in this
section . No person .shall interfere with, prevent or refuse
to permit the entry of said Board or any of its authorized
representatives into or upon any building, premises or lot for
^ any of the purposes set forth in this section
(g) To locate, inspect, test, and sample the discharges to,
from and within a PSDS.
Carl Tripp indicated sampling by Sanitation is not routinely done.
All PSDS permits are reviewed once a year for inspection andr-»[ questioning. Subsequent sampling or testing is done where it
p, appears warranted. No sampling or testing has been deemed necces-
*• • sary or warranted to date through the routine inspections. They
r considered these discharges sanitary sewage only.
p The Bureau of Engineering had identified approximately 3500 in-
dustrial and commercial properties where sewer house connection
f permits have not been issued to connect to the public sewer. 2800V ->
l*1*" ! of these had sewers available and 700 did not have sewers avaiable.
Hank Yacoub asked why there was such a varience between the 2800
s plus 700 VS. the 111 PSDS permits issued.
Van Ark indicated the 3500 properties covered the entire San
Fernando Valley and were determined from Y-Maps, District Maps
and Zoning Maps only, without searching ownership records or
field investigation. Some of these properties may be vacant or
parking lots or in some other way not in need of a sewer con-
nection. Others may be developed in combination with other
properties already connected to the sewer. Still others may be
currently of residential use. The 7 zip code area of North
Hollywood where the 111 PSDS permits are issued represents about
1/13 of the area of the San Fernando Valley.nThe Bureau of Sanitation is currently conducting a survey to
r-j ascertain owner, tenant, type of improvement, connected to the
_ sewer or not, and existence of PSDS on all industrial and
'' commercial properties in the enforcement area of the PSDS Abandon-
r ment Ordinance. This survey should be complete by March 1, 1986.
n After the survey and appropriate determination of property use and
sewer availability a Notice To Connect will be issued.
rHank Yacoub said the underground tank inspection program is in
H jeopardy because owners allude to adjacent properties that don't
have public sewers. Why are storage tank owners being singledrI out when PSDS's could also be contaminating the groundwater.
n
r .-4-
„ Because of that concern, we're having this meeting. Storage tan):
L owners would lose the arguement that they are being singled out if
PSDS users were controlled through sampling.
Van Ark acknowledged that our effort has been directed to elimi-
nate PSDS's not monitor them. However, we do now have authority
through L.A.M.C. .Sec. 64.25 (g) to monitor.
A definition of domestic wastewater (by exception) is found in the
General Regulations of the Plumbing Codes, Chapter 3, Page 25 Sec.
304. Section 305 says something about industrial waste.
Industrial wastewater is defined in L.A.M.C. Sec. 64.00. Section
64.30 B.I & 2 lists limitations on the use of P.O.T.W. Carl
Tripp feels these same limits can be applied to a PSDS. It has
also been interpreted that anything that gets into the underground
water gets into "Waters of the state".
Jim King - Septic tanks of individual companies should be looked at
or inspected. Testing of septic tank material in North Hollywood
area is a place to start. Testing for quality should be con-
sidered significant but thats not necessarily so for quantity.
Hank Yacoub - How do you quantify? It's an impossible task. Con-
clusion .should be as to source on the basis of quality only.
Carl Tripp related that in 1978 or 79 CBE provided a list
of dry disposal injection wells locations where PCE and TCE was
likely being dumped during World War II. An Industrial Waste
-5-
n
Inspector went to each location in the City of L.A. but found no
evidence of the wells. Most of these site's were actually located
in the City of Burbank near their airport.
Hank Yacoub - Additional comments about underground storage tanks.
Carl Tripp - Inspectors reviewing commercial and industrial
property determine what chemicals have been purchased and what
chemicals are in stock. If the answers aren't good, they will
not give them an Industrial Wastewater Permit. They will make
them seal all drains and sinks suspect of Industrial Waste Dumping.
Also waste haulers manifests are checked.
Van Ark - We should initiate a test program small in scale to
sample PSDS's and perhaps the adjacent ground to try to determine
what is getting into the ground from the PSDS's.
Yacoub - Would like a program to random spot check a few properties
with Industrial Wastewater Permit for other chemicals not just
PCE's or TCE's, but any hazardous waste. Such a program would
indicate we haven't absolved PSDS's of causing a problem and
would indicate to storage tank owners that the RWQCB is not
singling them out for persecution.
•
Clean up and abatement action can be taken by RWQCB with authority
if City can tell them on which properties it's necessary.
Yacoub - City should develop program and define the problem of
groundwater contamination caused by PSDS's.
-6-
Van Ark - Tripp has a list of 12 sites previously sampled by
Bureau of Sanitation and tested by DWP.
Tripp - 50 business in 1983 were surveyed, only 12 PSDS's identi-
fied. Only 2 of the 12 locations brought about some concern,
and they were further investigated. No industrial wastewater is
permitted to be discharged to underground unless previously
approved by State through a NPDES permit. (Presently these
original 12 are being reviewed, reevaluated and new sampling is
being done).
Yacoub - Deal with problem in an acceptable manner now at the
local level. Conformance by City at this time would satisfy
RWQCB.
Van Ark - Can Bureau of Sanitation document PSDS problem now by
spot check sampling and testing.
Tripp - We should start now.
Yacoub - A summary report should be prepared with the following:
1) Issue discussed.
2) Facts and findings/ perhaps from monitering.
3) Proposal on how we-would proceed, or,
4) official position from City that no action is necessary.
The issue can then be addressed on behalf of RWQCB and decide if
further action is necessary. One solution may be to have septic
tank owner self monitor his discharge.
City will resolve numbers that don't seem to jive 2800, 700, 111
etc.
-7-
City will also set up a step-at-a-time sampling and reporting
program that should document what's going on with PSDS's and
satisfy Yacoub and RWQCB.
I Tripp will prepare a summary of whats been done to date and es-
tablish a follow-up proposal.nThe next ICC meeting is March 25, 1986 City will try to have a
'. report for that meeting. The report will consist of preliminary
results of the PSDS survey of the 2800 locations where sewers are
' • available and not used and possible sample results of the 12
P original septic tanks tested by DWP in 1983.I:
nm
r.nfn -8-
r• lyfl M £
Pit B I- it? X)
r
r\ '•1 •
[i Osv& Yoest
\\
n
n
nn
n
OF
- Z 3 « /
i4-
bur.
n
•[[
Date:
Time:
Place:
Chairman:
A G E N D A
REGULATION OF PRIVATE SEWAGE DISPOSAL SYSTEMS
January 29, 1986
1:00 P.M.
2335 Dorris Place
Robert J. Van Ark
General Topic: Monitoring PSDS's
1. GWQMP - SFVB Recommendation No. 2.
2. Industrial Waste Control Ordinance.
3. L. A. M. C. Section 64.25 (g).
4. Existing test results and any determination made from thoseresults.
5. Program to ensure the proper utilization of the PSDS.
n
TVn CITY OF LOS ANGELES
INTER-DEPARTMENTAL CORRES PONDENC E
nDate: February 24, 1986
nnnnnrr-
To: Hank Yacbub Carole KawamotoRegional Water Quality Regional Water QualityControl Board Control Board107 S. Broadway 107 S. BroadwayLos Angeles, CA 90012 Los Angeles, CA 90012
Bureau of Sanitation LADWP - Water Quality DivisionAttn: Publio Aliwalas Attn: Jim King, Room A-18
Bureau of Sanitation I.W.Attn: Carl Tripp
Department of Building and SafetyPlumbing DivisionAttn: Bob Martin
Department of Building and SafetyAttn: Jim Nishimoto
.-.;"7/ ••• r .-:From: Robert J. Van Ark ,x- //« > "'/' /«• •' '•' '
Subcommittee Chairman *•'
Subject: REGULATION OF PRIVATE SEWAGE DISPOSAL SYSTEMS GROUNDWATERQUALITY MANAGEMENT PLAN - SAN FERNANDO VALLEY BASIN -JANUARY 29, 1986 SUBCOMMITTEE MEETING MINUTES
n Attached are the minutes/notes, agenda, and attendance listfrom the January 29, 1986 meeting with the principal topicbeing monitoring of private sewage disposal systems.
r[; Please review these minutes/notes for errors or important
omissions.
Please return your comments arid corrections by March 7, 1986.These minutes will be submitted to the ICC at its next meet-ing, March 25, 1986.
RJVA:jm
cc: Joseph A. Lucas (W/Enc.)Robert S. Horii (W/Enc.)Delwin A. Bia'gi (W/Enc. )
rC
'1?rn
ATTAOttENT 4
SUBCOMMITTEE ON THE REGULATION OF S T O R A G E TANKSSUMPS, AND PIPELINES
MINUTES
March 13, 1986
n
nnr
Members Present;
Kill Jam C. Lebeck, ChairmanRon MaranoAl KobigHoward KaplanRobert Whittouck
Dave Crosley
Art Van Orden
Jeff Dobrowolski
Ron Shak
Randy Euroda
Toir B a l d w i nRick Ka i l s
Los AngelesLos AngelesLos AngelesLos AngelesLos Angeles
and PowerLos Angeles
and PowerLos Angeles
and PowerLos Angeles
and PowerLos Angeles
and PowerLos Angeles
and PowerLos AngelesLos AngelesWorks
Fire DepartmentFire DepartmentFire DepartmentFire DepartmentDepartment of Water
Department of Water
Department of Water
Department of Water
Department of Water
Department of Water
County, Hazardous WasteCounty, Dept. of Public
The thirteenth Subcommittee Meeting for the Regulation of UndergroundStorage Tanks, Sumps and Pipelines convened March 13, 1986, Thursday,9:30 a.m., at the Los Angeles Fire Department, 200 North Main Street,Ninth Floor Conference Room, Los Angeles, California.
Minutes of the January 16, 3986 meeting were approved as read.
An Adhoc Committee has been formulated within the Los AngelesFire Department to study the responsib-ilities and liabilities of the leadagency and to interface requirements for Underground Tank Program withthe State and Regional Water Quality Control Board. The possibility andf easibil ity .--Jbf creating a Memorandum of Understanding to specificallydenote actions by the two agencies is an example of the current study.Funding and criteria necessary to retrieve monies expended to administerthe program is also under study. A committee report should be submittedto the Fire Department Administration prior to July 1, 1986.
Clarification of the Los Angeles Fire Department requirements forexisting tanks was discussed. The date to comply is January 1, 1985.This date has not been extended. Facilities that contain undergroundtanks that have not had their tanks tes-ted and monitoring method approvedare in violation of the City of Los Angeles Ordinance.
r
rnrnnr-
SUBCOMMITTEE ON THE REGULATION OF STORAGE TANKSSUMPS, AND PIPELINES
MINUTES
March 13, 1986
Chairman Lebeck advised members present of a public hearing to discussamendment to the Hazardous Liquid Pipeline Safety Law. The hearing willbe conducted April 21, 1986, 10:00 a.m., Office of the StateFire Marshal, 1501 West Cameron Avenue, West Covina. It was suggestedthat members attend commensurate with their schedules and workresponsibilities. The Pipeline Safety Law Proposal mainly includes anincrease in fees required; however, since pipeline safety and undergroundtank installation coincide it was felt that familiarization of pipelinelaws are appropriate.
Assembly Bill Number 2920 authored by Assemblyman Sher was discussed.The Bill would establish a different method of storing information onunderground storage tank permits. This Bill would require City andCounty to submit their data to the State-wide Environmental Evaluationand Planning System (SWEEPS). Committee members present generallyconcurred that the legislation would create further impact on localagencies; and therefore, it was recommended that the Bill not besupported.
Ron Shak submitted a proposal by the Department of Water and Power forunderground tank decontamination procedures. Members were asked toreview and comment prior to the next meeting. Ron Shak may be reached at(213) 481-3413.
Rick Walls is also assisting in formulation of a standard for Los AngelesCounty regarding decontamination on underground tank procedures. Rickhas had contact with Crosby and Overton, and other agecnies that handleand dismantle underground tanks. Rick apprised members of a State TaskForce study that is directly responsible for tank disposal, qualitycontol, site assessment, and similar activities. The Task Force isgenerally known as Leaking Underground Fuel Tanks (LUFT). Rick estimateda report should be available by June 1986. He would keep the committeeinformed.
'It was agreed the Federal Tank Law has little or no impact on localagencies or -facil ities.
The Regional Quality Control Board Executive Office Report ofFebruary 24, 1986, was distributed for the information of members present,
Al Wobig requested members review the procedures for removal andassessment criteria for underground tanks proposed by the Los AngelesFire Department.
•
rfn
nr
SUBCOMMITTEE ON THE REGULATION OF STORAGE TANKSSUMPS, AND PIPELINES
MINUTES
March 13, ]9B6
Electronic in-tank monitoring was discussed as an acceptable monitoringtechnique. There appears to be much research and development by privateenterprise to incorporate and include these devices in undergroundtanks. The Los Angeles Fire Department has approved, on an interimbasis, three locations with in-tank monitoring in association with recordkeeping and will compare specifics after a six month trial period.
The meeting was adjourned atMay IS, 1986, Thursday, 9:30Ninth Floor Conference Room,
11:30 a.m. The next meeting scheduleda.m., Los Angeles Fire Department,Los Angeles, California.
nr-
William C. Lebeck, ChairmanSubcommittee on the Regulation of
Storage Tanks, Sumps, and Pipelines
WCL:pr:1800E
r
nnr
rnnrr
)'PAGE i
•* •
COUNTY
ALAMEDA COUNTY
ALPINS COUNTY
AMADOU COUNTY
BUTT! COUNTY
CALAVERAS COUNTY
COLUSA COUNTY
CONTRA COSTA COUNTY
DEL N3RTE COUNTY
EL D04ADO COUNTY
FRESNO COUNTY
GLENN COUNTY
HUN30LDT COUNTY
IMPERIAL COUNTY
INTO COUNTY
KERN COUNTY
KINGS COUNTY
LAKE COUNTT
LASSE1 COUNTY
'LOS ANGELES COJNTY
.1ADERA COUNTY
.1ARI.1 COUNTY
MARIP9SA COUNTT
.1ENOOCINO COUNTY
MERCE9 COUNTY
, * • — • . . » i .. 1 I
STATE WATER RESOURCES CONTROL BOARDUNDERGROUND CONTAINER PROGRAMCONTAINER SUMMARY 3Y COUNTY
MOTOR . FARM MOTORVEHICLE VEHICLEFUEL FUELTANKS TANKS
1 . 2
4/043
46
224
»41
269
269 .
2/281
316
722
3/877
262
1/080
583
435
3/150
765
409
743
24/136
633
788
236
666
1/066
93
8
26
401
37
200
187
117
4/673
2*2
142
82
42
1/099
261
181
131 -
309
932
67
40
134
951
OTHERTANKS3
1/227
3
37
137
34
41
346
79
66
313
53
188
90
95
621
182
58
246
7/823
126
139
54
117
150
TOTAL1/2/3
3/36)
57
287
1/479
340
510
3/014
433
905
9/363
607
1/410
755
572
4/870
1/208
648
1/120
32/273
1/691
994
330
937
2/167
PITSPOMDSOR
SUMPS LAGOONS4 5
• 344
1
3
31
4
7
331
8
11
216
12
29
27
12
328
63
68
5
2/600
18
24
4
16
51
37
4
0
7
1
4
190
3
1
118
5
10
33
3
331
33
23
4
468
26
4
1
2
23
i ^\_ i r^85-12-06 17j02t25
TOTAL4/5 OTHER
381
5
3
38
5
11
721
11
12
334
17
39
60
15
659
96
91
9
3/068
44
28
5
18
74
31
0
2
4
0
0
100
0
2
31
0
13
0
29
9
21
1
736
0
3
0
1
1
COUNTYTOTAL
5/780
62
292
1/521
345
521
3/835
444
919
9,728
624
1/450
818
587
5/558
1/313
760
1/130
36,077
1/735
1,025
335
956
2,?42
I
1
33in
• P A G E
1 —I
S T A T E W A T E R R E S O U R C E S C O N T R O L B O A R DU N D E R G R O U N D C O N T A I N E R P R O G R A M
C O N T A I N E R S U M M A R Y B Y C O U N T Y
55-12-06 1 7 s Q 2 i 2 5
\
COUNTY
HODOC COUNTY
MONO COUNTY
MONTEREY COUNTY
NAPA COUNTY
NEVADA COUNTY
ORANGE COUNTY
PLACER COUNTY
.. PLUMAS COUNTY
RIVERSIDE COUNTY
SACRA1ENTO COUNTY
SAN BENITO COUNTY
SAN BERNARDINO COUNTY
SAN DIEGO COUNTY
SAN FRANCISCO COUNTY
SAN JOAOUIN COUNTY
SAN LUIS OBISPO COUNTY
SAN MATEO COUNTY
SANTA BARBARA COUNTY
SANTA CLARA COUNTY
SANTA CRUI COUNTY
SHASTA COUNTY
SURRA COUNTY
SISKIYOU COUNTY
MOTORfEHICLEFUELTANKS
1
ZS7
199
1/504
498
508
7/114
1/032
554
3/238
3/552
208
5/079
6/522
1/737
2/144
1/023
2/071
1/339
4/320
802
1/003
80
570
FARM MOTORVEHICLE
FUELTANKS2
154
21
371
*' 343
36
353
171
45
750
295
216
389
668
13
1/795
214
102
382
3»7
255
135
13
108
OTHERTANKS
3
31
23
231
76
74
1/519
139
111
545
593
SO
1/044
1/391
383
528
183
480
335
1/509
133
146
15
105
TOTAL1,2,3
(62
243
2/106
«17
618
8/988
1/342
710
4/533
4/440
474
6/512
8,581
2,133
4,467
1/425
2/653
2/276
6/226
1,195
1,304
' 108
783
SUMPS4
2
1
70
23
9
475
23
4
103
116
6
300
317
121
111
54
122
90
369
32
25
0
9
PITSPONDSOR
LAGOONS5
2
0
19
8
16
54
6
10
26
36
t
141
30
1
61
28
13
60
32
1
3
2
7
TOTAL4/S
4
1
89
31
25
329
29
14
131
152
10
4(1
347
122
172
112
135
150
421
33
28
2
16
OTHER
1
0
3
1
0
179
2
0
9
19
2
101
64
6
12
9
17
56
42
1
0
1
1
COUNTY10TM.
467
244
2/200
949
643
9,«9*
1/373
724
4,673
4,611
436
7,C54
8,774
2,251
4,651
1,546
2, SOS
2»C82
6,689
1,229
1/JJ2
111
800
PAGE
STAT! W A T E R R E S O U R C E S CONTROL B O A R DUNDERGROUND C O N T A I N E R P R O G R A MC O N T A I N E R S U M M A R Y BY COUNTY
TOTAL MOTOR VEHICLE FUEL TANKS] 105/615TOTAL F A R M MOTOR VEHICLE FUELTANKSt 26/063TOTAL OTHER TANKS! 24/892TOTAL SUMPSJ 7/354TOTAL PITS/PONDS,AND LAGOONS: 2/303TOTAL OTHER! • 1/696
85-12-96 17t02t23
COUNTY
SOLANO COUNTY
SONOMA COUNTY
STANISLAUS COUNTY
SUTTIR COUNTY
TEHAMA COUNTY
TRIMITY COUNTY
TULANE COUNTY
TUOLUMNE COUNTY
VVENTURA COUNTY
YOLO COUNTY
YUBA COUNTY
MOTORVEHICLEFUELTANKS .
1
1/172
2/061
1/835
427
373
US
2/015
405
2/304
859
45B
FARM MOTORVEHICLE
FUELTANKS
2
173
812
2/106
j 323
236
3
2/863
33
1/340
311
165
OTHERTANKS
3
222
300
315
60
37
14
453
53
590
179
35
TOTAL1/2/3
1/369
3/173
4/256
810
66S
182
5/331
496
4/234
1/349
658
PP
SUMPS LA4
54
102
45
6
14
2
72
5
164
37
6
ITSONDSOR.GOONS5
38
106
56
20
6
0
65
6
82
10
3
TOTAL4/5
112
208
101
26
20
2
137
11
246
47
9 .
OTHER
11
12
6
4
0
0
10
0
140
7
1
COUNTYTOTAL
1/692
3/393
4/363
840
638
184
3/478
507
4/620
1/403
668
TOTAL CONTAINERS! 167/913
PHONE:CONTACT:
r(818) 847-6815Bill Spaniel ATTACHMENT 6
rPrr
rrri .
rn
FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE
LOCKHEED WILL CONDUCTGROUNDWATER MONITORING PLAN
BURBANK, Calif., Feb. 24—In an effort to locate sources of
chemical contamination found in recent years in groundwater in the
Burbank area, the Lockheed-California Company will conduct an
extensive groundwater monitoring program, the company said today.
Bob Miland, the firm's environmental affairs director, said
Lockheed is cooperating .with a request from the California
Regional Water Quality Control Board's Los Angeles region for
Lockheed to perform this work.
"There is no way to obtain reliable information on the
existence of contaminants in the groundwater until we conduct this
monitoring program,'" Miland pointed out.
"As a member of the Burbank community, we are interested 'in
working cooperatively with governmental agencies in their efforts
to ensure proper water quality in the Burbank area," Miland added.
He noted" that during the past two years the company has spent
approximately $1 million inspecting its underground storage tanks.
Lockheed's groundwater monitoring program will involve
drilling 16 monitoring wells on the company's property. Seven of
these wells will be upstream of the water flow while the remainder
will be downstream.
- more -
p 1ST ADD XX LOCKHEED WILL CONDUCT MONITORING PLAN XX DOWNSTREAM.1 ' ' '
n •f Miland said that among the chemicals Lockheed will be lookinq
for are degreasing agents that clean metal parts. Such agents have
[ been used by many manufacturing firms throughout the San Fernando
— Valley for many years.
Miland noted that potential sources of contaminated ground-
r* ' water may be difficult to ascertain. He said Lockheed believes
that several hundred firms within a 10-mile radius of its property
( . may have used degreasing agents in recent decades.
P "Underground water flows relatively slowly," he said. "Sot1 ' there is a possibility that contaminants may have entered upstream
r* of the Lockheed property years ago."i ,
Lockheed has hired a consulting hydrogeologic firm to drill therJ v monitoring wells and analyze the water and soil samples.
^ ***
' 2/24/86
n
V" ATTACHMENT 7S^ATE OP CALIFORNIA GEORGE DEUKMEJIAN. Gortmor
\ UFORNIA REGIONAL WATER QUALITY CONTROL BOARD-L', ANGELES REGION1OSOUTH BROADWAY.SUITE 4027L' I ANGELES. CALIFORNIA 90012-4596Cl.J) 620-4460
rL :
Prp
P
n
March IP, 1986
Mr. Michael A. FrancisEnvironmental Control Specialist
Facilities EngineeringRocketdyne DivisionRockwell International Corporation6633.Canoga AvenueCanoga Park, CA 91304
GROUND WATER CONTAMINATION SITE ASSESSMENT PROGRAM CID #9130304)
On March 14, 1986, Regional Board staff met with representatives-fr.om Rockwell and ULARA Watermaster office to discuss the groundwater contamination problem at the Rockwel1-Rocketdyne facilitylocated in Canoga Park. As agreed to in this meeting thefollowing action must be taken to adequately characterire theextent of ground water contamination and to design an effectiveremedial program:
1. Al 1 underground sumps and clarifiers will be retrofittedwith a secondary containment system and a continuousmonitoring device.
2. Underground tanks that have been identified as leaking are tobe taken out of service immediately and removed.
3. An evaluation of interim remedial action alternatives for thecontainment and treatment of contaminated ground water flowon-site shall be performed. The rationale for the proposedground water treatment technology must be presented inaddition to the description of the process.
4. A Site Assessment Plan must be developed to define the fullextent and impact of the off-site ground water contaminationproblem.
5. A l i q u i d management plan must be developed for the properstorage, treatment and disposal of contaminated watergenerated during the development, sampling and pumpof installed monitorinc wells.
•n '•/:.•'-.- '
, -;
• < " ."- ** "•."""" ' .. . *
r
Mr. Michael A. FrancisPage 2
''• - '-. A written proposal is to be submitted to our o-f-fice -for review." j'-.- April 11, 1966. This proposal should detail the manner"((. ..V.., %,,. - provide a time schedule -for completino each o-f the above tasks• I ' • • . '..'•:-~""~ :„'.
I-f you have any questions concerning this matter, please phoneat <213> 620-4397 or Mr. Andy Sa-f-ford at (213) 620-4695.
•/—-' ••>•;."'•• x£r - -;f HANK H. YACOUB-".j: f~e S'V; Supervising Water Resource-;T: v.;;r J', •"'([ Control Engineer
'~l •'-£:££:&'£ ANS/
''r^ S"!'.:"r»T" '." - cc: Captain W i l l i a m Lebeck, Los Angeles C i t y Fire DepartmentI ."•:.:.-:>•-'•;.; .Mr. Nestor Acedera, Department o-f Heal th Services-Toxic
j .••"-• ; .,.:.; ."• Substances Control D i v i s i o n
r .'.^_. • • ' - : • • • ' ' . Mr . M e l v i n E l e v i n s , Upper Los Angeles R i v e r Area Uatermas
. . - . - . :" ' '-i..""
ATTACHMENT 8KM. 0 1 USE
rrrrr
n
PROJECT/PROGRAM:
SANITATION
FACT SHEET
City Sponsored Snail Quantity Hazardous WasteGenerator Collection Program.CD 1 CF 85-0911
LEAD PERSON/PHONE NO.: Reva Fabrikant 213-485-5347
DESCRIPTION OF EFFORT:
ESTIMATED COST:
A City sponsored email quantity hazardous wastegenerator collection program in the North Hollywoodarea. The City will contract with a licensedhazardous waste hauler to perform the service.
$250,000, annual program cost.
FUNDING SOURCES: Fee for services rendered.(Possibly some city subsidy)
SCHEDULED IMPLEMENTATION MILESTONES:
Preparation of draft RFP for hazardous wastecollection completed. Program Is on hold until adecision is made on what direction to take.
CURRENT STATUS: AB 49, a bill which would allow City to proceed in .this program, has been amended and no longer addressthe needs of the City's program, i.e. franchisingprivate hauler(s). Bureau continues to participatein related educational programs.
ANTICIPATED PROBLEM AREAS: None at this tine.
RMA/RBH 105 copy/ab
•rSANITATION
FACT SHEET
0 1 1SB£
rrrr
PROJECT/PROGRAM: Water Quality Monitoring at City LandfillsCD: All districts.
LEAD PERSON/PRONE NO.: Richard B. Humphreys
CF 83-1742
213 485-5347
DESCRIPTION OF EFTORT: Water quality monitoring at City owned/operatedsanitary landfills. (Current Monitoring atSheldon-Arleta landfill is under the direction ofDWP; related to their Tujunga Spreading Grounds).
ESTIMATED COST: Unknown — final prograjc will be determined byCRWQCB, L.A. Region.
FUNDING SOURCES: General Funds
SCHEDULED IMPLEMENTATION MILESTONES:
CURRENT STATUS:
Bureau*s program proposal was submitted to L.A.Region, CRWQCB, in May, 1985. Completion of veilconstruction by May, 1966; start of MonitoringProgram by September, 1986; completion ofFeasibility Study on additional monitoringrequirements by July, 1987. On or before January 1,1987, a solid vaste vater quality assessment testreport is to be submitted ; to said Board for theSheldon-Arleta landfill (AB 3525, Chapter 1532,1984), by the Bureau of Sanitation.
Bids to construct three wells and redevelop one wellbeing held pending approval by CRWQCB.Wells located at: Branford- one existing
Toyon - one proposedLopez - two proposed
Awaiting guidelines from CRWQCB on assessment testreport for Sheldon-Arleta landfill.
ANTICIPATED PROBLEM AREAS:None at this time.
RMA/RBH 105a/ab
MAR 0 1 19B6
rr*,
r(
rrr
PROJECT/ PROGRAM:
LEAD PERSON/PHONE NO:
DESCRIPTION OF EFFORT:
SANITATION
FACT SHEET
Control and Monitoring of Gaseous Ernieslone fromactive and Inactive Landfills.CD: all districts CF
Abdul S. Danishvar 213-485-5347
ESTIMATED COST:
To comply with Rules 1150.1 and 1150.3, gaseousemissions (including organic compounds and toxiccontaminants) from active and Inactive landfillswill be sampled, monitored, controlled andreported.
Unknown
FUNDING SOURCES: Private and/or General Funds
SCHEDULED IMPLEMENTATION MILESTONES:
r,
CURRENT STATUS:
ANTICIPATED PROBLEM AREAS:
RBH 105o/ab
Active Landfill Sites:Landfill surface monitoring (500 ppmv) by October1, 19B5.Integrated landfill surface sampling by Jan., 1989.Sampling from collection system by Jan., 1989.Sampling from landfill perimeter probes by Jan.1989Ambient air sampling at landfill perimeter by Jan.,1989.
Inactive Landfill Sites:A compliance plan for testing offsite migration andtoxic components In both ambient air and gasstreams within disposal site (AB 3525, StateChapter 1532, 1984) vill be submitted afterfinallration of State guidelines and/or Rule 1150.3by AQMD.
Compliance plan for Rule 1150.1 submitted toSCAQMD (Sept., 1985) for revlev and comments.Compliance plan for Rule 1150.3 under preparation.SCAQMD permit application for monitoring systems(Active Landfills) under preparation — due April1, 1986.
Done at this time.
.-nTLrrrrr
PROJECT/PROGRAM:
LEAD PERSOK/PHONE KO.:
DESCRIPTION OF EFFORT:
SANITATIOK
FACT SHEET
Household Hazardous Waste Collection ProgramCD: All CF 85-0911
Reva Fabrikant 213-485-5347
Train City refuse collectors to collecthousehold hazardous vaste from a pilot area inthe Harbor District.
ESTIMATED COST: $637,000.
FUNDING SOURCES: Environmental Trust Fund (ETF), EPAapproval on August, 1985.
SCHEDULED IMPLEMENTATION MILESTONES:
Program implementation by May, 1986.
CURRENT STATUS:
ANTICIPATED PROBLEM AREAS:
In the process of «ecuring permits, etc.Awaiting Council approval.Developing a method of manifesting wastes.Developing a computer data base and related•ystem.Negotiating contract vith "Safety Specialists.
Meed to receive a variance or change in currentregulations regarding manifesting of wastes.Heed to find method of disposing of latexpaints.
RMA/RBH 105f/ab
nI !
< PROGRAM; ABANDONMENT OF PRIVATE SEWAGE DISPOSAL SYSTEMS(PSDS) AND CONNECTION TO THE PUBLIC SEWERr
nnrnn
GOAL: To prevent toxic waste contamination of groundvater basins locatedgenerally in the San Fernando Valley by connecting private sewage disposalsystems (PSDS) to the City sewer system.
WHO ARE AFFECTED: Owners of industrial, commercial or multiple residential (5 ormore units) properties using a PSDS which now have a public sewer available.
MEANS TO ATTAIN GOAL: Each affected owner will receive a "Notice to Connect tothe Public Sewer and to Abandon a PSDS". Abandonment and connection is tobe completed within one year from the date of this Notice. A ReminderNotice will be sent in eight (8) months if compliance is not achieved. A"Final Notice*1 will be sent three (3) months later if compliance still hasnot been achieved. If full compliance has not been achieved within one yearof the date of the Notice to Connect, a Notice of Violation shall be issuedto the owner. The Director of the Bureau of Sanitation shall so notify theCity Attorney, the Department of Water and Power (DWF) and theSuperintendent of Building. The Director may request DWF to discontinue
p water service and may also request the Superintendent of Building to order| i the building vacated.
IMPLEMENTATION;
Step 1 Bureau of Engineering establishes a list of industrial and commercialproperties that have not applied for a house connection permit wherea City sewer is available. (Completed 1985).
Step 2 Bureau of Sanitation conducts field survey of this list to identify•PSDS owners. (Completed February 25, 1986).
Step 3 Bureau of Sanitation will review the results of the field survey,establish a list of affected PSDS owners. (To be completed March,1986).
Step A Bureau of Sanitation mails letters to the owners of the lots containingPSDS, informing them of the requirements and compliance with theOrdinance. (Mailing to start April, 1986).
Step 5 Bureau of Sanitation issues "Notice to Connect*1 to PSDS owners who haveone year to connect from date of issue. (Mailing to start May, 1986).
Step 6 PSDS owner secures house connection permit from the Bureau ofEngineering, and plumbing permit from the Department of Building andSafety. \
Step 7 PSDS owner completes the work.
Step 8 Plumbing inspector checks and certifies that the work has beencompleted.
Step 9 If compliance is not achieved within one year from the issuance of the
•rrrrrrn
*< ' Notice to Connect, the Bureau of Sanitation nay request enforcement actionby the City Attorney. (Criminal and/or Civil action), Department of Waterand Power (discontinuance of vater service), Superintendent of Building(vacation of building).
VARIATIONS/APPEAL PROCESS
Exemption - PSDS in compliance vith applicable lavs and codes and used by four orfever units vhich are used solely for residential purposes.
Appeals - (1) Application to the Director vith a $100 appeal fee, filed vithin 90days of date of issuance of the Notice to Connect. Appeal to be based onhardship and finding that use of the PSDS vill not have a significantadverse effect on groundvater. Director shall act vithin 60 days.Effective period of a variance cannot exceed two years.
If not granted
(2) Appeal to the Board of Public Works vithin 15 days of the Director'saction. Appeal fee of $100. The Board acts vithin 90 days of the appeal.Pailure to act vithin 90 days of the appeal - the decision of the Directorshall be deemed affirmed.
P
n
If not granted
(3) Appeal to the City Council vithin 15 days of the Board's decision orthe close of the 90 days, whichever comes first. Appeal fee of 5100.If the Council fails to act vithin 90 days of the appeal, the decision ofthe Board shall become final or it the Board failed:to act vithin 90 days,the decision of the Director shall become final.
r,
nnnn
BMA. PPA Ua/pj
.p-
rrrrnr
Project Will Teach FirmsSafe Toxic-Waste Disposal
By JANET RAE-DUPREE, Time* Staff Writer
private companies bu announcedthe atari of a program to teachsmall-busineai openton how tossrfdy dispose of toxic waste.
The program, scheduled to beginin May, it a scaled-down version ofa larger proposal to curl/waste disposal in the &ast SanFernando Valley.
wet Gendron, operations man*sjger for the California SafetyCouncil, which will conduct theprogram, said tare and videotaped .lecture will be offered, along witha newsletter on proper handling of•mall quantities of solvent, acid andpetroleum watte*.
Oendron aaid the council willalao inaugurate a "hot line" next
sWvsnlThe plan was announced earlier
tab month at a North Bollywoodpress rru \tfrtpt*' attfTvVd by T^**Angf^ff City fv«««HimMi HowardFinn and Lot Angela* CountySupenriaor Mike Antonovich. It
of aeveral jecommenda-bfytf rnM* in a Southern California•am of Ou^emn>fntt report lastyear on how to reduce ground -wa-ter r°"t^TTitTt*ttfw' in th^ E<atl Val-ley.
Coocernt about water contain]-itioo emerged aereral •go
nn
r
with the discovery in public wellsof priati fm/<imi« 0f trichloroethy-lene and perchkroethylene, sol.Tents suspected of causing fanfft,Officials believe thehai been caused at least partly by
improper disposal or accidentalspills of liquid waste orer a periodof yean.
The educational effort was origi-nally seen as an adjunct to a
i «ocollect hazardom waste from smallburin patfr. The collection serricewas to UK a temporary transferstation to accumulate waste forerentual shipment to recycling ordisposal sites.
However, the transfer stationconcept was rejected last Jury by aCrty Council committee because ofeouuena about costs and Finn'scomplaint that four of the fivepotential transfer station sites werein his district. The committee thenasked the city's bureau of sanita-tion to propose a way to offer theservice without building a transferstation.
But Bob Alpern, principal sanita -tion engineer of the bureau, saidthat his office it not pursuing theservice because of the failure lastyear of state legislation that wouldhave allowed the city to hire aprivate firm to haul away hazard-ous waste.
<2endron said the $25,000 neededfor the program was provided byboth public and private groups.including the city and county ofLot Angeles, Anheuser-Busch. At-lantic Richfield Co., the Depart-ment of Water and Power, theMetropolitan Water District,Southern California Edison Co. andthe Valley Industry and Commerce
rATE OP CALIFORNIA ^^^^^ CEORGE DEUKMEJ|AN>
WJFORNIA REGIONAL WATER QUALITY CONTROL BOARD-^ ANGELES REGION
p07 SOOTH BROADWAY. SUITE 4027.OS ANGELES. CALIFORNIA B0012-4596
I .213)62<M4R)
f RECEIVED
n
rn
March 12, 1986 •.'
Mr. Del win A. Biagi gy D'->'. •'''• ^Director of Bureau of Sanitation S'-.'iilTA.'i • ••City of Los AngelesDepartment of Pub!ic Works200 North Spring Street, Room 800Los Angeles, CA 90012
SOLID WASTE WATER QUALITY ASSESSMEhJT TEST (SWAT)Sheldon Arleta Landfill (File No. 60-100)
Recent amendments to the Water Code (Section 13273) by AssemblyBill (AB) 3525 (Calderon, 1984) required the State WaterResources Control Board (State Board) to rank the approximately1,900 active and inactive solid waste disposal sites throughoutthe state with respect to their potential to adversely impactground or surface water through the release of hazardoussubstances. On December 19, 1985, the State Board adopted a listof 1,800 ranked sites; 150 sites per rank.
The operators of the first 150 sites are required to submit a SWATto the appropriate Regional Water Quality Control Board on orbefore January 1, 1987. Section 13273 of the Water Code requiresthat the SWAT contain (1) an analysis of the surface and groundwater on and under within one mile of a solid waste disposalsite to provide reliable indication whether there is any leakageof hazardous waste, and (2) a chemical characterization of thesoil-pore liquid in those areas which are likely to be affected ifthe solid waste disposal site is leaking as compared withgeologically similar areas near the solid waste disposal sitewhich have not been affected by the leakage or waste discharge.The. SWAT report is required to be certified by a registered CivilEngineer,'"a registered Geologist, or a Certified EngineeringGeologist pursuant to Sections 6762, 7850, and 7842 of theBusiness and Professions Code. The certifier is also required tohave at least five years experience in ground water hydrology.
Disposal site operators with active sites on the State Board'sranked list may also wish at this time to comply with the StateBoard's regulations "Discharge of Waste To Land' (CaliforniaAdministrative Code, Title 23, Chapter 3, Subchapter 15). Insuch cases they should comply with the regulations outlined in
fl' Subchapter 15 in addition to the material required under this
guidance. In the event an operator cannot be located for aclosed or abandoned site, the SUAT report should be submitted bythe current owner. SUAT reports should be submitted through thedisposal site operator and/or owner.
rnrrrrnPrrI -
The SUAT will consist of a two-phase submittal. This year, theinitial SUAT submittal is to be made to the appropriate RegionalBoard on or before July 1, 1986. The i n i t i a l submittal shallconsist of the proposed SUAT monitoring program. Informationrequired to be contained in a SUAT proposal and report isattached. The SUAT report is due by January 1, 1987.
For those sites where hazardous wastes are known to be leakingthrough existing monitoring programs or other information, theoperator may apply to the appropriate Regional Board for a waiverto the SUAT requirements. The request for a waiver shouldinclude all the information in Sections I, IX, and X of theGu i dance.
The subject landfill(s) operated by you are in Rank 1; as such,their SUAT proposal reports.must be submitted to this Board byJuly If 1986; final reports are due by January 1, 1987.
The State Board has not yet adopted the guidance for the SUATreport and so we are enclosing a copy of the draft guidance forthe SUAT report. It is expected that the final guidance w i l l besimilar to the draft guidance. We wi l l send you the finalguidance when it becomes available.
If you have any questions, please call me at (213) 620-4460 orcall Lena Tran at (213) 620-5444.
ROBERT P. GHIRELLI, D. Env.Executive Officer
LTTiltt •
Enclosure
ccr Jeff Barnickol, State Water Resources Control Board, Divisionof Water Qual i ty
I GUIDANCE FOR '
SOLID WASTE WATER QUALITY ASSESSMENT TEST
r •' • .. . • ••r • ' • . - • • . :I I • ' • . ' . . . ; .
p I. Introductory Data
li . •P A.. Site Xame (including earlier names)
I B. Operator/owner ('including earlier operators/owners)
,__^ names, mailing addresses, and telephone numbers
' ID)p C. Site location. A map showing relationship tc highways
and nearby communities;
1. Township, Range, Section, and fractional Section;
• •' :2. County Assessor's Parcel No(s).. (if site located in
urban area) ' : •
D. Whether the site is open to the public, or for cespany
use only.
E. Any enforcement orders -or Adain. Civil Liability
Complaint.
i —
r"*s • • •' F.* Certification by qualified person as to accuracy andrI , completeness of SWAT proposal and report together vith
p • statement of'their qualifications, including
. .^....certifier's signature and Registration Board Member.
r • • . . .- . - : . . • 'II. Waste Characteristics •" • r
r " : .- .• '••-• ' .* * •.P A. For the entire history of the site:! ] ' •
* ' ' '
r. 1. A list of .the types, 'quantities, physical statei ;
(e.g., solid,, liquid) and concentrations of vastesnJ ! discharged at the site. Wastes and known vaste
P—N .constituents shall be specifically identified
according to the most descriptive nomenclature. A D>listing for hazardous vaste constituents
include reference numbers for listings established
by DES at Section 66680 of Title 22 of this code.
2. A description of disposal methods; including vaste. ' y
mixing, management practices, protocol.
B. Insofar as data are available, character and location
(in the vertical and horizontal) of hazardous or
potentically hazardous materials already in site. Also
include a list of vaste generators for each type of
hazardous vaste.
-2.-
r .v • :- ' "
p III. Site Characteristics •I ' . •"
r - ' .A. Operators shall provide in tht report an analysis
describing how the ground and surface water haver - • . - . : • . ' . • • •affected or may affect the waste site, and hew the site
p has or may affect ground'and surface vater. •i i * • 'I * *• ' ' " • • *
p .• . B. Operators shall provide the following data (in
Subsections D through E below) on the physical
characteristics of the waste site and the surrounding
'region. Information• shall be presented in clearly
written, tabular, and graphic format as appropriate.\
Plans, diagrams, and other graphics shall be prepared
to appropriate scale. Kaps and sections should be at
the same scale where possible for easy cross reference.
.••
C. If a report submitted by an operator refers to another
source, the relevant information from that source shall
be referenced. :
D. , Operators who own or operate classified waste sites
shall submit detailed preliminary and as-built plans,
specifications, and descriptions for all liners,
containment structures, leachate collection end removal
system components, leak detection system components,• *
precipitation and drainage control facilities, and
jj
p.. . .:• - - -. .-.- •^ • • • • • ' • •interim covers which have been or will be installed orr • • •i used at each site. Operators shall submit- a
p . description of fand location data for ancillary
facilities including roads, waste handling areas,
n building, and equipment cleaning facilities.. • * •
nn
For any cite having a leachate collection and removal' * • - »
system recent analyses shall be submitted from said* •
system with the SWAT proposal. The analysis shall
j> ' -include'a volatile scan (EPA 624), a'netal scan, and '
standard physical and chemical parameters (i.c ph,
1: . . Temp., E.G. T.D.S.)
E. The following information shall be included for closed
sites:
1. Date closed.'*
. ' IF2. Description of final treatment procedures which j——-j
were used for the wastes in waste sites if LJ
applicable.
F. Topography
A map of the disposal site and its surrounding region
within one mile of the-site, showing elevation
contours, natural ground slopes, drainage patterns, and
-•i-
r •' •1 '. . .
•*> other topographic features (before and after disposal• •
site construction, if possible) . " . . .
| . G. Geology
n -. '
. _1. A geologic nap and geologic cross -sections of the
•
waste showing lithoiogy and structural features.. ' . ; . . - . ; . .
Cross-sections shall be indexed to the geologic sap
> and shall be located to best portray geologic
features relevant to the -discharged waste. Scales
. should be consistent for cross comparisons.* . •
2. A description of natural geologic materials beneath
"r\\the waste site and its surroundings, including
identification of rock types, nature of alteration
depth and nature of weathering, conpatability of
wastes and geologic materials, continuity and / \
lateral extent of formation and all other pertinent J
lithologic data. . ; . j—p
•
3. A description of the geologic structure of the
' "" waste site including the attitude (strike and dip)• • .
.of bedding' (if any) ; thickness of beds (if any) ;
the location, attitude, and condition (tight, open,
clay, or gypsua-filled, etc.) cf any fractures; the
nature, type (anticlinal, synclinal, «Jtc.)» and'
orientation of any folds; the location, attitude,
r . •• * * * • . .. ; ^ . v .... • " • • ' •n .
and nature (tight, gouge-filled, etc.) of any
faults; and all other pertinent structural data.r •• • • i
p E. Hydrology
• * * . *
P 1, An evaluation of the water-bearing characteristics
of the natural geologic materials identified underr . • • • . • • • - • • : .[ ; subsection (G) (2) of this section including
p delineation of all ground water zones'and basic
. data used to determine the above.
n ' ' ' : ' . ' • ' . • ; ' - . ' • - .• 2. An estimate of the in-site permeability of soils
r.( ; immediately underlying the disposal site.
p1 3. An evaluation of the perennial direction(s) of
P ground water movement within the uppermost groundt . •'
water zone(s) within one mile of the disposal site
perimeter. FEjj1
4. Estimates of the height to which water rises due to jj
capillary -forces above the uppermost ground water
• •-•-"* - zone(s) beneath and within one mile of the disposal
site perimeter. These estimates shall include
seasonal fluxuations, historical highs and lows,
and trends with time. These estimates shall
include an evaluation of the methods and rationale
used in their development.
I-'-1 •'•f ' ' • • V
p ' "5. A map showing the location of all' springs in the
disposal site and vithin one'anile of its perineter.^M * "
j • The nap shall be accompanied by tabular data
•indicating the flow and the ainerai quality of ther *vater front each spring.
1 " *
n ' • " " • - . . ' • • ' • ' 'I. Land and Water Use
n •' v . • '•• . ;1. A map showing the locations of all vater veils,
r • • ' • •'i. . oil/gas veils, geophysical exploration veils, and* > •
• . • *
p • • geothermal veils- in the proposal site or vithin one
anile of its perimeter.\
.2. Name and address of the owner of each veil.
3. Well information vhere available for each veil
indicated in subsection (E)(1) of this section
including, but not limited to:
a. total depth of veil;
••>•*". •'•" b. • diameter of casing at ground surface and at
total depth;*
p c. type of veil construction (cable-tool, rotary,
etc.);r[ i d. depth, and type of perforations;
e. name and address of veil driller;
.: • ••. i • • •• ...' -7-• »•
TV :•r;- f. year of well construction;
* • •
g. use of well (agricultural, domestic., stock
.watering, etc.);
h. depth and type of seals;
i. lithologic, geophysical, and other types of* ' i *
wells .logs, if available;
j. water levels, pump .tests,- water quality, and
other well data, if available;
k. anular packing materials and intervals; and
1. v-abandonment methods, -if applicable..« *
* • •
• 4. Current land use 'within one mile of the perimeter
of the disposal site (e.g., residential,
commercial, industrial, agricultural, recreational,
etc.).
5. Current and anticipated future use of ground water
within one mile of the perimeter'of the waste site.
VII. ffater Quality Monitoring Proposal
All monitoring wells shall be constructed in a manner that
maintains the integrity of the drill hole and presents cross-.
contamination of saturated zones.
A. Operators shall submit-to the Regional Board detailed
plans and equipment specifications for compliance with
•i .-. • . . . •" .. •'•,:•• V- v. •*'•;,' • • < - ' - . - ;t*'/ . '•'] • • > • • • . ,
u
-fi-
( ^ ' the surface water, -ground water, and unsaturated zone
monitoring requirements with their proposal;• When' * • " «
. . leachate analysis are not available from a leachate
t ' collection and removal systems, the proposal shall
p. • include .leachate sampling and analysis where feasible.
site, operators shall provide technical support which
I j ' " includes rationale for £he -spatial distribution of
' ground' water and "unsaturated zone monitoring
. facilities, for the design of monitoring equipment. ." . • • * .
. . ---This report shall be. accompanied by:
* . " • " • * . * " • • • •
. ' 1. a' map showing" the locations of proposed monitoring
facilities; and\
E>2. drawings and data showing construction details of
proposed monitoring facilities. These data shall
include:
a. casing and test hole diameter;
b. casing materials (FVC, stainless steel, etc.); ' £3
c. depth of each test hole; : crp
d. size and position of perforations; LJ
e. method and joining sections of casing;
f. nature of filter material r
•g. depth and composition of seals;
h. method and length of time of development;
3. specifications, drawing, and data for location and
installation of unsaturated zone monitoring
.equipment.
. ' ' '. . 4. sampling protocol and analytical methods.
• .P B. The detection monitoring program shall be designed to
detect the presence of waste constituents in surface• • •'•» v« _~ .«/•'•.- -• • . . _ . ! . •
[ j * water of ground water outside of the 'waste site and in
' . the iinsaturated zone beneath and -adjacent to the vasten •' • ••••'••'' -'••.' • eite, arid the background water quality;
n • • • *.- /, •' • -C. The. water quality monitoring program shall include
p . . ' '• • 'j ' . :• consistent and appropriate sampling and analytical* • • • • * * * « ' • *
. procedures that accurately neasure indicator parameters
I . and waste constituents to provide a reliable indication' * . ^
of water quality. At a minimum, the program shall
include procedures and techniques for:
*
1. sample collections; '/AX•f. . : . Lf-\\
2. sample preservation and shipment; PEr*
T3. chain 'of custody control; and
4. analytical procedures. The program shall include a
priority pollutant scan - EPA 624, 625 and ICAP
.i^ .-.-• metal scan - all sampling shall include std. field" * • • •
parameters of (ph Temp. E.C.) laboratory orders• . . .« •* • *
should request any other breaks or peaks of
concern.
'>.
D. The unsaturated zone monitoring program shall be
» .r- • . . •T . . • , . • • - . - •* * • .r * * . * * * •' • designed to detect waste constituents which may escape*
' from waste sites before such constituents reach ground .
I • water.
r ' ' • . •E. The unsaturated zone monitoring system shall consist of
n - a sufficient number bf monitoring points at apcropriate- . . . ' * • ' . '
locations and depths to-represent the background soil-r •. • ' •' • • • • ; . . .I. , pore liquid quality and, the chemical make-up of soil
p . that has not been affected by leakage from the disposal: • •. .' • . ' • ' • • : ;
.site. >Method for determining background values are
P . given in subchapter 2552 (d) of Subchapter 15. •
F. Regional Boards shall specify the frequency and timing• « "
of soil and soil-pore liquid aonitoring at the waste
site. '
. •* •
VIII. Water Quality Monitoring Report
The Water Quality Monitoring Report (SWAT) shall consist of the•
results and conclusions of the monitoring program conducted
• i
A. An evaluation, supported by water quality analyses on
the quality of water known to exist under or within one' • 'V
• Aile of the disposal site perimeter including all data
necessary to establish background water quality.
AIFf
during'the year in which the site was ranked. It shall include:
I •»- •. •• • • » • " « •. i* » ^ •
•;. .."rv/:; •:.-""_'••/.•/ . . . '-|J-^ . • _•_• _ _,* • » •
[ " ' " • • " • " • -: •1 1. Background vater quality shall be based on dataf •. • •r from quarterly sampling of veils tipgradient fro:
. . the vaste for one year, if available. These
f . analyses shall:
nn
a. account for measurement errors in sampling and
analyses; and • • " ' " .
I . b. account for seasonal fluctuations in backgroundI : . • . • '. »•
vater quality, if such fluctuations are. - .' ' . . • :
• •" * * • • •
expected to affect the concentration of the' . ' ' . ' • • - ' .." ';"••'. •'•'••* '••" ; • ' '
• • . ' hazardous* constituent. • .\ t
. \2. Background vater quality »ay be based on
appropriate vater quality data that are available
. . in lieu of one-year analyses.
3. .Background vater quality of ground vater »ay be |Cj
based on sampling of veils that are riot cpgradient crp
from the vaste management unit vhere: U
.-• a. hydrogeologic conditions-do not allow the* * • •
determination of 'the upgradient direction; cr
b. sampling at other yells vill provide a
representative • indication of background vater
quality.
-— ••
".:..• .<• L- - 2.' ->':V- • • •.«•-.:
[""....•• . •• . • • • ' • 'rr . 4. In developing the data base used to determine aI . . . . ' •
background value in ground water, the site operator
ji . shall take a minimum of one sample' from .each well
'used to determine background. A minimum of fourp ':: •' • v . "{ J " samples shall be taken from the entire systea used
* • • i
r- • to determine background vater quality, each time' • . . ; ' * • ' • - . . ' . • • • " • ' '•'"' '• -' '
the system is sampled. Should there be only one• * • • .. .
P . background veil, the four consecutive samples shallLi ?, • *'t* .• * •
be' obtained from the one veil and conductingr ' :-:---•'•"' • . •. • '• ' . •[ j . . 'separate analyses for each sample.1
. . • '• ' i; • . . • . - • ' i
n " ' •••''. \ '\ B. All monitoring veils shall be constructed in a manner
that maintains the integrity of the drill hole and
prevents cross-contamination of saturated zones.
C. Logs of-monitoring veils shall be filed vith the . 15
Department of Water Resources (DWR), on forms provided by ' crp
DWR, pursuant to Water Code Section 13751. Soil shall U
. • 'be described according to the Unified Soil
<..•"•*' Classification System. Rock shall be described in a. ' - i- ( iy^' • • v •-.
- • manner appropriate for thie purpose of the
•j.--. • [. ' .investigation.' ' .«
n - . • ' • . . " • . . ' •• • D. The operator shall def ermine vhether "background pore-
^M. " » " ' ' * " • "
f^ " : ' . • ' soil liquid quality end the chemical makeup of the soil; r « r /Jr^l:'. : . = ' • ' T - . • . • . - ' . " ' " : •[ ;-.:~-•?:. • -j: ."•»' • : • "• . • ;::*• • •'! V**-.' •'• -'^ :: ! • - : ^ - - !r .-•'••: ' ;.' r-«!. • £• Kv U1*::..11-'i?*s.: " • -j'- ' ' .-' •••-••-
- .-r-:'''- -ai-.M-v ••-«• -• •• 3'
f . •
r " • • ' • . • '| • " . " has been exceeded vhen the operator conductsO ' ' ' ' '. ' unsaturated zone monitoring.
P . Z. The report ehall include the results of any on-site
leachate jnbnitoring required.
n - '.' .•:• • • ;
_„ IX. TCir Quality Solid Waste Asse'ssTnent Testn - . - • • • • . - - . • • - - . .r A. ' Summarize the findings of the above test.
n - •. .B. Discuss the implications of cuch findings relative to
• potential degradation of water quality as a result of
'. •' gas migration. .
X. Conclusions
A. Full description 'of any hazardous fluids in the. •
disposal site. .
B. Full description of any leakage of hazardous fluids
from the cite.
-*x" :•'; • •
C. Full description of a.ny threat to water quality as a
result of migrating gases from the site.•
D. Description of any resiedial aneasures required/
implemented to mitigate any threat to water quality.
•- ;\ ' •V ! : : . . • -
•- . ... • -I*/-
LI
