HomeMy WebLinkAboutUNDERGROUND TANK FILE #1
-' P;ERN COUNT'( HEALTH DEPARTMEh ~
2700 M Street HEALTH OF~ · o
Bakersfield, California f~ ENV,{ROIqMENTAL HEALTH DIVISION Leon M Hebertson, M.D.
Mailing Address: ~%~ DIRECTCR OF ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH
1415 Truxtun Avenue ' Vernon S. Relchard
Bakersfield, Californ;a 93301
~ovember ~7, ~988
Clifford Bressler
c/o Mr, Jim Clements
P.O. Box 81495
Bakersfield, CA 93308
Re: Reai Estate Studies Completed for two parcels ence owned by
.Rancho Labcrde Estates in Bakersfield, CA
Dear Mr. Clements:
The s~udies completed by Emcon and Assoclaues ~or two real
estate parcml~ Once o~ed by Rancho Laborde Estate in Bakersfield,
Califo=nia we=e reviewed by m ~epresentative of this department.
The studies described one 320 acre lot bordered by CcC~ee Road to
the West and Fruitvalm Avenue to the East: ~nd a 1480 acre lo~
bordered by Co~ee Road to th~ East, Ro~edale Highway to the South
and Calioway to the West, The reports provided information on the
past use o~ the properties, possible p~oblem~ associated with the
Mites, and assessments completed. An overview of the problem areas
aloa~ with the department~ comments are provided below. The 14S0
area lot contained a pesticide s~orage area which is referenced in
a letter ,~ated SeDtembe~ 14, 19S9, The pesticid~ st.ura~e area,
will be discussed and -~e~ences w~l! be m~de to the violations
cited in tbs[ letter.
The %,~'.4~G acre psrc~l had 'the ~cl~ng items of concern
described 'in tbs study 9repa~ed. ~ .
~ r "S h~idin was~/'crude ~t1.. The ~.~ '-
~resen~ in si'gnif, g~ levels. ~ne ~e~ona~ ~r
Clifford Brews
November 17, 1988
Page 4
7. A refuse dump was described east of the friant Kern
Canal. Surplus a~ricultural equipment, use .~res, empty
oil drums, ;~od ahd other refuse was id~ied as h~vi~g
viela~tng Sect'i~.s 8.28.100 and/~8~l~o of ~ne ~ern
and Safe:y Code regar~~he creation o~ a nuisance.
· he i~ems dumped ~~..s~o~d be inven:o=iea
{th~ d~ums) mmy.~~t to ~~ler: some equipment may
s ' _~o a scrap ya~ Th~ owner/opera,or
be used or ~ -.. ~ th
~hould pro~~~ plan to the ~.~,rn c~un:y Heal
Depar~men~%~re ctea~ing this ~lt~'~9~ that it wil~ no~
violate/~la~ions provided !n the state iap~ or iocaA
ordinance.
The 320 acre parcel, had the following items of concern
describ~d in ~he s~udy prepared.
1. Two oil sumps were noted in the southern portion of the
parcel. The liquid within the sump should be sampled to
see if ot~er chemicmls of concern as halogena~ed
compounds, PCBs, and Metals are present In significant
levels. The Regional Wa~er Quality Control Board should
be advised ~nd allowed to give guidanc~ on the closure
of the sumps.
2. 0il stains were observed around two oil stormge tanks.
The stains could bs indicative of pmst leaks/s~lls. One
~amDle was retrieved 6" below ~r~de at one tank.site, on
the South,'So~heastern portion of the parcel. The sample
sh~wed ~oil contamination o~ heavy hyd:ocarbons. The .... ~'.
e~nt of cont~ain~lo~ should, be determined, c~ude oil
iS not presently considered a hazardous waste, however
~he contamina~ion present should be characterized and any
possible threat to G~oundwa~er sources addressed. The
future plans ~o~ the c~ntamlnat~d area should be
cpnsidered in mll discussions addressing mitigation of
thi~ s~te.
The ir~lGation sump ~ad only tr~ce amGunts of the
pesticides DDE and DDT. ~h~ levels detected ~e~e not
significant. If the sample retrieved was representative
of the sump, ~hen the s~p appea~s to be no problem as
far as an accumulation o~ halogenated hydrocarbons- The
assessment company should address the ra~iona~ for
~etFlevJng ~nly one sample in the sump.
Clifford Bre~sler
November 17. 1988
Page §
4. The sample taken in the Ag acreage had nondetectable
levels of halcgenated hydroca:~bons. If the sample
retrieved was either representative of ~he ~armin9
acreage cr the worst expected, the area can be assumed
free of halogenated pesticides/herbicides. The ratlonml
for ~et~i,~ving only one sample ~rum this area should be
documented.
5. The stained areas beneath the l~akin~ transformers were
mualyzed. The analysis suggested that there were no PCBs
pre~en~ in the soils sampled. This area appears ~o have
been appropriately characterized, assumAn9 that t~e
stained area was small and the sample was retrieved
within the stalaed area.
The letter dated September !4. 1988, r~quired that you submit
a site charaoterizatlon proposal to the Kern County Health
~epartmen-~: within GO d~¥s. The studies completed for the Rancho
Labo~de Esta%:es were deficient in the items ~ummarized above. You
must submit a repor'~ p:~oviding rational for activities completed
and proposed ~ampiing aJ~d analysis for the pesticide ~torage area,
~he irrigation drainage basins, and the refuse dump site wlth~n 30
days. T~e a~plicati::n Sot operation or abandonment o~ the
~ndez'~round ~tora~e t$r:~s m~st be completed an~ submitted to this
~epartment within 30 day~.
Thank you ~..r the opportunity to assist you in this ma~er~ ,
and if you nay:9 any quegtlons, please feel free to call me at (805)
861-S636.
/~i/~~erely,
Envir~nnlgn~al Heal u-~r--~pec~alis~
Hazardous Materials Management Program
AEG:dr
cc: County Administrative Office
Reg~.ona~ Water Quality Control Board - Fresno
MCCORM CK. BARe. W. S r rARD. WAYr &
A~ORN~S AT ~W
~a~ E Wa~ Sa~ ~ ~ P.O. BOX 2~13
~{~ ~. ~ Wa~ w. ~e~a FRESNO, CALIFORNIA ~13 ~ ~ ~ Dudl~ W. Shepp~
3am~ ~ Perm Mi~ F. ~11 RoM ~ ~ Or ~1
S~phen ~ ~ea S~ ~ ~ M~
M~o L ~l~m~ 3c. 3e~ ~ Ead 1 ~1 FuEon Mall Pa~ L r~ ~ ~ M~i~
Mi~ael G. W~ ~ Jon~ Fresno, Cal~ornia ~721 ~ G. ~ (19~-1~1)
3am~ P. Wagoner ~ D. H~ T~d W. ~ S~phen B~e~
S~en G. ~u P~p ~ ~i~ ~B~ Paul 3. O'~u~ Jr. (1~1-1~)
Gordon ~ Pa~ Ma~ ~ Harm ~0~ ~O$~O Stroo~ Do. Id
Wade M. Ha~ ~ ~ B~n Fr~o, Ca[~omia 9372~ Rog~
W. F. D~er D~d ~ McNa~ Daniel · Wu~ Doro~ 3. Aden
J~t~ ~ Spi[Iner ~m~ L ~om~n ~ T~d ~ Fi~ Administer
Hilwn ~ Ryder De~ ~ ~n Telephone (209) ~2-1150 Go.on
D. Greg Du~in W~ [ U~d F~ (209) ~2-1~2 ~oaa ~ Hol~ 3r. MODESTO OFFICE
Mamball ~ ~im~ ~ W. Hop~ ~qua
Donald [ Bia~ Reni L ~mple Ted ~ Smi~ ~n~ PI~ ~ To~r
Daniel P. Lyons Mi~l 2. ~hins~ Mi~ 2. R~ 11~ Nin~ ~ Su~ 1510
~l~ ~ Waist D~d G. Vald~ ~ F. Vo~
Mi~ael L Wilhelm Ro~ E Hud~ 3~ D. G~ Telephone (~) ~11~
~oh.~D~o~,h~S~. ..S~o.. ~anua~y 2~, 1993 F~(~)5~*11a
~y G~een
P~og~am Nanage~
Environmen~a[ Hea~h Services Dept.
ReSource ~anagemen~ Agency
Dept. of Environmental Hea~h Services
1700 M Street, Suite 300 ~'
Bakersfield, CA 93301
Re: Laborde Property.
Dear ~y:
Enclosed herewith is a copy of a letter you sent to the
trustee for the Laborde Estate regarding the above-referenced real
property. In the letter you confirm that the pesticide storage
area had been cleaned up on the property and that any further
remediation of the sump area would be limited to a capping in place
by either an asphalt or concrete cap during construction of a
co~ercial structure on the property.
The purchasers of the real property are interested in
~ ...... = c~n,..ma~.on from you that the sump area can be capped, if
you can provide me with a description of what work, if any, is
necessary for this site to be closed, it would be appreciated. If
a cap is required, a description of the type of cap necessary would
be helpful. I suspect that the fact this property is zoned
co~ercial should help. Please contact me if you have any
questions or need any assistance.
Very truly yours,
McCO~ICK, B~STOW, SHEPP~D,
WAYTE & C~UTH
TJ: jdh
51]5f000.~re
Val Vista Estates, Inc.
January 4, 1993
Ms. Amy Green
Kern County Environmental Health Department
2700 M Street
Bakersfield, CA
RE: 320-Acre Parcel formerly part of Rancho-Laborde Estates~.~
Dear Ms. Green:
Enclosed is a copy of a letter (3 pages) from you to Clifford Bressler dated November 17,
1988, which references an Emcon and Associates report on 320 acres that we purchased from
Mr. Bressler. Since that report was issued, the oil wells and two oil sumps which were
operated under a leasehold agreement by Baker-Dickey, have been abandoned. We requested
Emcon and Associates to review the abandoned area (approximately 80 acres) as well as address
other items that you questioned in the original 'report.
Enclosed is Emcon's updated report for your review which covers the approximately 80-acre
parcel.
Please let us know what action is required so that we may proceed with development of this
acreage. Ms. Erin O'Connell at Emcon, 805 389-3771, can answer any technical questions
regarding their report. Jim Baker, 805 589-0910, can answer questions regarding the
abandonment.
Very truly yours,
FRUITVALE PROPERTIES
By: Va_l Vista Estates, Inc.
Project Manager
enc.
cc: Erin O'Connell, Emcon
Jim Baker
201 Shipyard Way, Suite E · Newport Beach, CA 92663 · (714) 723-4255 · Fax (714) 723-4246
Mailing Address: P.O. Box 3006 · Newport Beach, CA 92659
INTER-OFFICE MEiVlO
TO DATE
i ~/~ ~. ~/~/~
Gmcon Ass ociates
140 Camino Ruiz · Camarillo, California 93012-6700 · (805) 389-3771 · Fax (805) 389-3779
December 9, 1992
Project 2206-400.01
Ms. Bonnie Godfrey
Project Manager
Fruitvale Properties
Post Office Box 3006
Newport Beach, California 92659
Re: Response Letter
81.87-Acre Portion of 320-Acre Rancho Laborde Site (Parcel "A")
Bakersfield, California
Dear Ms. Godfrey:
EMCON Associates (EMCON) has prepared this letter discussing the
environmental consulting services provided to Fruitvale Properties, Inc.
(Fruitvale) for the above-referenced site. The purpose of the environmental
services was to review the previous work completed at the site, conduct a
site reconnaissance to observe the current condition of the property, and to
respond to the Kern County Health Department - Environmental Health
Division (County) review letter dated November 17, 1988.
BACKGROUND
The site is an 81.87-acre parcel located to the north of Meany Avenue,
between Coffee Road and Patton Way, in Bakersfield, California (Figure 1 ).
The site has previously been used for both agricultural and crude-oil
production activities.
PJ2206~L120792.WP5:VCJsbz(2206-400.01) ~
Ms. Bonnie Godfrey Project 2206-400.01
December 9, 1992
Page 2
In August 1988, EMCON conducted a Real Estate Due Diligence study on
a 320-acre parcel (Parcel "A") that included the subject site (EMCON,
August 17, 1988). This study included:
· Interviewing local, county, and state regulatory agencies to
determine if regulatory files concerning the property existed
· Reviewing aerial photographs to determine prior land usage
· Visually inspecting the parcel to identify any potential "high risk"
areas
· Collecting shallow subsurface soil samples from identified "high
risk" areas during the site visit
· Analyzing selected representative soil samples for various
pesticides, herbicides, oils, and similar chemicals
This study concluded that two out of 26 pdority pollutant pesticides (DDE
and DDT) were present in the soil sample collected from the irrigation
sump. The concentrations of these two compounds were approximately two
levels of magnitude below the State of California Total Threshold Limit
Concentration ('FI'LC) for both compounds. The study also concluded that
no chlorinated acid herbicides were detected in this soil sample 'or in the
soil sample collected from the irrigation catch basin. Polychlorinated
biphenyls (PCBs) were not detected in a soil sample collected from beneath
the transformer. Crude oil impacted soils were detected in the vicinity of
the aboveground tank location. However, crude oil is not considered a
hazardous substance according to the State of California (Health and Safety
Code, Chapter 8.6, Section 25317[a]).
On November 17, .1988, the County responded to the EMCON report dated
August 17, 1988, regarding the 320-acre (Parcel A) and the EMCON report
dated September 16, 1988, regarding a separate 1,480-acre property
(Parcel B). The County response letter discussed five items of possible
PJ2206~L120792.WP5:VCJsbz(2206-400,01)
Ms. Bonnie Godfrey Project 2206-400.01
December 9, 1992
Page 3
concem with regard to the 320-acre (Parcel "A") property, and requested
that a report responding to these items be submitted to the County.
In October 1992, Fruitvale requested that EMCON review the site
documentation regarding the abandoned well sites, the two oil sump areas,
and the irrigation sump; and respond to the County review letter dated
November 17, 1988.
DATA COLLECTION AND REVIEW OF DOCUMENTS
In November 1992, EMCON obtained and reviewed the available data
regarding the abandonment and cleanup of the four on-site oil wells and two
oil sumps. Abandonment data regarding the oil wells was obtained from
both Fruitvale and the Baker-Dickey Partnership (Mr. Jim E. Baker), the
previous leaseholder. Information regarding the removal of the oil sumps
was obtained from Mr. Jim E. Baker of the Baker-Dickey Partnership and
Mr. Michael T. Rodgers of the Regional Water Quality Control Board
(RWQCB) (personal communication, November 24, 1992).
On May 14, 1992, abandonment of the four on-site oil wells ("Tenneco"
1-21, APl No. 029-06775, "Tenneco" 2-21, APl No. 029-06776, "Tenneco"
3-21, APl No. 029-06777, and "Tenneco" 4-21, APl No. 029-06778) was
observed by Mr. Joe Perrick as a representative of the Resources Agency
of California Department of Conservation, Division of Oil and Gas (DOG,
May 28, 1992). The abandonment/plugging operations were witnessed and
reported as approved by the DOG. On August 14, 1992, the DOG
accepted the report of abandonment for the four on-site oil wells and
determined that all of the requirements of the DOG had been fulfilled.
Documentation regarding the abandonment of the four oil wells is presented
in Attachment 1.
PJ2206~L120792.WP5:VCJsbz(2206-400.01)
Ms. Bonnie Godfrey Project 2206-400.01
December 9, 1992
Page 4
On June 22, 1979, Waste Discharge Requirements (WDR) Order
No. 79-144 prescribed requirements and governed the disposal of produced
wastewater to the unlined oil sumps on the subject property. On December
5, 1980, Cease and Desist Order No. 80-213 was adopted. This order
required the discharger to comply with the effluent limitations established
in WDR Order No. 79-144. Mr. Jim E. Baker acquired these requirements
with the operation of the site.
On July 30, 1992, Mr. Michael T. Rodgers, as a representative of the
RWQCB, conducted a facilities inspection of the subject site and concluded
that the oil wells and associated appurtenances had been abandoned
(RWQCB, September 18, 1992). Mr. Rodgers also noted that no oil sumps
were observed on the site during this inspection. Mr. Rodgers concluded
that WDR Order No. 79-144 and Cease and Desist Order No. 80-213 were
no longer necessary to regulate the operation of facilities on the site. On
November 2, 1992, the RWQCB sent two letters to Mr. Jim E. Baker stating
that, on October 23, 1992, the RWQCB adopted Order Nos. 92-206 and 92-
207, finding that all sumps used for the disposal of wastewater had been
removed from the listed sites, including the subject site (RWQCB,
November 2, 1992). These Orders rescinded previous Order Nos. 79-144
and 80-213, stating that the dischargers had achieved compliance with the
Cease and Desist Orders. The inspection report and vadous letters
documenting the removal of the oil sumps are presented in AttaChment 2.
Documentation regarding the analysis and removal of stained soils in the
area of the western oil sump is presented in Attachment 3.
SITE RECONNAISSANCE
EMCON conducted a site visit on November 16, 1992, to observe the
locations of the four former oil wells, two oil sumps, and the condition of the
surrounding soil, the condition of the irrigation sump/catch basin, and the
condition o:t the above-ground oil storage tanks and the surrounding soils.
No additional soil samples for analyses were collected.
PJ2206~L120792.WP5:VCJsbz(2206-400.01)
Ms. Bonnie Godfrey Project 2206-400.01
December g, 1992
Page 5
No evidence of the four oil wells was observed at the ground surface during
the site visit. Based on the data obtained from the DOG and the RWQCB,
these wells are assumed to have been abandoned. No staining of the
surrounding soils was observed in the vicinity of three of the four wells;
however, minor soil staining was observed in the vicinity of the central well
to the north (Figure 2). These soils cover an area of approximately
30 square feet and appear to be limited in extent based on the surface
appearance.
The irrigation sump is located in the northwestem portion of the property
and does not appear to contain any discolored soils.
Discolored soils are located to the west of Patton Way, approximately 40
feet west of the water pump. These stained soils appear to be surficial,
encompassing an area of approximately 300 square feet, and have a slight
petroleum odor.
RESPONSE TO COUNTY REVIEW LE'I'rER
The County responded to the Real Estate Due Diligence report dated
August 17, 1988, and requested responses to five comments. The County
comments and EMCON responses are included below.
County Comment No. 1. Two oil sumps were noted in the
southern portion of the parcel The liquid within the sump should
be sampled to see if other chemicals of concern as halogenated
compounds, PCBs, and metals are present in significant levels.
The Regional Water Quality Control Board should be advised
and allowed to give guidance on the closure of the sumps.
PJ220~L120792,WP5:VCJsbz(2206-400.01 )
Printed on Recvcled PaDer
Ms. Bonnie Godfrey Project 2206-400.01
December 9, 1992
Page 6
EMCON Response No. 1. The oil sumps were removed pdor to July
30, 1992, and the removals were accepted by the RWQCB on
October 23, 1992 (RWQCB, November 2, 1992). This subject was
discussed in detail earlier in this letter. Documentation regarding the
removal of the oil sumps is presented in Attachment 2.
County Comment No. 2. Oil stains were observed around two
oil storage tanks. The stains could be indicative of past
leaks/spills. One sample was retrieved 6 inches below grade at
one tank site, on the south~southeastern portion of the parcel
The sample showed soil contamination of heavy hydrocarbons.
The extent of contamination should be determined. Crude oil is
not presently considered a hazardous waste, however the
contamination present should be characterized and any possible
threat to groundwater sources addressed. The future plans for
the contaminated area should be considered in all discussions
addressing mitigation of this site.
EMCON Response No. 2. One area of oil-stained soils in the vicinity
of one set of oil-storage tanks was located on a portion of the 320-
acre Parcel "A" site, located to the north of the subject site and,
therefore, is not addressed in this document. The second area where
oil-stained soils were noted was visually checked during the NOvember
16, 1992 field reconnaissance. An area of approximately 300 square
feet of stained soil was noted. This subject was discussed previously
within this letter.
County Comment No. 3. The irrigation sump had only trace
amounts of the pesticides DDE and DDT. The levels detected
were not significant. If the sample retrieved was representative
of the sump, then the sump appears to be no problem as far as
an accumulation of halogenated hydrocarbons. The assessment
company should address the rationale for retrieving only one
sample in the sump.
PJ2206\L120792.WPS:VCJsbz(2206-400.01)
PrintRd on. Flecvcled PaD er
Ms. Bonnie Godfrey Project 2206-400.01
December 9, 1992
Page 7
EMCON Response No. 3. Analysis of the sample detected only trace
amounts of the pesticides DDE and DDT (EMCON, August 17, 1988).
The sample collected from the irrigation sump is considered to be
representative of the matedal found within the sump. Any materials
carded into the sump would be transported by water and would be
homogenized by the transportation process. Therefore, one sample
was considered adequate for characterization of the sump material.
County Comment No. 4. The sample taken in the Ag acreage
had nondetectable levels of haiogenated hydrocarbons. If the
sample retrieved was either representative of the farming
acreage or the worst expected, the area can be assumed free of
halogenated pesticides/herbicides. The rationale for retrieving
only one sample from this area should be documented.
EMCON Response No. 4. The soil sample was not collected on the
subject site but was collected within the 320-acre Parcel "A" site to the
north and, therefore, is not addressed in this document.
County Comment No. 5. The stained areas beneath the
leaking transformers were analyzed. The analysis suggested
that there were no PCBs present in the soil samples. This area
appears to have been appropriately characterized, assuming that
the stained area was small and the sample was retrieved within
the stained area.
EMCON Response No. 5. The stained area beneath the transformer
was limited in extent and the sample was collected from within the
stained area. The analysis of the sample did not detect the presence
of PCBs within the soil sample.
PJ2206~L120792.WPS:VCJsbz(2206-400.01)
Printed on Recycled Pa~)er
Ms. Bonnie Godfrey Project 2206-400.01
December 9, 1992
Page 8
SUMMARY
EMCON has prepared this letter report to summarize the findings from the
data review and the site reconnaissance, and to respond to the County's
five comments regarding the site, as presented in the review letter dated
November 17, 1988.
EMCON appreciates the opportunity to provide services to Fruitvale
Properties for this project. Should you have any questions, please contact
either of the undersigned at (805) 389-3771.
Respectfully submitted,
EMCON Associates
Erin K. O'Connell
Project Geologist
Ralph J. Schmitt
Executive Manager
EKO/RJS:sbz
Attachments: References
Figure 1 - Site Location Map
Figure 2 - Site Plan
Attachment 1 - Documentation of Oil-Well Abandonment
Attachment 2 - Documentation of Oil-Sump Removal
Attachment 3 - Certified Analytical Results and Soil
Manifests
PJ2206\L120792.WP5:VCJsbz(2206-400.01)
Printed on Recycled Pa=er
REFERENCES
County, November 17, 1988, Review Letter of EMCON Report dated
August 17, 1988, for Parcels A and B, Rancho Laborde Estates,
Bakersfield, California: Kern County Health Department
Environmental Health Division, Bakersfield, California.
DOG, May 28, 1992, Report on Operations, No. T492-820 through
T492-823, Sec. 21, T. 29S, R. 27E, MDB&M Fruitvale Field, Kern
County: Resources Agency of California, Department of Conservation,
Division of Oil and Gas, Bakersfield, California.
DOG, August 14, 1992, Report of Well Abandonment, "Tenneco" wells 1-21
through 4-21, APl No. 029-06775 through 029-06778, Section 21, T.
29S, R. 27E, MDB&M, Fruitvale field, Kern County: Resources
Agency of California, Department of Conservation, Division of Oil and
Gas, Bakersfield, California.
EMCON, August 17, 1988, "Parcel A" Summary Report, Real Estate Due
Diligence Study, Rancho Laborde Site: Bakersfield, Ca#fomia: EMCON
Associates, Burbank, California.
EMCON, September 16, 1988, "Parcel B" Summary Report, Real Estate
Due Diligence Study, Rancho Laborde Site, Bakersfield, California:
EMCON Associates, Burbank, California.
RWQCB, November 2, 1992, Recission of Waste Discharge
Requirements/Cease & Desist Orders for Fruitvale Oil Field- Kern
County, California: Regional Water Quality Control Board, Fresno,
California.
PJ2206\L120792.WPS:VCJsbz(2206-400.01 )
Printed on Recycled Paper
RWQCB, September 18, 1992, Inspection Report - Tenneco Lease
Fruitvale Oil Field, Kern County, California: Regional Water Quality
Control Board, Fresno, California.
PJ2206~L120792.WP5:VCJsbz(2206-400.01)
Printed on Recvcled Paoer
FIGURES
Printed on Recvcled PaPer
TOUR
,.~haf~r-4'am Co
VILLAGE ~ t,.~, .~v ~..
20
ACRES eu~ ~r,4 I ~
L ~
TENTATIVE TRACT NO. 5620
BAKE RS.~__F! EL D, CAL_.~I FOR.__._.N I A IP"°OEcT "°'/
SITE LOCATION MAP 12206'400'01J
Printed on Recycled Paper
ATTACHMENT 1
DOCUMENTATION OF OIL-WELL ABANDONMENT
R~SOURCES AGENCY /0RNIA
DEPARTMENT OF CONSERVATION
DIVISION OF 0IL AND GAS No. T492-823
REPORT ON OPERATIONS
James E. Baker
BAKER-DICKEY PARTNERSHIP Bakers field, California
P.O. Box 1032 May 28, 1992
Bakersfield, CA. 93302
Your operations at well "Tenneco" 1-21, AP1 No. 029-06775, Sec. 21, T. 29S, R. 27E,
MDB&M Fruitvale Field, in Kerm County, were witnessed on 5-14-92. Joe Perrick,
representative of the supervisor, was present from 1200 to 1215. There w~re also
present Mr. James E. Baker, agent.
Present c~ndition of well: 27" cern. 40'; 7" cern. 3885', perf. (@ int.) 3340'-34A2',
cavity shot 3180'. TD. 4496'. ED. 3695'. Plugged w/cern. 3695'-3210', 3190'-3018'
amd 130 '-5 ' .
The operation~ w~re performed for the purpose of abamdor~ent.
DECISION:
THE PLUGGING OPERATIONS AS WITNESSED AND REPORTED ARE APPROVED.
K. P. Menderson
: Acting Oil & Gas Supervisor
~P/~s ~ ~..
Hal Bop~~~~-~
De~ S~pervisor
OG ~09
R. ESOU~CE$ AGENCY OF .ANIA
DEPARTMENT OF CONSEHVATION
DIVISION OF OIL AND GAS No. T492-822
R~.PORT ON OPF/{ATIONS
James E. Baker
BAKER-DICKEY PARTNERSHIP Bakers field, California
P.O. Box 1032 May 28, 1992
Bakersfield, CA'. 93302
Your operations at: well "Tenneco" 2-21, API No. 029-06776t See. 21, T. 295, R. 27E,
MDB&M Fruitvale Field, tn Kern County, were witnessed on 5-14-92. Joe Perrick,
representative of the supervisor, was present fr~m 1215 t:o 1230. There w~re also
-presen~ Mr. James E. Baker, a~ent.
Present cgndttion of well: 22# cern. 40'; 5 1/2" id. 3939', c.p. 3887', W$O perf.
3881', perf. 3891'-3939', cavil7 shot 3215'; 4" ld. 3845'-3937', perf. 3889'-3936'.
ID. 3940'. Plugged w/cern. 3853'-3647', 3220'-3123' and 130'-5'.
The operations were performed for the purpose of a~u~oument.
DECISION:
THE PLUGGING OPERATIONS AS WITNESSED AND REPORTED ARE APPROVED.
K. P. H~nderson
; Acting.Oil & Gas Supervisor
3Pl~ .,..
Hal Bopp Deputy
109
~ESOURCES AGENCY OF
DEPARTMENT OF CONSERVATION
DIVISION OF OIL AND GAS No. T492-82I
REPORT 0N OPERATIONS
James g. Baker
BAKER-DICKEY PARTNERSHIP Bakers f ield, Calif omi a
P.O. Box 1032 May 28, 1992
Bakersfield, CA. 93302
Your o~erations at well "Tenneco" 3-21, API No. 029-06777, See. 21, T. 29S, R. 27E,
MDB&M Fruitvale Field, in Kern County, were witnessed on 5-14-92. Joe Perrick,
representative of the supervisor, was present from 1230 to 1245. There were also
present Mr. James E. Baker, Agent.
Pre~ent condition of well: 22" cern. 40'; 5 1/2" ld. 3938', c.p. 3883', WSO perf.
3875' , perf. 3888'-3938' , cavity shot 3240 '; 2 3/8" ld. 3841'-3938' , perf.
3883'-3937'. 193. 3938'. Plugged w/cern. 3841'-3675', 3250'-3045' amd 130'-5'.
The operations were performed for the'purpose of abandonment.
DECISION:
THE PLUGGING OPERATIONS AS WITNESSED AND REPORTED ARE APPROVED.
/ ; K.P. Henderson
Acting .Oil & Gas Supervisor
~/~s ~;~ .,:
Hal Bopp Deputy' ~upervisor
0G 109
DEPARTMENT OF CONSERVATION
DIVISION OF OIL AND GAS No. T492-820
· EPO~T ON OPERATIONS
James E. Baker
BAKE~-DICKEY PArTNErSHIP Bakersfield, California
P.O. Box 1032 May 28, 1992
Bakersfield, CA. 93302
Your operations at wm]l "Tehneeo" 4-21, API No. 029-06778, Sec. 21, T. 29S, R. 27E,
MDB&M Fruitvale Field, in Kern County, were witnessed on 5-14-92. Joe Perrick,
representative of the supervisor, was present from 1245 to 1300. There w~re also
present Mr. James E. Baker, A~ent.
Present ¢on~ition of we]l: 27" cern. 40'; 7" id. 3950', c.p. 3895', W$O perf.'3885',
perf. 3900'-3950'. TD. 3950'. Plumed w/cern. 3950'-3756', 3250'-3088' and 130'-5'.
The operations were performed for the purpose of abandonment.
DECIS I0N:
THE PLUGGING OPERATIONS AS WITNESSED AND P. EPORTED ARE APPKOVED.
K. P. H~nderson
~ Acting Dtl & Gas Supervisor
JP/]s~
Hal B0pp Deputy Supervisor
OG 109
~OURC~$ AGENCY OF CALIFORNIA
DEPAR?MENT OF CONSERVATION
DIVISION OF OIL & GAS
REPORT OF WELL ABY~NDONMENT
· Bakersfield, California
AUgUSt 14, 1992
James E. Baker
Baker-.Dickey Partnership
P.O0 Box 1032
Bakersfield, CA 9302
Your report of abandonment of well "Tenneco" X-ZZ, A.P.I. No. 029-
06?75, Section 21, T. zgs, R. 37~, MD B.& M., FrUitw&le field, Kern
County, dated 8/4/92, received 8/3/93, has be~n examir=d in
conjunction with records filed in this office, nnd we have
deternined that all of the requirements of this Division have been
fulfilled.
NOTE~ Surface plugging completed on 5/14/92.
NO Bond
cc: Conservation committee
K. P. Henderson
Acting Oil & Gas Supervisor
HB/RH/RF _~._.. ~ ~.vv~:'
H~iBopp, Deput~ Super'z~s-~
0~159
Printed on Recycled Paper
~8OUR¢~S AG~.N¢¥ OF CALIFORNIA
D~PARTMENT OF CONSERVATION
DIVZ$ION OF O2L & OAS
REPORT OF WESL AB~DO~E~T
· Bakersfield, California
Auguzt 14, 1992
James E. Baker
Baker-Dickey Partnership
P.O. Box 1032
Bakersfield, CA 93302
Your report of abandonment of well "Tenneco" 3-Zl, A.P.I. No. 039-
06776, Section 21, T. 29S, R. Z?E, MD B.& M., Fruitvale field, Kern
County, dated 8/4/9~, received 8/3/gZ, has been examined in
conjunction with records f~led in this office, and we have
determined that all of the requirements of this Division have been
fulfilled.
NOTE~ Surface plugging completed on 5/14/92.
NO Bond
cc: Conservation Committee
K. P. Henderson
Acting Oil & Gas Supervisor
/Hal Bopp, Deputy Supervisor
0G159
Printe~ on Recvcled Paper
~,OUR¢~.$ AGENCY OF CALIFORNIA
DEPARTMENT OF CONSERVATION
D~VISION OF OIL & GAS
REPORT OF WELL ABANDONMENT
· Bakersfield, California
August 14, 1992
James E. Baker
Baker-Dickey Partnership
P.O. Box 1032.
Bakersfield, CA 93302
Your report of abandonment of well "Tenneco" 3-Zl, A.P.I. No.
06777, Section ~X, T. 2gs, R. 27E, MD B.& M., Fruitvale field, Kern
County, dated 8/4/92, received 8/$/92, has been examined in
oonjun:tion with records filed in this office, and we have
deterKlned that all of the requirements of this Division have been
fulfilled.
NOTE~ Surface plugging completed on 5/14/92.
NO Bond
cc: Conservation Committee
K. P. Henderson
Acting Otl & Gas Supervisor
L~[&l Bopp, D~p~Y SuPervisor
09159
Printed on Recvcled Paper
2OURCE$ AOENC¥ OF CALIFORNIA
DEPARTMENT OF CONSERVATION
DIVISION OF OIL & GAS
RZPORT OF WELL ABARDONMEI~T
· Bakersfield, California
August 14, 1992
James E. Baker
Baker-Dickey ~artnership
P.O. Box 1032
Bakersfield, CA 93302
Your report of abandonment of well "Tenneco" 4-2~, A.P.I. No. 029-
06778, Section 21, T. ZgS, R. 27Z, ND B.& M., Fruitvale field, Kern
County, dated 8/4/92, received 8/3/§2, has been examined in
conjunction with records filed in this office, and we ha,'e
determined that all of the requirements of this Div~.sion have been
fulfilled.
NOTE: Surface plugging completed on 5/14/92.
No Bond
cc: Conservation Committee
K. P. Henderson
Acting Oil & Gas Supervisor
Hal Bopp, Deputy superv~ sot
O~1~
Printed on Recycled Pal)er
ATTACHMENT 2
DOCUMENTATION OF OIL-SUMP REMOVAL
printed on Recycled Paper
: r ......... , :-.-:: .... '. PI'ir wiI
CALIFORNIA REGIONAL WA1
CENTRAL. VALLEY REGION ~'~
~6~ EAS1 ASHLAN AV~-NUF
J,E. Baker ]8 September 1992
P.O, Box t032
Bakersfield, CA 93302
Warren O, Hahn
Arco 0tl and Gas Company
P.O, Bux ]47
Bakersfield, CA 93302
INSPECTZON REPORT - TENNECO LEASE ~ FRUITVALE OXL FIELO, KERN COUNTY
Enclosed for your informaLion is a re~ort covering a recent inspection of
former oii production wastewaCer land d~sposal facility at the 7enseco lease in
the F~uitvale oll fleld,
The ~nspection indicates ~aste Oisch~rge Requirements Order No. 79-~44 and Cease
and Oes~st Order Ho. 80-2]3 are no longer necessary to regulate the
production operaL~on.
A proposal to ~esctnd these orders will be placed on the agenda for consideration
at the Regional Board meeting to be held o~) ~3 DcLober ~gg2. Alsu enclosed for
your information is tile public hearing notice concerning this matter. If you
have any questions or require additional information, please call Mike Rogers at
(209) 445-619].
SHELTON R. GRAY
Senior Engineering Geologist
~TR:mtWfmc
Enclostlre
cc: Mr. Dave Clark, California Division ot Oil and Gas, Bakersfield
Mr. Steve McCa!lay, Kern County Environmental Health Department.,
Bakersfield
Printed on Recvcled Paoer
OFFICE NO: 5F FA(iILITII~S INSI'I[CH'ION R} ' ' PCA $~slem la~k No. 131
51.}152087002 I.E. Baker (Evans and Cater) Fruilvale, Section 21
None
Kern Count~
SCHEDULED I~SPECTION DATA
OXY M~
..~ tS rids a ~pe 'Al' or 'BI" Compii~n~ In~Oon ot ~n NPDES facility e~ ,e~i~,d by tho ~c~on 1~ g~c,nt workplan? (Y/N)
ff ~. ~nd a ~DY el fl~is fopoH ~ EPA
--. ............................ ..--.._-~ ......... , .. -
INS PI ~I'ION TYPE (Ch~k One)
At ~ 'A' ~pocompl~a~'~ -. Compmhm~sive in~puction in whch &~mp~s m~ t~ken. (EPA Ty~ S)
E1 _ , . 'B' type complianoe - A Ioulmo non~a, mpfir,g in;,po, ct~c,. (CPA ~tp~ C)
02 .. Noncompliance ~l:ow.up -- Inspection made tu vmily cm~ection of a p~evim~siy idnntltiud v{olOlio~
03 ~.~ Enlorc~'men! !olios.up .- Ir.~pecliorc m,de to vodly that c, ondillon~, of an uMorcem~nt action o,o boing met
04 ~ _ Comptalnl .. !nspecl~on, taBOo in =~spo,':so Io t9 complain!
X
05 ..... Pre.ruquh'emen! -. Inspection maclo to g.~h., inlo f(,ta+,ivo Io p,opaf[ng, n,od,fyin0. or (esclnd ~g ri'~uirc, mc~rd;
Mi$~llaneOuS .. Any inspecllon lypt~; not mur~l,:;,~d obove
~f ~ts "~ ~n ~PA i"~sp~'ti~ not me~tioned o~w, ptons~ .Ole lypo, (e.g. -- biomonilorlng. ~rlo~man~ nud~l, diagn~f, lic, otc,)
N Wa~ ~1~ ~ ~alib Assutan,'e-B~sed r.~,~,.tio,~
N woro bioas~y ~mptes laken? (N = No~ :f Y[S. ~:er; S =- Slali~ o~ F = Fbwth~ough
INSP~I'ION SUMMARY (RI~QUIRED) (1 (g) character
Sujface impoundmenls have been removed, No discharge toland. See all~chmenl.
Reg. WDS C~rdmator
WDS ~3~ E~try Date:_ ,, Reg~cnal ~ard f de Numbm:
Print~ on Recvcled Paoer
1[zI2.'92 12:~0 ~ $05 5~9 2552 3 E BAKEA P.2!
FACILI'I'IES INSI .~:CI ION REI'ORT
.q'WRCB {Xll (R{';¥, 5.91)
VIOLATION (IF APPLICABLE)
VIOLA1 ION WPE? {A.O} NrA (~o ~ges lKOOO and IKO~.I gl ~e ~o Wasl~ Dscha~or S~slom U~r$ ~m~ual}
DAlE OF VIO~TI~ {~MMDD) DATE OF VtO~TION DETERMINATION (YYMMDO}
DESCR~PT;ON:
EPA SUG¢'iI".S'D{D INSI'ECTION CI II;.CKI ,IST
' r-~ ..................................................................... . .- :: .'~:":.--.'.':"..-7.'"': ':t-.: :' :.:.'a..:L:.-.':_:.:~_..__~ .... :. ..............
(S ,, Satis,~acto~. M .-. Ma~gi~a!, O, Ur,sati~f~mry, N ~ Not Evoluatod~
NIA
15erm~l Flow ~asu~omonl . P~eboa~mun~ ~.. O;'~'rOl~Or~$ & Me;menonco
____ Reomd$/Report~ ___ Labe,atotk~s ..... Ccmpi,ance .~:h(.~dules __ .Sludge Oisoosal
Facility Site Review EN./P, eceiv,;g Waters S~ll.~.milotiqg ..... O[hor
~ _ (1-5) O.'e;all F ac~lily Oper~don Evaluation (5 ~ Very reliable, 3 = ~fi~lnc~, I - [Jnreli~b~)
~--- '' ".i~ZL~F.~LT.i. ZT.;"TTTT~T.'.'F~':-~'LTf;'7". ........... Y: ....... .'. .................. ..................... ....... ' .......... :.' ..... . . . .
Si t:~..IAL INSTRIJCI'IONS. ]'I'I~MS FOR FOI.,LOWUI~ ON
ADDITIONAL COMMENTS, "' '~
FUTURE INSI'ECI'ION. NOTES, ETC, (Almch additional pages, if necessary)
~-'~Y :" '; '. ............. - . : .................... 7_ '.: '. .. ~Tr~ ..........
See attachment.
ms~omc~t
M05i' RFSENT ORDERS' MOST RECENT INSPECIIONS MOS1 IIECEN1 VIOLA1
~~ ~~I~ ~ ~,~ ~P. TYPE ~ONS? VIOL_ 1~
See altachment.
Printed on Recycled Paoer
l!xi3x92 }2:~0 ~ ~05 5~9 ~552 ~ E ~K££ P.22
[NSt°ECTION REPORT - TENNECO LEASE - FflUITVALE OIL FIELD, KERN COUNTY
INTRODUCTION
Order No. 79-144, adopted 22 June 1979, p~escrtbes ~-equirement~ for Evades and
Carey. Inc. and governs the disposal of produced wastewater to unlined sumps in
Section 21, T29S, R27E, HDB&M of the F~uitvale o~1 field. Cease and Desist Order
No. 80-213 was adoptee on § Oecembet' t980 and requires the Oischatge~ to comp!y
with the numerical effluent l~m~tatton, established in the Otscharger's
requirements. These operations were acquired by J.[. ~aker.
INSPECTION
An inspection of t~ts facility was per. formed on 30 duly 1~92. ! was
unaccompanied during the inspection.
'J.E. Baker operated the Tenneco oil lease in ti~e ~W 1/4 of Section 21. The o~l
wells and associated appurtenances at the facility have since been abandoned.
The? ar? no sumps on the lease. !t)e land is surrounded by a ne~ly developed
residential and commercial area. Mr. Baker has indicated he recently abandoned
the oil lease and sold the property to a ~and developer. Photos (slides) were
taken to document site conditions.
SUMMARY
i.E. laker ~cquire~ ~l~e operations that are governed by Waste Discharge
Requirements Order No. 79-144 and Cease and Des(st Order No. 80-213 which
~ere originally issued to Evans and Carey, )nc.
2. The discharge of ~astewater to unlined sumps has ceased ~t the subject
facility. The Pischarger has achieved compliance with the Cease
Desist Order,
3. All su~ps ha~e bee~ removed ~nd the oil wells h~ve been abandoned at the
subject facility. Waste Discha~geRequtrementsOrder ~o. 7g-144 and Cease
ane Desist Order No. 80-~13 are no longer necessary to regulate this
operation.
Print~J on Recvcled Paper
llxi2792 i2:11 ~ 80~ ..,:9 75~2 ] E eAKER = 23
CALIFORNIA REGIONAL WATER QUAIII'¥ CON1ROL
C[N1RAL VALLEY REGION
36]4 E, Ashla~ Avenue
Fresno CA 93726
and
Proposed Rescission of Cease and Desist Orders
for
OIL PROOUCT[ON OPERAI'ORS, FRUITVALE (ill FIELD
KERN COUNIY
The Board adopLed various Cease and DesSst C&D
~!!. producers (~ereafter DIscha~ne ~ ,.,~ .... [_Orders. on ~ December ~gBO for
wasce~ate~ ~o un]tned sumps a: va~t~°~ ~L~,~[~ ~at~n~. o!1 production
uo -~,v.a ~fl ~ne rru~tva~e otl f~eld,
~htch is ~tthtn and Just ~est of the ctty o~ Bakersfiel The C&D Orders
requtred the Dischargers to comply wtth the numerical v:ater~aitLy limitat'lons
establ;shed tn ~hetr ~aste discharge requirements.
Since the issuance o~ the enforcement orders, ~an~ o~ the oil lea~es have been
sold to new operators ~ho have davelope~ appropriate methods of disposing
.thetr oll productionwas~ewaCer. All sumps used for the dt~posal
have been removed. The Dischargers have thus achteved compliance of
~tth the Cease
and Desist Orders. The Board ~il1 consider rescission of
addition, the Boara w111 consider rescinding their ~aste discharge requirement
orders.
The California Regtonal ~aLe~ qualit~ Control Board, Central Valley Regton, wtll
hold a public hearing:
DATE: ~3 Gctober
TINE: 9:00 A.~.
PLACE: gt~te Capitol Butlding
Roo~ J26, ]]th bet.~een L and ~ Streets
gacramento
~ersons wishtng to comment or object to the proposed rescissions are tnv~ted to
5t~bmtt same tn ~etting to the R~gtonal Boa~-d ~ao l~ter than ]80ctobe~ ]~92. All
~o~ent~ or objections ~ce~ved b~ L;fi~ date
Proposed rescissions are brcught before the Board,
A public hearing may.be held upon the r'equest of any ~nterested person, A£ter
considering co,,~r~ents or object, lens, the Board may rescind the J4 cad orde~,s.
Anyone having euesttons r'egard~ng (.his matter should cent. act Hike Rogers at
(~09)445-6~], 'The proposed rescissions and related documents may he inspected
and copied at the Regtonat Board's o~fice at ~he above address, ~eekdays between
8:00 a.m, and 5:~0 p.m.
Printed on Recvcled Paoer
CALIFORNIA EGI NA WATER QUAL~]'Y CO BOARD-- ' .......
CENTRAL VALLEY REGION
SAN JOAQUIN WATERgHED ~RANCH OFFICE,. ~ '
3614 EA&3 ASHLAN AYENUE
ERESNO, CA ~3726
PHONE: (~09) 445,5116
FAX: {209) 445,5~1~
2 Novomber 1992
J.E. Baker
P.O. 8ox 1032
B&ke~sfield, CA 93302
RESCX$SION OFNASTE DISCHARGE REQUIREHENTS / CEASE & DESIST ORDERS FOR FRUITVALE
OIL FIELD - KERN COUNTY
On 23 October 1992, the Central Valley Regienal Water~ Quality Control Board
adopted Order Nos. 92-2O6 and 92-207, which rescinds various waste discharge
requirements and cease & desist orders'previously adopted by the Board, S~me of
the rescinded orders pertain to your operations in the Fruitvale oil field. A
copy of the orders are enclosed for your information.
If you have any questions or require additional information, please call Mike
Rogers at (20g) 445-6191.
SHELTON R. GRAY '"~'~
Senior Engineering Geologist
MTR:mtr
Enc}osu,res
Printed on Recycled Pa~er
CALIFORNIA REGIONAL WATER QUALITY CONTROL BOARD
CENTRAL VALLEY REGION
ORDER NO. 92-206
RESCINDING CEASE AND DESIST ORDERS
FOR
OIL PRODUCTION OPERATORS
FRUITVALE OIL FIELD
KERN COUNTY
The California Regional Water Quality Control Board, Central Valley Region,
(hereafter Board) finds that:
1. The Board adopted various Cease and Desist Orders on 17 December 1980
against oil producers (hereafter Dischargers) who were discharging highly
saline oil production wastewater to unlined sumps at various locations in
the Fruitvale oil field, Kern County. The Cease and Desist Orders
required the Dischargers to comply with the numerical water quality
limitatio~)s established in their waste discharge requirements.
2. At each of the Otschargers' facilities staff has determined that all
sumps used for the disposal of wastewater have been removed. The
Dischargers have achieved compliance with the Cease and Desist Orders.
3. The issuance of this Order is exempt from the provisions of the
California Environmental Quality Act (Public Resources Code Section
21000, et seq.), in accordance with Section 15321(a)(2), Title 14,
California Code of Regulations.
4. The Board, on 23 October !gg2, held a hearing and considered all evidence
on this matter.
IT IS HEREBY ORDERED' that the following Cease and Desist Orders be rescinded:
Order No. Operator Location
(lggS, RZTE, HOB&M)
80-196 Black Gold Oil Co. Section !S
BO-19? BuLtes Resources Section 28
80-198 Calpet Management, Inc. Section 29
80-i99 Cencal Drilling, Inc. Section 29
80--20! Grace Petroleum Company Section 23
80-203 Robert L. Knight Section 28
80-207 W.F. Moore & Son, Inc. Section 2§
B0-209 Pacific Energy Resources Sections 7 & 14
80-210 Petro Resources, Inc. Section 29
80-2]] W.T. Woodward Section 2]
80-~12 B & S 0tl Company Section 23
"'"'-,,80-2i3 Evans and Carey, Inc. Section 2}
80-215 Central Lease, !nc. Section 29
B0-2)6 John L. Sowers Section 26
80-217 Willis Joint-Venture Section 1!
Printed on Flecvcled Paper
ORDER NO. g2-206
RESCINDiNg CEASE AND DESIST ORDERS
OJL PRODIJCTIOH OPERATORS
FRUITYALE OIL FIELD
KERN COUNTY
-2-
!, WILLIA~I H. CROOKS, Executive Officer, do hereby certify the foregoing is a
full, true, and correct copy of an Order adopted by the California Regionm)
Water Quality Control Board, Central Valley Region, on 23 October Igg2.
WIL[~ CROOKS, Executtv'e O~cer;
Printed on RecYcled Pas3er
CALIFORNIA REGIONAL WAI'~R (~UALIT'Y CON'i'ROL BOARD--.
CENlRAL VALLEY REGION
~AN JOAQUIN WA1EI{SIIEO ~IANCIt O!
3614 EA83 ASH[AN AVEN~ ......
FHE~NO, GA 937~6
PIIONE: (2~gl 445.5116
f AX (~09) d45-SDI0
2 November 1992
0.E. Baker
P.O. Box 1032
Bakersfield, CA 93302
RESCISSION OF WASTE DISCHARGE REQUIRER£NTS / CEASE & DESIST ORDERS FOR FRU[TVALE
OIL FIELD - KERN COUNTY
On 23 October 1992, the Central Valley Regional Water quality Control Board
adopted 0rdar Nos. 92-206 and 92-207, which rescinds various waste discharge
requirements and cease & desist orders previously adopted by the Board. Some of
the rescinded orders pertain to your opeFations in the ~ui~vale oil fie~d. A
copy of the orders are enclosed for your information.
If you have any qtm~tions or require additional infurmation, please call ~4ike
Rogers at (209) 445-6191.
SHELTON R. GRAY ~
Senior Engineering Geologist
MTR:mtr
Enclosures
print~cl nn R~cvcl@d Pacer
CALIFORNIA REGIONAL WATER QUALITY CONTROL BOARD
CENTRAL VALLEY REGION
ORDER NO. 92-207
RESCINDING WASTE DISCHARGE REQUIREMENTS
FOR
OIL PRODUCTION OPERATORS
FRUITVALE OIL FIELD
KERN COUNTY
The California Regional Water Quality Control Board, Central Valley Region,
(hereafter Board) finds that:
i. The Board adopted various waste discharge requirements for oil producers
(hereafter Dischargers) operating at various locations in the Fruitvale
oil field, Kern County. lhe requirements govern the discharge of oil
production wastewater to unlined sumps.
2. Staff has inspected the Dischargers' facilities and determined that all
sumps used for the disposal of wastewater have been removed.
3. Waste discharge requirements are no longer necessary to regulate the oil
production operations.
Il IS HEREBY ORDEREO that the following waste discharge requirements Orders
are rescinded:
~.lcJ. tr._~. Adopted for Date of Adoption
77-077 Black Gold Otl Co, 27 May ]977
77-078 Buttes Resources ~7 May 1977
80-092 Calpet Management, Inc. 26 June 1980
80-086 Cencal Drilling, Inc. 26 June 1980
80-089 Grace Petroleum Company 26 June 1980
80-088 Robert L. Knight 26 June 1980
80-Og] W.F. Moore & Son, inc. 26 June 1980
B0-085 Pacific Energy Resources 26 June 1980
80-094 Petro.Resources, Inc. 26 June 1980
77-080 W,T. Woodward 27 May ]977
"~-~-79-144 Evans and Carey, Inc. 22 June lg7g
80-156 Central Lease, Inc. 24 October 1980
80-093 John L. Sowers 26 June 1980
77-220 Willis Joint Venture 22 July 1977
I, WILLIAM H. CRODKS, Executive Officer, do hereby certify the foregoing is a
full, true, and correct copy of an Order adopted by the California Regional
Water Quality Control Board, Central Valley Region, on 23 October I992.
WILLIAM H. CROOKS, Executive Officer
ATTACHMENT 3
CERTIFIED ANALYTICAL RESULTS AND SOIL
MANIFESTS
11/12,'92 i2:02 ~ ~05 _~97 2552 3 E 8~KE£ P.05
LABORATORIES, INC.
Total l."et~':O] ~Um llydrocarbonu
BAKER-DICKY Date of
P.O, BOX 1032 Report: 05/21/92
BAKERSFIELd, CA $3302 Lab #; 4356-2
Attn.: JIM BAKER B05-SBg-0910
Smmpl~ Desorlpti~n: R~MOVED AFTER CONTAMINATION (SOIL) 05-15-92
sa~plo ~h~tri~: Soil
Method
C0nst i tuen~ s ~p.~_~9_~ u 1 t ~ Uni ~ ~,_Q.. L. Me tho~
ToLa! ~etroleu~
Hydrocarbons 80. m~/kg 20.
THESE SAMPLES WERE TAKEN FROM THE
SUMPS AFTER THE CONTAMINATED SOIL
WAS REMOVED.
C&li£o~"nia D.O.H.~. Cert. #1186
D~paremen~ Supervisor
4'10C'),~tl~,~ C:;~ , '."-.]Mk~.~ ..~r~eK.h C;A ~:~-!1 )Fl · flE~L-'lO) -~2/.4,~1 1 ·
L~BORATORI E S, IN L.;.
BAK~R-D%CKY Dst'e cC
P.O. BOX ]032 Report:
BAKERSFIELD, CA 93302 ~ab ~:
Attn.: JI~ BAKER 805-589-0930
Sample Degcrlption: REMOVED FROM SUMP (SOIL) 05.~5-92
~ample Matrix: ~o~]
Matbod
Total Petroleum
'Hydro~&rbons ~000. ~%g,/k~ ~0~0. EPA-41§.].
THIS SOIL IS THE CONTAMINATED MATERIAL
FROM THE SUMP.
california D.O.H.~. C~rt.
Dspargment Supervisor
Printed on Recycled Par)er
Report To: .... . _ o Analysis Requested
:-
~e,~_ _~m~P._- Oec-c__.-riplton Date & Time Sampled
li,'i2/92 12:00 ~ 885 589 255'2 J E BRKER P.82
. ~6MP'"TRUcK' 'BILL~ ........ ~
. '"' ~ .... . .... . ........ ~. .~,. .... ~'L~ '.~':":,~'
, . , .~
.. ~l~ - .7 ..' , : "~ '"
~ ,~i~,~ ~¢"/ ,o,., ' '{:~,N~ .... ~._.,..._ :.:...~*i'A~:~5~[~I
~~ , '" 2 .' :' ~.:"~ .'.'~:.~
' Z ' '. '~ ..... ~ ........... ' ...... :'. ,:~'-I
~~'. ~- /~' ,. ~;~1
, ~. .~, ~;::...:~,....,
-.. :, :;~ ~',:~,.,..~.:
" ~ ~. · ' ~1 ~ ~Sl ~ ~1 I~l '. :" ) .
· "'~.;i~" ~" '"'""~
.~:,' ~.~t~ ~.. ~,'~ .~z. ,- . . z ~'.'.~'
· :. , OFFICE COPY ".'.. .:'.
Print~d on Fl~cvcled Paoer
1~/12./92 12:0! ~ 885 589 2552
. ~'" ~' DUMP.
.~,;.., ~. ~~ ..... ..
"~,~ : .'
, _ ~ ..... ~_ . m;7
~' ,
{~J~) , ...,...
JCJ~lpo) ~ ,... ',~
., ..~ ~., ?~..
~ DESII~O~ ~1~ .' ":
.~ ' ' ' .: 'U."
,..
" ~ - : ~ ~', ,.. ,~.~;.:. ~.;, .,,.
/ ,, . , ,..~..,:~;...~ ~, ~ ~'~
IS~ ~I H~ I~ I~[I
'.~."~' t ' ' A~ ~M.
' ~..~ r.~. t.~ ~. I'
-'. :~.', ==. ~:~.,,.,: :. ,,=.,~.,.~,_,t:~,,
~ ~., l, ..l, . ..: :, ,.,.,~'~~
.. ~o ,t~ i ' :...,..:
~.¢! &~-- - , ~, "
' OFFICE COPY ....
Printed on Recycled Pa,;er
[I/12/92 t2:02 ~ 885 ~,$9 2552 _ 3 E B~KER P.84
Baker-Dickey Patton Way
P.O. 1032
Bakersfield, CA ,
93302
1 ." , ..... ,:,~ .... 10e% Complete With # k ,,'. ..... 1,35e.oe
TillS I$ THE DIRT HAULED IN
TO REPLACE TItE CONTAMINATED
SOIL
Printed on Recycled Pal~er
UNDERGROUND STORAGE TANK UNAUTHORIZED RELEASE (LEAK) / CONTAMINATION SITE REPORT
REPORT DATE CASE.
NAME OF INDIVIDUAL FILING REPORT PHONE ~ SIGNATURE
REGIONAL BOARD COMPANY OR AGENCY NN~IE
REPRESENTING [] OWNER/OPERATOR [] KERH CO. ,~,NV. HEALTH SERVICES DEPT
[] LOOAL AGENCY [] OTHER '
AmRESS
2700 "M" ST. ST~r300, BAKERSFIELD, CA ~301 STATE ZiP
~ , NAME IcONTACT PERSON IPHONE
ADDRESS
4963 E. MCKINLEY AVE., S?E. 202, FRESNO, CA 93'727
FACILITY NAME (IF APPLICABLE~ OPERATOR PHONE
RAi,~CHO LABORDE ESTATE ( )
ADDRESS
CALLOWAY & HAGEMAH ROADS, BAKERSFIELD, CA 93308
STREET C~rY COUNTY
CROSS STREET TYPEOFAREA [] COMMERCIAL [] INDUSTRIAL [] RURAL TYPE OF SUSINESS [] RETAIL FUEL STATION
[] RESIDENTIAL [] OTHER [] FARM [] OTHER
LOCAL AGENCY AGENCY NAME { CONTACT PERSON PHONE
KERN CO. ENV. HEAL'£H' LYDIA V. VON SYDOW 80~ 861-3636
REGIONAL BOARD PHONE
CENTRAL VALLEY ( )
(1) NAME QUANTITY LOST (GALLONS)
P2STICIDES [] UNKNOWN
DATE DISCOVERED HOW DISCOVERED [] INVENTORY CONTROL [] SUBSURFACE MONITORING ~-~][ NUISANCE CONDITIONS
o ~1 8 ~1 Iol :]'ol s~l 8 ~ [] TANK'rEST [] TANK REMOVAL [] OTHER
DATE DISCHARGE BEGAN METHOD USED TO STOP DISCHARGE (CHECK ALL THAT APPLY)
~1 ~f ol ol ~l ~1 [~UNKNOWN [] REMOVE CONTENTS [] REPLACE TANK [] CLOSETANK
HAS DISCHARGE BEEN STOPPED ? [] REPAIRT/t~IK [] REPAIR PIPING [] CHANGEPROCEOURE
SOURCE OF DISCHARGE TANKS ONLY/CAPACITY MATERIAL CAUSE(S)
[] TANK LEAK :~ UNKNOWN GAL. [] FIBERGLASS [] OVERFILL [] RUPTURE/FAILURE
[] PIPING LEAK AGE YRS [] STEEL [] CORROSION [] UNKNOWN
[] OTHER [] UNKNOWN [] OTHER [] S.ILL ~ OTHER
CHECK ONE ONLY
[] UNDETERMINED ~ SOILONLY [] GROUNDWATER [] SRINKINGWATER-(CHECKONLYIFWATERWELLSHAVEACTUALLYBEENAFFECTED)
CHECK ONF ONLY
[] siTE I.VEST,GATION,N PRO~RESB(DEF,NI.G EX~NT OFPROB' ~M, [] C' ~ANUP,. PRCOREBS [] SIGNED OFF (OL~NUPCOMPLE~D OR ~.NEC~S~ARY)
[] NO ACTION TAKEN [] POST CLEANUP MONITORING IN PROGRESS [] NO FUNDS AVAILABLE TO PROCEED [] EVALUATING CLEANUP ALTERNATIVEB
CHECK APPROPRIATE ACTION(S) (SEE BACK FOR DETAILS)
~ [~ CAP SITE (CD) [~ EXCAVATE & DISPOSE (ED) [] REMOVE FREE PRODUCT (FP) [] ENHANCED BIO DEGRADATION (,T)
[] CONTAINMENTBARRIER(CB) ~ EXCAVATE&TREAT~E3~ [] PUMP & TREAT GROUNDWATER (GT) [] REPLACE SUPPLY (RS)
~-~ TREATMENTATHOOKUP(HU) [] NO ACTION REQUIRED (NA) [] OTHER(CT)
GARY J. WICKS 2700 M Street, Suite 300
Agency Director Bakersfield, CA 93301
(805) 861-3502 Telephone (805) 861-3636
~','~'~'~ - Teiecopier (805) 861-3429
TEVE Mc CALLEY " :
RESOURCE MANAGEMENT AGENCY
DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL
HEAt.TH SERVICES
February 28, 1990
Clifford Bressler
c/o Mr. Jim Clements
P. O. Box 81495
Bakersfield, CA 93308
Re: Mitigation of contaminated soils at the pesticide storage area
and the steam cleaning sump on property at the Calloway and
Hageman roads intersection, once owned by Rancho Laborde
Estates.
Dear Mr. Clements:
On October 26, 1990 a report was submitted to the Kern County
Environmental Health Department summarizing mitigation activities
completed on property once owned by Rancho Laborde, north of the
intersection of the Calloway and Hageman road intersection. The
report was completed by Kern Environmental Services, and described
the removal of approximately fifty four cubic.yards of soil from
the old pesticide storage area, identified in previous reports'as
being contaminated, and disposal of the soils at a hazardous waste
disposal facility. The hydrocarbon contamination identified in the
area once occupied by a steam cleaning sump, had not been removed,
however the department received an acknowledgement from Jim
Clements in June 1989, of the requirements to cap that area with
a concrete slab, or other material approved by this department, and
any contaminated soils removed from that area are to be
characterized and disposed of as in a manner consistent with state
laws and regulations regulating the disposal of hazardous waste,
if the soil is characterized as being hazardous.
This letter confirms the completion of the investigation and
site remediation action in the pesticide storage area at the above
site. With the provision that the information provided to this
agency was accurate and representative of existing conditions, it
is the position of this office that no further action is required
at the pesticide storage site, and that any additional work planned
for the old steam cleaning sump must be submitted to this
department for review before any work is to be initiated.
Please be advised that this letter does not relieve you of any
liability under the California Health and Safety Code or Water Code
for past, present, or future operations at the side. Nor does it
relieve you of the responsibility to clean up existing, additional
or previously unidentified conditions at the site which cause or
threaten to cause pollution or nuisance or otherwise pose a threat
to water quality or public health.
Additionally, be advised that changes in the present or
proposed use of the site may require further site characterization
and mitigation activity. It is the property owner's responsibility
to notify this agency of any changes in report content, future
contamination findings, or site usage.
If you have any questions regarding this matter, please
contact me at (80§) 861-3636.
Sj~cerely, ~ ~
Program {~anager ~
Environmental Health Services Department
~.~~ ~ ~ ~ Ora.nl,,~;~ ^p~,~:~: ~ KRAZAN & ASSOCIATES, INC.
~~. ~ ~ ~oiect Ho. Drawing Hd. ' Fresno Visalia Bakers~eld
..ZSSLER ENTERPRiI a.,
ACQUISITIONS ' RESTRUCTURES
RECEIVERS · FINANCIAL CONSULTANTS
4969 E. McKINLEY AVENUE, SUITE 202
FRESNO, CALIFORNIA 93727 ~...
/,~:~-~ -~..//,,
CLIFFORD E. BRESSLER ,/'"~'~: ~ '~'~'~ TELEPHONE
PRESIDENT '~;:37 __ .. X~ ~ I ''~'1 '~ 209/456-0229
'~ ~ ~ ,~ ~?~ 209/439-6281
Pis. Amy Green
Kern County Environmental Health
Services Department
2700 "M" Street
Bakersfield, CA 93301
RE: JEAN E.C. LABORDE and MADONNA P. LABORDE. dba LABORDE
FARMS, dba LABORDE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CO.
Case No. 184-00643-B-11 - Chapter 11
Cleanu~ Activities - Rancho LaBorde/Riverlakes Ranch
Callowa¥ and Hageman Roads
Dear Ms. Green:
Enclosed is a co~v o~ a letter i sent you on October 30~
1989.
We still have not received the certificate or letter o~
compliance. The buyer of the ~ro~ert¥ involved is now ready
to develoD the land and needs the compliance certificate.
I¥ there is some problem in this mat~er, please let me know
at your earliest convenience.
Sincerely~
CLI~[]RD E. BRESSLER
Trustee
CEB:br
cc: Unibell International, Bakersfield
Unibeil International. Tustin
.,.,.;.. ,4 ,:,-.,,CLIFFORD E. BRESSLER & ASSOCIATES
~ /I~P~--~/ '/~SS ~1 TRUSTEE'RECEIVERS
:~, ft~Z/g[~ fi FINANCIAL CONSULTANTS
· P.O. BOX 3950, PINEDALE STATION
FRESNO, CALIFORNIA 93650
k,~lifford E. Bresaer ~ (209) 439-6281
"~,*~ent ~ (805) 398-0268
October 30, i989
Ms. Amy Green
Kern County Environmental Health
Services Deoartment
2700 "M" Street
BakersfieiO, CA 93501
RE: ,JEAN E.C. LABORDE and MADONNA P. LABO~DE. dba LABORDE
FARP!S, dba LABORDE COMMUNITY DEVELOPMENT CO.
Case No. !84-006~3-B-11 - Chapter
Cieonup Activities - Rancho LaBorde/~iverlakes Ranch
Cailowav and Haoeman Roads
Dear Pis. Green:
Please advise v~hat o~,,~ , ._O~,irements are necessary
al i o'~ the reguiatz~ns to the best c,~ our kn~wieoge.
if there ~re no 4urther actions ¢,~e need to tak~, please issue
us a certificate or letter o~ comoiiance.
Sincerely,
Z~. BRESSLER
Trustee
/--- KERN ENOI LJlMENT II, SERt}I L
October 25, 1989
Ms. Amy Green
KERN COUNTY ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH
SERVICES DEPARTMENT
2700 "M" Street
Bakersfield, California 93301
REGARDING: Cleanup Activities Conducted for Rancho LaBorde/Riverlakes
Ranch at Pesticide Storage Area, Calloway and Hageman Roads
Dear Amy:
The purpose of this correspondence is to provide documentation that
remedial action has been implemented regarding the pesticide storage area
at the above referenced location in accordance with your letter of June
1, 1989.
On October 4, 1989, Kern Environmental Service excavated, loaded and
transported contaminated soil to one foot in depth from within the pesti-
cide ~torage area and ten feet to the south, and ten feet to the east of
the same area. (See attached Figure). The excavated area was backfilled
to conform to existing contours. A total of fifty four cubic yards was
transported to Chemical Waste Management for disposal.
Please find the following copies attached:
1. Hazardous Waste Manifest Nos. 88598861, 88598862, 88598865.
2. Extremely Hazardous Waste Permit No. 1-2695.
Please feel free to contact me should you have additional questions re-
garding said described remediation activity.
Sincerely,
KERN ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICE, a division
of Kern Backhoe Service, Inc.
I~,~K R. R0§ENLIiB, Operations Manager
FRR:jm
cc: Mr. Jim Clements
c/o Cl±fford E. Bressler & Associates
P. O. Box 3950, Pinedale Station
Fresno, California 93650
Stale of C. ahto~ma---it(-.altn and Wettare Agency Depa~lment oi'Heallh Serv;cee
Form Approved OMB NOg 20.5~g (Expires 9-30-~ ~ '
TO~C
Contror
Pierrot or type. (Form de~J~ne~ tot uae on e/~: ~ypewr~er).
Sacramento.
~ ........ ' ~ ~ ~ Manifest 2. Page 1 ~ tnlormafion tn the aha~eO
~ ,,.,[ of I is not reouire0 by Fe0eral
Transporter I Company Name 8. US EPA ~D Number C. ,~lale Tranapb:lo~'a ID ~D~ ~ '~"_ j'-'~' 'q'~,"
7. Transporter 2 Company Ni~me 8. US EPA ~D Number E. SI~e Trafl~poner's ID
'. ~ F. Tran~porter'~ t.'hone
g. Doaionote~ Facitffy Name and Sile A~d~eaa 10. US EPA ~O N~mbor G. ~t~e Facility's tD ..
, I Ouanlity Unit [
11. US DOT Description (Including Proper Shipping Name, Hazar~ C[ass. and ID Number)
No.
Type
WllVO
.: I I [ State r
J. Additional Descriptions tot Materials Listed Above K. Handling Codes for Wastes Crate0 Above..;
~. ~5. Specter Handling Instruction~ and Additional information
OENERATOR'~ CERTIFICATION: I hereby declare that Ihs contents of this consignment are tuffy an~ accurately Oescribed above by proper shipping name
and are classified, packed, marked, and labeled, a~g are in all respects in ~roper co~a~tio~ for transport by h~ghwey according to applicable international and
national government regulations.
If I a~ a large quantify ,3enerelor, I ce~tfy that I have a pr~ram in Ceca to reduce the volume and toxicity of waste generated to the degree I have datelined
to be economlcaBy practicab!e and that I ha~e selecled the praCtiCable .lelhod gl lreatment, storage, or dtspo~al cunently evadable to me whic~ minimizes the
present end future throal to human hoa~th end the environment; OR, ~f I am a Smell quantity Oglers:or, t have ma0e a gooo iaJlh effo~ to minimize my waste
generatiOn and select the best waste manegemenl methoE that is avai!ab'e to me end mat I can afford.
PrintedlTy~e~ Name i S~gneluro .. Month Day Year
17. Transpolar 1 Acknowledgement of Race{pt gl Materials ,,' ~. /
P, inte~/ryped Nam. , ! Signature ~1; / __/ __.. Month Day, Year
18. Tt~n~poder 2 Acknowledgement of ~ece~pt of Mnterialn
Printed/Typed Name ~ Signa,ure Month Day Year
19. Discrepancy Indicalion Space
20. Facility Owaer or Operalor CarlificaNon of receipt gl ha.'z~doua materiels covered by thiB maniee,~t except as noted in ~te~ 19.
Printed/Type~ Name ~ S;O~atu~o Mont~ Day Year
~ 8022 A (~/~). DO Not Write ~,e~ow This tine
EPA fl7~22 "
(Rev. ~8) Previous ~lfia, a are obsolete. ' .....
.... ~ L, -..- ,. ~ u, [ ~ GEEEN: HAULER EETAINS
:5t~lel Of C:-.hfoi'nm---.~eelfh an0 Welfare Agency Deparlment of Health Se~ces
Fo~m Applovud OMB No, 205~39 (Exm~ea 9-3~ Toxic Substances Co~t~ot
Please pr ~e.: (Form designed for uae on e h typewriter) Sacramento. Cohtom a
Manifest ~ ~2 Page 1 ~
: UNIFORM [~AZARDOUS '~,,;,,~o,', us EPA ID No. Document No I ' I In o,mation In the ,ha0ed area,
WASTE MANIFEST "-iJ'~ J 2 ~ ~ ~ ,~ , ~ ~ ~ , 1'~ o~
7.
9. Designated Facility Name an~ Site Addres~ t~. I t ~ '~ . ~i ,, t.~ G. Ct~te Facl!ilV's ID . , .' .. -. '.:
' No. Type ~ [WI/Veil". ' ~'" .
' ' EPAI Other
C. j 5tare ,..]..' ~] }.,:..':
c.', ,. "' J EPA/~h~r:, ::.,; ..;~
State-.:' .;.; ::
d. :, t i , ,: · .~,.:.
· . EPA/Other,
J. Addtllo~at Descriptions for Materiel* ~iste~ Above K. Handling Codes for Waster isled A~ovo, .
CI ''~ ' I : ...... ' ::~' "':'"
..... ":'k[~ ........ t ..... ' ..
· ;,'.~.:~h:;~ ,~:_~;r-,.:~-'C~' -,:'~:~, :~.:.'~ ,:'2. ':~ .' .-. ...' - ' : : . ~.} :':~.
15. Spoci~t Hanoling Inslfuct}on~ and A0dilional Information
~o, ~-~4232~012 '
GENERATOR'S CERTIFICATION: I hereby declare t~at the contents of thin consignment are tully an~ accurately ~escrlbe~ above ~y 0roper a~lo~lng name
on~ [~e clasalfie~, packeO, mnrKe~, an~ Inhere0, an~ are in all re~0ec~l in proper conOition ~ot tr~n~po~ ~y mghway accoromg tO applicable international and ,
:'- national govarnmenl regulations.
If a~ a large Ouafltlty generator, I ce~i~ that I have a program In place to reduce the volume an~ texicity o~ waste generated to the ~egree I have ~etermln~
lily Oracticaole and that I have 8elected ~he practicable method of treatment, storage, or disposal currently evadable to me w~Jch minimizes the
.t generation an~ n~lect the bent wasle manogement method lhal is avnilebte tO me eno Ihs1 ] can aUord.
Printed/Typed Name . ' ~ S~gnature Mont~ Day Year
.. / ., . .' .......,..:,:::. ,., -.,
17. Tranapo~er ~ Acknowledgement. of Receipt of Ma~eri~18 ',' '.. .... '~
PrlnJd01Type~ Name ..... L i j Slgqature ,. '~, ~ Monm Day Year
' ~ ;~* ' ' ~[ I ~X,~; ;-..,, .~,.., X: ~,, ' "
.. ,. ~ .... 3 ,'~ ., ~ . : ~ ~.'.,{,"~/~' ~.t
18.'Ytanapo~er 2 Acknowledgement of Receipt ol Materials ~ ' ' ~ ' " " '
Printed/Typed Name . ' Signature Month Day Year
~' J.' 19. Discrepancy Indication Space
1
~.'~::' A ' . · ' ":
[~,,:: y Printe~/Typed Name ~ S.gna~ure Month . Day Year
-* .--'r' [~".,, ~- ~,,*.~", ~ =',,, ' ''
~:~ ['~ ._ _, ~ . , , , ~- _ .,~ , ,
~S~22A(t/BS) DO ~Ot Write F.e~ow T~is L;ne
EPA
(Rev. 9-88) P~evioua editions are o~aolefe. "
~ ~ ~ .~GRE~:
~AULER
RETAINS
~,lele el C..dJforn~a--HeaJir~ end Wellare Agency Dl~parlment of Health
Fogm App~ OMB No, 205~39 [Exp:res i' Toxic Substances Control Division
. Plaint or type. (Fo~ ~eaigned for use .,~ typewriter). ~ Secrame~lo, Calilo~ma
UNIFORM HAZARDOUS '[,. c~.~,,,o,', us E,~O.o. ~.*'~,, [ 2. Paae ~ '
j Document No.i J lntormation in the ~ha0ed areas .
3. Generators Name ano Mailing A~re~8 :~' ~ ~ : ~f t '
6. Tranaponm I Company Name ,. US EPA ID NumVer C, ~lal~ Tra,,sp~rt~r'e ~D~;/] ~/...~/7;~' '
7. %~n~.po~e~ 2 Company Name 8. US EF'A ;D Numpof E. SIDle Tran~po~er'e ID
9. Deaignate~ Facilily Name nnd Site A0dresa 10. US EPA ID Number G. Stele FaciSly'e ID . . .:.
. 11. U~ OOT OelcrtDtlon (~ncluding Prover Shipping Name, Hezar~ Class, nnd tO Number) O~antity ~nit · :"' W~ste No. '.,
No. ~ype ~Wt/Vol ' .. ~' . ~ ·
., ....... .:)..h.~...
EPA/~er..-~ :. '.
c. ' I ~ ' i Stale ;7." '.. '. :-
· -. '"" I "
d. I I ~ i Slate ~...i-..'.'.- .
J. Additional Descriptions for Materiels Listed Above K, Handling Codes for Wastes L~sted Above t -
. a: '- -~ : b.. ........... '..;.·
. ' ".. L' :".'. ~.. ... ~ a,., .. ', :..? '
' . ..,- . ~ ;'. . · ,.e._.: · .. . .., . ./'r:. :,'.~ .:<;s'} ~-:~ ?. .
1~. Special Handling instructions and Aodilional Information
GENERATOR'S CER~FI~ON: .I hereby declare that th. contsnts ol this I, ol,~qnm,rll m,l tult~ sad accurately described above by proper shipping name
national goverome~t regulations. . ~.. -.
If I am a ~rge quantity generator, I cavity that I have a Dr~ram In Ol~,e h, '*t~v' ~ li~ ~'.'!.~,~ ~d InaJoily of waste generated to the degree I have determined
present an~ ~uture threat to human health a.~ the envi~onnml t, (iff ~ '{ ..'~, · ' '" ' ~ J" ..... , ' '
, ~ ,-'~;. ~-~;:i',l ~e+,et~h., I hav¢ made a goo~ (aah etlo~ to minimize my waste
generation and select the best waste management method that i~ a~iiable lu lira add IhaJ J ca~ of lord.
Printed/TypeS Name ~ Signatare Mont~ Day Year
,. .... ..,/' / :-' , /./., ,'/
r, /,, ," .:., ,,.', , ~ ,; · ~ I " '.-"~'m""-... ' .'; '-'
' R , · " Mont~ Day. YOe~
~ ': R I Printe0iTyped Name ' Signature Month Day Year
.:',~
~' A ' '
Prinled/Typed Name ' I Signature Month
~'~ ~.-~,~ ~f~.,c, ,~.,: ~.: ,.x I~':I Iq'l
~S~ A (~/~) Do Not Wri+e ~ow This Line
:-,*' ~REE~= H~ULER RET~I~S
~.7; ' ' ...... ': * - '*' ' ' .',
~NViF1ONM[NTAL
& Associates,
Geo~echnical [ngi~eering · [ngineering Geology ~ ~avironmental [ngineering * [ngineering kabora~orie$ * Chemical laboratories
August 11, i989 OUR JOB B88153
Kern County Environmental
Health Department
2700 "M" Street, Suite 300
Bakersfield, California 93201
Attention: Ms. Amy Green
SUBJECT: Preliminary Environmental Assessment
Proposed Fruitvale District School Site )
Kern County, California
Dear Ms. Green:
BSK & Associates has been contracted by the Fruitvale School
District to perform a Preliminary Environmental Assessment for
a proposed school site ~o be located near the southeast
intersection of Meacham Road and Abbot Drive in Bakersfield,
California. The proposed site is situated within the SN-I/4,
NW-1/4 of Section 20, T.29S., R.27E.
We understand that an environmental Site Characterization,
directed by your Department, is currently in progress for a
property less than 1/2-mile north of the proposed school site.
That Site Characterization is investigating potential pesticide
and hydrocarbon contamination concerning a facility, located near
the intersection of Calloway and Hageman Roads, which served the
Rancho Laborde operation.
By copy of this letter, we are requesting a review of your
records for the Rancho Laborde facility currently under
invest;G., on.
Thank you in advance for your cooperation.
Respectfully submitted,
BSK & Associates
Mark F. Milward
Staff Geologist
MFM/ds
Fresno, California 93706 1645 "E" Street, Suite 105 * Telephone ~209) 485-3200, Fax (209) 485-7427
Fresno, California 1445 "F" Street * Telephone (2091 485-0100
Fresno, California 93706 1414 Stan qaus Street * Telephone ~209) 485-8310
Visalia, California 93291 808 E. Douglas Avenue - Telephone (209) 732-8857
Bakersfield, California 93304 117 "V" Street * Telephone (805) 327-0671. Fax t805) 324-4218
Pleasanlon, California 94566 5729-F Sonoma Drive * Telephone (415) 462-4000, Fax ~415) 462-6283
~ S','ATE OF CALIFORNIA.--HEALTH AND WELFARE ~I~LC' GEORGE DEUK~EJIAN,
'DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH S ES
TOXIC SUBSTANCES CONTFIOL DIVISION
REGION 1
42~o POWER ,N. ROA'-'
SACRAMENTO, CA 9Se26 July 28, 1989
Mr. Jim Clements
Riverlakes Ranch (Rancho Laborde)
P.O. Box 81495
Bakersfield, CA 93380
Dear Mr. Clements:
EXTREMELY HAZARDOUS WASTE PERMIT NUMBER 1-2695, RIVERLAKES RANCH
(RANCHO LABORDE), KERN COUNTY ..
Your application for an Extremely Hazardous Waste Disposal Permit
has been approved. One copy of the approved application is
enclosed for your records. Department regulations require that
records related to hazardous waste disposal be retained for at
least three years.
Hazardous waste haulers and disposal site operators may require
copies of the approved application before accepting extremely
hazardous waste. Accordingly, you may make copies of the
approved application, if necessary, provided no alterations are
made to the approved.permit application and all copies made are
unaltered duplicates of the document copied.
If you have any questions regarding the approved application or
Department requirments related to extremely hazardous waste,
please contact me at (916) 920-6041.
Sincerely,
Jeff ~atson
Hazardous Materials Specialist
Enclosure
Hazardous Waste. Manag.emcnt Brar~ '
APPLICATION FOR
CALIFORNIA.EXTRF'MELY H~/,~l;)~.O~; 2~r~41~_ _~POSAL. PERMIT'
. ' / TOXIC 5U~TANCES C~OL ~VlS~ · ·
,Io~ I ..... -- '~ - ·
........................... Rlveriakes Ranch (Rancho Labgrde~ 1(805) 589-0408
P. O. Box 81495 ] Kern'
Bn~r~{i ~] d , California ~z,p 93380
Corner of Hageman and Calloway~ B~kersfield
· J~m Clements ~ '~ A~nt for
PILO~)SEI)
~lr['['l and No. {~r Ii.(). llns)
~. o. ~x 5337
Bakers~leld ! gal~ornla '~ '93388
0095
C~ 082189911
pROposED L)'i.SPOSA i.N,,,,,. ,,I
(OROTHEIL) Chemical Waste Managemerll;
FACILITY: S. rt'I and No.
35251 Old Skyline Road
Kettleman City ] Ca~iforn~
~2S0 power ~nn ~oad 2151 Berkeley Way~ ~. 119 55~5 East Sh~eldsAve. 107 South Broa4~
Sacr~ento, CA 95826 BerkeleyB CA 947~ Fresno, CA 9372~ ~. 7012
(916) 739-3143 (415) 540-2043 (209) 291-6676 Cos ~Seles, CA90012
" (213) 62~2380
(Section 66570, Title 22, CAC), · ~
CALIFORNIA DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH SERVICES Parc
Hazardous Waste Management Branch J:JC2§
APPLICATION FOR CALIFORNIA EXTREMELY HAZARDOUS WA~E PERMIT
Company R~verl~k~ R~n~h C[{y Bakersfield Da~e 07/13/89
QUANTITY
Dcscriptlon of Wast,': On One Thnc Basis:
(/,-ch~;,,~ ~'n'c~ ~'th W:stc ¢,.'umpo.cnt(s) Upper Lower % ppm Number: Unili-"
U/rTxr and l,o~er G:~entmn'on
°/M~a~°~~tU)Soil Contaminated with ,.100, __ _ ~ ~-~ 50 CY
W^ST£ D±sulfoton 410
Vc.r's
Permit:
I - Per
Drscripth.: of Pac~kaglng. Containcrlzation and Transport: I-] r)rum~ I'zl Cartons ' [] Bottles [3 Tank Truck [~ Other End Dump or Trans£er
PROPOSED METHOD
OF I)I~P,OSAL I-~ Burial I'"l P,mdh~g [] Storagc*" ' [] lr~cineration L-J Other (,Specify): .... [~ Trcatmcnt ($pccifyJ:
[] Recycling ISprcify method of reuse):
I~.ck,L~i,L~. co,tt,ti,.'ri.',ttiuu, ,..I tnt.si:or! of the .I,tterhd s/mll be ht ,:ccordauce I1,itll Title 49. Cot/:. uf i:vth.ral
R,~.l,:tivtts for h,m~r, tu.s matcri,ds, ,t,,,! with r,:~.!,~tio.s o.f the C, diforufil H~qhw,ly /'.trot, T/th' 13. C, Ilifi~ru;,~
.,hlmi.istratirc (2o~h'. fi~r i. trast,lte tr, lusport of lm:,mlo.$ m,lterlal.~ ,Uld, fi~r IK.'B-cot~tai~du.~ u,,Istvs, itt accord.
,mcr with U.b'.I'LP..4. r¢'.qulat.(v.s srt forth ht Title 40 C21:R Part 76 I.
I-1 Chcck if additional wastes are described on page 3 o~' 3.
PERMIT TO BE U~ED FOR: (Lenglh of Time)
~ On a onc time baslsO~T Z~ ~
~ For a period of one year from date of issue
PERMIT RENEWALS: ,Ipp/~caffon for ~neu, al ora one.~ear blanket
p~r to expffatlon date to ~ce~ ~c~lt ~n effect.
Foe te.e~al, tend a ropy of exlsti.~ ~ermil with cover h'lh'r r(',lurslh:~ an~ ad, lilio.al umrn,lmcnt~
"Sto~age means holding at an off-~it~ facility for greater than 72 hours.
June 15, 1989
Ms. Amy Green
Ilazardous Materials Specialist
Environmental ttealth Services Dept.
2700 "iq" Street, Suite 300
Bakersfield, CA 93301
Re: STEAM CLEANING SUMP OH RIVERLAKES RANCH PROPERTY
Dear Amy:
This letter is to advise you that tile -+4.5 acres of land which contains the
steam cleaning sump area is bein,i rezoned from residential to commercial.
There are at present no specific: plans available to determine exactly what
will be installed on the steam cleaning sump site; however, it is my under-
standing from you that the contamination problem existing there can be
permanently addressed by erect:ing a c~)mmercial building on a concrete slab or
by paving with all approved material for use as a parking area.
~ als() understand that any maf~rial removed from the steam cleaning dump site
due to construction must be handled in tile appropriate manner if character-
ized as a hazardous waste.
I will appreciate your si!~ning the acknowledgement if ,you approve of the
contents of this letter as heinfi the approved method of Fec~f~'].',n,,~ '~!l,~i~
problem.
S i ncere 1 y,//~/
~i~ ements
/ l\gen~]'for the Trustee
JC/mjf
Ac knowl edged Ua l.e
· OUNTY OF KERNO
Environmental Health services Department
2?00 ~ Sift. et Sull~ .t00
Baimrsfleld. CA 93301
(80S) 861.3636
(805) 861-3429 Fax Number ~ ~~.,,,
June 1. 1989
Clifford Bressler
c,'o Mr. Jim Clemenr. s
P.O. Box 81495
Bakersfield. CiA 93308
RE: Site Characterization and Remediation Alternative Reuorts submitted for the pesticide
storage area and tile steam cleaning sump on property at the Callowav and Hageman
Roads intersection, once owned by Rancho Laborde Estates.
Dear Mr. Cleme~s:
On }lasz ;il. 1989 the remedial actioo alternative report submitted for the steam
cleaning sump und pesticide storage ;.trea on proper~y once owned by Jean Laborde Estates
:ti lhe Cailowav an(i Hageman Roaas intersection was reviewed by a representative from [his
DeDartmenL The t'eport summarized the site investigation, and propose~ three remedial
action options. The following list consist ut" the remedial action options discusse(I within
the repot'c:
!. Excavation -
'this option involves the ~-emoval of cuntaminated soils from the sites in
questions co a disposal site. licensed to handle such waste. This option was
discussed as nor being practical for the soils ~n the steam cleaning sump due
to the volume but as an economical uno effecrive meQ~od for mitigating
contaminated soils in [he old pesticide srorage area.
Capping -
This option was describe(] as being u viable alternative for contaminants in
tile steam cieanin.v, suml), it involves placiug an imuermeable cad over t:he
;ii'letted area I.o reduce the pot. ential for leaching.
Clifford 8ressler
June 1. 1989
Page 2
3. No Action - This option was proposed along with capping for the steam
cleaning sump.
Based upon the findings described in the reports submitted, this Department is
satisfied that tile assessment is complete for the pesticide storage area and the steam
cleaning sump. Tile following remedial action alternatives are acceptable means of
mitigating this site:
1, Excavation of the soils in the pesticide storage area. The fol]nwh~cond~tions
must be met before utiliziug this method:
A. The company hired to remove and dispose of the material must have
experience working in lmzardous environments and utilizing methods
to minimize dust and exposure of personnel on site.
8. The disposal site and transport companies utilized must be licensed to
transport and dispose of the soil and it's contaminants.
C. Soil in tile pesticide storage area must be excavated to a depth of one
foot and either handled as a hazardous waste or characterized as
nonhazardous.
2. Capping the area. once utilizin~ us a steam cleaning sump, with material of
limited permeability. This option can be utilized only under the following.
conditions:
A. Since construction of tile cap will involve some grading or soil removal
in the contaminated area. tile contaminated soil removed must be
separated and either l~andled as a hazardous waste ~)r characterized as
non-lmzardous.
B. Specifications on ~he (:upping material and construction must be
submitted to this Department before tile cap is applied.
C. 'file contaminated area was estimated as having an area with 15-20 foot
radius, This area mus~ be covered by the cappillg material, with fin
additional distance added for runoff.
if you i~ave any questions, please feel free ~o call me at 1805) 861-3636.
Si,merely .....
Amy g. (]rein .... ,. 1 ' "
Ilazar(iou~ ~at. eriaJs S~.cial}st
Hazardous Materials ~anagement Program
AG:cd
[~reen ', ~:leme nts..i U'
May 19, 1989
Ms. Amy Green
Department of Environmental Health
2700 !'4 Street #300
Bakersfield, CA 93301
.Dear Amy:
This letter is a follow-up to ,.our telephone conversation of May 16, !989.
I ,,,/as frankly quite surprised when v~u told me you were waiting for a work
plan from Krazan & Associates. Had i realized that ! would have jumped
them as soon as Sou reviewed the report.
I must stress to you the importance of completing this project
immediately! The bankruptcy estate has a very viable potential sale of
~ne remain~nm unsold property and it is incumbent on us as ~he bankruptcy
trustee to .... pedlt~ the rlean-up at the site worked on by Krazan. This
clean-up, is a vital o:~,,~.~ of ~'~.ne sa!..~ and taus~ not be dela,/ed, anvmore.~
I am going to look to you .~o take ~h~ lead i..q this matter and g~ the
situation with Krazan cleared up and :ell me ',,ma~ you want done in an
expeditieus manner.
Thank you in advance for your nrempt ='~*:'~ion to this prnblem
i-~es t regard~,] _
Jim C1 e,m. en~s
g ......... r Trustee
JC/ml
2 19§9
Environmen~ Health Div.
Kern County Health Del)lC
KERN COUNTY HEALTH DEPARTMENT
2700 M Street HEALTH OFFICER
Bakersfield, Califorma ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH DIVISION Leon M Hebertson. M.D.
Mailing Address: DIRECTOR OF ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH
1415 Truxtun Avenue Vernon S. Reichard
Bakersfield. California 93301
(805) 861-3636
November 30, 1988
Mr. H.L. Jack Caldwell
Val Vista Estates
c/o Reynolds Environmental Group
3190-3 Airport Loop
Costa Mesa, CA 92626
Re: 'Recently purchased 320 acre parcel, once owned by Rancho
Laborde
Dear Mr. Caldwell:
The Emcon report prepared for'the 320 acre parcel was reviewed
by a representative of this department. A letter was drafted and
mailed to Clifford Bressler discussing concerns with the report
contents. Mr. Clements advised the Health Department
representative of the ownership change during a meeting held on.
November 29, 1988.
A copy of the letter, sent to clifford Bressler is enclosed,
please review the contents referring to the 320 acre parcel. The
concerns must be addressed to the satisfaction of this agency
before the properties are developed/changed.
If you have any questions please feel free to call me at (805)
861-3636.
Sincerely,
,? //,':-,/
Green
Environmental Health Specialist
Hazardous Materials Management Program
AEG:cd
(green\caldwell.let
KERN COUNTY HEALTH DIII~ARTMENT
2700 M Street HEA~,
Bakersfield, Californ~ ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH DIVISION Leon M i
Mailing Address: DIRECTOR OF EN¥
1415 Truxtun Avenue Vernon
Bakersfield. California 93301
(805) 861-3636
November 17, 1988
Clifford Bressler
c/o Mr. Jim Clements
P.O. Box 81495
Bakersfield, CA 93308
Re: Real Estate Studies Completed for two parcels once owned by
Rancho Laborde Estates in Bakersfield, CA
Dear Mr. Clements: _
The studies completed by ~mcon and Associates for two real
estate parcels once owned by Rancho Laborde Estate in Bakersfield,
California were reviewed by a representative of this department.
The studies described one 320 acre lot bordered by Coffee Road to
the West and Fruitvale Avenue To The East; and a 1480 acre lot
bordered by Coffee Road to the East, Rosedale Highway to the South
and Calloway to the West. The reports provided information on the
past use of the properties, possible problems associated with the
sites, and assessments completed. An overview of the problem areas
along with the department's comments are provided below. The 1480
area lot contained a pesticide storage area which is referenced in
a letter dated S~ptember 14, 1988. The pesticide storage area,
will be discussed and references will be made to the violations
cited in that letter.
The 1480 acre parcel had the following items of concern
described in the study prepared.
1. A screened oil sump on the South side of the parcel, was
described as holding waste crude 0il. The liquid within
the sump should be sampled to see if other chemicals of
concern as halogenated compounds, PCB's and metals are
present in significan~ levels. The Regional Water
Quality Control Board should be advised and allowed to
give guidance on the closure of the sumps.
Clifford Bressler
November 17, 1988
Page 2
2. Two underground gasoline tanks, were discovered in an
., area East of the old pesticide storage area. At present
the Kern County Health Department has not received an
application for a permit to operate or abandon these
t~nks. Rancho Laborde Farms is presently violating
Sections 3912.4.01 and 3912.5.01 of the local underground
tank ordinance. The Tanks must be permitted for
operation unless closed, and a closure permit must be
obtained before removal. Both applications are enclosed.
3. Oil saturated soils were detected around above ground oil
storage Tanks. and in an area ,identified as a steam
cleaning sump. The samples retrieved in these area were
contaminated with heav~ hydrocarbons. IT is not clear
how extensive the contamination is? The extent of
contamination should be determined and discussed in a
final report which describes any hazards associated with
these sites.
4. .Three transformers appeared to have been leaking. Only
one sample was retrieved near a power pole south of the
Calloway canal. No PCBs were detected in The soil
sampled. The other two sites should be sampled for PCB
contamination.
'5. Seventeen irrigation catch basins and one flood control
' sump were identified on This parcel. Only one sample was
retrieved in one of The irrigation catch basins. The
sample was analyzed for organochlorine pesticides and
chlorinated herbicides. None of the constituents tested
for were detected in the sample. The following questions
should be addressed:
A. A discussion of the size of The catch basin and
whether one sample is representative o~ this basin.
B. The other catch basins should be characterized with
a discussion of the rationale for sample strategy
discussed to justify the number and location of each
sample.
Cliffford Bressler
November l?, 1988
Page 3
One sample in one ca~ch basin does not adequately
characterize all catch basins unless the more
heavily contaminated is sampled. The relative
contamination of each must be known.
The area to be sampled should include other than
organo chlorine pesticides/herbicides such as
arsenicals and mercurial compounds. Heavy metal
contamination should be ruled out as a significant
contaminant.
6. The pesticide storage area located North of the building
near Calloway and Hoffman was described as having odorous
stained soil by the assessment contractor, the health
inspector and the ag inspector. Two samples were
retrieved within this area.
The samples were retrieved 6" and 10" below grade. They
were analyzed for organochlorine pesticides and
chlorinated herbicides. The list obtained from the Ag
Commissioner showed that 1482 pesticide containers were
removed from this area. The containers held a diverse
group of pesticides/herbicides. The following concerns
should be addressed:
A. The samples retrieved from this area should be
representative o~ the most contaminated'portion.of
the encaged area, with a discussion provided giving
the rational for the location and number of samples
retrieved.
B. The analysis must show whether most of the suspect
pesticides/herbicides are present in the soil
sampled. (A complete pesticide/herbicide scan
should be completed on the more contaminated
sample.)
C., IS any pesticides are detected in signifi%ant
quantity, the report should discuss the extent of
contamination and suggest at leas~ three mitigation
alternatives, discussing the advantages and
disadvantages of each.
Clifford Bressler
November 17, 1988
Page 4
7. A refuse dump was described east of the friant Kern
Canal. Surplus agricultural equipment, used tires, empty
oil drums, wood and other refuse was identified as having
been dumped in this area. The site may presently 'be
violating Sections 8.28.100 and 8.28.160 of the Kern
County Ordinance Code, regarding maintaining.the premises
in sanitary condition, and failure to remove refuse twice
a week, along with Section 5411 of the California Health
and Safety Code regarding the creation of a nuisance.
The. items dumped on site should be inventoried to
determine their future use or disposal. Certain items,
(the drums) may be sent to a recycler: some e.c~uipment may
be used or sent to a scrap yard. The owner/operator
should provide a plan to the Kern .County Health
DeparTment before cleaning this site so that it will not
violate regulations provided in the state law or local
ordinance.
The 320 acre parcel had the following items of concern
described in the study prepared.
1. Two oil sumps were noted in the southern portion of the
parcel. The liquid within the sump should be sampled to
see if other chemicals of concern as halogenated
compounds, PCBs, and Metals are present in significan~
levels. The Regional Wa~er Quality Control Board should
be advised ~nd allowed to 'give guidance on the closUre
of ~he sumps.
2. Oil stains were observed around two oil storage tanks.
The stains could be indicative of past leaks/spills. One
sample was retrieved 6" below grade at one tank site, on
the South/Southeastern portion of the parcel. The sample
showed soil contamination of heavy hydrocarbons. The
extent of contamination should be determined. Crude oil
is not presently considered a hazardous waste, however
" the contamination present should be characterized and any
possible threat ~o groundwater sources addressed. The
future plans for the contaminated area should be
considered in all discussions addressing mitigation of
this site.
3. The irrigation sump had only trace amounts of the
pesticides DDE and DDT. The levels detected were not
signif!can~. If the sample retrieved was representative
of the sump, then the sump appears to be no problem as
far as an accumulation of halogenated hydrocarbons. The
assessment company should address the rational for
retrieving only on~ sample in the sump.
Clifford Bressler
November 17. 1988
Page 5
4. The sample taken in the Ag acreage had nondeTecTable
levels of halogenated hydrocarbons. If The sample
retrieved was either representative of The farming
a~reage or the worst~ expected, The area can be assumed
free of haiogenated pesticides/herbicides. The rational
for retrieving only one sample from this area should be
documented.
5. The stained areas beneath the leaking Transformers were
analyzed. The analysis suggested that there were no PCBs
present in the soils sampled. This area appears To have
been appropriately characterized, assuming that the
stained area was small and The sample was retrieved
within the stained area.
The letter dated September 14, 1988, required That you submit
a 'site characterization proposal to The Kern County Health
Department within 30 days. The studies completed for The Rancho
Laborde Estates were deficient in the items summarized above. You
must submit a report providing rational for activities completed
and proposed sampling and analysis for the pesticide storage area,
The irrigation drainage basins, and The refuse dump site within 30
days. The application for operation or abandonment of the
underground storage tanks must be completed and submitted To this
department within SO days.
Thank you for the opportunity to assist you in this matter,
and if you have any questions, please feel free to call me at (805)
861-3636.
S~my~Eerely' ~
Environr~nTal Heai~ecialisT
Hazardous Materials Management Progra~
AEG:dr
cc: County Administrative Office
Regional Water Quality Control Board - Fresno
November 15, 1988
Hs. Amy Green
Environmental Heal th Specialist
KERN COUHTY HEALTH DEPARTHENT
!415 Truxtun Avenue
Bakersfield, CA 93301
..gear iqs. Green:
t have not heard from you since m.y visit to .,..,our office on the morning
of October !1, 1988. I have several firms standing by ready to bid on
whatever work you may require at the shop site; however, as of this
date ][ have nothing to tell them.
T must advise you that T_ ,..,Jill ~qeed an extension of time beyond
Hovember """' ~' '""" ' ' ~ "~ ,
,_,_, ,,90~: to Dr]hq ~n...site into compliance, due to the lack of
communication from .'..tour ~ffice.
Please be assured that i do want to '?.~ork closel.7 ,,,Hth vou and do
whatever is necessar.v to alleviate any problems, i cannot act on this,
ho:,~ever, unless I ',lear from you right away. Please [live this situation
your '~op priority.
Sincerely,
'~ .-"/ /.~ ,:.
." ,~m Clements
Anent for i:he Trustee
J c / t
2700 M STREET KERN COUNTY HEALTH DEPARTMENT HEALTH OFFICER
MAILING ADDRESS Leon M Hebertson, M,D,
1415 TRUXTUN AVENUE ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH DIVISION
BAKERSFIELD, CA 93301 DIRECTOR OF ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH
(805) 861-3636 Vernon S, Reichard
September 22, 1988
Laborde Community Development Co. Inc.
8900 Rosedale Hwy.
Bakersfield, CA 93308
Attn: Jim Clements
Re: Site Characterization Proposal Outline.
Dear Mr. Clements:
The Site Characterization Proposal Outline which can be
utilized for the Old Pesticide Storage Area on' property located
east of Calloway Rd. and North of the Hageman Extension in
Bakersfield, California is enclosed.
If you have any questions please feel free to call me at
(805) 861-3636.
Environmenta~JHealth
AG:cd
0922-13
September 20, 1988
Ms. Amy E. Green
Environmental Health Specialist
Environmental Health Division
KERN COUNTY HEALTH DEPARTMENT
1415 Truxtun Avenue
Bakersfield, CA 93301
Ref: Old Pesticide Storage Area on Property Located East of Calloway
Road and North of the Hageman Extension in Bakersfield, CA
Dear Ms. Green:
On September !3, !988 you wrote a letter to Mr. Clifford Bressier
asking for a site characterization proposal for the above referenced
lmcation. You indicated that the department's outline for such
proposals was enclosed, to be used as a guide in preparing our
proposal.
You failed to include this outline with your letter and, as a result,
I am at a loss to know just exactly what you want. Please advise.
Sincerely,
Jim Clements
Agent for the Trustee
JC/mjt
ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH SERVICES DEPARTMENT
STEVE McCALLEY, R.E.H.S. ~ 27oo 'M' Street, Suite 300
DIRECTOR ~ Bakersfield, CA 93301
(805) 861-3636
(805) 861-3429 FAX
January 29, 1993
McCormic, Barstow, Sheppard, Wayte & Carrutth
Attorneys at Law
P. O. Box 24013
Fresno, CA 93779-4013
Attention: Timothy Jones
SUBJECT: LABORDE PROPERTY - CALLOWAY & HAGEMAN ROADS
BAKERSFIELD, CA
Gentlemen:
This office is in receipt of your letter dated January 21, 1993, regarding the Laborde property and
your request for information pertaining to capping requirements for the former steam cleaning sump.
A review of the f'fle has disclosed the former sump occupied an area of 12x12 feet with a depth of
4 feet. Krazan Associates, Inc.'s, Site Characterization Report of soil analyses, performed in
April 1989, reveals the greater part of the contaminant (oil and grease) to be present at 5 feet depth.
Total petroleum hydrocarbon levels were not significant.
You have indicated that future use of the property will be commercial. This Department agrees that
capping of the former sump area with a three-inch asphalt overlay would satisfy the mitigation
requirements specified by Amy Green in her letter dated February 28, 1990. Ideally, the capped area
should be planned as a portion of a future parking lot for a commercial business.
Please inform this office of your client's intentions regarding future use of the property and the
specifications for capping of the impacted sump area.
Sincerely,
Steve ~McCalley, ¢irector A?
By: Flora Darling, R.E.H.S., R.E~A./
Hazardous Materials Specialist 'III
Hazardous Materials Program
FD:cas
'~laborde.ltr
05/09/88
TO: Amy Green, Environmental
Health Specialist
Agricultural Commissioner
SUBJ: Pesticide Containers
Attached is the list of pesticide containers stored at the
Laborde site on Calloway Road. The numbers are approximate,
however, they will give you an indication of the volume of
containers stored at the site.
After we get the pictures back from processing we will send them
to you. If there is any further assistance needed, please let
us know.
cc: Lou~ie Cervantes, Deputy
Agricultural Commissioner
PESTICIDE CONTAINER INVENTORY FOR FLETCHER FARMS
Denny Bridges 5-5-88
30 Gallon Drums
Dintro 70
Goal 4
Round-up 1
Treflan 1
Unknown 40
5 Gallon Containers
Dinitro 460
Omite 200
Balan 165
Round-up 155
Paraquat 60
Phosdrin 45
Kelthane 15
Di-Syston 15
Lorsban 15
Parathion 10
Buctril 10
Treflan 10
Spreader/Sticker 10
Harvest Aid 5
Diazinon 5
Meta-Systox 1
Unknown 15
2½ Gallon Containers
Bladex 10
I Gallon Containers
Goal 150
Ambush 10
,~.ssoc,,~rEs Project No. B31-Ol.OI
Mr. )1.L. Jack Caldwell
Val Vista Estates
c/o Reynolds Environmental Group
3190-J Airport Loop
Costa Mesa, California'92626 ·
Re: "Parcel B" Summary Report:
Real Estate Due Diligence
Study: Rancho Laborde Site:
Bakersfield, California.
Dear t,lr. Caldwell:
This letter presents EMCON Associates' findings following completion of
a real estate due diligence study for a 1,480 acre parcel (Parcel B)
which was formerly part of the Rancho Laborde site, located on the
north edge of the City of Bakersfield. EMCON Associates (EMCON) was
retained by Mr. ,Jack Caldwell to aid in identifying site areas which
may hnve been previously impacted by hazardous materials or wastes.
Parcel B is located on the west side of Rancho Laborde and is bound by
the following:
Coffee 'Road Lo the'East
· Residential homes and Norris Road to the North
- Calloway Drive to Lhe ldest
· Rosedale Highway to the South
Figure I shows the location of Parcel B. Presently, soil grading is
being conducted For future development of site property approximately
at the intersection of Meacham Road and Calloway Drive,
Rancho Laborde was reportedly acquired by Mr. Gene Laborde approxi-
mately 15 Lo 16 years ago. Prior to Lhe land acquisition by
f,lr. Laborde, the )and was reportedly the property of the Kern County
Land Company.
PJB/bBIOIOI.DOC
Hr. II,L. Jack Cald' il
A~uust ]6, ]988
Page 2
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT STRATEGY AND SITE BACKGROUND
The purpose of this real estate due diligence study is to evaluate and
identify past and present activities at the site which may have yielded
potential environmental liabilities due Lo soils contaminated by
hazardous materials or wastes.
In conducting the environmenLal assessmenL, EMCON undertook the
Following activities:
]. Interviewed local, County, and State regulatory agencies to deter-
mine if regulatory files concerning the property existed.
2. Reviewed aerial phgtographs to determine prior land usage.
3. Visually inspecLed l. he parcel to identify any potential "high
~"isk" areas.
4. CollecLed shallow subsurface :-:oil samples from identified "high
risk" areas during the site visit.
5. Analyzed selected representative soil samples for various pesti-
cides, herbicides, ()ils, and similar chemicals.
HISTORIC I. AND USE AND AGENCY FILE REVIEW
Aeri,~ J ?hotooraohs
Aerial photoflraphs depicLinq I. he Rancho I. aborde siLe were reviewed aL
lhe Kern Iim~nl.y I)eparl. ment ~f' lhd)lic Works' Hap Section. l'he dates of
l. he available photographs are:
· Auoust I0. 1937
· Harch 5, 1958
· January 31, i975
· Hay I I. 1981
The ]975 ~nd ]98! photographs were Laken by Western PhoLo Air. inc..
locaLed in Bakersfield. The pl~oLograptler of the 1937 and ]958 phoLo-
graphs was noL known.
lhe aerial phoLoqraphs J'eviewed did noL indicaLe any obvious areas of
h~zardous w~ste disposal nr on-site storage oF hazardous reaL,finis.
The main usaae of Parcel B seems to have been for aaricultural
purposes, primarily row crops and almond orchards.
P,]B/b3 lOlOl .DOC
Hr. II.L. Jack 1 ..... ell
A~must 16,
Page 3
A cluster of buildings located north of the intersection of Hageman
Road and Calloway Drive were evident in the 1937 aerial photograph;
these were reportedly the site office and bunk houses. In the March
1958 aerial photograph, it appears that the site was primarily used for
agriculture with some producing oil wells and above-ground tank groups
present, The January 1975 aerial photograph shows the presence of a
refuse dump site located adjacent to and east of the Friant-Kern Canal
(see Figure 2). Also, commercial or residential development of
properties adjacent to Parcel B can be seen. The May ]981 aerial
photograph shows two sewage treatment ponds used in conjunction with a
small on-site wastewater treat, ment plant in operation from npproxi-
mately ]980 to ]988. The majority of properties surrounding Parcel B
had been developed by this point in time.
A~encv Review
EH£(1N contacted l. he following depart, ments and personnel to try and
,fl)rain information regarding Rancho Laborde:
· Hr. Larr.v Lowe
Regional Water Quality Control J]oard. Central Valley Region
· Hr, Don Weber
Bakersfield Department of Public Works
· Mr. Ken Walters
Kern County Fire Department, Station 61
· Hr. Gene Peoples
Kern County Fire Department, Station 65
· DuLy OFficer
I]alifornia Department of Ilealth Services
Office L' 1 erk
Califnrnia Department of Conservation. Division of Oi
and Gas
- Hr. Hike Fletcher
J)i'eviouS I'ancJl ujJet-ator
· lqr. Jack Kalar
Rancho Laborde Foreman
· Hs. Irene Acosta
Kern Cmlnty Agricultural Commission, Pesticides Division
· Hs. Amy Ilreen
Kern County OeparLmenl of flealth
PJB/b31010].OOC
Hr. I1.1.. ,Jack £
August 1,6, 1988
Pacle '4
The majority of the government agencies did not have any information
regarding the site. lhe California Division of Oil and Gas did supply
information as to the status of active and abandoned oil wells on the
property: this informalion is available upon request. Hr. Fletcher and
Hr. Kalar were able to provide information regarding site history as
well as pesticide/herbicide usage on the site.
A nonpermitted refuse dump site exists east of the Friant-Kern Canal
(see Figure 2). According to Hr. Kalar, the dump site was originally
intended for ranch use only for disposal of various vegetation and farm
products (i.e. tires, s~rplus equil)ment., etc.). Reportedly, local
residents used the dump site Lo d~spose of vegetation, etc.
When debris accumulaLed-.in the dump site, the material would be ignited
Lo reduce the volume. Because of this illegal practice, the County
Fire Station ~n Fruitsvale Avenue reportedly asked LhaL the Ranch
discontinue this practice. The dump site was excavated Lo an approxi-
mate deDth of four feet with the removed soils t, rucked off site for
disposal. The excavated area was later backfilled with soils collected
.,luring local swimming pool installations.
According to Hike Fletcher, the only pesticide or herbicide stored at
the dump site was approximately 30 gallons of a contact weed killer.
It is not known if hazardous compounds were disposed of at the site by
local residents.
The Kern Count, y Aoricultural Commission became involved with a portion
of Parcel B (Pesticide Storage Area) in 1988 when a member of a local
environmental gra'ss roots commit, tee, Valley Action Network. noticed
I. haL previously stockpiled pesLicides had been removed and disposed of.
The member contacted the Agricultural Commission who then investigated
t. he site. IL was determined t. hat t. he i)esticides/herbicides had been
transl]orted by Hike Fletcher If) another site in HcFarlane, California
rr}r ~lisposal. Available infnrmati(m frnm lhe Aqricultural Commission
'noardinq lheir l indin(ls and a list. ~f lite pesticides invnlv~d iq
presented in Appendix A.
Amy ~;reen wil, h l.he Kern Court v I)el)artm~nL ,f ItealLh also became
involved with the former pesticide storage area. Hs. {;teen stated that
she plans tn issue a letter to the prol)erty owner requestinq that a
site characterization study be ~onducted ~n the vicinity of the
pesticide storage area before residential building commences in this
.. immediate area. The characterization study is Lo also address any
potentia] impact that the pesticide storage area might have had on
groundwater wells in the immediate area.
PJB/b310101.DOC
Hr. II.L. ,]ack '11
Auaust 16, ]~
SITE RECONNAISSANCE
Rancho Laborde was visited on August 3 and 4, ~9BB, by representatives
of EMCON in order to view the site, identify "high risk" areas, and
obtain soil samples.
Upon arrival at the site, [MCON traversed the parcel in order to view
the site. Ouriny this inspection, specific areas of concern were
detected and the following notes recorded:
· One screened oil sump was located in the southern portion
of the parcel. The sump is for the collection of waste
crude oil.
. Four abovegrade oil storage lank sites are located in
Parcel B. Two oF the sites, located on the south end oF
Parcel B. consisted oF a single tank each while the other
two sites Incated approximately in the middle of Parcel O
consisted of three Lo four tanks each. Crude oil satu-
rated soils were detected around some of the tanks.
- Apprnximately one half ,Iozen power pole electrical trans-
formers are located in the northern half of the site along.
access roads. Three transformers were observed to have
bases which appeared to have leaked. Since PCB liquids
were commonly used in transformers prior to ]979, these
areas were listed as potential concerns.
· Approximately seventeen irrigation catch basins and one
flood control sump were identified l. hrouc~hout Parcel O.
fhe basins provide Field drainaye ~turing rainy weather Io
prevenL crop floodina. These areas were identified as
potential concerns because oF the seasonat collection oF
waters ~.~hich may have ,-onl. ained ,,il. her herbicides ,~r
pesticides commonly used in the fields.
· ~ Former pestici,le and herbicide storaqe area locaLe~J
orth of site buildinc~s at lhe intersecLion oF Callowav
N Drive and Haaeman Road cootained ,.liscolored soils and
1N exhibited odors. Tt~e sLoraae area was enclosed on three
des and on the Lop bva chain link Fence.
... ~ TWO underqround aasol ine tanks are located behind (east)
buildinqs aL [allowav Drive and Ilaaeman Road.
~ /t~e site' .
. ~ Although these tanks have not been recently used. it is
~~ot known whether l~rnduct still ~xists in I:he tanks or iF
he tanks had ever leaked and possibly contaminated
urrmmnd ina soils.
~- A Former steam ~.leaninq sump i::. located approximately
lO0 feet east oF the pesticide ql. oraue area. Due to the
P,]O/b3]OlOl .DOC
I.h-. Il.l_. Jack C
A,~ut~st. 15. 19013
poSUmp's proximity to the pesticide storage area, and
because the sump was used to collect wash water from a
prior steam cleaning operation, this site was listed as a
tential concern.
· A refuse site located .east and adjacent to the Friant-Kern
Canal c:ontained mainly surplus agricultural equipment,
used tires, empty oil drums, discarded wood, and assorted
additional refuse. Because of unknown past dumping
practices by the Ranch and local residents, this site was
listed as a potential concern.
Locations of the above mentioned areas can be found on Figure 2.
Photographs taken during reconnaissance of the parcel and of various
sampling points are presented in Appendix B.
I!ased nn lhe above nbservations, lhe following fie~d samplinq points
were selected, the samplinq locations were based on the potential For
hazardous materials contamination aL a particular location. In
addition, soil samples were collected From the Field areas to provide
backmround information and determine if any residual herbicides or
pesticides still existed in tile soils.
· Crop Areas (Sample B-] and [3-2)
') Pesticide/Herbicide Storage Area (Sample B-3 and B-4)
C) Steam Cleaning Sump (Sample B-5)
Above-Grade Oil Storage Tanks (Sample I]-6)
· Transformer Area (Sample B-7)
· lrriqation f/al. er CaLchnleni. Ilasin (Sampi~ 1!-8)
· Refuse I]ulnp Area (Sanlple 1.~-9 and [3-10)
COLL[C'TIOIi AND ANALYSIS OF SOIL SAHPI. ES
After l. he sampl ing lncaLions nnd the analytical parameters were
selected, subsurface soil sampling was conducted. The nla~oritv of soil
samples were collected aL a depth of one f~ot. below grade except where
clround condil, ions caused ntherwise. Figure 2 depicts the sampling
~ocaLions and Table I details sampling information (i.e.. sample
m~mbers, sample lqcat, ions, etc.).
Soil Samolinq Activities
.. Soil ':amples t./pr~ roJlecl'.ed ~ino a hand-sampler which was cleaned
between samplings with a TSP solution and rinsed with distilled water.
P.1B/b310]O1 .DOC
Hr. It.L. dack ~ 1
A~must 16. 1988
Page 7
Four-inch brass tubes were inserted into the hand sampler prior to
sampling so that undisturbed soil samples could be obtained. After
sampling, the brass tubes were removed and Teflon sheets and plastic
end-caps were secured on the tube ends. Labels were then attached and
the sample was placed in plastic bags and stored on ice until
laboratory receipt. A Chain-of-Custody Form (see Appendix C) was used
to document sample handling, information.
Analytical Procedures and Results .
Soil samples were submitted to State-certified, Brown and Caldwell
Laboratories in Pasadena for analysis. Selected analytical test
methods were selected using the specific sampling location and on
assumed hazardous chemicals present, based on EMCON's initial site
reconnaissance, conversations with site personnel, and discussions
EHCON's lqanager of Environmental Chemistry/
Yhe following test methods were selected:
Samole U.S EPA TEST HETHOD
B-i, B-2 (Crop Areas) Organochlorine Pesticides/PC[3
...... o8o)
~-3~,~.B]~l(Pesticide Chlorinated Herbicides (8150)
--Storage Area)
{3-8 (Irrigation Water
Catchment [3asin)
(~(SI. eam Cleaning Petroleum Ilydrocarbons (4]8.])
Sump) Organochlorine Pesticides/PC[3 (8080)
Chlorinated Herbicides (8150)'
~-6 (Above-Grade Oil Purqeable Volatile Organics (80]5)
SI, orage Tanks) Petroleum Hydrocarbons (418.])
[]-7 (Transformer Area) Organoct~lorine Pesticides/PI[3 (8080)
~-9. [3-]0 (Refuse Dump Volatile Organics (8240)
Area) Semi-volatile Organics (8270)
-. [~rioritv Pollutant Pesticides
DDE and DDT were the only two priority pollutant pesticides recovered.
Concentrations of DDE detected were 0.007 mg/kg in B-I. 0.003 mg/kg in
B-2, 0.032 rog/kg in B-3, 0.002 mg/kQ in [3-4, and 0.003 rog/kg in B-7.
DDT was detected in Sample [3-3 at a concentration of 0.011 mg/kg.
Pri~riity Pollutants were not detected in Samples [3-5 or B-8.
PJB/b310101.DOC
Hr. li.L. ,)ack Ci
A,gust 16. ]988
Page 8
Extractable priority pollutants (either basic, neutral, or acid
extractable) or volatile priority pollutants were not found in
Samples B-9 or B-lO. Hydrocarbons in the C15 to C35 plus range were
detected in Sample B-lO at a level of 8,000 mg/kg. The detected
compounds are long chained hydrocarbons such as waxes, asphalts, etc.
Chlorinated Acid Ilerbicides
Chlorinated acid herbicides were not detected.
Petroleum Hydrocarbons
Petroleum hydrocarbons were detected in Samples B-5 and B-6 at concen-
trations of 3,590 mg/kg..and 1,400 mg/kg, respectively.
COHCLUSION AND RECOHHENDAT!ONS
CroD A)'eas
DOE was present in both of the collected soil samples. The concentra-
tions of DDE detected was aL least two orders of magnitude below the
SLate of California Total Threshold Limit Concentration (TTLC) of
1.0 mg,/kg for either DOE or DDT. [he TTLC is a designated concen-
tration threshold above which the State of California considers a
material a hazardous waste when disposed of. In addition, residual
concenlration ranges For 00E and 00T in, Kern Counly is 0,003 to
2,] rog/kg and 0.002 to 1.6 rog/kg, respectively (California Department
of F()od and Agricultural).
Due to the l~)w )evels of pesticides present, no Further action should
be required in these areas.
Pesticide SLoraqe Area
I'rioKiLy poll,lanls DDE and DDT were detected in soil samples collecled
From wit. hin the former pesticide storage area although the levels are
be)ow the I'TLC and are within established background leve)s (see
above).
It: the Kern County Health Department requires a characterization study
of the Former pesticide area as t. hey have stated, then further sampling
_. and arJalysis within and around the Former pesticide storage area may be
required. An approximate cost range to drill three soil borings, ,
sample and analyze two samples per boring, and submit a letter-report
is bet, ween $6,000 to $10,000. A proposal with more specific costs will
'- be submitted upon request.
PJB/b310]OI.DOC
[.lt. It.L. Jack C, '1
Anaust 16, 1988
Page 9
IrriGation Catchment Basins
Neither priority pollutants nor chlorinated acid herbicides were
detected in the sampled irrigation catchment basin. Therefore, no
further action should be necessary regarding the other irrigation
catchment basins.
Transformer Areas
Polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) were not detected in soils collected
from underneath a power pole transformer, although residuals of DDE
were detected.
Since only one transformer area was sampled, the possibility exists
that other transformers' on site may still contain or have leaked PCBs
in the past. However, ownership of utility pole transformers is
normally the utility company, not the land owner.
Above-qrade Storage Tanks, 0i1 Sumo
Crude oil contaminated soils were encountered around the aboveground
tank areas and an oil collection sump. According to the State of
California [H&S Code, Chapter 8.6, Section 25317.(a)], crude oil is not
considered a hazardous substance and regulatory agencies may not
require the clean-up of oil contaminated soils. However, for aesthetic
purposes, EMCON recommends that crude oil contaminated soils be exca-
vated and removed.
Steam ¢leanino Sumo
Petroleum hydrocarbons were detected in the former steam cleaning sump
located east of the pesticide storage area. The source of the hydro-
carbons is not known, although steam cleaning of vehicles is suspected.
Since the contamination was probably not due to crude oil but rather
past steam cleaning' operations, excavation and disposal of sump soils
is likely t.o be required. Since the extent of contamination is not
known, costs to excavate, sample, and dispose of contaminated soils is
not known. It is possible that only simple excavation of the sump
floor and side soils may be required.
Underground Tanks
Two underground tanks located south of the steam cleaning sump report-
edly contained gasoline and are not currently used. Proper removal of
the tanks will be required if they are not to be used. If plans for
-- their ~se exist, then a monitoring program must be established in
accordance with Kern County underground tank regulations.
- Removal of the underground tanks is recommended if they are not to be
used. At the time of )-emoval, soil sampling will be required to
PJB/b310]01 .DOC
Mr. H.L. Jack
Auoust 16. 198
Paoe lO
determine if the tanks had leaked in the past. An approximate cost to
remove the tanks, sample and analyze underlying soils, and properly
dispose of the tanks range between $10,000 and $]5,000. A more
accurate cost estimate can be obtained upon your request.
Refuse Dumo Site
Pesticides were not detected in samples collected from the refuse dump
site area. Since past excavation of site surface soils was conducted
to a depth of approximately four feet below grade, the possibility of
hazardous materials contamination from local residences and past ranch
dumping practices has been minimized. However, since only surface
sampling was conducted by EMCON, the possibility of deeper contami-
nation exists and only drilling, soil sampling, and analysis can better
conclude whether contamination from past practices exists at the refuse
dump s i te.
The approximate cost to conduct a limited underqround site assessment
consisting of three borings wilh soil sampling and analysis is ranges
between $6,000 and $I0,000 depending on the analytical results
requested. Hore detailed costs can be developed upon your request.
If you have any questions or comments regarding Lhis study, or if 'you
wou)d like more detai)ed cost estimates of possible additional
services, please call either of the undersigned.
RespectFully Submitted,
EMCON Ass6ciates
John P. HcCabe
Env}ronmentat Scientist
Katherine Winsor
Project Hanager
,JPM/KRW: se
Attachments: References
Figure I - Site Location Map
Figure 2 Site Plan
Table I Sampling Information
Table 2 Analytical Results
Appendix A - Pesticide Episode Investigation Report
Appendix B Site photographs
Appendix C Certified Analytical Results,
· -- Chain-of-Custody Form
P,]13/b3 lOlO] .DOC
I -N-
,
I
I
I
I
I
I ~: ~
I I
I
I
PROJECT' SITE
I
..
'~ ~ ~/~ ~ ,- _ __
{ I I I
I I I
I I
R,'M~CHO LA BORDE
REAL ESTATE 'DUE DILIGENCE' STUDY
- - PARCEL B
BAKERSFIELD. CALIFORNIA
SITE LOCATION MAP 'R0d~CT NO. !
i B31-01.01 ]
TABLE 1
SAMPLING INFORMATION
Sample Sample Sample Sample Analysis
Number Location Depth Type Conducted
B-1 North end of 6" soil EPA Methods 80BO,
Parcel B 8150
B-2 Southwest Corner of 1' soil EPA Methods 8080,
Parcel B 8150
O-3 Pesticide Storage 6" soil EPA Methods 8080,
Area 8150
B-4 Pesticide Storage 10" soil EPA Methods 8080,
Storage 8150
B-5 Steam Cleaning l' soil EPA Methods 418.1,
Sump East of 8080, 8150
Pesticide Storage Area
B-6 Above-ground Tank 4" soil EPA Methods 8015,
Area adjacent Lo 418.1
the Friant-Kern Canal
B-7 Transformer adjacent 2" soil EPA Methods 8080
to Sample B-6 area
B-8 Jrrio~tion §unl~ in J' soil EPA Methods 8080,
Middie of Parcel B 8150
B-9 Refuse Dump adjacent 4" soil EPA Hethods 8270,
to the Friant-Kern 8240
Canal
O-10 Refuse Dump ad.iacent 2" soil EPA Methods 8270,
to the Friant-Kern 8240
Canal
REFERENCES
U.S. EPA 1982. Test Methods For Evaluating Solid Waste;
Physical/Chemical Methods. SW-846. Second Edition. Office of
Solid Waste and Emergency Response, U.S. EPA, Washington, D.C.
California Department Of Food and AgriculLure. September 1985.
Agricultural Sources of DDT Residues in California Environment.
California HealLh and Safety Code. Chapter 6.8, Section 25317.(a)
PJB/b3]O]01 .DOC
Page [
F;'olect ,'lo. ~SI-O[ O[
[~BL£ 2
ANAL¥[ ICAL RESULT<`
........................................ SAHPL£S .........................................
~i S
rest. B-t £-Z 8:3 8-4 B-S 8-6 8-1 B-8 8-9 B-tO
Hethcd Parame[er (~r,g.'kg) (reg.:kg) (rog/kg) (rog/kg) (~ag/k,]) (,r. cJ.'kg) (rog/kg) (rog/kg) (rog/kg) (rog/kg)
~050 A I dr ~n ;~0 NO NO t~D ~O ,'iD NO NO NO
Ch Iordane IlO NO NO NO NO NO~ NO NO NO
0 ~ e lot i n NO NO NO NO I10 NO NO NO NO
Endosul fan [ lid NO IlO ND NO NO NO NO NO
Endosulfan Il NO ND NO NO NO NO NO NO NO
Endosulfan ~uhJ~te NO NO ND ND ND lid ND NO NO
Endr in ~lJeh)da lid rtO HO NO NO NO ND ND NO
Hept ach Iorepox ide NO ;10 ,40 ND NO ItO NO NO NO
Hep t .~c h Io r NO ltl) ttO NO Ill] ltl) ND III]
Aroc lor JO I 6 IlO IlO I10 NO ltd HI] ltd NO NO
Aroc lot 122I ND NO NO NO Ill] III] NO NO NO
Aror Ior IZ]Z IlO NO IlO NO IlO NO ND IlO NJ)
Aroc loc 12.42 lid IlO I10 ltl) I10 NO NO ND
Aroc lor 1248 lid ND IlO NO NO NO NO NO NO
Aroc lot 125~ NO ND III] ND NO ND NO NO NO
Aroc lor IZBO ND NI) It0 NO IlO ltd Iii] NJ) NO
Aroc lor 1267 NO NO NO NO IlO NO IlO NO NO
TOXal~hene ItO IlO NO NO NO ND NO NO NO
BHC. alpha iscmer NO NO NO NO NO NO NO HO NO
BHC..beta ~scmer NO NO NO ND ND NO ND NO
BHC. de 1 t ~, isomer I10 ND NO 110 lid NO NO NO NO
8HC. ga~rrna isomer (L inoane) IlO lid NO NO lid ND NO NO NO
P' P' -DDO ltd Ill) ND ND NO NO ND NO NO
P'P'-DDE 000l O.O0] 0.032 0.002 NO 0.003 NO NO NO
P~e. Z
A,'GsL'f T IC~L ~F~UL[~,
u S EP~, ........................................ L-','~PL££ .........................................
[est E-I fi-: 5-3 8-4 ~.-S fi-6 B-i B-8 B-~ B-tO
HathaJ Parameter (,cg ,.]) [:ag.'k~;; (.ng,'k g) (~cg ~k.:]) J.r,cj.: k ~ j [,:lcj :k ,] ) (.ng/k9) (reg.;kg) (mg,'kg) ling/kg)
P'P' -OOf lid NO 0.0! I .'tO NO NO NO rio lid
,:; 50 ' J, 5- T ;.O :i£ lid NO NO [JO I'10
Z. J. S - [P S ~ · lex NO NO ;ID HO lid ltd 1tO HO
2. -I - O i'tO ~tD HO NO tlO NO fid
2.4-DP- lid IlO IlO ilo lid ND ND NO
2. l - DP Pig ND ND IlO ttO NO rid ltd
0 icamba ;ID lid NO ~tD ltO NO ND lid
O inoseb Iii:) ;ID ltd NO NO lid NO
HCI:'A lid NO NO ;lO ltd NO NO ND
HCF P ~lO ;lO :iD PlO lid ND NO NO
~[~.1 TOTAL FIJ[L HI[SROC~R£ON:: ~,'~]0 !100
,:GI5 TOTAL PET~OLFIjH HI~,ROC.:~R£CI'I~ NO
HO HO
.~,: ?0 I.Z 4 - I',,- ~ c h I.:,reben: e-ne HO HO
I, ~, -0 ich Iorebenz. ene HO lid
1. Z, -0 ipheny Ihydr~: ine HO NO
l, 3 -O ich Iorobenzene HO NO
I. J, -0 ~ch Iorobenzene NO HO
Z.4.6' i'r ich Ioropheno I NO HO
~, ~-O~chloraphenol ND HO
2,4 -O ime thy Ipheno J ND NO
2,4-Oinitrotoluene
A,,SSOCIAT~S Project No. B31-01.01
Mr. II.L. Jack Coldwell
Vol Vista Estates
c/o Reynolds Environmental Group
3190-J Airport Loop
Costa Mesa, California'92626 .
Re' "Parcel B" Summary Report:
Real Estate Due Diligence
Study: Rancho Laborde Site:
BakersField, California.
Dear I.lr. Coldwell'
This letter presents EMCON Associates' Findings Following completion of
a real estate due diligence study For a 1,480 acre parcel. (Parcel B)
which was Formerly part of the Rancho Laborde site, located on the
north edqe oF the City oF Bakersfield. EMCON Associates (EMCON) was
retained by Hr. ,]ack Caldwetl to aid in identifying site areas which
may h,~ve been previously impacted by hazardous materials or w'astes.
Parcel B is located on the west s~de of Rancho Laborde and is bound by
the Fo}lowing'
· CoFFee Road Lo the East
· Residential homes and Norris Road to the North
Calloway Drive'to the West
· Rosedale Highway to the South
Figure i shows the location of Parcel B. Presently, soil grading is
being conducted For future development oF site property approximately
at the intersection oF Meacham Road and Calloway Drive,
Rancho Laborde was reportedly acquired by Hr. Gene Laborde approxi-
mately ]5 to 16 years ago. Prior to Lhe land acquisition by
I,Ir. Laborde, the land was ~'eportedly the property of the Kern County
Land Company.
PJB/b310]O1.DOC
PESTICIDE CONTAINER INVENTORY FOR FLETCHER FARMS
Denny Bridges 5-5-88
30 Gallon Drums
Dintro 70
Goal 4
Round-up 1
Treflan 1
Unknown 40
5 Gallon Containers
Dinitro 460
Omite 200
Balan 165
Round-up 155
Paraquat 60
Phosdrin 45
Kelthane 15
Di-Syston 15
Lorsban 15
Parathion 10
Buctril 10
Treflan 10
Spreader/Sticker 10
Harvest Aid 5
Diazinon 5
Meta-Systox 1
Unknown 15
2½ Gallon Containers
Bladex 10
1 Gallon Containers
Goal 150
Ambush 10
05/09/88
TO: Amy Green, Environmental
Health Specialist
FROM: Ted Davis, Assistant //~
Agricultural Commissioner
SUBJ: Pesticide Containers
Attached is the list of pesticide containers s~ored at the
Laborde site on Catloway Road. The numbers are approximate,
however, they will give you an indication of the volume of
containers stored at the site.
After we get the pictures back from processing we will send them
to you. 7=~ there is any further_ assistance needed, .oiease let
us know.
cc: Louie Cervantes, Deputy
Agricultural Commissioner
ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH SERVICES DEPARTMENT
STEVE McCALLEY, R.E.H.S. ~ 2700 "M" Street, Suite 300
DIRECTOR ~ Bakersfield, CA 93301
(805) 861-3636
(805) 861-3429 FAX
January 29, 1993
McCormic, Barstow, Sheppard, Wayte & Carrutth
Attorneys at Law
P. O. Box 24013
Fresno, CA 93779-4013
Attention: Timothy Jones
SUBJECT: LABORDE PROPERTY - CALLOWAY & HAGEMAN ROADS
BAKERSFIELD, CA
Gentlemen:
This office is in receipt of your letter dated January 21, 1993, regarding the Laborde property and
your request for information pertaining to capping requirements for the former steam cleaning sump.
A review of the f'fle has disclosed the former sump occupied an area of 12x12 feet w/th a. depth of
4 feet. Krazan Associates, Inc.'s, Site Characterization Report of soil analyses, performed in
April 1989, reveals the greater part of the contaminant (oil and grease) to be present at 5 feet depth.
Total petroleum hydrocarbon levels were not significant.
You have indicated that future use of the property will be commercial. This Department agrees that
capping of the former sump area with a three-inch asphalt overlay would satisfy the mitigation
requirements specified by Amy Green in her letter dated February 28, 1990. Ideally, the capped area
should be planned as a portion of a future parking lot for a commercial business.
Please inform this office of your client's intentions regarding future use of the property and the
specifications for capping of the impacted sump area.
Sincerely,
Steve McCalley, Director
By: l~ora Darling, R.E.]-I.S., R.E.A.//
Hazardous Materials Specialist 'III
Hazardous Materials Program
FD:cas
klaborde.ltr
September 20, 1988
Ms. Amy E. Green
Environmental Health Specialist
Environmental Health Division
KERN COUNTY HEALTH DEPARTMENT
14!5 Truxtun Avenue
Bak,.~s,o' ~ld, CA 93301
Ref: Old Pesticide Storage Area on Property Located East of Calloway
Road and Horth of the Hageman Extension in Bakersfield, CA
Dear ,,1
,,s. Green:
On S~*ember la 1988 '/ou wrote ~ letter to Mr. Clifford Bressier
askin~ for a site characterization proposal for the above referenced
~ ~ eutl~ne for such
location. You indicated '~ ~ '
~.na~. ,.h~ department's
proposals was enclosed, to be used as a guide in preparing our
pr.~posai.
You failed to ~nclude, . ,.h~o outline, with your 1o~:''.....~.~,..I and, as a result.
I am at a tnss to know just ?~c.+l~, what you want Please advi~
Sincereiy,
2700 M STF)EET Ik~-t~N COUNTY HEALTH DEPARTM HEALTH OFFICER
MAILING ADDRESS Leon M Hebertson, M,D,
1415 TRUXTUN AVENUE ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH DIVISION
BAKERSFIELD, CA 93301 DIRECTOR OF ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH
{805) 861-3636 Vernon S. Reichard
September 22, 1988
Laborde Community Development Co. Inc.
8900 Rosedale Hwy.
Bakersfield, CA 93308
Attn: Jim Clements
Re: Site Characterization Proposal Outline.
Dear Mr. Clements:
The Site Characterization Proposal Outline which can be
utilized for the Old Pesticide Storage Area on property located
east of Calloway Rd. and North of the Hageman Extension in
Bakersfield, California is enclosed.
If you have any questions please feel free to call me at
(805) 861-3636.
Amy E. Green(
Environmenta~teal th S~,~list
AG:cd
0922-13
November 15, 1988
Ms. Amy Green
Environmental Health Specialist
KERN COUHTY HEALTH DEPARTMENT
!415 Truxtun Avenue
Bakersfield, CA 93301
Dear Ms. Green:
I have not heard from you since my visit to your office on tile morning
of October !!, !908. ! have several firms standing by read.!/ to bid on
whatever work you may require at the shop site; however, as of this
date .T have nothing to tell them.
.. F~v ~ ,4 ~-'
T ~USt: advise VOU that ! will need an .... tuns.on of ulme beyond
*' . uh.. lack of
,,o~~' ,~._moer ~ ,_~, !988 to bring ~ne .~ite into compliance, due to
communication from your office.
?lease be assured that T do want to '.4ark closely with you and do
whatever is necessary to 3,11e,.'iate any problems. ! cannot act on this,
however, unless I hear from you rigi~t away. Please give this situation
your top priorit.7.
Sincerely,
"' J~m Clements
A.qmqt for '~:he Trustee
*,r'/-~-~ t
Hr. II.L. Jack C. ald'
A,~uust ]6. 1988
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT STRATEGY ArID SITE BACKGROUND
lhe purpose of this real estate due diligence study is to evaluate and
identify past and present activities at the site which may have yielded
potential environmental liabilities due to soils contaminated by
hazardous materials or wastes.
In conducting the environmental assessment, EMCON undertook the
following activities:
I. Interviewed local, County, and State regulatory agencies to deter-
mine if regulatory files concerning the property existed.
2, Reviewed aerial phgtographs to determine prior land usage.
3. Visually inspected the parcel to identify any potential "high
risk" areas.
4. ¢]ollected shallow subsurf'ace ...:oil samples from identified "high
risk" areas during the site visit..
5. Analyzed selected representative soil samples for various pesti-
cides, herbicides. ()ils, and similar chemicals.
HISTORIC I_AND USE AND AGENCY FILE REVIEW
Aerial PhotooraDhs
Aerial photooraphs depicLinq I. he Rancho I. aborde site were reviewed al
lhe Kern I:otmt, y l)eparl.menL ~f lh~l)lic Works" Flap Section. l'he dates of
[he available phol:oqraphs are:
AUOllS [ I O. 1937
· I,larch 5, 1958
· January 31, 1975
May Il. 1981
The 1975 and 1981 photographs were taken by Western Photo Air. Inc.,
located in Bakersfield. Tile photographer of the 1937 and 1958 photo-
graphs was not known.
Tile aerial photoqraphs reviewed did not indicate any obvious areas of
hazardous waste disposal or on-site storage of hazardous materials.
Tile main usaoe of Parcel B seems to have been for aoricultural
purposes, primarily row c~'ops and almond orchards.
PJB/b310101 .DOC
I-Ir. ii.L. Jack Cai e11
Page 3
A cluster of buildings located north of the intersection of Hageman
Road and Calloway Drive were evident in the 1937 aerial photograph;
these were reportedly the site office and bunk houses. In the March
]958 aerial photograph, it appears that the site was primarily used for
agriculture with some producing oil wells and above-ground tank groups
present. The January 1975 aerial photograph shows the presence of a
refuse dump site located adjacent to and east of the Fr~ant-Kern Canal
[see Figure 2). Also, commercia~ or residential development of
properties adjacent to Parcel B can be seen. The May 1981 aerial
photograph shows two sewage treatment ponds used in conjunction with a
small on-site wastewater lreatment plant in operation from approxi-
mately ]980 to I988. The majority of properties surrounding Parcel B
had been developed by this point in time.
Agency Review
EMCON contacted I. he Following depart, ments and personnel to try and
,H)tain information regarding Rancho Laborde:
· I.Ir. Larry Lowe
Regional Water Quality Control Board, Central Valley Region
· I.Ir. Don Weber
Bakersfield Department of Public Works
· Mr. Ken Walters
Kern Courtly Fire Department, Station 61
· Mr. Gene Peoples ·
Kern County Fire Department, Station 65
· Duty OFficer
California Department of tlealth Services
· Office [lerk
CaliFnrnia Departnleol. of CunservaLion, Division {)F Oil'
and Gas
· Mr. Hike FleLcher
Previous ranch uperator
· Mr. Jack Kal ar
Rancho Laborde Foreman
· Hs. Irene AcosLa
Kern Connty Agricultural Commission, Pesticides Division
· Hs. Amy I;r~en
Kern County DeparLmenL of Heal Lh
PJB/b31OIOI.DOC
;.h-. i{.I.. Jack £~
A,must 16, 1988
Page 4
The majority of the government agencies did not have any information
regarding the site. The California Division of Oil and Gas did supply
information as to the status of active and abandoned oil wells on the
property; this information is available upon request. I.lr. Fletcher and
I.lr. Kalar were able to provide information regarding site history as
well as pesticide/herbicide usage on the site.
A nonpermitted refuse dump site exisls east of tile Friant-Kern Canal
(see Figure 2). According to Mr. Kalar, the dump site was originally
intended for ranch use only for disposal of various vegetation and farm
prodllcts (i.e. tires, st~rplns equipment., etc.). Reportedly, local
residents used the dump site to dispose of vegetation, etc.
When debris accumulated..in the dr,rap site, the material would be ignited
to reduce the vo]ume. 13ecause of this illega] practice, the County
Fire Slation nn Fruitsvale Aven~e reportedly asked that the Ranch
discontinue this practice. The dump site was excavated to an approxi-
mate de,th of Four Feet with the removed soils trucked off site for
,'Jisposal. The excavated area was later backfilled with soils collected
,luring local swimming pool installations.
According Lo Mike Fletcher, the only I)esLicide or herbicide stored at
l. he dump site was approximately 30 gallons of a contact weed killer.
It is not known if hazardous compounds were disposed of at the site by
local residents.
The Kern County Aaricultural Commission became involved with a portion
of Parcel B (Pesticide Storage Area) in 1988 when a.member of a local
environmental gra'ss roots commil, tee, Valley Action Network. noticed
I. haL previously stockpiled pesLicides had been removed and disposed of.
the member contacted the Agric~ltural Commission who then investigated
the site. IL was determined that the pesticides/herbicides had been
transported by Hike Fletcher Io another site in l,lcFarlane, California
r~}r ~lisposal. Available infnrmal, ion Frnm lite Aoricull. ural Co~mission
~'nqardinq Iheir I inrlintls atd a list nf Ihe i~esticir]es invnlw~d iq
i:resented in Appendix A.
Amy I;,'een wil. h I.he Kern Iiotnl. v l)el)artmm~t ~,F Health also t~ecame
involved with lhe former pesticide storage area. Ms. Green stated that
:,he plans t.n issue a letter ~o ~he property owner reqt~estinq ~hat a
site characterization study I:e conducted in Ihe vicinity of the
pesticide storage area before residential building commences in this
.. immediate area. lhe characterization stud.¥ is to also address any
potential impact that the pesticide storage area might have had on
groundwater wells in the immediate area.
PJB/b31OIO1.DOC
Flr. I~.L. ,lack
Auqust 16, 1
Ua~Je 5
SITE RECONNAISSANCE
Rancho Laborde was visited on August 3 and 4, 1988, by representatives
of EMCON in order to view the site, identify "high risk" areas, and
obtain soil samples.
Upon arrival at tile site, [MCON traversed lhe parcel in order to view
tile site. Durin~j this inspection, specific areas of concern were
detected and the following notes recorded:
· One screened oil sump was located in the southern portion
of the parcel. The sump is for the collection of waste
crude o i 1.
· Four abovegrade oil storage lank sites are located in
Parcel B. Two of the sites, located on l. he south end
Parcel B. consisted of a single tank each while the other
two s~tes I~cated apprdx~mately in t.t~e middle of Parcel B
consisted of three Lo t'our tanks each. Crude oil satu-
~-ated .soils were detected around some of the tanks.
- Apprnximately ~)ne half dnzen power pole electrical trans-
formers are located in the northern half of the site along
access roads. Three transformers were observed to have
bases which appeared to have leaked. Since PCB liquids
were commonly used in transformers prior Lo I979, these
areas were listed as potential concerns.
· Approximately seventeen irrigatinn catch basins and nne
flood control sump were identified throu(lhout Parcel
the basins p~-ovide [ield drainage ~lt~rim] l'ain.y weather
prevent crop floodina. These areas were identified as
potential concerns because ~)f l. he seasonal collection of
waters ~.~hich mav have ,-()ntained ,,ither herbicides
pesticides commonly ~sed in the fields.
· A f~rmer i)esL~ci,le and herbicide storaqe area located
north of site buildin(~s at lhe intersection of Callaway
D~'ive and Haaemao Road contained ,.liscolored soils and
exhihiLed odors, the sI. oraoe area was enclosed on three
sides and on the Lup bv a chain link fence.
._ · Two underground gasoline tanks are located behind (east)
the site buildings at [alloway D~'1ve and Itaaeman Road.
//'Altho~lgh these tanks have not been ~'ecently used. it
~ not known whether prnduct st~ll ~xists ~n the tanks or
the tanks had ever leaked and possibly contaminated
st~r~-ot~nd i nq soils.
~- A Former steam ~.leaninq sump i::. lr)cated approximately
100 feet east oF the I}est~cide sl. ora~e area. Due to the
P,]B/bBlOJ01 .DOC
l-h-. I1.1.. ,Jack [ '1
pSUmp's proximity Lo the pesticide storage area, and
because the sump was used Lo collect wash water from a
prior sLeam cleaning operaLion, this siLe was listed as a
oLential concern.
· A refuse site located .easL and adjacent to Lhe Friant-Kern
Canal contained mainly surplus a(IriculLural equipment,
used tires, empty oil drums, discarded wood, and assorted
additional refuse. Because of unknown past dumping
practices by the Ranch and local residents, this site was
listed as a potential concern.
Locations of the above mentioned areas can be found on Figure 2.
Photographs taken during reconnaissance of the parcel and of various
sampling points are presented in Appendix
tased nn the above nbservations. Ihe Following field samplin~ point, s
were selected, fhe sampIinq locations were based on the potential For
hazardous materials contamination aL a particular location, tn
addition, soil samples were collected from the field areas to provide
backeround information and determine if any residual herbicides or
pesticides si. ill existed in the soils.
· Crop Areas (Sample B-1 and 0-2)
PesLicide/lterbicide SLorage Area (Sample B-3 and B-4)
~)Steam Cleaning Sump (Sample
Above-Grade Oil Storage Tanks (Sample
· Transformer Area (Sample B-7)
· lrriuation Wal. er [atchment. Basin (Sample Il-0)
· Refuse I)ump Area (Sample Ii-9 and B-i0)
[OLL[CTION AHD ANALYSIS OF SOIL SAMPI. ES
AFter l. he sampling lncations and the ,~nalytical parameters were
selected, subsurface soil samplim.1 was conducted. The majority of soil
samples were collected aL a depth of one Fnol. I)elow grade except where
ciround conditions caused ntherwise. Figure 2 depicts the samplin9
~ocations and Table I details samplin~l information ~i.e.. sample
m~mbers, sampie locations, etc.).
Soil SalllDl iRq Activities
· . Soil qamples ,,v~re cnllecl'.ed ~sinq a hand-~ampler vH~ich was cleaned
between samplinqs v~it.h a TSP solution and rinsed with distilled water.
P,1B/b310IOI .DOC
I,lr. lt.L. Jack
A~must 16. 1
Page 7
Four-inch brass tubes were inserted into the hand sampler prior to
sampling so that undisturbed soil samples could be obtained. After
sampling, the brass tubes were removed and Teflon sheets and plastic
end-caps were secured on the tube ends. Labels were then attached and
the sample was placed in plastic bags .and stored on ice until
laboratory receipt. A Chain-of-Custody form (see Appendix C) was used
to document sample handling information.
Analytical Procedures and Results ..
Soil samples were submitted to State-certified, Brown and Caldwell
Laboratories in Pasadena for analysis. Selected analytical test
methods were selected using the specific sampling location and on
assumed hazardous chem.icals present, based on EMCON's initial site
reconnaissance, conversations with site personnel, and discussions
EIqCON's Hanager of Environmental Chemistry/
File following test methods were selected:
Sample U.S EPA TEST HETHOD
B-i, B-2 (Crop Areas) Organochlorine Pesticides/PCB
......
~-3r,~ B-~?(Pesticide Chlorinated Herbicides (8150)
~---S't~Yrage Area )
[3-8 (Irrigation Water
Catchment Basin)
([~(Sl. eam Cleaning Petroleum Ilydrocarbons (418.1)
'Sump) Organochlorine Pesticides/'PCB.(8080)
Chlorinated Iterbicides (8]50)
~-6 (Above-Grade Oil Purqeable Volatile Organics (80]5)
SI. orage Tanks) Petroleum Hydrocarbons (4]8.])
[3-7 (Transformer Area) Organochlorine Pesticides/PCI3 (8080)
B-9. B-lO (Refuse Dump Volatile Organics (8240)
Area) Semi-volatile Organics (8270)
-- Priority Pollutant Pesticides
ODE and DOT were the only two priority pollutant pesticides recovered.
Concentrations of DOE detected were 0.007 mg/kg in B-I, 0.003 mg/kg in
B-2, 0.032 rog/kg in B-3. 0.002 rog/kg in B-4, and 0.003 rog/kg in B-7.
DDT was detected in Sample B-3 at a concentration of 0.011 rog/kg.
Priority PolluLants were not detecLed in Samples B-5 or B-8.
PJB/b3]O101.DOC
Mr. II.L. Oack
^ugust 16, 1
Page 8
Extractable priority pollutants (either basic, neutral, or acid
extractable) or volatile priority pollutants were not found in
Samples B-9 or B-10. Itydrocarbons in the C15 to C35 plus range were
detected in Sample B-lO at a level of 8,000 mg/kg. The detected
compounds are long chained hydrocarbons such as waxes, asphalts, etc.
Chlorinated Acid Ilerbicides
Chlorinated acid herbicides were not detected.
Petroleum Hydrocarbons
Petroleum hydrocarbons were detected in Samples B-5 and B-6 at concen-
trations of 3,590 mg/kg..and 1,400 lng/kg, respectively.
CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS
£roD Areas
ODE was present in both of the collected soil samples. The concentra-
tions of DDE detected was at least two orders of magnitude below the
State of California Total Threshold Limit Concentration (TTLC) of
).0 mg/kg for eiLher DDE or DDT. [he TTLC is a designated concen-
tration threshold above which the State of California considers a
material a hazardous waste when disposed of. In addition, residual
concentration ranges for DDE and DDT in. Kern County is 0.003 to
2.3 mg/kg and 0.002 to 1.6 lng/kg, respectively (California Department
of Food and Agricultural).
Due to tile l~)w levels of pesticides present, no Further action should
l)e req~ired in these areas.
Pesticide Storage Area
Priority i)o)luLan[s DDE and DDT were detected in soil samples collected
from within l. he former pesticide storage area although the levels are
below the I'TLC and a)-e wiLhin established background levels (see
above).
If the Kern County HealLh Department requires a characterization study
of the Former pesticide area as they have stated, ti]eh further sampling
_. and analysis within and around tile former pesticide storage area may be
required. An approximate cost range to drill three soil borings,
sample and analyze two samples per boring, and submit a letter-report
is between $6,000 to $10,000. A proposal with more specific costs will
-' be submitted upon request.
PJB/b3IO!O] .DOC
I.~r. tt.t. Oack Ca '1
Anoust 16. 1988
~age 9
Irriqation Catchment Basins
Neither priority pollutants no)' chlorinated acid herbicides were
detected in the sampled irrigation catchment basin. Therefore, no
further action should be necessary regarding the other irrigation
catchment basins.
Transformer Areas
Polychlorinated biphenyls (P£Bs) were not detected in soils collected
from underneath a power pole transformer, although residuals of DDE
were detected.
Since only one transformer area was sampled, the possibility exists
that other transformers' on site may still contain or have leaked P£Bs
in the past. However, ownership of utility pole transformers is
normally the utility company, not the land owner.
Above-~irade SLorage Tanks, Oil Sumo
Crude oil contaminated soils were encountered around the aboveground
Lank areas and an oil collection sump. According to the SLate of
California [H&S Code, Chapter 8.6, Section 253]7.(a)], crude oil is not
considered a hazardous substance and regulatory agencies may not
require the clean-up of oil contaminated soils. However, For aesthetic
purposes, EMCON recommends that crude oil contaminated soils be exca-
vated and removed.
Steam Cleanin~ Sumo
Petroleum hydrocarbons were detecLed in the former steam cleaning sump
located east of the pesticide storage area. Tile source of tile hydro-
carbons is not known, although steam cleaning of vehicles is suspected,
Since the contamination was probably not due t.o crude oil but rather
past steam cleaning' operations, excavaLion and disposal of sump soils
is likely t.o be required. Since the extent, of contamination is not
known, costs Lo excavate, sample, and dispose of contaminated soils is
not known. It is possible that only simple excavation ot~ the sump
floor and side soi)s may be required.
Underground Tanks
Two underground tanks located souLh of the steam cleaning sump report-
edly contained gasoline and are not currently used. Proper removal of
the tanks will be required if they are not t.o be used. IF plans for
-- their use exist, then a monitoring program must be established in
accordance with Kern County underground tank regulations.
- Removal of the underground tanks is recommended if they are not to be
used, At tile time of Femoval. soil samplinq will be required to
PJD/b31010I.DOC
Hr. It.L. Jack
Auuu:t [6. 1
Paue 10
determine if the tanks had leaked in the past. An approximate cost to
remove tile tanks, sample and analyze underlying soils, and properly
dispose of the tanks range between $10,000 and $15,OO0. A more
accurate cost estimate can be obtained upon your request.
Refuse Dumo_Si te
Pesticides were not detected in samples collected from the refuse dump
site area. Since past excavation of site surface soils was conducted
to a depth of approximately four feet below grade, the possibility of
hazardous materials contamination from local residences and past ranch
dumping practices has been minimized. However, since only surface
sampl, ing was conducted by EMCON, the possibility of deeper contami-
nation exists and only drilling, soil sampling, and analysis can better
conclude whether contamination from past practices exists at the refuse
dump si te.
Tile approximate cost to conduct a limited under~round site assessment
consisting of three borings with soil sampling and analysis is ranges
between $6,000 and $10.000 dependin9 on the analytical results
requested. Hore detailed costs can be developed upon your request.
lr you have any questions or comments regarding this study, or if you
would like more detailed cost estimates of possible additional
services, p)ease call either of the undersigned.
Respectfully Submitted.
EMCON Ass6ciates
John P. lqcCabe
Environmental Scientist
/:-- , './.' ..'
Katherine Winsor
Project Hanager
,] ?M/KRW: se
At. tachments: References
Figure I Site Location Map
Figure 2 Site Plan
Table ] Sampling Information
Table 2 Analytical Results
Appendix A - Pesticide Episode Investigation Report
Appendix 13 Site photographs
Appendix C Certified Analytical Results.
.-. Chain-of-Custody Fnrm
P,}B/b31010I .DOC
I I sw IPqo
~NOW
I
I
I
I ~ '--~ .......
I
I
~ .... ~ ~ ~' ,
I I I
SITE L~ATION ~AP ~o~c~ No. ~
TABLE !
SAMPLING INFORMATION
Sample Sample Sample Sample Analysis
Number Location Depth Type Conducted
B-1 North end of 6" soil EPA Methods 8080,
Parcel B 8150
B-2 Southwest Corner of 1' soil EPA Methods 8080,
Parcel B 8150
D-3 Pesticide Storage 6" soil EPA Methods 8080,
Area 8150
8-4 Pesticide Storage lO" soil EPA Methods 8080.
Storage 8150
D-5 Steam Cleaning 1' soil EPA Methods 418.1,
Sump East of 8080, 8150
Pesticide Storage Area
8-6 Above-ground Tank 4" soil EPA Methods 8015,
Area adjacent to '418.1
the Friant-Kern Canal
0-7 Transformer adjacent 2" soil EPA Methods 8080
to Sample B-6 area
B-8 IrriaaLion Sump in 1' soil EPA Methods 8080,
Middie of Parcel B 8150
B-9 Refuse Dump adjacent 4" 3oil EPA Hethods 8270,
lo the Frianl-Kern 8240
Canal
0-10 Refuse Dump adjacent 2" soil EPA Methods 8270,
to the Friant-Kern 8240
Canal
REFERENCES
U.S. EPA 1982. Test Methods for Evaluating Solid Waste;
Physical/Chemical Methods. SW-846, Second Edition. Office of
Solid Waste and Emergency Response, U.S. EPA, Washington, D.C.
California Department ~f Food and Agricullure. September 1985.
Agricultural Sources of DDT Residues in California Environment.
California Health and Safety Code. Chapter 6.8, Section 25317.(a}
PJB/b31OIO1.DOC
DILIGENCE' STUDY
PLAN Bal-01.01
Page
F:'olect rio B3I-OI OI
i'A~L E 2
.ANALYTICAL RESUL IS
........................................ SAHPLE5 .........................................
[est B-t F.-2 8:.i 8-4 0-5 B-6 B-/ B-8 B-9 D-lO
14ethcd Parameter (mg..kg) (mg.;k§) (mg/~g) {lng/kg) (~g/kg) {,Kg/kg) (rog/kg) (~/kg) [rog/kg) (~g/kg)
~OJO A )dr ~n ~10 ?iD ~lO ND ND rio ND NO NO
Ch lordane )(0 ND ND ND NO ND~ HD NO ND
D ~e lot i n ND ~(0 ND ND )~0 NO NO NO ~0
Endosu)fan I ND )(D )(0 ND ND ND NO NO NO
Endosu)fan ~l NO NO ND ND NO ND ND )(0 NO
Endosul~an ~uJdJte NO ?(O ~lO ND NO ND lID ~10 NO
Endr in ~J,'Jeh)de IlO )ID ~tO rio ND ND ND NO NO
Hept Jcn Jorepox ide lid ND ND ND NO ND NO ND ND
Hep ~ ~ch lot lid ~iD ND ND ~ID ND ND lib ND
Aroc lot JO16 lid ~(D ND ltd ND ND ND lid ND
AFoc 1or 122~ ~13 ~iD lid ND lid ND ND NO NO
A~'oc lar 12]2 JiD ~tD lid ND .NO ND ND lid ND
AKoc Ior 1242 IlO ~(D NO ND ltd ND NO ND ND
Aroc Ior 124:5 liD ND ltd ND NO ND ND NO NO
Aroc Jot 1254 ~(D JID ltD ND ND ND ND ND ND
Aroc lot 1260 ~10 ~iD ltd ND )ID ND NO ~10 NO
Aroc 1or 1262 lid ~lO ltd ND lid ND ND ND ND
[oxaphene ND ~lO ND ND ND ND ND ND NO
8HC. alpha mscmer tiD ~lO lid ND ND ND ND NO ND
BHC,. be t a i s~e r lid rio NO NO ltd NO NO NO NO
BHC, de I t ~ isomer I10 ltd lid 110 /lO /lO NO NO NO
EHC, ga~a isomer (L ina8ne) I10 rid ltd NO /t0 ND ~O lid NO
P' P' -ODD liD ilo ND , ~O ~0 ltd ~O NO NO
P'P'-DDE 0 0~1 O.O03 O.03Z O.OOZ 110 0.003 ND ND NO
r,.:,e L F. Z
u :5 £P~, ........................................ :,'MPL£ £ .........................................
r~st E-i ~,-2 8-.~ B-a B-5 ~-6 8-1 8-8 B-~
ttethcJ P.)rameter {:rg.',g) {:ng.'kgj {,ng,'kg) (~g,kg) (,t~.'k;j [,ng'~g) (,rig/kg) (rog/kg) (~,'k~)
p 'p' -OOr IlO ~O O. Ol I HO lid NO lid NO NO
~.J,5-IP S~,lex ~tO NO ~iO ND NO ND NO ND
~. ~ -0 ~O HO MD NO NO NO NO ND
Z. 4-08 ~O ~0 ~O ~lO ND NO flO NO
2. i-DP HO ~0 ND NO NO ND fid ND
D mcambJ ~tD fid NO ND ND ND fiD NO
O i noseb r~O HD HD ND ND ND ND ND
HCF'A rid NO ND NO lid NO NO fid
MCF P HO NO ND NO NO ND NO NO
4[~.l [OTAL FUEL HI~ROC~REOtt~ j~)O !400
,d)15 iO[AL PETrOLeUM M~DRSCARBCII~ HO
NO NO
.~70 I ~ 4-[rlchl.Droben:~ne NO NO
I, 2. -O ich Iorobenzene NO ND
I.Z. -Oiph~nTIhydra~ i,e ND NO
I. 3-D ich loroDen:ene NO NO
I, 4-0 ~cN IoroDenzene flO NO
Z.4.6- [r~chloropheno I ~10 NO
2. ~ -0 ~c~ Ior~pheno I NO NO
g. ~ -O ime thy lpheno I NO NO
~. 4-0 in ~ troto luene
Fro~ect No B~l-OI.61 Page
ANALYflCAL R££UL[S
u.~,. EPA ........................................ S:,H~'L E S .........................................
t4er. hod Parameter i,r,g · ]) (.ng.k:l) (,'~g/kg) (c~j.,'kg) (mg;'k;i (.-.g/kg) (rog/kg) ([r<J/kg) (rog/kg) (rog/kg)
2.4-Oin~trcphenol NO NO
2,6-Oin it rctoluene ~ NO NO
2-ChJorcnaph[na lena NO ND
2-Herb> ]naphtha lane . /ID ND
2-Methyl Phenol NO NO
2-Nstrcpneno I NO ND
~ It'll J~ rcana I me ND NO
Z. 4, '~- J'r ion Ioropheno l ltd NO
Z ICh Ioropheno I NO ND
2-MethyJ-4.6-'~n
i. 3-O scm lorobenz Id lne rid IlO
3-N ~troana I ~ne Jig NO
J -8rcmcphen? Jpheny lather I't0 NO
4 -Ch Ioro-S-ma thy lpheno l /ID NO
4 -Ch Ioropheny Iphenv l el:nar ND NO
4-Ch Ioroana line NO NO
l-Methyl Phenol ND NO
$ -N i t ropheno I NO ND
4-Nitroana I sne ND NO
Acenaphthene NO NO
Acenaphthy lena NO ND
An 1 I me NO NO
Anthracene NO ND
B ss(2-ethy lhex71 )phtha Iste NO NO
Benz id ina ND NO
Prs]ec[ ~to E.iI-OI.CI Page
[ABLE Z
ANAL¥[ICAL
S EP-~ ........................................ i,~HPLES .........................................
]'est B-[ 8-2 8-3 I]-4 £-~J 8-6 8-I §-8 8-9 8-10
He[nod P.~ rame. t e r [,r,g .'k.~ ) (mg,'kg) (mcJ/kg) (~ng/kg) { .r.g.' k.g j (rog/kg) (ip, g/k g ) (rog/kg) (mg/kcj) (rog/kg)
8en.'o~c Ac ~d ,'iD
8enzy) Alcohc) ' ND
8is[2-ch]oroel:h7 I)el:r, er lid
8 is(2-chlaro i-=oprcpy ) )e[ner NO ND
8 i s(~-chJoroetho×) ).n~[P,]ne NO
8enza( ] janthr ]cene IlO I'10
Eenzo( ])pyrene NO HO
8enzo( b ) I: )uoran [ ~,ene /JO NO
Benzo(g.h, ~ )pery lene NO HO
Benzo(k)f l~ranthen_= NO NO
§u[.~ Ibenz'/Iphtha I.::e ND NO
Chr) :ene NO IlO
O I -n-oc ty Iph~.h.~ I ~[_= NO NO
OibenzoJa.hJanthracene ltd NO
Oibutylph[ha lite rio
Oiethylphtha late ND NO
O imet hy 1phi ha 1 ~. t e HO NO
Dmbenzofuran NO NO
F luorene HO NO
F luoranthene ND
Hexach Ioroben.-ene NO NJ)
Hexach Iorobu t ad i erie NO NO
Hexachlorocyclopent~d:ene fid ND
Hexac h loroe thane 1t0 NO
lndeno(I.Z.3-c.d)Pyrene fid
r~BL£ Z
ANALYTICAL RESULTS
u S. £,~A ........................................ £AHFL£-~ .........................................
,He t ha~ P~r~meter (,,~g-~,gJ {,rig 'kg~ {mg/kg J {,?q/k :j J (,'nq/kgl {:ng.;kg J [~g/kg ) [ ~t~j,'k g ) {~g/~9) {mg/kg)
[ sophoror, e ltO NO
N -Il i I: rosod i -n - propy lam ine ' NJ) NO
ll-llitrosadimethylamine ND
ti~fl i t rosod ipheny lamlne I10
Naphtha lene NO
fl i t rcben ;.en=_ NO 1t0
Pan t ich Ioropheno i NO NJ)
Phen]n~hrene IlO NO
Pheno I IlO
P:..rene
~eml-Odantif;ed Results'~
(.; ':I'~ tO C]5 Plus liydrccarbcn :~3£r;.; :Ii3 8000
,~lO l.l. [-[rlchJorc~Lhane IlO ltd
J, J ,~._~-[etrachloroeth~ne NO
I. 1.2-[richJoroethane ~lO NO
!.l-OIchloroethane ,. IlO NO
1. l-Oichloroethylene ND NO
1,2-0 ich Ioroe thane :lO NO
I. 2 -0 ich Ioroben.'ene lid NO
1.2 -O ich Ioropropane NO fid
I .3-OIchlorobenzene ND ND
c Is- 1. ]-0 ichloroprcl:ene
1.4 -0 ich Ioroben-ene NO NO
Z-Chloroethy Iv Iny lecher NO
II S. t[PA ........................................ SAHPLr]~. .........................................
Method P~r2meter i.~g ~.]j ~.rg k]) (.rg~kg) (~g,'kg) (mg.tkgt ..:g.'kj) (mg/kg) ~mg,,'kg) (mg'kgJ (~/k.~j
2 -Hexanone rio NO
~cetone
~cro la ~n lid NO
1cry Ion ~t r ~ le lid ND
Bramco ich Ior~e thane NO
~romome thane NO ND
~enzene
Ch loroben2e~e rid ND
;:arbon let r.lch ior ~,le NO NO
Chlorcethane ilD ND
8romoform NO
Ch lor~f~r~a I10 NO
Ch Iorcme[h.~ne
CJrbcn O ~Su If ~de tlO NO
Oibrcmocn I~r~meLn]ne NO NO
Erh7lbenzene ND
Freon ~ID
Methyl [scbutyl ~etone NO NO
Math71 Ethyl Ketone ND
Itethy lena Ch lor ide /10
tat r Ich Ioroe th,:. lena NO NO
~ t) rene
[rlchlorat 1.crometh~ne tlD
roluene , rio NO
Vmyl Acetate ND NO
tZroiect ;h). r:31-Ol.,:,i Page
iJ ~. (pq ........................................ ~ZHPL(5 .........................................
lest ~-I 8-2 fi-3 fl-4 8-5 8-6 8-1 8-3 8-J 8-10
Hethod Parameter (,ng kgJ Img'kjj {,rg/kg) (mg/kg) {mg,/k~J (,ag/kg) {~g/k§) Img/kg) [,hq/kg) (mg/kg)
Vmyl Chloride NO NO
Total Xylene Isomers , NO NO
tr~ns-l.Z-O~.:nlorcetnTlene NO ND
tr~ns-l,S-O~chlorcpr~pene ND ND
rio : ;lot Detected
'' OuJntlf~ca~lon b]sed up,:n compar~s,sn of [.;~.1 Izn c~ur, t 3~: the compound
w~th that of the nearest, mtarn.~l st.~nd~'rd.
APPENDIX A
PESTICIDE EPISODE INVESTIGATION REPORT
PJB/B31OIO1.DOC
--ESTICIDE EPISODE INVESTIGATION REPORT
~¢~ ..... ~, ~,,,, ...... /,c,~,,-~;;. _ roe Farms Shod - Call
[.~....c .... ,.,~
· :: ...... <: :~::~ ..:..~,4; .... r.: ~::,..,..::..;.: .%.,, ~,.,..:..,v-.-:,~.:..:: :.':.c.,. H a n Pma n 1 7 7 q 2 7
._Various Emoty. Containers
x . ot o o ¢ , o
' .... ......... 77,'
I
~,, d C~X ~ ................ ~ ...... "
- i I o~ o } o l''~ t o ) o I o~ o t ol.'.~,, .
~.-.
,, ~.,.'..,~...2'.~, :..; ".th ':''" ':'~ .'~?{:':::s' ~"~ t' ......"';~5*!~?t~;~'.. ¢,~';,'~: ~' 3~Z'~:~ ::; ': 'v *'"~:~ ";.'~' 't~'w~ ~"
PESTICIDE CONTAINER INVENTORY FOR FLETCHER FARMS
Denny Bridges 5-5-88
30 Gallon Drums
~'Dintro.b. 70 -
Round-up
Treflan
Unknown 40
5 Gallon Containers
Dinitro 460
Omite 200
Balan 165
Round-up 155
Paraquat 60
.Phosdrin 45
Kelthane 15
,jDi-Syston 15
...Lorsban 15
,~arathion
Buctril 10
Treflan 10
Spreader/Sticker 10
Harvest Aid 5
.piazi non 5
~.~eta-Systox 1
Unknown 15
2!-Gallon Containers
Bladex 10
1 Gallon Containers
Goal 150
Ambush 10
APPENDIX B
SITE PHOTOGRAPHS
PJB/B3]OIO].DOC
PESTICIDE STORAGE AREA
APPENDIX C
CERTIFIED ANALYTICAL RESULTS
AND CIIA[N-OF-CUSTODY FORMS
PJB/B3IOiOI.DOC
BROWN AND CALDWELL LABORATORIES ANALYTICAL REPORT
LOG NO: P88-08-176
Received: 08 AUG 88
Eeported: 02 SEP 88
John MeC~be
Emcon Associates Purchase Order: 20306
3300 N. San Pernando Boulevard
Burbank, California 91504
Project: B31-O1.01
REPORT OF ANALYTICAL RESULTS Page
LOG NO SAMPLE DESCRIPTION, SOIL SAMPLES DATE SAMPLED
08-176-2 B-2
O8-176-3 B-3 6"
08-176-4 B-4 10"
O8-176-5
Pti. Poll. ?~stlcides/?CB~ (EPA-8080)
Date Extracted 08/09/08 08/09/88 08/09/00 08/09/08 08/09/88
Date Analyzed 08/20/88 08/20/88 08/20/88 08/20/88 08/20/88
Dilution Factor, Ttme~ I ! ] ] ! !
Aldrin, mg/kK <0.0005 <0.0005 <0.0005 <0.0005 <0.0005
Chlordane, m~./kg <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.0!
Dieldrin, mM/kg <0.001 <0.001 <0.O01 <0.001 <0.001
Endosulfan I, mg/k~ <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001 <0.001
Endosul£an II, mE/kg <O.OOI <O.OO! <O.O01 <O.001 <0.001
Endo~ulfan sulfate, mE/kg <0.005 <0.005· <0.005 <0.005 <0.005
Endrtn, mglkg <O.OOl <0.001 <O.001 <0.00! <0.00!
Endrin aldehyde, mE/kg <0.002 <0.002 <O.OOZ <0.002 <0.002
Heptachlor epoxtde, m~/~ <0.001 <0.001 <0.O01 <0.001 <0.001
Hep~achlor, mg/k~ <0.001 <0.001 <O.001 <0.001 <0.001
Hethoxychlor, mg/kg <0.0! <0.01 <0.01 <O.0l <0.01
Aroclor 1016, mE/kg <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03
Aroclor 1221, m~/kK <0.03 <0,03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03
Aroclor 1232, m~/kg <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03
Aroelor 12~2, mg/k~ <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03
Aroelor 12~8, m~/k~ <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03
Aroclor 1254, mE/kg <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03
Aroclor 1260, m~/kg <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03
Aroclor 1262, m~/k~ <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03 <0.03
[~ BROWN AND CALDWELL LAgORATORI£S ANALYTICAL REPORT
bO~ NO: P88-08~176
Received: 08 AUG 80
heported~ 02 5[P BD
John McCabe
Emcon Associates Purchase Order: 20306
3300 N. San ?ern~ndo Boulevard
Burbank, Calt£ornla 91504
Project:
REPORT OF ANALY'rICAL RESULTS Page 2
LOG NO SAMPLE DESCRIPTION, SOIL SAMPLES DATE SAMPLED
08-176-1 B-! 6"
08-176-2 5-2 !'
08- 176-3 B-3 6"
08-176-4 B-4 I0"
08-176-5 BbB l'
.......................
Toxaphene, mE/kg <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05
BHC, alpha isomer, me/kg <0.0005 <0.0005 <0.0005 <0.0005 <0.0005
BHC, beta isomer, mE/kg <0.001 <0.O0! <0.001 <0.00! <0.001
BIIC, delta isomer, mg/k~ <0.O0l <0.00] <O.OOl <0.001 <0.001
BHC, Mamma i~omer (Lind~ne), mg/kE<O.O01 <0.00l <0.001 <0.00~ <0.00!
p,p'-DDD, m~/k~ <0.001 <0.00l <0.001 <0.001 <0.001
p,p'~DDE, mE/kg 0.007 0.003 0.03~. ~0_~_002 <0.001
p,p'-DDT, mR/k~ <0.002 <0.00Z -0.O1! <0.002 <0.002
Chlorinated Acid Herbicides (EPA-8150)
2,4,5~T, mE/kg <0.0l <0.01 <0.01 <0.01 <0.01
2,4,5-TP Stlvex, mE/kg <0.01 <0.0! <0.01 <0.01 <0.01
2,4-D, mE/kg <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05
2,4-DB, mg/~ <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 · <0.05
2~4-DP, mg/k~ <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05
Dicamba, mgl'k.~ <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05
Dino~eb, mE/kg <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05 <0.05
MCPA, mE/kg <10 <10 <10 <10 <10
MCPP, mE/kg <10 <10 <lO <10 <I0
-~ BROWN AND CALDWELL uABO~ATO~IES ANALYTICAL REPORT
LOG NO~ ?80-08-]75
Reeetved: 08 AUG g8
~eported: 02 SEP 88
John HeC~be
Emcon ^~oct~es Purchase Order: 20306
3300 N. San Fernando Boulevard
Burbank, California 91504
Project: B31-OI.OI
REPORT OF ANALYTICAL RESULTS Page 3
LOC NO SAMPLE DESCRIPTION, SOIL SAMPLES DATE SAMPLED
08-176-6 B-.5 1'
PARAMETER 08-176-6
Petroleum Hydrocarbons, IR (EPA Method 418.1), mg/k~ ~590~
[~ BROWN AND CALDWELL LABORATORIES ANALYTICAL REPORT
LOC NO: PSg-Og-176
Received: 08 AUG 88
keported: 02 SEP 88
John McCabe
Emcon Aasociate~ Purchase Order: 20306
3300 N. San Fernando Boulevard
Burbank, Call£ornia 91504
' Project: B31-Ol.O1
REPORT OF ANALI~ICAL RESULTS Page
LOG NO SAHPLE DESCRIPTION, SOIL SAMPLES DATE SAMPLED
08-176-6 B-5
PARAMETER 08-176-6
Pti. Poll. Pastletdes/PCBs (EPA-8080)
Date Extracted 08/O9/88
Date Analyzed 08/20/88
Dilution Factor, Times 1 10
Aldrin, mR/kg <0.005
Chlordane, mg/kK <O.~
Dieldrin, mg/kg <0.0!
Endosulfan I, mg/kg <0.01
Endosul£an II', mR/kg <O~0]
Endosul[au =ulfate, mg/kg <0.05
Endrin, mg/k~, <0.0!
Endrtu aldehyde, mg/kK <0.02
Heptachlor cpo×ldo, mg/kg <O.01
Heptachlor, m~/~ <O.O1
Hetho×ychlor, mg/kg <0.!
Aroclor 1016, mK/kg <O.3
Aroclor 1221, m~/k~ <0.3
Aroclor 1232, mg/k~ <0.3
Aroclor 1242, mg/k~ <0.3
Aroclor 1248, mg/kg <0.3
Aroclor 1254, mg/kR <0.3
Aroclor 1260, mg/kg <0.3
Aroclor 1262, mK/kg <0.3
Toxaphene, mg/kg <O.5
BHC, alpha isomer, mg/kg KO.O05
BHC, beta t~omer, mg/kg <O.Ol
BHC, delta l=omer, mg/k.~ <0.0!
BROWN AND CALDWELL LABORATORIES ANALYTICAL REPORT
LOG NO~ l'80-O8-17G
~ecelved: OD AU~ 88
Repo~ted: 0~ S~P 88
John McCabe
~mcon ^~ociates Purchase Order: 20306
3300 N. Snn Fernando Boulevard
Burbank, California 91504
- Project: B31-OI.O1
REPORT OF ANALYTICAL RESULTS Page 5
LOC NO SAMPLE DESCRIPTION, SOIL SAMPLES DATE SAHPhED
0B-176-6 B-5 1'
PARAMETER 08-176-6
BIIC, gamma ~nomer (Lindane), mg/k,j~ <O.Ol
p~p'-DDD, mg/kg <0.O1
p,p'-DDE, mR/kg <0.01
p,p'-DDT, mR/kg <0.02
Chlorinated Acid Herbicides (EPA-8150)
2,4,5-T, mg/kg <O.Ol
2,4,5-T? Silvex, m~/k~ <0.01
2,4-D, mg/P~ <0.O5
2,4-DB, m~/~ <0.05
2,4-DP, m~/k~ <0.05
Dlcamba, m~/~ <0.05
Dlnoseb, mt~/k~ <O.05
MCPA, mg/kg <lO
HCPP, mg/kg <10
-~ BROWN AND CALDW£LL LABORATORIES ANALYTICAL REPORT
LOC NO: ~8B-O8~176
Received: 08 AU~ 8~
Repo~ted: 02 S~P 88
John Me.be
Emcon Associates Purchase Order: 20306
3300 N. San Fernando Boulevard
Burbank, California. 91504
. Project: B31-O1.01
REPORT OF ANALYTICAL RESULTS Page 6
LOG NO [;AMPLE DESCRIPTION, SOIL SAMPLES DATE SAMPLED
0B-176-7 B-6 4"
PARAMETER 08'176'7
Petroleum Hydrocarbons, IR (EPA Method 418.1), mg/kg 1400
Fuel ~ydrocarbons (8015)
Date /~alyzed 08/09/88
Dilution Factor, Times 1
Fuel Hydrocarbons, mglkg <5
'--~ BROWN AND CALDWELL LAgORATO~IES ANALYTICAL REPORT
LOG NO: ~80-O8-176
Received: 08 AUG 88
Reported: 02 SEF 88
John McCabe
Smcou Associates Purchase Order: 20306
3300 N. San ~ernando Boulevard
Burbank, Call£ornia 9150&
.. ProJcct~ B3l-Ol.O1
REPORT OF ANALYTICAL RESULTS Page 7
LOG NO $AMFLE DESCRIPTION, SOIL SAMPLES DATE SAMPLED
08-176-8 B-7 2"
PARAMETER 08-176-8
Pti. Poll. Pesttcides/PCBs (EPA-8080)
Dmte Extracted 08/09/88
Date Analyzed 08/20/8H
Dilution Fa. ctor, TiRes 1 1
Aldrtn,. mE/kg <0.0005
Chlordane, mE/kg <0.01
Dieldrin, mg/k~ <0.001
Endosulfan I, mR/k~ <0.001
Endosulfan II, m~/k~ <0.00!
Endosulfan sulfate, m~/k[ <0.005
gndri~, m~/kg <0.001
Endrin aldehyde, m~/kR <0.002
Heptachlor epoxldc, m~/kg <0.001
Heptachlor, mg/k~ <0.001
Methoxychlor, mE/kg <0.O1
Aroclor 1016, mE/k~ <0.03
Aroclor 1221, m~/k~ <0~03
Aroclor 1232, mg/k~ <0.03
Aroclor 1242, mKIkg <0.03
Aroclor [~48, m~/kg <0.03
Aroclor 1254, m~/kg <0.03
Aroclor 12613, m~/k~ <0.03
Aroclor 1262, m~/kg <0.03
Toxmphene, mE/kg <0.05
DJ{C, alpha isomer, mK/kg <0.0005
BHC, beta isomer, m~/kg <0.O0!
BBC, delta isomer, m~/k~ <O.00!
BROWN AND CALDWELL L,,,,~ORATO .... $ ANALYT. ICAL REPORT
LOG NO: ~88-08-176
Eece$v~d: O~ AUG 8B
John McCabe
Emcon A~ociates Purchase Order: 20306
3300 N. San Fernando Boulevard
Burbank, California 9]504
" Project: BJ]-Ol.Ol
REPORT OF ~ALS~ICAL RESULTS Page 8
LOC NO SAMPLE DESCRIPTION, SOIL SAMPLES DATE SAMPLED
08-176-8 B-7 2"
PARAMETER 08-176-8
BBC, gamma isomer (Lindane), mE/kg <0.O0!
p,p'-DDD, mE/kg <0.00]
p,p'-DDE, m~/kK 0.003
p,p'~DDT, mE/kg <0.002
'~L~~ BROWN AND CALDWELL LAEORATO,~!FS ANALYTICAL REPORT
LOC NO: PBS-OB- 176
Received: O8 AUG BB
Reported: O2 SEP 88
John McCabe
Emcon Associates Purchase Order: 20306
3300 N. San Fernando Boulevard
Burbank, California 91504
- Project: B31-OI.OI
REPORT OF ANALYTICAL RESULTS PaRe 9
LOG NO SAMPLE DESCRIPTION, SOIL SAMPLES DATE SAMPLED
08-176-9 ~,-9 6"
08-176-10 B-lO 2"
PARAMETER 08-176=9 08-176-10
B/N,A Rxt. Prl.Poll. (EPA-8270)
Dat~ Extracted 08/10/88 08/10/88
Date Analyzed 08/16/88 08/16/88
Dilution Factor, Times 1 1 3
1,2,4-Trtchlorobenzene, mg/kg <l <3
1,2-Dtchlorobenzene, mg/kg <~ <3
1,2-Dtphenylhydrazine, m~/kg <1 <3
1,3-Dlchlorobenzene, mR/kg <l <3
1,4-Dichlorohenzene, mg/kg <! <3
2,4,6-Trichlorophenol, mg/k~ <1 <3
2,4-D~chlorophenol, mR/kg <! <3
2,4-Dimethylphenol, mg/k~ <1 <3
2,4-Dtnttro~oluene, mg/kg <1
2,4-Dlnitrophenol, mg/kg <3 <9
2,6-Dinitrotoluene, mg/k~ <1 <3
2-Chloronaphthalene, mg/kg <1 <3
2-Hethylnaphrhalene, mg/k~ <1 <3
2-Methyl Phenol, mg/kg <1
2-Nitrophenol, mg/kg <] <3
2-Nltroaniline, mg/kE <5 <15
2,&,5-Trtchlorophenol, mg/kg <1 <3
2-Chlorophenol, mg/kg <1 <3
2-Hethyl-4,6-dtnttrophenol, mg/kg <5 <15
3,3.'-Dichlorobenzldine, mg/kg <!
3-Nltroaniltne, mg/kg <5 <15
6-Bromophenylphenylether, mg/kg <l <3
~ BROWN AND CALDWELL LABORATORIES ANALYTICAL REPORT
LOG NO: ~88-O8-I76
Keee[ved: 08 AUG 88
Reported: O~ SEP 88
John McCabe
Emcon A~oetatem Purchase Order: 20306
3300 N. San Fernand~ Boulevard.
Burbank, California 91504
Project: B31-01.0!
REPORT OF ANALYTICAL RESULTS Page 10
LOG NO SAMPLE DESCRIPTION, SOIL SAMPLES DATE SAMPLED
O8-176-9 B-9 4"
08-176-10 B-lO 2"
PAi~ETER O8-176-9 08-176-10
4-Chloro-3-methylphenol, mR/kg <l <3
4-Chlorophenylphenylether, mR/kg <1 <3
4-Chloroaniline, mR/kg <2 <6
4-Methyl Phenol, mg/k~ <1 <3
~-Nitrophen°l, mM/kg <3 <9
&-Nitroanilln~, m~/kg <5 <15
Acenaphthene, mg/kK <1 <3
Acenaphthylene, mR/kg <! <3
Aniline. mg/kR <2 <6
Anthracene, mR/kg <! <3
Bt$(2' e [hylhexyl)phthala re, mR/kg <1 <3
Benzidine, mg/k~ <a <12
Benzoic Acid, mg/k~ <5 <15
Benzyl Alcohol, m~/kg <2 <6
Bls(2-chloroethyl) Ether, mR/k[ <1 <3
Bis(2-Chloroisopropyl)ether, mR/kg <1 <3
Bis(2-chloroethoxy)methane, mR/k~ <I <3
Benzo(a)anthracene, mR/kg <1 <3
Benzo(a)pyrene, mg/k$1 <1
Benzo(b)£1uoranthene, mg/k~ <1 <3
Benzo(g,h,l)perylene, mg/k~ <1 <3
Benzo(k)fluoranthene, mR/kg <1 <3
Butylbenzylphthalate, hR/kg <1 <3
Chrysene, a,g/kg <1 <3
Dl-n-o¢~ylphthalate, mg/kg <1 <3
Oibanzo(a,h)anthracene, mR/kg <1 <3
-~~ BROWN AND CALDWELL LABO,~ATOF~IES ANALYTICAL REPORT
LOG
Rcceived: OB AUG 80
Reported: 02 SEP 88
John HcCabe
Emcon Associates Purchase Order: 20306
3300 N. San Fernando Boulevard
Burbank, California 9]504
Project: B3~-0~.0]
REPORT OF ANALYTICAL RESULTS Page ! 1
LOG NO SAMPLE DESCRIPTION, SOIL SAMPLES DATE SAMPLED
08-176-9 B-9 A"
08-176-10 B-lO 2"
PARAMETER 08- 176-9 OO- 176-]0
Dibutylphthalate, ms/kg <5 <15
Dlcthylphthalate, ms/kg <l <3
Dimethylphthala~e, mg/kK <3 <9
Dlbenzofuran, ms/kg <! <3
Fluorene, mg/kM <] <3
Fluoran~hene, ms/kg <l <3
Hexachlorobcnzene, ms/kg <! <3
ilexnchlorobu tad iene, mK/kR <! <3
Me×achlorocyclopen tad lone, ms/kg <] <3
Hexachloroethane, ms/kg <] <3
Inflcno(l,2~,3-c,d)Pyr~ne, ms/kg <1 <3
Isophorone, ms/kg <1 <3
N- Nit rosod l-n- propylamine, ms/kg <4 <12
N~N~trosodimethylamine, mM/kg <8 <24
N-Ni t rosodiphenylamine, ms/kg <! <3
Naphthalene, ms/kg <! <3
Nt trobenzene, ms/kg <l <3
Pentachlorophenol, ms/kg <I <3
Phenanthrene, ms/kg <1 <3
Phenol, ms/kg <1 <3
Pyrene, mR/kg <1 <3
Semi-Ouant~fied Results **
A C15 To C35 Plus Hydrocarbon Matrix, ms/kg --- 8000
** Ouant~fication based upon comparison of total ion coun[ of the compound with
~that of the nearest internal standard.
~ BROWN AND CALDWELL LABORATORIES ANALYTICAL REPORT
LOG NO:
Received: 08 AUG 88
· - ~epor~ed: 02 SEF 88
3ohn MeCabe
Emcon Associates
3300 N. San Fernando Boulevard Purchase Order: 20306
Burbank, California 91504
?rojec~: B3]-O~.O!
REPORT OF ANAI.YTICAL RESULTS Page ]2
LOG rio SAMPLE DESCRIPTIOI!, SOIL SAMPLES
......................................................
08-17G-10 ~-10
..........................................................................
........ 08-]76-9 08-]76-]0
Vol. Pri.I'oll. (EPA-8240) ''~ ...................... ~ ......................
Date Extracted
Dilution Factor, Tlmes 1 08/09/88 08/09/88
1
! l,l-Trlchloroethane, mg/kg <0.3 <0.3
! ],2,2-Te[rachlo~oethane, mg/kg
! 1,2-Trtchloroethane mE/kg <0.3 <0.3
' <0.3 <0.3
1 1-Dlchloroe~hane, mg/kK <0.3 <0.3
1 ]-Dichloroethylene, mg/kg <0.3 <0.3
] 2-Dlchloroethane, mM/kg <0.3 <0.3
1 2-Dichlorobenzene, mg/k~ <0.3 <0.3
! 2-Dichloropropane, mg/kg <0.3 <0.3
I 3-Olchlorobenzene, mg/kg
<0.3 <0.3
cls-l,3-Dlchloropropene, mg/kg <0.3 <0.3
1,4-Dichlorobenzene, mg/kg <0.3 <0.3
2-Chloroethylvtnylether, mg/kg <0.3 <0.3
2-Hexanone, mg/kg <0.3 <0.3
Acetone, .mg/kg <3 <3
Acrolein, m~/kg <3 <3
Acrylonltrlle, mg/kg <3 <3
Bromod~chloromethane, mg/kg <0.3 <0.3
Bromomethane, mg/kg <0.3 <0.3
Benzene, mg/kg <0.3 <0.3
Chloroben:zene, mg/kg <0.3 <0.3
Carbon Tetrachloride, m~/kg <0.3 <0.3
Chloroethane, mg/kg <0.3 <0.3
Bromoform~ mE/kg <0,3 <0.3
BROWN AND CALDWELL LABORATORIES ANALYTICAL REPORT
373 GOUT~
LOG NO: POB-O8-176
Received: 08 AUG 88
Reported~ 02 SEP 88
John McCabe
Emcon A~oocia~es Purchage Order~ 20306
3300 N. San Fernando Boulevard
Burbmnk, California 91504
Project: B31-OI,O1
REPORT OF ANAL%'fICAL RESULTS Pa~e 13
LOG NO SAMPLE DESCRIPTION, SOIL SAMPLES DATE SAMPLED
08-176-9 B-9
08-176-10 I~-10 2"
PARAMETER 08-176-9 08-176- 10
Chloroform, m~/kg <0.3 <0.3
Chloromethane, mg/k~ <0.3 . <0.3
Carbon Di~ul£ide, mE/kg <0.3 <0.3
Dtbromochloromethane, mE/k.~ <0.3 <O. 3
Ethylbenzene, mM/kg <0.3 <0.3
Freon 113, ~g/kg <0.3 <0.3
Methyl Isobutyl Ketone, mg/kg <0.3 <0.3
Methyl Ethyl Ketone, mE/kg <3 <3
Methylene Chloride, mg/kg <0.3 <0.3
Te trachloroe thylene, mR/kg <0.3 <0.3
Styrene, mE,/k,~ <0.3 <0.3
Trtchloroethylene, mE/kg <0.3 <0.3
Trtchloro[luorome thane, mE/kg <0,3 <0.3
Toluene, mE/kg <0.3 <0.3
Vinyl Acetate, mE/kg <3 <3
Vinyl Chloride, m~/kg <0.3 <0.3
Total Xylene Isomers, mg/kg <3 <3
trans-l,2-Dichloroethylene, mE/kg <0.3 <O.5
trans-l,3-D[chloropropene, mR/k~ <0.3 <0.3
Amended Report O9/15/88 '. Corrected result for
EPA 418.1 analysis on sample PBB-OB-176-7.
-- T. Gaynor
.. c_.
Jeffrey A. Etlon, Laborat..?,ry Manager
'::"~: ~i~!'""':'~";J '~'i:"'~" "~ ' 1~ August 17, 1988
ASSOCIATES Project No B31-O1 O1
Mr. H.L. Jack Caldwell
Vel Vista Estates
c/o Reynolds Environmental Group
3190-J Airport Loop
Costa Mesa, California 92626
Re: "Parcel A" Summary Report;
Real Estate Due Diligence
Study; Rancho Laborde Site;
Bakersfield, California.
Dear Mr. Caldwell:
lhis letter presents EMCON Associates (EMCON} findings following the
completion of a real estate due diligence study for a 320 acre parcel
/Parcel A) which was formerly part of Rancho Laborde located on the
north edge of the City of Bakersfield. EMCON was retained by Mr. Jack
Caldwell to aid in identifying site areas which may have been impacted
by hazardous materials or wastes. Parcel A is located on the east side
of Rancho Laborde and is bounded by the following:
· Coffee Road to the West
· Residential homes and Weldon Avenue to the North
· Fruitvale Avenue to the East
· Patton Way and Krebs Road to the south
Figure 1 shows the location of the property. At present, construction
has been initiated for the development of a residential community at
the site. Hageman Street has been extended and now bisects Parcel A
between Coffee Road and Fruitvale Avenue.
Parcel A is a portion of Rancho Laborde which was acquired by
Mr. Laborde approximately 15 to 16 years ago. Prior to the land
acquistion by Mr. Laborde, the land was reportedly the property of the
Kern County Land Company.
Mr. H.L. Jack .11 .'oject No. B31-OI.O1
August 17, 1988
Page 2
ENVIRONMENTAL ASSESSMENT STRATEGY AND SITE BACKGROUND
The purpose of this real estate due diligence study was to evaluate and
identify past and present activities at the site that may have resulted
in potential environmental liabilites due to soils contaminated by
hazardous materials or wastes.
In conducting this environmental assessment, EMCON undertook the
following activities:
1. Interviewed local, county, and state regulatory agencies to
determine if regulatory files concerning the property existed.
2. Reviewed aerial photographs to determine prior land usage.
3. Visually inspected the parcel to identify any potential "high
risk" areas.
4. Collected shallow subsurface soil samples from identified "high
risk" areas during the site visit.
5. Analyzed selected representative soil samples for various
pesticides, herbicides, oils, and similar chemicals.
HISTORIC LAND USE AND AGENCY FILE REVIEW
Aerial Photographs
Aerial photographs depicting the Rancho Laborde site were reviewed at
the Kern County Department of Public Works' Map Section. The dates of
the available photographs were:
· August 10, 1937
· March 5, 1958
· January 31, 1975
· May 11, 1981
The 1975 and 1981 photographs were taken by Western Photo Air, Inc. in
Bakersfield. The photographer of the 1937 and 1958 flights is not
known.
The aerial photographs reviewed did not indicate any areas of obvious
hazardous waste disposal or prior on-site storage of hazardous 1}quids.
The main usage of Parcel A seems to have been for agricultural
purposes, primarily row crops. Oil wells were drilled on the parcelings.
some time after ~937 and are still currently in production.
Mr. H.L. Jack ~..~11 .,'oject No. B31-01.01
August 17, 1988
Page 3
Reoulatorv Agency Review
EMCON contacted the Following departments and personnel to obtain
information regarding Rancho Laborde:
· Mr. Larry Lowe
Regional Water Quality Control Board, Central Valley
Region
· Mr. Don Weber
Bakersfield Department of Public Works
· Mr. Ken Walters
Kern County Fire Department, Station 6]
· Mr. Gene Peoples
Kern County Fire Department, Station 65
· Duty Officer
California Department of Health Services
· Office Clerk
California Department of Conservation, Division of Oil
and Gas
The majority of the above individuals did not have any information
concerning Parcel A. The California Division of Oil and Gas did have
some information regarding the current on-site production of oil.
SITE RECONNAISSANCE
Rancho Laborde was visited on August 3 and 4, ]988, by representatives
of EMCON in order to view the site, identify "high risk" areas, and
obtain soil samples.
Upon arrivai at the site, EMCON traversed the parcel to view the site.
During this inspection, specific areas of concern were detected and the
following notes recorded:
· Two oil sumps were located in the southern portion of the
parcel. These sumps have been used in the past for crude
oil collection and residues of crude oil were present.
, Two above grade oil storage tank sites (approximately four
tanks each) were located in the southern and southeastern
portions of the parcel. Crude oil satkn'ated soils were
detected in both of these areas. --
Mr. H.L. Jack ,Il .oject No. B31-OI.O1
August 17, 1988
Page 4
· Electrical transformers were located along Patton Way on
power poles and one was located on the north edge of the .,~
parcel One transformer located on Patton Way appeared to~t~qO
have leaked in the past and had a brown discoloration at
the base of the unit· Because PCB liquids were commonly
used in transformers, this area was listed as a potential
· One irrigation catch basin was identified detected on the
east side of the parcel. This basin provides field
drainage during rainy weather to prevent crop flooding.
This area was identified as a potential concern because of
the seasonal collection of waters which may have contained
either herbicides or pesticides common)y used in the
Photographs taken of the parcel and of some of the sampling points can
be found in Appendix A.
Based on the above observations, field sampling points were then
determined. The sampling locations were based on the potential for
hazardous materials contamination at a particu)ar location. The
sampling areas and analyses selected are listed below.
Irrigation Water Catchment Basin (Sample A-l)
· Organochlorine Pesticides (US EPA Method 8080)
· Chlorinated Herbicides (US EPA Method 8150)
Above-Grade Oil Storage Tank Area (Sample A-5)
-..,. ,,.· Purgeable Volatile Organics (US EPA Method 8015)
- . · Petroleum Hydrocarbons (US EPA Method 418·1)
Transformer Area (Sample A-4)
,,:r' · · Polychlorinated Biphenyls (US EPA Method 8080)
... In addition, one soil sample was to be collected from the Field area so
that both background information and any residual herbicides or
pesticides existence in the soils would be determined. The analytical
., , ~. test methods selected are listed below.
,}," -, '"i,' Crop Areas (Sample A-2)
,'"~',,,-.~ ...,,'-",~. Organochlorine Pesticides (US EPA Method 8080)
-~,. '.¢...
Mr. H.L. Jack ,,~11 .,'oject No. B31-01.01
August 17, 1988
Page 5
· Chlorinated Herbicides (US EPA Method 8150}
COLLECTION AND ANALYSIS OF SOIL SAMPLES
AFter the sampling locations and tile analytical parameters were
selected, subsurface soil sampling was conducted. T__hhe:~ of soil
sampl es were col 1 ected at ...a.__d_.e_p_t_h__o_f__o..n_e. foot. be.1 ow .g._r.~_de__.excel~'t~Z'_wh_~
~_d~_-~ond~.i~:~:on-.szLYaL~-U~ed...othe~w-i-~e~. Figure 2 depicts the sampling
locations while Table 1 details sampling information (ie., sample
numbers, sample locations, etc.).
Soil SamDlina Activities
Soil samples were collected using a hand-sampler which was cleaned
between samplings in a TSP-cleaning solution and rinsed with distilled
water. Four-inch brass tubes were inserted into the hand sampler prior
to sampling so that undisturbed soil samples could be obtained. After
sampling, the brass tubes were removed and Teflon sheets and plastic
endcaps were secured on the tube ends. Labels were then attached and
the sample was placed in plastic bags and placed on ice until
laboratory receipt. A Chain-of-Custody form (see Appendix B) was used
to document sample handling information.
Analytical Procedures and Results
Soil samples were submitted to State-certified Brown and Caldwell
Laboratories in Pasadena for analysis. Analytical test methods chosen
were dependent on the specific sampling location and on assumed
hazardous chemicals present based on EMCON's inital site reconaissance,
conversations with site personnel, and i.n-house chemical experts.
Only trace amounts of pestic,i~es DDE (0'.0~ mg/kg) and DDT (0~.~008 mg/kg)
were detected in Sample ~'"'(crop--~r-ea~-. Sample
c~tcq~-mee~d¢~) did not have any detectable amounts of pesticides or
herbicides present. Sample A-4 (transformer area) did not have ~ny
detectable levels of chlorinated compounds present in the soil Sample
A-5 (Above-Grade Oil Storage Tank Area) d~d have petroleum hydrocarbons
present at a concentration level of 710 rog/kg. A summary
analytical results are tabularized in Table 2 and the certified
analytical results are presented in Appendix B.
CONCLUSION
Laboratory results indicated that two out of 26 priority.~._p~l.~u~ant
pesticides were present in one of the
while no chlorinated acid herbicides were encounteredq The total
concentrations of DDE and DDT detected in the soil were at least two
orders of magnitude below the State of California Total Threshold Limit
Concentration (TTLC) of 1.0 mg/kg for both DDE and DDT. The llLC
r.lr. tt.L. Jack CI~,~,l ,,oject No. B31-01.01
August 17, 1988
Page 6
designated concentration threshhold above which the State of California
considers a material a hazardous waste when disposed. In addition, the
residual concentration ranges for both DDT and DDE in Kern County is
0.002 to 1.6 mg/kg and 0.003 to 2.3 rog/kg, respectively (California
Department of Food and Agriculture).
~. ;:'C' :\'.
None of the 26 priority pollutants or 9 chlorinated acid herbicides'~~
scanned were detected in the irrigation catch-basin. Polychlorinated~'"
biphenyls (PCBs) were not found in soils collected from underneath the
pole transformer. Crude oil contaminated soils were encountered around
the above-ground tank areas due to past and current oil production
on-site although according to the State of California, this is not
considered a hazardous substance (H&S Code, Chapter 8.6,
Section 25317. (a)).
RECOMMENDAT IONS
Soil areas adjacent to above-ground oil storage tanks showed signs of
crude oil as did two oil sumps. Since crude oil contamination is not
considered a hazardous substance under California Health and Safety
Code, Chapter 6.8, Section 25317, regulatory agencies may not require
remedial actions to be taken. However, local ordinances may require
remediation of the oil-saturated soil Costs for remediation of the
oil contaminated soils would depend on the quantity involved. If you .-
desire, EMCON would be pleased to submit a proposal for the removal and
treatment of the oil-saturated soils. -q .~'
'-
Mr. H.L. Jack ll ~'oject No. B31-01.0!
August 17, 19~
Page 7
If you have any questions concerning this report or require additional
information, please call John McCabe.
Very truly yours,
EMCON Associates
Johh.~. McCabe
Environmental Scientist
.. ~'i ~,'I
Ralph 'J. Sc'~mi tt
Director of Engineering
JPM/RJS: bg
Attachments: References Cited
Table i - Sampling Information
Table 2 - Analytical Results
Figure I - Site Location Map
Figure 2 S~te Plan
Appendix A - Site Photographs
Appendix B - Certified Analytical Results and
Chain-of-Custody Form
No. B31-Ol.O1
REFERENCES
U.S. EPA, 1982, Test Methods for Evaluating Solid Waste; Physical/
Chemical Methods, SW-846, Second Edition: Office of Solid Waste
and Emergency Response, U.S. EPA, Washington, D.C.
California Department of Food and Agriculture, September I985,
Agricultural Sources of DDT Residues in California Environment.
California Health and Safety Code. Chapter 6.8, Section 25317.(a)
roject No. B31-01.01
TABLE 1
SAMPLING INFORMATION
Sample Sample Sample Sample Analysis
Number Location Depth Type Conducted
A1 Irrigation catch- 1~ soil EPA Methods 8080,
basin on Coffee 8150
Road
A2 Crop Area 6" soil EPA Methods 8080,
8150
A4 Transformer pole 1~ soil EPA Methods 8080
on Patton Way
A5 Above-ground tank 6" soil EPA Methods 8015,
area 418.1
oject No. B31-01.01
TABLE 2
ANALYTICAL RESULTS
Results (mg/kg)
Test Sample Sample Sample Sample
Method Parameter A-1 A-2 A-4 A-5
8080 Aldrin ND ND ND
Chlordane ND ND ND
Dieldrin ND ND ND
EndosulFan I ND ND ND
Endosulran 1[ ND ND ND
Endosulfan Suldate ND ND ND
Endrin ND ND ND
Endrin Aldehyde ND ND ND
Heptachlorepoxide ND ND ND
Heptachlor ND ND ND
Aroclor 1016 ND ND ND
Aroclor 1221 ND ND ND
Aroclor 1232 ND ND ND
Aroclor 1242 ND ND ND
Aroclor 1248 ND ND ND
Aroclor 1254 ND ND ND
Aroclor 1260 ND ND ND
Aroclor 1262 ND ND ND
Toxaphene ND · ND ND
BHC, alpha isomer ND ND ND
BHC, beta isomer ND ND ND
BHC, delta isomer ND ND ND
BHC, gamma isomer (Lindane) ND ND ND
P'P'-DDD ND ND ND
P'P'-DDE 0.02 ND ND
P'P'-DDT 0.008 ND ND
8150 2,4,5-T ND ND ND
2,4,5-TP Sivlex ND ND ND
2,4-D ND ND ND
2,4-DB ND ND ND
2,4-DP ND ND ND
Dicamba ND ND ND
Dinoseb ND ND ND
MCPA ND ND ND
MCPP ND ND ND
418.1 7800
8015 710
11714~
NOrth tO Port.till
· Nor~ m Dels~o ~nd Fresno,
- N -
;~ENTH, ROAD S~ENTH
" q~:~:. '"~.~ MEADOWS FIELD
~ ~ "%~ '~:~"'-" OIL
~ ~ KERN COU~Y
~o.~n~ E~ A R~RT NO. I
I!! ~ ~'"~'
·
~i' \ ,,'',,~: ~,/ ~:' "!"~"
t:' ;:1 ~:~. c..,,,,,-~ ~... '
~" I:: ::1,.
- .... -'~: x. ~. ~., ~.,,. ~"~'~: ~":~
' " PROIfiCT
HWAY RO~ tlGHWAY OSEDALE
EMCON
R~L ESTATE "DUE DILIGE~E" STUDY
BAKERSFIELD, CALIFORNIA NO--
SiTE L~ATION MAP B3]-O1.0t /
~ HAGEblAN RD.
KREBS RD.
A-$ ~ LEGEND
2 15' DI~ETER T~KS 0 0 ~
~_. / _/
Existing water well
R~L ESTATE 'DUE DILIGE~E' STUDY
P~CEL A '
~roject No. B31-01.01
APPENDIX A
SITE PHOTOGRAPHS
I,rigatiou sump (soulh end)
*(Sample A-I)'* Irrigaliou sump (north end)
(Sample A-I)
Oil sump .... &**~:.* ' -. '~*" ' ', - Pumping -nit plus oil sump
Soulh porlion Parcel A
Sampling siie A-4 below pole
Aboue-ground tanks and oil sump
Above-g,ound tanks Above-ground lanks
(Sample A-5) ~j (Sample A-5)
.... ._._ ..... ~:..-~:..~.. .
-. ~ .... ,~. :,: ..., .~,-,,~:. ...."-,~.-
. - .., . ~. ~ '~;~,..~
._. r; -~. -- ..~ .;~....,,..1
.oject No. B31-Ol.O!
APPENDIX B
CERTIFIED ANALYTICAL RESULTS AND
CHAIN-OF-CUSTODY FORM
~BROWN AND CALDWELL LABORATORIES ANALYTICAL REPORT
373 SOUTH ~R OAKS A~NUE ~SADENA. CA 9! 705 el818} 795.7553 ,F~ ~818) 795-8579
LOG NO: F88-08-175
Received: 08 AU~ 88
Reported: 1! AUG 88
John McCabe
Emcon Associates Purchase Order: 20306
3300 N. San Fernando Boulevard
Burbank, California 91504
Project: B31-01.0I
REPORT OF ANALYTICAL RESUU£S Pa6e I
LOG NO SAHPLE DESCRIPTION, SOIL SAMPLES DATE SAMPLED
08-175-! A-1 1'
08-175-2 A-2 6"
PARAMETER 08-175-1 08-17§-2
Pti. Poll. Pesticides/PCBs (EPA-8080)
Date Extracted 08/08/88 08/08/88
Date Analyzed 08/10/88 08/10/88
Dilution Factor, Times I 1 1
Aldrin, m~/kg <0.0005 <0.0005
Chlordane, m~/k~ <0.01 <0.01
Dieldrin, mg/kg <0.001 <O.OOl
Endosulfan I, mg/k~ <0.001 <0.001
Endosulfan II, mg/kg <0.001 <0.001
Endosulfan sulfa%e, mE/kg <0.005 <0.005
Endrin, mK/kg <0~001 40.001
Endrin aldehyde~ m~/k~ <0.002 <0.002
Heptachlor epoxtde, m~/k~ <0.001 <0.001
~eptachtor, ~g/?-F, <O.001 <0.001
Methoxychlor, m~/kg <0.01 <0.01
Aroclor 1016, mg/kg <0.03 <0.03
Aroclor 1221, mK/k~ <0.03 <0.03
Aroclor 1232, mg/kg <O.O3 <0.03
Aroclor 1242, mg/kg <0.03 <0.03
Aroclor 1248, aK/kg <0.03 <0.03
Aroclor 1254, mg/k.g <0.03 <0.03
Aroclor 1260, m~/kK <0.03 <0.03
Aroclor 1262, m~/k~ <0.03 <0.03
Toxaphene, mg/kg <0.05 <0.05
BBC, alpha isomer, mg/kg <0.0005 <0.0005
BBC, beta isomer, mg/kg <0.O01 <0.001
~BROWN AND CALDWELL LABORATORIES ANALYTICAL REPORT
373 ~UTH FAtR OAKS A~NUE PASAO~N~ CA 9~ 105 ,(81B1795-7553 ,F~ fB181795-8579
LOG NO: P88-08-175
Received: 08 AUG 88
Reported: 11 AUG 88
John HcCabe
Emcon Associates Purchase Order: 20306
3300 N. San Fernando Boulevard
Burbank, California 91504
Project: B31-01.01
REPORT OF ANALYTICAL RESULTS Page 2
LOG NO SAMPLE DESCRIPTION, SOIL SAMPLES DATE SAMPLED
08-175-2 A-2 6"
PARAMETER 08-175-1 08-175-2
BHC, delta isomer, mg/kg <0.001 <0.001
BHC, g~mm.~ isomer (Lindane), zg/kg <0.001 <0.001
p,p'-DDD, mg/kg <0.001 <0.001
p,p'-DDg, mg/kg 0.02 <0.001
p,p'-DDT, mg/kg 0.008 <0.002
Chlorinated Acid Rerbicides (EPA-8150)
2,4,5-T, mg/kg <0.01 <0.01
2,4,5-TP Silvex, mg/kg <0.01 <0.01
2,4-D, mg/k~ <0.05 <0.05
2,4-DB, mg/kg <0.05 <0.05
2,4-DP, mg/kg ~0.05 <0.05
Dicamba, mg/kg <0.05 <0.05
Dinoseb, mg/kg <0.05 <0.05
MCPA, mg/kg <10 410
MCPP, mg/kg <10 <10
~BROWN AND CALDWELL LABORATORIES ANALYTICAL REPORT
373 SOUTH ~IR OAKS A~NUE ~SADENA. CA 91105 · (818t 795-7553 · F~ ~8181795-8579
LOG NO: P88-08-175
Received: 08 AOG 88
Reported: 11 AUG 88
John HcCabe
Emcon Associates Purchase Order: 20306
3300 N. San Fernando Boulevard
Burbank, Califon'tia 91504
Project: B31-OI.OI
REPORT OF ANALYTICAL KESULTS Page 3
LOG NO SAMPLE DESCRIPTION, SOIL SAMPLES DATE SAMPLED
08-175-3 A-4 1'
PARAMETER 08-175-3
Pti. Poll. Pesticides/PCBs (EPA-8080)
Date Extracted 08/08/88
Date Analyzed 08/10/88
Dilution Factor, Times 1
Aldrin, m~/k~ <0.0005
Chlordane, mg/k~ <0.01
Dieldrin, mg/kK <0.001
Endosulfan I, m~/k~ _ <0.001
Endosulfan II, m~/k~ <0.001
Endosulfan sulfate, mg/k~ <0.005
Endrin, m~/kK <0.001
Endrin aldehyde, mK/kK 40.002
Eeptachlor epoxide, m~/kg <0.00l
Eeptachlor, mg/k~ <0.001
Methoxychlor, mg/k~ <0.01
Aroclor 1016, mg/k~ <0.03
Aroclor 1221, mK/kg <0.03
Aroclor 1232, mK/k~ <0.03
Aroclor 1242, m~/k~ <0.03
Aroclor 1248, mK/kK <0.03
Aroclor 1254, m~/kK <0.03
Aroclor 1260, mg/k~ <0.03
Aroclor 1262, mK/k~ <0.03
Toxaphene, mg/k~ <0.05
BBC, alpha isomer, mg/k~ <0.0005
BHC, beta isomer, mg/k~ <0.001
BBC, delta isomer, m~/kg <O.001
~BROWN AND CALDWELL LABORATORIES ANALYTICAL REPORT
373 SOU~ mir OAKS A~NUE ~SADEN~ CA 91105 e(818! 795-7553 ,F~ (818) 7~-8579
LOG NO: P88-08-175
Received= 08 AUG 88
Reported: 11 AUG 88
John McCabe
Emcon Associates Purchase O£der= 20306
3300 N. San Fernando Boulevard
Burbank, California 91504
Project: B31-Ol.OI
REPORT OF ANALTTICAL KESULTS Pa~e.4
LOG NO SAMPLE DESCKIPTION, SOIL SAMPLES DATE SAMPLED
08-175-3 A-4 1'
PARAMETF~ 08-175-3
BEC, gmmmm isomer (Llndane), mg/k~ <0.001
p,p'-DDD, mg/kg <0.001
p,p'-DDg, mi'/k; <0.001
p,p'-DDT, m;/kg' <0.002