Loading...
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.
Home
My WebLink
About
HAZARDOUS WASTE
Ap~ - 08'$ 99 10: 53 waste mgt mwts McKIITRIG~ WASTE TREATMEN't WASTE h'tA~dAI3EMEN~T COrrUPt. NY 56533 I-|wy. 58W McKitmck, CA 9325) (805)762.7366 -~' (805) 762-7696 Fax Fire Chief Ron Fraz. e Bakersfield Fire Deparlmenl 21ill H Street Bakersfield, CA 93301 Mr. Froze The purpose of this letter is to comment on thc Dr',fit Facilit3' Compliance Plan submitted by the Soilrem Corporation. Does thc Soilrcm facility plan on accepting liquid waste for either treatment or as feed stock for thc trcalmcnt process? In a letter dated Janm~D' 26. 1999 the San 3oaquin Valley umfied Air Pollution Control District asked for Soilrcm to identify all types of generators and sources of contaminaled soil :md liquid waste to be received at the facility, In their response to ihe District Soilrem states that no free liquids will be accepted and only soils contaminated with various hydrocarbons will be received. However in thc section Analytical Requirements for Soil and Water it discusses the analytical requirements necessary for accepting liquids for treaunent and recycling. This suggest that the facility does plan on accepting liquids and is contradictoD' with comments made earlier when responding to the District. If Soiirem does plan on accepting liquids what will be the l~mdling procedures and possible reuse options for the liquids? Clms O'Ham~ Districl Manager Ap~-08'= 0: 53 waste mgt P.02 McKII'rRICI~ WASTE TREATMENT SITE A WASTE MANAGEMENT COMPANY 565.33 Hwy. 58W McKiurick, CA 9325_1 (805) 762-7366 J (805) 762-7696 Fax · Fire Chief Ron Fraze Bakersfield Fire Deparhnenl 21 (} f H Street Bakersfield. CA 93301 Mr. Fraze Tile pu~osc of this letter is to comment on thc Draft Facilips, Compliance Plan submitted by the Soilrem Corporation. - Does thc Soilrcm facilily plan on accepting liquid wasle for either treatment or as feed slock for file trcauncnt process? In a letter dated Jantmry 26. 1999 the San Joaquin Valley Uuified Air Pollution Control District asked for Soilrcm to identify all types of gencmlors and sources of ~onlaminaled soil trod liquid waslc to be received at lhe facility. In their response to the District Soilrem states thai no free liquids will be accepted and only soils contaminated with various hydrocarbons will be received. However in thc section Analytical Requirements for Soil and Waler il discusses the analytical requirements necessary for accepting liquids for treaunent and recycling. This suggesl that the facility does plan on accepting liquids and is contradiclory with comments made earlier when responding to the District. If Soilrem does plan on accepting liquids what will be the hm~dling procedures and possible tense options for the liquids? Clms O'Ham~ District Manager PERMIT ASSISTANCE CENTER FRESNO AREA & KERN COUNTY Fresno A~ea Office 2600 Fresno Street Fresno, CA 93721-3604 Phone (209) 498-1343 Fax (209) 498-1020 frespac@ix.netcom.com ff. em6ountyOffice~ ~ 2700 "M" St., Ste. 125 Bakersfield, CA 93301 Phone (805) 862-5175 Fax (805) 862-5176 kernpac@ix.netcom.com Part~paffn$ Asenc~es California Environmental Protection Agency California Department of Toxic Substances Control California Department of Fish & Game California Department of Transportation Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board San Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution Control District Fresno County Agencies City Of Fresno ~e~-~l~t~rra'a~c~ · District Kern County Resource Management Agency Kern County Air ~llution Control District Business and Government Working Together for Economic Opportunity February 23, 1999 Ralph Huey Hazardous Materials Coordinator Environmental Services City of Bakersfield 1715 Chester Avenue Bakersfield, CA 93301 Dear Mr. Huey: On February 22, 1999, we received from your office copies of the Facili~ty Compliance Plan (FCP) for SoilRem Corporation, 408 E. Pacheco Road in --B~l~¢r'sfi'eld~The-45--d a. y :x~-iew~ p eriod-be g an-~y esterda y ....... - As previously discussed and agreed, the Permit Assistance Center will act as the Clearinghouse for SB 1299 and FCP distribution. On February 23, 1999, I hand-delivered copies of the FCP to Tom Goff of the San Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution District, Diana Wilson of Kern County Environmental Health, and Tony Medrano of the Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board. We discussed that any questions or comments are to be directed to you (Zone Administrator) for this FCP. We also discussed the need to make suggestions for developing and improving this pilot program. If I can be of any assistance during the FCP process please call. Thank you. Sincerely, . ~P.~ev-Ruggeve!!o- Director Kern County Permit Assistance Center Tom Golf, SJVUAPCD Bill O'Rullian, Environmental Health Diana Wilson, Environmental Health Lonnie Wass, CRWQCB Howard Wines, Env. Serv., City of Bakersfield Chris Kinne, Assist for Permit Assistance, Cal/EPA D February 22, 1999 FIRE CHIEF RON FRAZE ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES 2101 'H' Street Bakersfield, CA 93301 VOICE (805) 326-3941 FAX (805) 395-1349 SUPPRESSION SERVICES 2101 "H" Street Bakersfield, CA 93301 VOICE (805) 326-3941 FAX (805) 395-1349 PREVENTION SERVICES 1715 Chester Ave. Bakersfield, CA 93301 VOICE (805) 326-3951 FAX (805) 326-0576 ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES 1715 Chester Ave. Bakersfield, CA 93301 VOICE (805) 326-3979 FAX (805) 326-0576 TRAINING DIVISION 5642 Victor Ave, Bakersfield, CA 93308 VOICE (805) 399-4697 FAX (805) 399-5763 TO: RE: Participating Permitting Agencies Facility Compliance Plan for SoilRem Corporation 408 East Pacheco Road in Bakersfield, CA Attached, please find a copy of the Facility Compliance Plan for SoilRem Corporation. The 45 day review period has now commenced. The Facility Compliance Plan represents a new regulatory concept and should be approached as an entirely new process, separate and distinct from existing environmental permits. The Facility Compliance Plan is organized in accordance with the federal guidance for integrating multiple environmental planning and protection requirements (61 Fed. Reg. 28641-64), a fuller explanation of which is contained in the guidance document at the front of the plan. Since this particular plan contains pre-construction details, approval at this time would authorize commencement of construction, rather than actual operation. Amendments to the plan can later be added certifying that construction was completed according to design and is ready for operation. If you have any questions, please call me at (661) 326-3979. Sincerely, Ralph E. Huey, Administrator City of Bakersfield Permit Consolidation Zone S:\FEB 99\SoilRem Cover Ltr.wpd ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH SERI STEVE MCCALLEY, R.E.H.S., Director 2700 "M" STREET, SUITE 300 BAKERSFIELD, CA 93301-2370 Voice: (661) 862-8700 Fax: (661) 862-8701 'FrY Relay: (800) 735-2929 e-mail: eh~co, kern. ctrus ;ES DEPARTMENT ~OURCE MANAGEMENTAGENCY DAVID PRICE III, RMA DIRECTOR Community Development Program Department Engineering & Survey Services Department Environmental Health Services Department Planning Department Roads Department April 8, 1999 Ralph Hucy, Permit Consolidation Zone Coordinator City of Bakersfield Environmental Health Services 1715 Chester Avenue, Suite 300 Bakersfield, CA 93301 SUBJECT: Soilrem Corporation, Inc - Review of Facility Compliance Plan Dear Mr. Huey: Our Department, as the Local Enforcement Agency (LEA) for the California Integrated Waste Management Board, has reviewed the Facility Compliance Plan for the SoilRem Corporation. We reviewed the information for consistency with the Enforcement Agency Notification requirements and the Contaminated Soil Operation State Minimum Standards, as prescribed in Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations (CCR). The following comments are submitted for your consideration: I. Facility Information ao Section 1.1 (C) Question: Section authorizing eligibility for this tier T14, CCR 17361 (c)? Answer: Permit consolidation zone application. This statement should be revised to read: "The section authorizing eligibility for this tier. is T14, CCR, 76362.2." b° Section 1.1 (F) Question: Peak loading and annual load estimates? Answer: New business, no historical data to base estimation. The applicant should be able to estimate the peak volume that the facility is capable of handling based upon the equipment throughput rate and the facility size. The annual loading can be estimated from the New Company Preliminary estimates multiplied by the months the site will operate per calendar year. Co Section 1.1 (G) Question: Hours of Operation? Answer: 8-12 hoursper day City of Bakersfield, Permit Consolidation Zone Subject: Soilrem Corporation, Inc. April 8, 1999 Page 2 The applicant should provide the actual hours the facility will open and close for the day. Annex 1.11.3.c Operations l(C) Question: Describe how litter, nuisances, dust, or other impacts will be minimized? Answer:. Site is designated as 7.3 Heavy Industrial Zone. This area is located in a remote area of the city with no Residential housing within. 5 miles. .The applicant adequately describes dust control measures in subsequent sections of the · document. Although the site is remote, specific actions are necessary to control litter and noise. Please describe the control measures for litter and noise. 5 Recovery The following statement should be added: "Written notice will be provided to the LEA at least 30 days prior to beginning site restoration." Receiving and Storage 3) Question: Specify maximum hourly, daily,· and annual amounts of contaminated soil/material and liquid waste received. Answer: No liquids, up to 500 to 600 tons a day of contaminated soil. The contaminated soil amount does not correspond with the number provided in Section 1.1 of the Facility Compliance Plan. The following items should also be addressed in the compliance plan: Legible signs shall be posted at all public entrances. following information: (A) name of the operation (B) name of the operator (C) hours of operation (D) (E) The signs will provide the state that only nonhazardous petroleum-contaminated soil will be accepted phone number where the operator Or designee can be reached in case of an emergency o The following records shall be kept by the operator in one location and accessible for five (5) years: (A)' A log of special occurrences and the methods used to resolve the problems, including the details of all incidents that required implementing emergency City of Bakersfield, Permit Consolidation Zone Subject: Soilrem Corporation, Inc. April 8, 1999 Page 3 procedures: special occurrences may include: fires, injury and property damage accidents, explosions, discharge of hazardous or other wastes not permitted, flooding and other unusual occurrences. (B) A record of any written public complaints received by the operator, including: (1) the nature of the complaint (2) the date the complaint was received , (3) if available, the name, address, and telephone number of the person or persons making' the complaint (4) any actions taken to respond to the complaint- If we may be of any further assistance to you, please contact Diana Wilson at (661) 862-8734. Sincerely, Steve McCalley, Director By: 'William O'Rullian. R.E.H.S. Environmental Health Specialist IV Solid Waste Program WO:DW:jrw CC: Peter Ruggerello, Director, Kern County Permit Assistance Center Lew Elliott, California Integrated Waste Management Board Shelton Gray, Central Valley, Regional Water Quality Board Clif CalderWood, San Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution Control District Dave Price III, Resource Management Agency Guy Greenlee, Community Development Program Department File (sw\wilson\soilremnd2.wpd) ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH S_~irVICES DEPARTMENT STEVE McCALLEY, R.E.H.S., Director 2700 "M' STREET, SUITE 300 BAKERSFIELD, CA 93301-2370 Voice: (805) 882-8700 FAX: (805) 882-8701 'nY Relay: (800) 735.2929 e-mail: eh~kerncounty.com March 5, 1999 _.O_~_RCE MANAGEMENT AGENCY DA VID PRICE III, RMA DIRECTOR Community Development Program Department Engineering & Survey Services Department Environmental Health Services Department Planning Department Roads Department City of Bakersfield Planning Department 1715 Chester Avenue Bakersfield, CA 93301 Attention: Jim Eggert SUBJECT: SoilRem Corporation, 408 E. Pacheco Road, Bakersfield Draft Negative Declaration - Conditional Use Permit P99-0053 Dear Mr. Eggert: We have reviewed the draft Negative Declaration for the SoilRem Corporation and have the following comments: The Local Enforcement Agency for the California Integrated Waste Management Board has determined this facility is a Nonhazardous Contaminated Soil Processing/Transfer Station. Therefore, the design and operation of the facility shall comply with the 'Nonhazardous Petroleum Contaminated Soil Operations and Facilities Regulatory Requirements, Title 14, California Code of Regulations (CCR), Article 5.6, Sections 17360 - 17366. We request the following condition be placed in the Conditional Use Permit: "The design and operation of the facility shall comply with the Nonhazardous Petroleum Contaminated Soil Operations and Facilities Regulatory Requirements, Title 14, California Code of Regulations, Article 5.6, Sections 17360- 17366." The Nonhazardous Petroleum Contaminated Soil Operations and Facifities Regulatory Requirements regulations apply only to soil that contains designated or nonhazardous concentrations of petroleum hydrocarbons, such as gasoline and its components (benzene, toluene, xylene, and ethyl benzene), diesel and its components (benzene), virgin oil, motor oil, aviation fuel and lead as an associated metal. Receipt of soils not meeting this criteria, other types of waste, or liquid wastes will require review and approval from the Local Enforcement Agency. We request the following condition be placed in the Conditional Use Permit: City of Bakersfield, Planning Department Subject: SoilRem Corporation March 5, 1999 Page 2 The facility may receive only soil that contains designated or nonhazardous concentrations of petroleum hydrocarbons, such as gasoline and its components (benzene, toluene, xylene, and ethyl benzene), diesel and its components (benzene), virgin oil, motor oil, aviation fuel and lead as an associated metal. Receipt of soils not meeting this criteria, other types of waste, or liquid wastes will require review and approval from the Local Enforcement Agency." The need for requiring clean up bonds has been demonstrated at several soil processing facilities that have operated in the unincorporated and incorporated areas of Kern. The bond amount should be adequate to address characterization and removal of wastes. We request the following condition be placed in the Conditional Use Permit: "The operator/owner shall establish and maint~n a bond sufficient to provide for clean up of the property should it be vacated or abandoned. The bondis subject to the following conditions: (a) Notify the City of Bakersfield Planning Department and Local Enforcement Agency in the evem that the bond is terminated. (b) Notify the City of Bakersfield Planning Department and the Local Enforcement Agency if the owner/operator defaults on payments. (c) The owner/operator shall immediately cease and desist operations in the event that the bond is terminated." Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the draf~ Negative Declaration. If we may be of any further assistance to you, please contact Diana Wilson at (661)862-8734. Sincerely, Steve McCalley, Director By: William O'Rullian.. R.E.H.S. Environmental Health Specialist IV Solid Waste Program cc: Doug Patteson, Regional Water Quality Control Board, Fresno Suzanne Hambelton, California Integrated Waste Management Board, Sacramento John Arnold, SoilRem Corporation Nancy Ewert, Kern County Waste Management Department. ENTAL HEALTH Si ICES'DEPARTMENT STEVE McCALLEY, R.E.H.S., Director 2700 'M" STREET, SUITE 300 BAKERSFIELD~ CA 93301-2370 'Voice: (805) 802-8700 f' FAX: (805) 882-8701 , · T'I'Y Relay: (800)735-2929 e-mail: eh@kerncounty.corn . /,,,']' ., ! / .. '~ ~ ;:,.: December 22, 1998 Ralph Huey, Permit Consolidation Zone Coordinator City Of Bakersfield Environmental Health Services 1715 Chester Ave, Suite 300 Bakersfield, CA 93301 .; ~ URcE 'MA/VA GEMENT A GENC Y DA VlD PRICE II/. RMA DIRECTOR Community Development Program Department Engineering & SurveyServices Department Environmental Health Services Department Planning Department Roads Department SUBJECT: .S_oi!rem Corporation,. inc ,..Local EnfOrcement Age_ncy Re_quirements Dear Mr. Huey: Enclosed are the requirements of the Local Enforcement Agency' for the Soilrem Corporation, Inc facility. As discussed at the Permit Consolidation Zone meeting, Tuesday December 15, 1998, I have removed the requirement to submit a "Notification Form" and replaced it with a list of the specific information needed to meet the "notification" regulation. If you have any questions, please contact Diana Wilson at (805)' 862-8734. Sincerely, · Steve I~-~e.y.<_Director ' '~ETgy: William O'Rullian, R.E.H.S. Environmental Health Specialist IV Solid WaSte Program Supervisor enclosure CC: ' Peter RUggerell0, Director, Kern County Permit Assistance Center File Local Enforcement Agency Requirements Contaminated Soil ./Transfer Processing Operation Enforcement Agency Notification Local Enforcement Agency Notification: The operator shall notify the Local Enforcement Agency, in writing, of its intent to operate a ContaminatedSoil/-I'ransferOperation. The notification shall include the following information: (A) The name, address, and phone number of: (1) the proposed operation, (2) where the operator can be contacted, if these differ from the operation site, (3) the owner, if these differ from the operator. (B) The section authorizing eligibility for this tier: Title 14, California Code of Regulations, Section 17361(c). (C) A description of the facility's operation, including, but not limited to, volume of wastes/materials handled, peak loading, annual loading and hours of operation. --(D) ,~s~tatement by th(~ (~wne~nd operatOr ~(~r{i-fyin~ under pen~lt~/~f perjury that the information which they have provided is true and accurate to the best of their knowledge and belief. General Operating Standards: (E) All activities shall be conducted in a manner that minimizes litter, nuisances dust, noise impacts, other public health and safety and environmental hazards. (F) Unauthorized human or animal access to the operation or facility shall be prevented. (G) Traffic flow into, on, and out of the operation and facility shall be controlled in a safe manner. (H) All operations and facilities open for public business shall'post legible signs at all public entrances that include the following: (1) name of the operation (2) name of the operator (3) hours of operation (4) specify that only nonhazardoUs petroleum contaminated soil will be accepted (5) phone number where the operator or designee can be reached in case of an emergency. (I) The operator shall provide telephone or radio communication capability for emergency purposes. General Record Keeping Requirements: All contaminated soil/transfer operations shall meet the following requirements: (A) All of the following records shall be kept by the operator in one location and accessible for five (5) years: Revised. 12/22/1998 ¢aliforni Regional Water Qu.ali lli .Control Board , ~ Central Valley Region~l~ Winston H. Hickox Steven T. Buffer, Acting Chair Gray Davis Secretary for Fresno Branch Office Governt~r Environmental Protection Internet Address: http://www.swrcb.ca.gov/-rwqcb5 3614 East Ashlan Avenue, Fresno, California 93726 Phone (559) 445-5116 · FAX (559) 445-5910 · . 26 March 1999 Mr. Ralph Huey City of Bakersfield Fire Departmeht Environmental Services 1715 Chester Avenue Bakersfield, CA 93301 COMMENTS ON FACILITY COMPLIANCE PLAN, SOILREM CORPORATION, INC., BAKERSFIELD, KERN COUNTY Soilrem Corporation, Inc. is proposing a soil recycling facility in Bakersfield near Pacheco and Cottonwood Roads, next to the former CleanSoils recycling facility on White Lane. Nonhazardous hydrocarbon contaminated soils are proposed to be treated by soil washing and subsequent bioremediation. Recycled soils are then proposed to be sold as fill materials. :- On 23 February 1999, we received Soilrem's draft Facility Compliance Plan (FCP). Under the Permit Consolidation Zone program, the FCP constitutes a replacement for permits from individual agencies. The FCP must contain all information required by the permitting agencies for the issuance of an individual permit. To facilitate preparation of the FCP, we have drafted the attached Water Quality Compliance Plan (Attachment A) so that it may be inserted into the FCP as a complete section rather than separated and spread throughout the document. Also attached are the "Standard Provisions and Reporting Requirements," dated August 1997, (Attachment B) which need to be incorporated into the FCP. The attachment contains several requirements for Soilrem to submit specific information for Regional Board Executive Officer approval prior to construction and operation of the facility. The information was not contained in the FCP, or was inadequate, and is needed to address regulatory requirements. Significant information needed includes: site specific groundwater conditions, liner system design, a construction Quality Assurance/Quality Control Plan, and design for groundwater and unsaturated zone monitoring systems. This work needs to be performed under the direction of a California registered civil engineer, certified engineering geologist or geologist to the extent appropriate under the California Business and Professions Code. The draft FCP also contains a letter from Soils Engineering, Inc. regarding possible use of monitoring wells at the former CleanSoils facility. However, no data were provided supporting the use of those wells as part of Soilrem's monitoring system. Before use of the CleanSoils wells can be considered, an adequate hydrogeologic characterization must conclude that the groundwater aquifers beneath the Soilrem site and the former CleanSoils site are interconnected. The characterization must demonstrate that groundwater quality data from the CleanSoils site are suitable as background for the Soilrem site. California Environmental Protection Agency ORecycled Paper Mr. Ralph Huey - 2 - 26 March 1999 The FCP contains a letter from Garcia Tracking stating that Soilrem has the right to access the groundwater monitoring wells on the former CleanSoils facility. The former CleanSoils site is located on assessor's parcel numbers 172-070-20 and 172-070-21 which, according to the Kern County Assessor's Office, are owned by Jose Garnica and the Regency Bank, respectively. It is unclear exactly on which parcel or parcels the wells are located. If Soilrem intends to use these wells for groundwater monitoring purposes, the FCP needs to contain written assurance that the wells will be available for sampling by Soilrem during the active life of the facility, as well as during any post-closure maintenance period. The FCP needs to clearly identify the proPerty owners on which the facility is to be located, and the Assessor's parcel number. Based on the locations shown on the map in the draft FCP, it appears that the proposed facility would be on parcel number 172-070-03. According to the Kern County Assessor's Office, that parcel is owned by the South Enterprise Zone. Discussion with Mr. Wayne Massie, indicates that South Enterprise Zone is a limited pannership between Mr. Wayne Massie and Mr. Robert Reese, both of Fresno. The FCP needs to contain a certification by the property owners acknowledging that they are ultimately responsible for any condition of pollution, nuisance or violations of the FCP occurring on the property. Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the draft FCP. Regional Board staff are available to meet with Soilrem and their technical consultants to clarify our comments. Once our comments are addressed and the final FCP is submitted, we will draft a special order for adoption by the Regional Board at one of · its.upcoming meetings. The special order will require compliance with the FCP, naming both Soilrem and the property owners as responsible parties. If we can be of further assistance, please contact Doug Patteson at (559) 445-6191. Senior Engineering Geologist WILLIAM PFISTER Supervising Engineering Geologist CEG No. 931 Attachments CCi Ms. Loft Senitte, Office of Chief Counsel, SWRCB, Sacramento Mr. Gorden Innes, SWRCB, Sacramento Ms. Chris Kinne, Cal/EPA, Sacramento Mr. William O'Rullian, Kern County Depm:tment of Environmental Health, Bakersfield Mr. John Arnold, Soilrem Corporation, Bakersfield Mr. Wayne Massie, South Enterprise Zone, Fresno Mr. Robert Reese, South Enterprise Zone, Fresno . ater aali oatrolB°ar6 K.C. #" 3646 1999 Administrator M~. Ralph I4ueY, _ 405 East pachcCO goaa CheSter Ave. ~5---~d, CA 93301 ~poRT OF ~ASTE DISC~GE ' 40g East pacheco Koa6, ~e~ Co~W 1999, ~6 fil~g fee ot$ 4000.00' ~ you ,or ~e ~eP°~ °f Waste Disch~ge dated 19 ~eb~ .. sch~ge req~,re~ _ ~d dete~m~ . _ ieteneSs . ._ ~lI be [o~ ..~o rea~eme~ts' . - ' re o¢ for co~ ~ea~rementS bt~ . ~ _. thc ~gc~ll~. _~c~d ~ _ {or co~'' .. -- ~n this ma~er, you I[ ~ou ha~e ~ queSUm~ ~ GARY I4. CM~LTOlq ExecUtive Offxcer r~d-fre.d°c C lifornia Environmental protect~ Winston H. Hickox Secretary for Environmental Protection California [ gional Water Qualityl ontrol Board ' ' Central Valley Region ~ Steven J. Butler, Acting Chair 8 March 1999 Fresno Branch Office Interact Address: http://www.swrcb.ca.gov/-rwqcb5 3614 East Ashlan Avenue, Fresno, California 93726 Phone (559) 445-5116 · FAX (559) 445-5910 R.C. #: 3646 Gray Davis GoYer~or Mr. Ralph Huey, Administrator 408 East Pacheco Road 1715 Chester Ave. Bakersfield, CA 93301 REPORT OF WASTE DISCHARGE - 408 East Pacheco Road, Kern County Thank you for the Report of Waste Discharge dated 19 February 1999, and filing fee of $ 4000.00. Staff will review this report for completeness and determine whether waste discharge requirements are needed for the facility. Any proposed requirements will be forwarded to you and to any interested party, for comments before we recommend that the Regional Board adopt the requirements. If you have any questions on this matter, you may contact Mr. Doug Patterson at (559) 445-6191. GARY M. CARLTON Executive Officer rwd-fre.doc California Environmental Protection Agency ~ Recycled Paper Winston H. ltickox SecretarY for 'Environmental Protection California R ional Water Quality .. l ntrol Board Central Valley Region Steven T. Butler, Acting Chair Fresno Branch Office http://www.swrcb.ca.govI-rwqcb5 3614 East Ashlan Avenue, Fresno, California 93726 Phone (559) 445-5116 · FAX (559) 445-5910 Mr. Jim Eggert City of Bakersfield Development Services Department 1715 Chester Avenue Bakersfield, CA 93301 Gray Davis Governor 19 February 1999 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. P99-0053, DRAFT NEGATIVE DECLARATION, SOILREM CORP., INC., BAKERSFIELD, KERN COUNTY We~haYe-reviewed the draft-Negative-Declaration for the proposed Soilrem Corp. facility at408 East Pacheco Road and have the following comments: 1. The project description should contain a statement that no RCRA or California regulated hazardous waste will be accepted at the facility. The groundwater and surface water sections (under the Water Quality/Quantity heading) should contain statements that the project will be required to comply with Title 27, California Code of Regulations, Section 20005 et seq (Title 27). 3. The groundwater section should contain a statement that in accordance with Title 27, unsaturated zone' and groundwater monitoring will be conducted. The surface water section should contain a statement that the project will be required to comply with the General Construction Activity Storm Water Permit (SWRCB Order No. 92-08-DWQ) during construction of the facility, and unless all storm water is retained on site, the project will be required to comply with the Industrial Activities Storm Water General Permit (SWRCB Order No. 97-03- DWQ) during operation of the facility. Thank-you for-the opportunity to comment on the draft Negative Declaration. If yoU have any questions, please call Doug Patteson at (559) 445-6191. WILLIAM PFISTER Supervising Engineering Geologist CEG No. 931 CC: Mr. RalPh Huey, City of Bakersfield Fire Department, Bakersfield Mr. John Arnold, Soilrem Corp., Inc., Bakersfield DKP: c:\~word~pac~negdec.srm California Environmental Protection Agency oRecycled Paper California ] gional Central Water ValleyQUalit3 °ntr°l Region Board Winston Hickox Fresno Branch Office Secretary for Interment Address: http:l/www.swrcb.ca.govl-rwqcb5 Environmental 3614 East Ashlan Avenue, Fresno, California 93726 Protection Phone (559) 445-5116 · FAX (559) 445-5910 Gray Davis Governor 8 January 1999 Mr. Ralph Huey Bakersfield City Fire Department Office of Environmental Services 1715 Chester Avenue Bakersfield, CA 93301 PROPOSED HYDROCARBON CONTAMINATED SOIL RECYCLING FACILITY, SOILREM CORPORATION, INC., BAKERSFIELD, KERN COUNTY On 15 December 1998, Doug Patteson and Lonnie Wass from our office attended a meeting with representatives of Soilrem Corporation, Inc., the City of Bakersfield, and various other government agencies. Soilrem Corporation is proposing to operate a nonhazardous, hydrocarbon contaminated soil recycling facility in Bakersfield near Pacheco and Cottonwood Roads, near the former CleanSoils recycling facility on White Lane. Soilrem Corporation is proposing to prepare a, Facility Compliance Plan under SB 1299 (the Environmental Permit Consolidation Zone Program) instead of obtaining individual permits from each agency. As the Permit Consolidation Zone Administrator, the City of Bakersfield will be the lead permitting agency. The purpose of this letter is to assist you by outlining some of the requirements which need to be incorporated into the Facility Compliance Plan to be consistent with State Laws and Regulations and for the Regional Board to consider such a plan. General Site Conditions In 1994, the groundwater table near the proposed site occurred at 30 feet below the ground surface. Greater than normal rainfall in recent years is likely to have caused a recent rise in the groundwater table. Groundwater has an average specific electrical conductivity of approximately 1300 pmho/cm. Soils in the area are classified as moderately permeable. Beneficial uses of groundwater near the proposed site include municipal and domestic supply, agricultural supply, and industrial process and service supply. Therefore, protection of groundwater from the discharge of waste at the proposed facility is a primary concern. Waste Classification Soilrem Corporation is proposing to accept nonhazardous hydrocarbon contaminated soils for treatment by soil washing and subsequent bioremediation. Reportedly, the Process will not generate liquid waste. Hydrocarbon contaminated soils contain soluble petroleum fractions which pose a threat to water quality when stored as waste piles or if discharged in an uncontrolled manner. Therefore, they are classified as a 'designated' waste and are regulated by the California Code of Regulations (CCR), Title California Environmental Protection Agency Recycled Paper Mr. Ralph Huey 2 - 8 January 1999 27, Section 20080, et seq. (Title 27). Both incoming soil and treated soil may be classified as designated waste, depending on the concentration of contaminants. Any soil, treated or not, which contains constituents above levels that may threaten water quality must therefore be stored on a lined waste management unit which meets Title 27 requirements. Title 27 contains siting and construction standards, and performance goals to protect water quality and prevent public nuisances. Therefore, the Facility Compliance Plan must implement Title 27. At the 15 December 1998 meeting, it was stated that Title 27 would be applicable to the proposed facility. Copies of previously adopted Waste Discharge Requirements regulating similar soil recycling facilities were provided, along with a copy of the required Standard Provisions and Reporting Requirements. For your convenience, we have enclosed duplicates of those documents and a copy of Title 27. Some of the provisions that need to be included in the Facility Compliance Plan are discussed below. Liner Design Designated waste must be discharged to Class II waste management units designed and constructed to prevent migration of wastes to adjacent geologic materials, groundwater, or surface water [§20310(a)]. Containment structures must be designed by, and construction supervised by a registered civil engineer or certified engineering geologist [§20310(e)]. The Facility Compliance Plan needs to require submittal of the design specifications and Quality Assurance/Quality Control plan for review before construction of the unit. The Facility Compliance Plan also needs to require submittal of construction Quality Assurance/Quality Control documentation for review and approval before discharge of waste is allowed [§20323/4]. The liner design must include a leachate collection and removal system (LCRS) [§20340(a)]. The liner must be constructed of at least 2 feet of clay of at least 90% relative compaction and conductivity less than lx10-6 cra/sec [§20330(b)]. Title 27 allows engineered alternatives to the prescriptive liner design, provided Soilrem demonstrates that construction of the prescriptive standard is not feasible and the alternative affords equivalent protection against water quality impairment [§20080(b)]. Monitoring The Facility Compliance Plan needs to contain a 'Water Quality Protection Standard'. The Water Quality Protection Standard consists of a list of 'Constituents of Concern', 'Concentration Limits' for each constituent of concern, and the 'Point of Compliance' and 'Monitoring Points' at which the concentration limits apply [§20390(a)]. The constituents of concern are a list of all waste constituents, reaction products, or other constituents that are reasonably expected to be in or derived from waste [§20395(a)]. Soilrem needs to propose concentration limits for each constituent of concern based on background Monitoring Points [§20400(a)]. Background data must be based on quarterly groundwater sampling for a period of one year, collected before waste is discharged.to a waste management unit [§20415(e)(6)]. For anthropogenic (not naturally occurring) constituents, the concentration limit should be the lowest obtainable laboratory detection limit. Mr. Ralp,h Huey O - 3 - 8 January 1999 The point of compliance is a vertical surface located at the hydraulically downgradient limit of the waste management unit that extends through the uppermost aquifer underlying the waste management unit [§20405(a)]. Soilrem needs to establish background monitoring points at appropriate locations and depths to yield groundwater samples that represent the quality of groundwater passing the Point of Compliance [§20415(b)(B)(1)]. Soilrem needs to establish monitoring points capable of providing the best assurance of the earliest possible detection of a release from a waste management unit [820415(b)(B)(2)]. Soilrem also needs to propose an unsaturated zone monitoring system for each waste management unit [§20415(d)(1)]. All monitoring systems (for groundwater and the unsaturated zone) must be designed by a registered geologist or a registered civil engineer [820415(e)(1)]. Cl'osure Plan The Facility Compliance Plan needs to require submittal of a preliminary closure plan which provides a reasonable estimate of the maximum expected cost that would be incurred at any time during the waste management's projected life for a third party to close the unit and carry out post-closure maintenance [§21769(b)]. The preliminary closure plan must include a lump sum estimate of the cost of carrying out all actions necessary to close the unit, prepare detailed design specifications, develop the final closure and post-closure maintenance plan, and carry out the first thirty years of post-closure maintenance [§21769(b)(2)]. Financial Assurance The Facility Compliance Plan needs to require Soilrem to 'establish an irrevocable closure fund to .ensure closure of eachwaste management unit in accordance with the approved preliminary closure ,- plan [§22207(a)]. The Facility Compliance Plan also needs to require Soilrem to establish an irrevocable fund to ensure that funds are available to address a known or reasonably foreseeable release from a waste management unit [822222]. Title 27 contains descriptions of acceptable financial assurance mechanisms [822240- 822254]. Signatory_ Requirements All submittals from Soilrem containing proposed designs for containment structures and/or monitoring systems must be approved and signed by a registered civil engineer or a certified engineering geologist [§21710(d)]. CEQA In order for the Regional Board to consider the Facility Compliance Plan, the Regional Board must make a finding that the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) has been implemented. The City of Bakersfield, as Lead Agency, needs to provide an adopted CEQA document and Notice of Determination to be incorporated into the Regional Board's approval of the Facility Compliance Plan. The CEQA document (either a Negative Declaration or Environmental Impact Report) must address the discharge of designated waste at the facility. Mr. Ralph Huey O - 4 - Fees 8 January 1999 The State Board fee schedule is based on the program type, threat to water quality and complexity of a discharge. There are three levels of threat to water quality (1-3) and three levels of complexity (A-C). The program type for the proposed facility is Title 27 (Chapter 15). Based on the proposed discharge and the criteria in the fee schedule, the fee rating for Soilrem's proposed operation is classified as 2-B. The required annual fee for a 2~B facility is $4,000. This is consistent with the fee rating for the former CleanSoils facility, adjacent to the proposed Soilrem facility. The fee needs to be received along with the draft Facility Compliance Plan in order for Regional Board staff to proceed with review. Please note that Title 27 contains other requirements that were not specifically addressed above, but which will need to implemented by the Facility Compliance Plan. Other statutes or codes (for example domestic .well standards or storm water control requirements) may be applicable, depending on Soilrem's operations.. We appreciate the opportunity to provide you with our comments and look forward to participating in the review of the draft Facility Compliance Plan. Please call Doug Patteson at (559) 445-6191 if you have any questions. SHELTON R. GR~~ Senior Engineering Geologist Enclosures. WILLIAM PFISTER Supervising Engineering Geologist CEG No. 931 cc: Mr. Peter Ruggerello, Kern County Permit Assistance Center, Bakersfield Soilrem Corporation, Inc., Bakersfield San Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution Control District February 2, 1999 Mr. Ralph Huey, Zone Administrator ' City of Bakersfield Permit Consolidation Zone Office of Environmental Services 1715 Chester Avenue Bakersfield, CA 93301 RE: Additional Questions for Soil Rem Corporation Dear Mr. Huey: The District is in receipt of the January 29, 1999 fax from Mr. Howard Wines regarding Soil Rem Corporation. Based on the fax, additional, information is required in order to determine the applicability of various District rules and regulations to the Soil Rem proposal: 3 4 5 6 Please specify for what emissions the knock down agent is used for (e.g. VOC or PM 10) Specify what emission concentration would determine the use of a knock down agent and how often are emissions levels taken? Please provide MSDS chemical make up for knock down agent Specify maximum VOC concentration after treatment and immediately prior to release of material Response to question #10 did not include units of measure and did not answer the volume The active portion of the contaminated soil storage piles will assumed to be equal to the daily facility throughput unless otherwise specified. (The active portion is the portion that is uncovered and is actively being handled for processing.) Specify the average height of contaminated soil received and stored on site before processing Flow chart provided shows three "solids" drop out points, please indicate what these solids indicate and corresponding VOC concentration David L. Crow Executive Director/Air Pollution Control Officer 1999 Tu~lumne Street1 Suite 200 · Fresno, CA 93721 ° (209) 497-1000 ° FAX i209) 233-2057 Northern Region 4230 Kiernan Avenue, Suite 130 · Modesto, CA 95356 (209) 545-7000 · Fax (209) 545-8652 Central Region 1999 Tu01umne Street, Suite 200 · Fresno, CA 93721 (209) 497-1000, Fa~ (209) 233-2057 Southern Region 2700 M Street, Suite 275 · Bakersfield, CA 93301 (805) 862-5200, Fax (805) 862-5201 9 Specify what happens to oil product after initial oil/water separation indicated on flow chart (e.g. is oil stored on site?, is oil transferred off-site?, if so how?) 10 Is flow chart incorrect? - there is no oil/water separation 11 Specify what filters are used for in process (e.g. Are the filters used to filter oil or bio waste?, How and when a. re filters changed and disposed?, What are the associated emissions?) 12 Because the flow chart provided does not indicate a bioreactor, please specify on the flow chart where the bioreactor fits into process 13 Because you stipulate the system is closed loop, please indicate how oxygen for the bioreaction is provided and how off gassing is handled? 14 Specify how treated soil/material is actively aerated (e.g. Are windrows physically turned or mixed?, Is air induced through venting?...etc.) 15 Response to question #19 did not include maximum area for windrow storage or windrow dimensions (height and width) 16 Specify what waste stream is sampled every 100 tons (e.g. after treatment or every 100 tons received) Thank you for your cooperation in this matter. Should you have any questions, please contact Mr. Steve Tomlin or Mr. Raymond Rodriguez of Permit Services at (805) 862-5200. Sincerely, Seyed Sadredin ~,,~~. ct~(~rmit_ Services p~i~eBr~iG~sff' MP'aEn ~ge r svt/rgr Enclosures San Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution Control District January 26,1999 Mr. Ralph Huey, Zone Administrator City of Bakersfield Permit Consolidation Zone Office of Environmental Services 1715 Chester Avenue Bakersfield, CA 93301 RE: List of Questions for Soil Rem Corporation Dear Mr. Huey: Pursuant to your January 22, 199 meeting with Mr. Tom Goff, Mr. Raymond Rodriguez, and Mr. Steve Tomlin of the District's Permit Services Division, the following information must be obtained from Soil Rem Corporation in order to determine the applicability of various District rules and regulations: Receiving and Storage o identification of all possible emission points in the process including a description of all particulate PM 10 and VOC emission control devices (e.g. enclosed conveyor, enclosed screening, venting to fabric baghouse or venting to thermal oxidizer, vehicular emissions from driving on unpaved areas/roadways...etc.) identify all types of generators/sources of contaminated soil/material or liquid waste to be received and processed (e.g. gasoline and diesel from tank pulls or spills, heavy or light crude oil storage tank bottoms, gasoline contaminated water, car wash waste water, fabric laundry waste water...etc.) specify maximum hourly, daily, and annual amounts of contaminated soil/material and liquid waste received (these will become permit limitations) specify maximum possible concentration of all 188 State Toxic Air Contaminants/EPA l~azardous Air Pollutants (see attached list) in soil/material or liquid waste as received (these will become permit limitations) describe how contaminated soil/material is received and stored (e.g. How high are drop points?, Are delivery trucks covered?, What are storage piles covered with?) David L. Crow Executive Director/Air Pollution Control Officer 1999 Tuolumne Street, Suite 200 · Fresno, CA 93721 · (209) 497-1000 · FAX (209) 233-2057 Northern Region 4230 Kiernan Avenue, Suite 130 ·Modesto, CA 95356 (209) 545-7000 · Fax (209) 545-8652 Central Region 1999 Tuolumne Street, Suite 200 · Fresno, CA 93721 (209) 497-1000 · Fax (209) 233-2057 Southern Region 2700 M Street, Suite 275 · Bakersfield, CA 93301 (805) 862-5200 · Fax (805) 862-5201 M~ RaSh Huey January26, 1999 Page 2 o o 10. specify maximum possible concentration of VOC's (see attached definition) in soil/material or liquid waste as received using EPA SW-846 test methods describe proposed sampling plan and procedures specifying sampling frequency and methods for all materials received (these will become permit limits) describe how contaminated liquid waste is received and stored (e.g. How is it delivered?, Is it ever exposed to the open atmosphere?, How long is it stored on site?, What type of containers is it stored in? What is the daily and annual volume received?) identify minimum soil/material moisture .content as received and maintained in storage piles, as loaded into the inlet hopper to be screened identify the volume and area of contaminated soil/material that is open to the atmosphere in the "working" portion of the storage piles and the volume and area that is covered. Processing 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. describe what happens to solids removed from the process (e.g. Are the solids removed from site?, How are the solids stored and transferred?, What is the moisture content and VOC concentration of the solids?) description of how generated wastewater and separated waste oil is treated, recycled or removed, include a process flow chart that indicates any points in the process that are in communication with the atmosphere if a bioreactor is to be used, describe where it would be placed within the process flow chart and the internal operation of the bioreactor (e.g. mass balance). specify the chemical composition of surfactants and floculents used in the process supply Material Data Safety Sheet for surfactants Finished Product Handling 16. specify maximum hourly, daily, and annual amounts of contaminated soil/material and liquid waste processed by the operation (these will become permit limits) Mr. Ralph Huey January26, 1999 Page 3 17. describe how treated soil/material is stored (e.g. Is it covered?, What is the maximum VOC concentration of soil/material?, Is it actively or passively aerated?, How long is it stored on site? At what VOC concentration is it deemed remediated?) 18. specify maximum concentration of VOC's and moisture content of effluent soil/material or liquid waste before exposed to the atmosphere or placed in windrows 19. specify maximum area for windrow storage 20. describe proposed sampling plan and procedures specifying sampling frequency and methods Miscellaneous 21. identify any lC engine to be used at the facility with a manufacturer's maximum continuous brake horsepower rating of greater than 50 hp (if any exist, see attached supplemental information sheet) 22. identify any boiler to be used at the facility and if liquid fuel fired, natural gas fired or 75 x 106 Btu/hr (if any exist, see attached supplemental information sheet) Thank you for your cooperation in this matter. Should you have any questions, please contact Mr. Steve Tomlin or Mr. Raymond Rodriguez of Permit Services at (805) 862-5200. Sincerely, Seyed Sadredin ~~7~rmit Services E./Goff, P.E. Permit Services Manager svt/rgr Enclosures San Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution Control District April 8, 1999 Mr. John Arnold, President Soil Rem Corporation P.O. Box 40764, South Station 524 Bakersfield, CA 93304-9998 Re: Project #990190 Project Description: Facility Compliance Plan for Soil Washing/Bioremediation Operation Dear Mr. Arnold: Your Facility Compliance Plan for your soil washing/bioremediation operation has been received by the Air Pollution Control District, and has been reviewed for completeness. Based on this preliminary review, the Facility Compliance Plan has been determined to be incomplete. The following must be incorporated into your Facility Compliance Plan: The attached Application Review and conditions Thank you for your cooperation in this matter. Should you have any questions, please telephone Mr. Steve Tomlin at (661) 326-6968, or Raymond Rodriguez at (661) 326-6957., Sincerely, Seyed Sadredin Director of Permit Services 'Thom'aks E .~G~o/ff, . . svt Ralph Huey, Zone Administrator City of Bakersfield Permit Consolidation Zone David L. Crow Executive Director/Air Pollution Control Officer 1990 East Gettysburg Avenue, Fresno, CA 93726 (559) 230-6000 FAX (559) 230-6061 Northern Regibn 4230,K~eman Avenue, Suite 130, Modesto, CA 95356 (209) 557-6400 FAX (209) 557-6475 Central Region -1990 East Gettysburg Avenue, Fresno, CA 93726 (559) 230-6000 FAX (559) 230-6061 Southern Region 2700 M Street, Suite 275, Bakersfield, CA 93301 (661)326-6900 FAX (661) 326-6985 PERMIT CONSOLIDATION ZONE CITY OF BAKERSFIELD Facility Name: Mailing Address: Contact Name: Phone: Fax: Soil Rem Corporation P.O. Box 40764, South Station 524 Bakersfield, CA 93304-9998 John Arnold, President (661) 834-8471 (661) 397-4508 Project #: Identification #'s: Date Received: 990190 S-3496-1-0,-2-0, &-3-0 February 23, 1999 II. III. IV, PROPOSAL: To install and operate a petroleum contaminated soil washing and bioremediation operation. APPLICABLE RULES:. Rule 2010 Rule 2201 Rule 4101 Rule 4102 Rule 4201 Rule 4202 Rule 4651 Permits Required (12/17/92) New and Modified Stationary Source Review Rule (6/_15/95). Visible Emissions (12/17/92) Nuisance (12/17/92) Particulate Matter Concentration (12/17/92) Particulate Matter Emission Rate (12/17/92) Volatile Organic Compound Emissions from Decontamination of Soil (12/17/92) Section 42301.6 California Health & Safety Code - School Notice - N/A - not within 1000 feet of K-12 school Section 41700 California Health & Safety Code - Toxic Compounds PROJECT LOCATION: The subject facility will be located at 408 East Pacheco Road in Bakersfield, California. The facility is not within 1,000 feet of a school. The nearest receptor for health risk screening purposes is a residence that is located approximately 200 yards South west of the nearest point of emissions. PROCESS DESCRIPTION: See Facility Layout in Appendix A Only soil contaminated with gasoline, diesel, crude oil, or crude oil tank bottoms is received in trucks at the site, stored in segregated piles according to origin, and covered with either plastic tarp or clean soil. Soil Rem will not accept any soil without a non-hazardous waste manifest and soil lab analysis for total petroleum hydrocarbon (TPH), benzene, toluene, ethyl benzene, and xylene (BTEX) concentrations. Soil Rem will also not accept any soil defined as Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) hazardous waste per Title 40, Part 261 of the Code of Federal Regulations, or a California Hazardous Waste per Title 22 of the California Code of Regulations. They will not accept any free liquid. 2 VI. Next the soil'is loaded by front end loader,into a hopper which feeds the soil washing/bio reacting equipment. From the hopper, soil is conveyed over shaker screen where rocks and other so~ids greater than 1 inch in diameter are removed. The rocks and solids fall onto a conveyor which transports all solids removed in the entire process to a cement storage bin. The under size soil paSses through the screen and into a classifying screw weir water containing hydrocarbon decomposing bacteria is added. Once the water solution is added, the resulting soil mixture is a slurry. The slurry then. enters two linear motion screens, mounted in parallel, where oversize material is again removed and sent to the cement storage bin by the same conveyor described earlier. The undersize slurry mixture falls into a surge tank and is pumped through hydroclones to removed more large particles (solids). These solids are then dewatered by a linear motion screen and sent to the cement storage bin by the solids conveyor. The soil mixture exiting the hydroclones enters the mud tank where some settling occurs. Bacteria and enzymes which break down hydrocarbons in the soil are added in the mud tank. Next, the soil mixture is sent to two parallel centrifuges for dewatering. FIoculent is added prior to the centrifuges. The floculent aids the separation of hydrocarbons from the soil/water mixture. The centrifuges essentially removes the water solution from the soil mixture pdor to stockpiling. The dewatered soil is Conveyed by the solids conveyor to the cement storage bin. The soil mixture contains small amounts of water, along with bacteria that continue to break down the remaining hydrocarbons in the soil. The water solution removed by the centrifuges is sent to the return water tank where additional water and 'surfactants are added. The water solution is then reused in the process.. The only.materials discharge from the process machinery are solids and soil. The washed soil is then placed in windrows to allow the biological activity to occur. EQUIPMENT LISTING: S-3496-1-0 Petroleum Contaminated Soil Receiving and StOrage Operation S-3496-2-0 Petroleum Contaminated Soil Washing Operation S-3496-3-0 Petroleum Contaminated Soil Bioremedation Operation EMISSION CONTROL TECHNOLOGY EVALUATION: The following emission sources result from this operation PMIO emissions from receiving and stockpiling of contaminated soil PM10 emissions fi'om storage of contaminated soil (assumed negligible due to high moisture content) PM10 emissions PM10 emissions PM10 emissions from applying clean soil cover to received contaminated soil from retrieval and transfer of contaminated soil to washing machinery hopper from transfer of washed.soil into windrows for bioreacting/storage PM10 emissions from applying clean soil cover to washed soil PM10 emissions from storage of washed soil (assumed negligible due to high moisture content) PM10 emissions from transfer of washed soil into trucks for shipping offsite PM10 emissions from vehicle traffic (assumed negligible-vehicles miles traveled is very small) VOC emissions from handling and storage of contaminated soil V©C emissions from washing of contamined soil in process machinery V©C emissions from storage of washed soil (bioreacting/storage) PM10 emissions from handling of the soil will be minimal due to the high soil-moisture content expected on delivery to this site. On delivery, the contaminated soil is stored in piles and covered with either clean soil or a plastic sheets. If dry, clean soil is used, the storage piles will be watered periodically to allow a crust to form that will greatly reduce PM10 emissions. Once the soil enters the soil washing process machinery, PM10 emissions are not expected as the entire process is wet. Once the washed soil is placed in windrows for bioreacting, PM10 emissions may occur from the effects of wind on the storage piles. However, PM10 emissions from the piles will be minimized by maintaining a high moisture content through pedodic application of water and are expected to be negligible. Best Available Control Technology (BACT) is not required for PM10 emissions from the operation as the increase in permitted emissions is not greater than 2.0 lb/day for any emissions unit. However, T-BACT is required for heavy metal particulate from this operation. T-BACT for soil/aggregate matedal storage and handling is maintaining a high moisture content in the soil to prevent visible emissions in excess of 5% opacity. The moisture content of the soil process by this facility will be maintained at a sufficient level to prevent visible emissions in excess of 5% opacity.. VOC emissions from the storage piles pdor to soil washing will be reduced with the use of 6 inch thick clean soil cover, and the use of a V©C knock down agent if V©C levels in the air above the soil exceeds 50 ppm, or with the use of overlapping 10 mil poly vinyl sheeting.. VOC emissions from the storage piles after washing will be reduced by maintaining a high moisture content and applying a knock down agent if VOC levels in the air above the soil exceeds 50 ppm. Best Available Control Technology (BACT) is required for V©C emissions from the operation as the increase in permitted emissions is greater than 2.0 lb/day for the storage operation, washing operation, and bioreacting/storage operation. See Appendix B for BACT analysis. VII. CALCULATIONS: Emissions from the following points/operation will be calculated: PMIO emissions from receiving and handling of contaminated soil PMIO emissions from applying clean soil cover to received contaminated soil PMIO emissions from retrieval and transfer of contaminated soil to washing machinery hopper PMIO emissions from transfer of washed soil into windrows for bioreacting/storage PMIO emissions from applying clean soil cover to washed soil PMIO emissions from transfer of washed soil into trucks for shipping offsite VOC emissions from storage of contaminated soil VOC emissions from washing of contamined soil in process machinery VOC emissions from storage of washed soil (bioreacting/storage) 4 Be Assumptions/Data: · maximum of 600 tons of contaminated soil received per day (applicant) · maximum of 600 tons of clean soil cover applied over contaminated soil storage piles per day (assumed) · maximum of 600 tons of contaminated soil transferred to soil washing machinery for processing per day (applicant) · maximum of 600 tons of washed soil loaded into delivery trucks for transportation off site per day (applicant) · maximum of 10,000 tons of unprocessed contaminated soil stored on site( of the 10,000 tons, maximum of 2,000 tons of gasoline contaminated soil, the remainder ( 8,000 tons) being soil contaminated with diesel fuel, jet fuel, crude oil, etc.) (applicant) · maximum concentration of hydrocarbons in soil as received: (applicant) gasoline 50,000 ppm (reduced to 40,000 ppm to not tdgger offsets) diesel 50,000 ppm jet fuel 50,000 ppm waste oil & grease 100,000 ppm crude oil 250,000 ppm · maximum of 5,000 tons of washed soil (after processed by system) Stored on site ( of the 5,000 tons, maximum of 1,250 tons of gasoline contaminated soil, the remainder (3,750 tons) being soil contaminated with diesel .fuel, jet fuel, crude oil, etc.) (assumed) · minimum moisture content of soil as received of 4% (assumed) · minimum-moisture content of soil after washing/processing of 12% (assumed) · density of contaminated soil = 90 Ib/ft3 (assumed for moist excavated soil) · 365 days per year unrestricted operation (applicant) Emission Factors and Control Efficiencies 1. PMIO Emission Factors ' PM10 emissions will be calculated using US EPA's publication AP-42, Chapter 13.2.4, for Aggregate Handling. PM10 emissions from handling of soil is' assumed to be equivalent to emissions from handling of aggregate. emission factor (lb PMlO/ton material transferred) = (0.35)(0.0032)(U/5)1'3/ (M/2)TM U: (wind speed) average annual windspeed: 7.2 mph 'for Bakersfield according to the National Weather Service M = Moisture 4% minimum for incoming contaminated soil, 12% minimum for soil after washing, per applicant emission factor for contaminated soil prior to washing = 0.00068 lb PM10/ton emission factor for contaminated soil after washing = 0.00015 lb PM10/ton 2. VOC Emissions and Control Efficiencies VOC emissions from all aspects of this operation are based solely on maximum gasoline contaminated soil received/stored, processed, and bioremediated. Petroleum Contaminated Receiving/Storage Operation S-3496-1-0 VOC emissions are based on the assumption that all VOC contained in top one (1) foot layer of contaminated soil will volatize within the first thirty (30) days of storage, and a 95% VOC control efficiency is assumed to be provided by a combination of VOC suppression agent (Bio-Solve) and at least 6 inches of clean soil or remediated soil cover placed on surface of contaminated soil, or with overlapping plastic sheeting. The contaminated soil pile is assumed to be cone shaped with an approximate height of 25 feet (applicant). Petroleum Contaminated Soil Washing Operation S-3496-2-0 VOC emissions from the screen are based on the assumption that all VOC contained in a half foot thick layer (assumed maximum screen loading) would volatize in a thirty (30) day time span, and a 6% VOC control efficiency (manufacturer) provided by the application of VOC suppression agent (Bio-Solve). Screen surface area = 35.8 ft2 Petroleum Contaminated Soil Bioremedation Operation S-3496-3-0 VOC emissions are based on the assumption that all VOC contained in top one (1) foot layer of contaminated soil will volatize or bioremediated within the first thirty (30) days of storage and 45% of the VOC c(~ntained in the first layer of-contaminated soil would be biodegraded in 30 days. A 95% VOC control efficiency is assumed to be provided by a combination of VOC suppression.agent (Bio-Solve) and at least 6 inches of clean soil or remediated soil cover placed on surface of contaminated soil, or with overlapping plastic sheeting. The washed soil windrows are assumed to be trapeZoidal (berm). shaped with an approximate height of 5 feet and 30 feet base (applicant). A width of 10 feet for the top of the trapezoidal shaped windrows is assumed. Potential to Emit (PE): Section 3.21 of Rule 2201 defines the potential to emit (PE) as the maximum capacity of an emissions unit to emit a pollutant under its physical and operational design. For new emission units, the PE is equal to the Increase in Potential to Emit (IPE). 6 S-3496-1-0, P~oleum Contaminated Soil Receivinq an~Storaqe Operation 1. PM10 emissions from receiving of contaminated soil 600 tons/day x 0.00068 lb PM10/ton = 0.4 lbs PM10/day = 0.0 lb/day per District policy NSR/ERC 18 and 25 2. PM10 emissions from applying clean soil cover to received contaminated soil 600 tons/day x 0.00068 lb PM10/ton = 0.4 lbs PM10/day = 0.0 lb/day per District policy NSR/ERC 18 and 25 VOC emission from received contaminated soil storage a. Calculate total volume of gasoline contaminated soil stored V1 = 2,000 tons of soil = 44,400 fi3 90 Ib/ff3 (1 ton/2,000 lb) b. Calculate radius (R) of contaminated soil pile 44,400 ft3 = ~/3 (R^2) h = ~/3 (R^2) (25 ft): R = 41 ft therefore: internal radius (r) for soil pile with 24 ft height = 40 ft and V2 = ~/3 (40"2) (24 ft) = 40,200 ft3 c. Calculate volume (V3) of contaminated soil representing top foot layer V3 = V1 - V2 = 44,400 ft3 - 40,200 fi3 = 4,200 fi3 d. CalcUlate uncontrolled VOC emissions @ 40,000 ppm = (0.04) x (4,200 ft3) x (90 Ib/ft3) = 15,100 Ib-VOC/over 30 days therefore: 15,100 lb/30 days = 503 Ib-VOC/day e. Calculate controlled VOC emissions VOC controlled -' 503 Ib-VOC/day x (clean cover & VOC suppression CE) = VOC to,trolled = 503 Ib-VOC/day x (1-0.95) = 25.2 lb/day f. Total potential to emit (PE) Potential to Em!t (lbs) PM10 VOC Maximum Daily Emissions 0.0 25.2 Maximum Annual Emissions 0.0 9,200 S-3496-2-0, Petroleum Contaminated Soil Washing Operation 1. PM10 emissions from transfer of contaminated soil to washing machinery 600 tons/day x 0.00068 lb PM10/ton = 0.4 lbs PM10/day = 0.0 lb/day per Distdct policy NSR/ERC 18 and 25 2. VOC emissions from contaminated soil washing operation a. Calculate total volume (V) of gasoline contaminated soil from maximum screen loaded V = (screen surface area) x (contaminated soil thickness) = V = (35.8 fit) x (0.5 ft) = 17.9 ft3 b. Calculate uncontrolled VOC emissions @ 40,000 ppm = (0,04) x (17.9 ft3) x (90 Ib/ft3) = 64.4 Ib-VOC/over 30 days therefore: 64.4 lb/30 days = 2.1 Ib-VOC/day c. Calculate controlled VOC emissions VOC co,tro,e~ = 2.1 Ib-VOC/day x (VOC suppression CE) = VOC co,tro,ed = 2.1 IbVOC/day x (1-0.06) = 2.0 lb/daY d. Total potential to emit (PE) Potential to Emit (lbs) P1~110' VOC Maximum Daily Emissions 0.0 2.0 Maximum Annual Emissions 0 730 S-3496-3-0, Petroleum Contaminated Soil Bioremedation Operation 1. PM 10 emissions from transfer of washed soil into windrows 600 tons/day x 0.00015 lb PM10/ton = 0.09 lbs PM10/day = 0.0 lb/day per Distdct policy NSR/ERC 18 and 25 2. PM10 emissions from applying clean soil cover to washed soil 600 tons/day x 0.00068 lb PM10/ton = 0.4 lbs PM10/day = 0.0 lb/day per Distdct policy NSR/ERC 18 and 25 8 3. PM10 emissions from transfer of washed soil into trucks for shipping offsite 600 tons/day x 0.00015 lb PM10/ton = 0.09 lbs PM10/day = 0.0 lb/day per District policy NSR/ERC 18 and 25 4. VOC emission from contaminated soil bioremediation storage a. Calculate total volume (V1) of gasoline contaminated soil stored V1 = 1,250 tons of soil = 27,800 ft3 90 Ib/ft3 (1 ton/2,000 lb) b. Calculate length (L) of cOntaminated soil windrows 27,800 ft3 = 1/2 H (B1 + B2) L = 1/2 (5 ft) (10 ff + 30 ft) L therefore:' L = 278 ft and with an internal height h = 4ft, bl = 8, and b2 = 28 V2 = 1/2 (4 ft) (8 ft + 28 ft) 278 = 20,000 ft3 c. Calculate volume (V3) of contaminated soil repreSenting top foot layer V3 = V1 - V2 = 27,800 ft3 - 20,000 ft3 = 7,800 ft3 d. Calculate uncontrolled VOC emissions @ 40,000 ppm = (0.04) x (7,800 ft3) x (90 Ib/ft3) = 28,100 Ib-VOC/over 30 days therefore: 28,100 I.b/30 days = 937 Ib-VOC/day e. Calculate controlled VOC emissions VOC co,t,o,~ = 937 Ib-VOC/day x (bioremediation. CE) x (cover & suppression CE) = VOC ¢o,tro,~ = 937 Ib-VOC/day x (1-0.45) x (1-0.95) = 25.8 Ibfday f. Total potential to emit (PE) Potential to Emit (lbs) '" PM'lO' voc Maximum Daily Emissions 0.0 25.8 Maximum Annual Emissions 0.0 9,417 .... APPENDIX A FACILITY LAYOUT Cl. ean Soils Property "...-" ...'" ...-" ..." .-.-' ..." ...'" ..-'" ..-" ..'"....'" ...--' ......-'....." ...."..-.-" ...."....".....". S O I L' REM.AD D I.-TIONA I:" ! 0"ACR I-, S."'/....'"...'"...'".--'".-.'"....'"..-"' .."' ..'"-." .'"--'" .-"' ..'" ..'" .."' .-"" ..'" .?" .-'"' "' .-"" ..-' -."5.""/:.-':'-:-"::"::." ....... ~.' ...-' ...." ...." ...' ...-' .,..' ....' ....' ....' ...-' ...' ...' - ..-' ..," ..-' ..." ..- ...- ..' .. ·., ....,., ...., .., .. .....,'., ..... . ...' .... . ~ . '5: ..-' ..-' ,.-' ...' ..-- ...' ......' ,,' ..." ..." .." ..." ..-' ..' ....' .,..' ...-' ...,' ....' .,.-' ....' -'".dL~'-~"5. "...'"...-"...-"...'"...." ....' ...."....'"...."....'"..."'...'"..' ...... ...'"...'"..."'...'"...-"..."'..-....-"...." ...,'......."....' ...."...."...."...."...."PG&!? Powe,?Lm'cs...."..-." ..-" ..."...." .-."...-"...."...."...."...."...."...c ;:.-~::~':~-~~ '"...'"..."'...'"..."'...'"..." ..."..-'"..."..-." ..-.". .... · '" .." .'" ,." ..'" ..'" ,.'" ..'" .."' .-'" .,"' .-"' '" ." .-" .-" -." .." -," --" ,-" ~-~--~ ......... v °'7~T77~,~.?~', '"7:~7 ...... T .......... ,--."-,~:-?,,~-~.,::--~:~: .-'::-~ ~--~.~77, , ,~./ ...." /' ...." .." .." ..-" .." .." ..." ..." .... .........., ....................-............................-........ ~.._,. ~ ....... ~.~,.:~.~ :.. :?..............: :...........,.: ...-?,....,~.~..--:~.:,.::.:.....,.:-, :: ~..,~.:.:,:~....-............-....../.................. · '-'"'".'"".'"'".'"'".'"" ."'"/.'"" .'"" .'"" .'"" .'"" ," ,'""/.'"" .""'-"'" ?" ."'" ."'"-'"',-'"' ."" ./,'"" :'"' ."'" .'"'-,'"' .'"'-'"' .'"'/..'"'..'"'/.-'"'.-'"' .,'"'.."".-'"' .'"' .'"' .'"' "" .'"" .'"'630 X..-1,321;57 ...... /' ..." ,.'" ..'~ ...."...." ?-': ,.-."..'/...."/...." ...." ,..." ..-." ..." ..,." ..." ..." .. 77/.....-"/.?.."..."...."..-.~'....'"./...'"....=, ...""...'"'...'"'/...-"'..."'...'"'...'"...-'",.'?...-5"...'... ? ?'". 25 ?...................../...?...?./.......'...?.....'.............~..........//./../........?../...'"...'"/...'"..?...'"/...'"/...'"...-"..-~ "...'"'...'"'....'"'....?'....'?....'"'/"....'"'....'"'?'"..4 ~r?~~q'~ ' .' -- .- .. .. ...' .C .-' ..' ..- .- '~' ' ~ " " " " " " : ' " ' " " " ?' '" '" '~ " '" " '" " " " " " '" '" ?'I" "' '"' '"' '"' '"']'"' '" '"' / '" " '" "' '" "' '" .." .." .." .... .."-" ." ~.'-.' ..' ..' .-' .: t' .." .-" .." .." ..' .." ?' .." ." .." ..' .... ." -" ..' ..'-.' .." .-" .." .." .." .-" .." ?' .... .." .." ."-"-" ." ." ."-" ." .-'-" ..' ..' ..' .: .." --" .." .." ,'~ .." .." .-" .." .." .." .," ./ .." / ~.~. .... .-' ..' ..'" ..'" ..'" ..'" ..'" .-'" .-"' .'" .'" .-"' i~ ..'" ..'" ..'" ..'" ..'" ..'" .." .." .'"-."-" .' ".-". .... ..-" ...6" Cha~ n' Ltnl¢ l ence." ..." ..." ..." ..." ..--' ....' ...-' ...' .,.' ...." ..." .-." ..." ..," ..." .~" ,,." ..." ' .-' ...' ...' ...' ..' ..' ..' .' .- ,' .' .,' .' ..' .." .,' . . · ." ..' .." ",." .--' ..-' .." ..' ...' ,' ,.' .,' .' .' ..... · ." .--' ..-' .." ...' ..." .-" .." .." .." .." .."~' .." .-" .." ..." ..' ~' ' 'Irash 25 Roll ' .." ..." ..." ..."~' ..." ..." ..." ..." ..." ..." ...-' ..." .." ..' ..N..' :: ....-' ....' .....' .....' .....' ......'.....' .."' ..'"...'" .-'" ..'" .. t.~ ..'" .-.'.,..'.....'... ' ""; "- -' B n Gate ' · '-'"' ."" "" ."~. ':" ".." "..'"" '"" ."" .-"" .'"" .'"". '"' .'"' ?.-' :' .... ..- ..- ............................- ....... o .... ': '" '" o . ~ s , , .So,l Wash. , .' .,' · a...... ......' ....-....' ...-....- PG'/oE 200 .... .... ~!~.krt' "~ ..... - ..... . ....... .' · .' ."-' l-oe 5:.:...k~!.rtyoou~rea · ~,- ....... ~'"--' ,~ ..........~ ! . ... ... ... ....... ....... ....... ......- ....... ......- .... .. .... ~t~ ......-...........:.-......., = ' 'i : 'd0' Mill Liner with 200"1200' 1oo .~':. ' ..." ..'" ,'" ..'~ ..... .."' ..'" ..'" .." ..' .'" ..'" .." .'" .~..' ' l~" ' " " '" -" ." ." -" ." 4' ' " " " .~LI. I_~ ..... ~ ~- ~ .. .. .. ~:' .d<~ ..' ..' ..' .....-.....-' ......'~ ...' ...' ..'~ __ Mon tot nlzl~omts3 Drt Wa ,,.._ t,o ":. o '" .'"-." '" ." ." ." ." ." ." ." ." ." ." '~ "~ ....... '" '"' '"" ""' '"" "LU '" "" "" .."el ,, Bur~s around I mcr ~ .~- '"" ~ .... '"' '"' '"' -~- .... '" '"' '"' "' '"' '"' '"' '"" '"" "0 .... ~ I'"'..-~i "'..."'"?i..""'???i.-'"' .'"'"." .-'"" '""-'"'".'"'".I~ ~' ~ . Dumping In L ne~: Ar~'a, ~o C3 =. ~."'.:~)'f co ./....'"/'..r-t] ..'""...'""...'""..'""...'""...'""?'.?'"'i ~ ." O-" ." ." .' ." ."-" .'" .'" .'""-"' -'" .'" .' · o .~ · ' ~ -'-'-- ~ O ""'"' '"' '"'' '" '" '"" '" '" ' "'"'~" ' ~' ,' .' .' .' .' -' .' .' -' .' .' - .. · ~ m I~ ~ ........ · .- . .. .. .. .. .. .. .. · . .~....~ .... ...................... ..... . ..... ........~ ,,~ ,,.,,. =- . . = .............. .... ................................ .... ~ · . ..... ,.' ." ..' ." ..' -.' ..' -.' · ..' .,' ...- cl _ _ t .... I,.~ -- ~l,-I,- . t~ :. c. ~ .-....- ...- .......,.........' . ..... ...' ...- ..- ..' ..' ..- ..' .. "~ ,."' .'" .'" .,." ..." .-" ,." .." ,-" .-" .." ..' .-" .." .," ~. ' & ~ h'. ~,. ~ .... .." ." ,'" ." .'" ,,'" ~' ..~ ..' ..' ..-..' .-' ..' ..' .' ..' .-- .--.-.' ...:, . I ~, .g... .... ', ~, .... ...'/.-.' ...' ..' ..'. .... ..-..' .-' ..' ..' ..' .' ..' ~.....?........?.....................................:......~......~.....?~.~..................???~..~ ~, I Run OffWater-'v"x ,.'a, Run i'[.."'?~.-'""i..""..-"'?~..'""??'.."'"'../'.--'""??7.."'"i.."?. ..~~~~~~..~~~~~~.~.~~~~~..`...........~...........................~...............~.... ..'". "..'" .."".."" .-'"' .."' .."" -.':" -":'~. ~"..'" :'-.-'"..""-."".."",..'"'.6.."Ch,sifi.'Link..F6n~:e" ..'" ..'"'.."" ..'"'..-'"..""./////>?/' //// :." ..." ..." ...-' ..." ..." ..-" .." ..." ..-' ...-' .." .." .." -' '...' ...' ...' ...' .-' .." ..." ..'¥~' .'~ ..... ." ..." ..." ...-: ..." ..." ..." ...' ...' 3' .............'. ......... ..." ," ..." ...': ...' ..." ." ..." ..."." ..." ...' .." ..-' ..." ..." ...' {,,fl.' ...-' ..-' ....' ...-' ....' ..-.' ....' ....' ...' ...-..-.' ..-.' ....' .' ..-' .--' ...' ..' ...' .- ..' · o _u .... } ................,.........-.....................................:C ;mm..E, nk..Fence E.en~tl4...................................., .............................. [~t.~'l I I I I I I I I I I I / q I I ' ' ' I' I' ' I' ' I' ' I .... I ....... I ..... I' " ' " I .... " ' " ~ '. ~ No Sidewalks or Curbs · . Fire FAST PACHECO ROAD SOIL REM 408 EAST PACHECO ROAD I SOIL.FEED Initial oil/water separation prescreening 1 ordinance separation (~ weir tank UPPER WASH solids SPRAY BARS sand screw DESILTER 5' CONES dewaterlng screens solids SPRAY BARS OIL/H20 SEP. FILTERS makeup water floculent tanks return wator tank <flow surlaclar solids "DEsIL~ER BYPASS ORAVIT Y ~down taring Ilow screen solids] STA31C MIXERS [2) APPENDIX B BEST AVAILABLE CONTROL TECHNOLOGYANALYSIS De Best Available Control Technology (BACT) Applicability: For new emission units, the Increase in Permitted Emissions (IPE) for BACT is equal to the Potential to Emit (PE) calculated above. Em New Source Review Balance Calculations: The NSR Balance includes PM10, SOx, and also CO as the project location is in an area designated attainment for CO by Federal Standards. The pre-project NSR Balance is zero for all pollutants as this is a new facility. ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: :.~ :~.:-~.:;<:::: <:-.':~: .<~:;~--".~.~:~>;~.'::i::::-:~ :~:~:.::~:: · ~ ~.-'";.~.~..>-..'~ ~:~:~:..-::".:::~ ::~::~::.'";~::~ ,<.< ::::~8~.~::" :'-'~.~>.'.~..::~?.':~, ::'-:::::.:.:.:.'::~:~:~!~:..'.~:..-'~.-<.~.-'..<~ :~:......~..~:.:.::::::: .... .: ~... i.iiiil'''~::.,.~.~:~.,..-~*: ..~.. ::::::::::::::::::::::: :::::~::..-.~.?.>~.. . .::?..~:~...<..-,,..,.: ..=...-..=,::..~.::~...~ . :..~ Post-Project S-3496-1-0 0 0.0 0.0 S-3496-2-0 0 0.0 0.0 S-3496-3-0 0 0.0 0.0 TOTAL 0 0.0 0.0 Offset Threshold 550.0 80.0 150.0 Offsets Required ? No No No Stationary Source Potential to Emit (SSPE): A stationary source potential to emit is calculated for NOx and VOC to determine the applicability of offset requirements. A stationary source potential to emit is not calculated for CO as the facility is located in an area designated .as attainment for CO by Federal Standards. SSPE (Ib/yr) NOx I VOC Pre Project SSPE · 0.0 I 0.0 Post Project SSPE S-3496-1-0 0.0 9,200 S-3496-2-0 0.0 730 S-3496-3-0 0.0 9,417 Total 0.0 19,347 Change in SSPE 0.0 19,347 Offset Threshold 20,000 20,000 Offsets Required ? No No 10 Actual Emission Reductions: Rule 2201, Subsection 6.5 Gists procedures to be used in calculation of Actual Emission Reductions. No actual emission reductions are expected as a result of this project; therefore, AER - 0.00 lb/day, all contaminants. He Major Stationary Source Calculation: Calculations are performed separately for each pollutant. All calculations are performed on an annual basis using tons per year of permitted emissions. A major source is a stationary source with a potential to emit of 50 tons or more per year of VOC's or NOx, or 100 tons or more per year of CO, or 70 tons per year or more of PM~o or SOx. The potential to emit for the proposed facility is less than the preceding threshold levels; therefore, this project does not result, in a new major stationary source. Title I Modification Calculation: Rule 2201, Subsection 3.31 defines a Title I modification as the modification of a non-major stationary source which increases the potential to emit from the entire stationary source to the levels specified in Subsection 3.19. Subsection 3.19 defines a major stationary source as a source with a potential to emit 50 tons or more per year of VOCs or NOx, or 100 tons or more per year of CO, or 70 tons per year or more of PMlo or SOx. The increase in permitted emissions for the proposed project is less than the preceding threshold levels; therefore, this project does not result in an' increase in permitted emissions exceeding the specified Title I thresholds and is not a Title I modification of a' non-major stationary source. Public Notice Requirements: Pursuant to Rule 2201 Section 5.1.3.4, public notice is required for any of the following: 2. 3. 4. 5. New major sources or Title I modifications. New or modified emissions unit with a 100 pounds per day increase in permitted emissions. New sources and modifications with an NSR balance of 140 'lb/day or greater for SOx and an increase in permitted emissions of SOx. New sources and modifications with an NSR balance of 70 lb/day or greater for PM~o and an increase in permitted emissions of PM~o. New sources and modifications in CO attainment areas with an NSR balance of 55 lb/day or greater of CO and an increase in permitted emissions of CO. None of the above apply to this project; therefore, publication of the Districts decision is not required. 11 K. Offsets Required: Rule 2201, Section 6.8 lists procedures to be used in calculation of offsets required. Offsets are required if offset trigger levels are exceeded. An increase in permitted 'emissions is proposed; however, offsets are not required because the NSR balance and SSPE levels are below the 'applicable offset thresholds. Therefore, calculations are not required. VIII. COMPLIANCE: A. Rule 220'! New and Modified Stationary Source Review: BACT~BACT For this project, BACT is required for VOC emissions from the soil as the increase in permitted emissions is greater than 2.0 lb/day. BACT is not triggered for any other pollutant as the increase in permitted emissions is not greater than 2.0 Ib//day for each pollutant. BACT for VOC toxic air contaminants ('TBACT) is not required for this project because the health dsk assessment shows that the dsk is below the District acute, chronic, and cancer dsk' thresholds for VOC toxics per the District's Risk Management Policy TO×-1 (6/23/97). However, for this project, TBACT is. required for particulate toxic air contaminants because the increase in cancer dsk is 2.1 in a milliOn. T-BACT for soil/aggregate material storage and handling is maintaining a high moisture content in the soil to prevent visible emissions in excess of 5% opacity. The moisture content of the soil process by this facility will be maintained at a sufficient level to prevent visible emissions in excess of 5% opacity. Offsets There are only PM10 and VOC emissions associated with the project. PM10 levels are well below offset trigger levels of 80 lb/day. VOC emissions levels are less than 10 tons per year. Therefore, offsets are not required for this project. Public Noticing Requirements Per Rule 2201, Section 5.1.3.4, public notification is not required. B. Prohibitory Rule Requirements: Rule 4101 Visible Emissions: If operated properly, the operations will not have visible emissions in excess of 20% opacity. Permit will be limited to less than 5% opacity. Compliance is expected. Rule 4102 Nuisance: Nuisance problems are not expected. Compliance with the provisions of this rule is expected. 12 Rule 4201 Particulate Matter Concentration: Particulate matter emissions from dust are not expected to exceed 0.1 grain per cubic foot of gas at dry standard conditions. Compliance is expected. Rule 4202 Particulate Matter - Emission Rate: As the emissions for the entire facility have been calculated to be well below the table values of Rule 4202, assuming PM10 = 100% TSP, compliance with the rule is expected. Rule 4651 Volatile Organic Compound Emissions from Decontamination of Soil:, Per Subsection 5.1.3, contaminated soil that is not being treated shall be covered with a layer of uncontaminated soil (clean cover) no less than six (6) inches deep. Because permit conditions require soil not undergoing treatment be covered with at least six inches of clean soil, compliance with this rule is expected. CH&SC 41700 - California Health & Safety Code Pursuant to District's Risk Management Policy TO×-1 (6/23~97), for any sources with' increases in toxic air emissions, the health risks resulting from sUch projects must be evaluated. The health risk evaluation process begins with pdodtization using CAPCOA Facility Prioritization Guidelines. For the purpose of .this HRA, the District's Technical Services divided HRA analysis into two sections: 'VOC's and particulates. For the HRA, benzene was the health risk "driver" and therefore the focus of the analysis. Because no specific benzene emission was specified, no prioritization score was preformed for VOC - and particulate emissions and a refined health risk analysis was conducted for both. The risk screening analysis indicated a cancer dsk of 0.99 in a million for VOC's and 2.1 in a million for PM10. Therefore, T-BACT is required for PM10 toxics only. No further analysis is required for VOC. The toxic air contaminants driving the health risk analysis are metals, which are particulate. For PM10 toxics, T-BACT is equivalent to BACT. Therefore, T- .BACT for this operation is equival.ent to BACT for PM10 for this operation. BACT for PM10 emissions from this operation is application of water suppression and clean soil cover. Therefore, T-BACT requirements are satisfied. See Appendix C for results of health dsk analysis. Compliance Testing: Since the applicant has proposed Technologically Feasible BACT, and the use of District accepted (and conservative) emission factors, compliance with all permit conditions is anticipated. Therefore, source testing shall not be required as a condition of approval as the referenced emission factors are considered both appropriate and representative of emissions from the new concrete batch plant and associated processes. 13 IX, RECOMMENDATION: Compliance with all applicable prohibitory rules and regulations is expected. Approve Facility Compliance Plan subject to the permit conditions in Appendix D. BILLING INFORMATION: S-3496-1-0 3020-06 Miscellaneous $89.00 S-3496-2-0 3020-01 689 Elec. Motor HI:) $520.00 S-3496-3-0 3020-06 Miscellaneous $89.00 14 APPENDIX C HEALTH RISK ANALYSIS TO: SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY UNIFIED AIR POLLUTION CONTROL DISTRICT Raymond Rodriguez, AQE--Permit Services FROM: Mike Maeda, AQS--Technical Services DATE: ~ March 4, 1999 SUBJECT:' SoilRem Corporation, Inc. '?'~. ,~., LOCATION: Bakersfield, CA · .~,~/~ £ ,: · '~ i995 APPLICATION #: S-3496-1-0 PROJECT ~:. 990008. s..,,~o~ou~,~~ REFINED HRA SUMMARY Categories I Soil Rem. (VOC's) I Soil Rem. (PM) Total Facility Risk PrioritizationIscore 'N/A I N/A N/A Cancer Risk I 0.99 in a million I 2.1 in a million · 3.09 in a million Acute HazardI Index 0.0041 I 0.0026. 0.0067 Chronic Hazard 0.0026 I 0.0061 0.0087 I Index TBACT Required? NO I YES Proiect Request On March 4, 1999, Technical Services performed a refined level health risk assessment (HRA)' for a petroleum-contaminated soil recycling facility..For the purposes of this HRA, this project was divided into two different emission types; they were VOC's an~ particulates. Emissions were associated with Soil Receiving and Storage, Soil - Washing, and Soil Bioremediation and Aeration. The results of this refined health risk are summarized in this'document. Background Pursuant to the District's Risk Management Policy, Technical Services will implement the following three steps to evaluate any release of HAPs (Hazardous Air Pollutants): SoilRem Corporation, Inc. March 4, 1999 Page-2- 1. Prioritization: A prioritization score will be determined for the HAPs prior to emissions modeling. No further evaluation is needed if the resulting prioritization score is less than 1.0. Screening HRA: The screening model used by Technical Services is the Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA's) Screen3. Screen3 is capable of modeling point, area, volume, and flare sources. Using either an array or discrete receptor distances, the Screen3 model can determine emittent concentration at any user- specified distance. WOrst case meteorological data is used in the concentration calculation. Refined HRA: A refined HRA is required when the screening HRA evaluation acute or chronic indices exceed one and/or the screening HRA cancer risk exceeds one in a million (1.0x106). Analysis ' TABLE 1 Source TYpe. Area Closest Receptor (m) 199 Release Height (m) 3.81 Location' Type Urban X-Dim (m) 12.19 Pollutant Type TPH Y-Dim (m) 12.19 Hourly VOC 4.16 lbs Emissions Stack Exit Temp. (0K) 293 Annual VOC 20,000 lbs Emissions Soil Throughput 600 tons/day SoilRem Corporation, Inc. March 4, 1999 Page -3- HRA Assumptions and Methodolo,q¥ for VOC's 1. For this analysis, benzene was the health risk "driver" and therefore the focus of this analysis. 2. No Prioritization was performed because no specific benzene emissions were given. 3. A refined HRA was performed using the parameters in Table 1, and an assumed emission rate of lib of benzene per year. Through the use of a ratio, it can be concluded that 157 lbs of benzene per year would yield a cancer risk of 0.99 in a million. 4. The 157 lbs of benzene was divided by the proposed permitted emission rate of 20,000 lbs of VOC, and multiplied by le6. This means that the benzene to total petroleum hydrocarbon concentration can not be 'greater than 0.785% by weight. 5. Toluene and xylene was included in'the analysis to obtain chronic and acute HI values. A mass balance calculation was performed using the 20,000 lbs VOC limit and MSDS's for gasoline from various Petroleum manufacturers. 6. Hydrogen sulfide was not included'i~ this analysis. HRA Assumptions and Methodoloqy for Particulates 1. The following metals and (detection limits reported in mg/kg) were used for this analysis: Arsenic (1.0), Chrome+6 (0.26), Lead (1.0), Nickel (0.5). Note: these concentrations were provided by the engineer. 2. The concentrations listed above were applied to a soil throughput of 600 tons/day or 219,000 Tons/yr. Refined HRA Results The USEPA's ISCST3 model was used to determine refined dispersion values for both chronic and acute exposures. The refined dispersion values and the resulting HRA92 risk results are shown in the summary table on page 1. CONCLUSION: Since the risk values for the VOC portion of this project are less than the District's risk management policy thresholds of 1.0 and 1 in a million, no further analysis is required for VOC's. Since the cancer risk value exceeds the District's risk management policy of 1 in a million for particulates, TBACT is required for particulate emissions. APPENDIX D PERMIT CONDITIONS PETROLEUM CONTAMINATED SOIL RECEIVING AND STORAGE OPERATION, PERMIT UNIT S- 3496-1-0 ii No air contaminant shall be released into the atmosphere which causes a ~ public nuisance. [District Rule 4102] 21 No air contaminant shall be discharged into the atmosphere for a period or periods aggregating more than three minutes in any one hour which results in visible emissions of 5% opacity or greater. [District Rule 4101] 31 Petroleum contaminated soil shall not be recieved or accepted if contamination is a "listed" or is derived from a "listed" hazardous waste per'the 40 CFR Part 261, Subpart D or contamination that has been characterized as hazardous waste per 40 CFR Part 261, Subpart C (i.e., ignitablity, toxicity, corrosivity,, or reactivity). [District Rules 2201 & 4102] 41 Petroleum contaminated soil shall not be received or accepted if the soil contains more than any of the following: 1.0 mg/kg of arsenic, 0.26 mg/kg chromium (VI), 1~0 mg/kg of lead, or 0.5 mg/kg of nickel. [District Rule 4102] 51 Petroleum contaminated soil shall not be received or accepted if benzene to total petroleum hydrocarbon (TPH) rakio is greater than 0.785% by weight. [District Rules 2201 & 4102] 61 Petroleum contaminated soils shall consist solely 'of soils contaminated' only by diesel, gasoline, jet fuel,, crude oil, waste oil and grease. [District Rules 2201 and 4102] 71VOC content of petroleum contaminated soils shall not exceed 50,000 ppmw for diesel, 40,000 ppmw for gasoline, 50,000 ppmw for jet fuel, 100,000 ppmw for waste oil and grease, and 250,000 ppmw for crude oil. [District Rule 2201] 81 Analytical results specifying petrolWum coDtaminated soil VOC content (ppmw) shall be provided by each generator prior to receipt ~of material. [District Rule 1070] 91 No liquid waste shall be received or stored on site. [District 'Rule 2201] 101 Operation shall not exceed 40,000 square feet area containing approximately 10,'000 tons of petroleum contaminated soils under bioremediation/storage. [District Rule 2201] .. 111 Of the 40,000 square feet containing approximately 10,000 tons.of petroleum contaminated soil., no more than 8,000 square feet.containing approximately 2,000 tons shall be gasoline contaminated soil. [District Rule 2201] 121 All petroleum contaminated soil received and stored shall be covered by end of work day with at least six' (6) inches of clean soil with a~moisture content of at least 4%. Any portion of petroleum contaminated soil that is uncoverable due to slope of soil piles shall be covered with impermeable plastic Sheeting. [District Rules 2201] 131 No more than 600 tons per day of petroleum contaminated soil shall be received and stored. [District Rule 2201] 141 Moisture content of soil received and stored shall least 4%. [District Rule 2201] 151 PM-10 emissions from the receiving of petroleum contaminated soil shall not exceed 0.00068 lb/ton. [District Rule 2201] 161 VOC emissions from this operation shall not exceed 25.2 lb/day. [District Rule 2201] 171VOC content of petroleum contaminated soils shall be measured as total petroleum hydrocarbons (TPH) and benzene, ethylbenzene, toluene, total xylene (BETX) using appropriate EPA test methods 8015B and 8021B or 8260B or gas chromatographic method in the Leaking Underground Fuel Tank (LUFT) Manual (October, 1989). '[District Rule 2201] 18'1 Metal content of petroleum contaminated soils shall be measured using EPA test method 6010 when testing for arsenic, lead, nickel and use EPA test method 7196 when testing for chromium (VI). [District Rule 2201] 191 The VOC content of soil samples (ppmw) shall be determined by independent State certified laboratory and all analytical results shall be maintained on the premises, or other location approved by the APCO, for at least two years and shall be made readily available for'District inspection' 'upon request· [District Rule 1070] · 201 Permittee Shall maintain daily records of quantity. (in tons) and type of petroleum contaminated'soil .received and stored, and daily maXimum area. (in sq. ft.) of petroleum contaminated soils stored. [District Rule 1070] 211 Permittee shall maintain all current analytical data and waste manifests provided by the generator for petroleum contaminated soil received. Analytic data shall be from analyses performed within a 90 day period prior to receipt of petroleum contaminated soil. [District Rule 2201] 221 If~receiving a continuous stream of petroleum contaminated soil, EPA test methods of analyses per conditions 17, 18 and 19 shall be repeated not less than every six (6) months. [District Rule 2201] 231 Ail required records shall be maintained on the'premises, or other location approved by the APCO, for at least two years and shall be made readily available for District inspection upon 'request. [District Rule 1070] 21 PETROLEUM CONTAMINAT~tSOIL WASHING OPERATION, PER~ IUNIT S-3496-2-0 11 No air contaminantshall be released into the atmosphere which causes a public nuisance. [District Rule 4102] 21 No air contaminant shall be discharged into the atmosphere for a period or periods aggregating more than three minutes in any one hour which results in visible emissions of 5% opacity or greater. [District Rule 4101] 31 Petroleum contaminated soil shall not be received or accepted if' contamination is a "listed" or is derived from a "listed" hazardous waste per the 40 CFR Part 261, Subpart D or contamination that has been reasonably characterized as hazardous waste per 40 CFR Part 261, Subpart C (i.e., ignitablity, toxicity, corrosivity, or reactivity). [District Rule 2201] 41 Petroleum contaminated soils shall consist solely of soils contaminated only by diesel, gasoline, jet fuel, crude' oil, waste oil and grease. [District Rules 2201 and 4102] 51VOC content of petroleum contaminated soils shall not exceed 50,000 ppmw for diesel, 40,000 ppmw for gasoline, 50,000 ppmw for jet fuel, 100,000 ppmw for waste oil and grease, and 250,000 ppmw.for crude oil. [District Rule 22011] 61 No more than 600 tons per day of petroleum contaminated soils shall'be introduced into.the soil washing machinery at facility. [District Rule 2201] 71 Moisture content shall be at least 4% for all petroleum contaminated soils introduced, into soil washing machinery. [District Rule 2201] 81 Screen surface area shall not iexceed 35.8 sq. ft. [District Rule 2201] 91 If VOC concentration of petroleum contaminated soil prior to being transferred to soil washing equipment exceeds 50 ppmv as measured by an organic vapor analyzer satisfying EPA Method 21, a vapor suppressant agent shall be applied to. the soil prior to transfer. [District Rules 2201 & 4102] 101 PM-10 emissions from loading of petroleum contaminated soils into soil washing machinery shall not exceed 0.00068 lb/ton. [District Rule 2201] 111 VOC emissions from petroleum contaminated soils screening shall~not exceed 2.0 lb/day. [District Rule 2201] 121' Permittee shall maintain daily records of quantity.(in tons)of petroleum contaminated soils transferred into soil washing machinery and daily records of VOC emissions measured by organic vapor analyzer. [District Rule 1070] 131 All required records shall be maintained on the premises, or other location approved by the APCO, for at least two years and shall be made readily available for District inspection upon request. [District Rule 1070'] 22 PETROLEUM CONTAMINAT~SOIL BIOREMEDIATION/STORAGE~ID LOADOUT OPERATION, PERMIT UNIT S-3496-3-0 11 No air contaminant shall be released into the atmosphere which causes a ' public nuisance. [District Rule 4102] 21 No air contaminant shall be discharged into the atmosphere for a period or periods aggregating more than three minutes in any one hour which results in visible emissions of 5% opacity or greater. [District Rule 4101] 31 Petroleum contaminated soil shall not be received or.accepted if contamination is a'"listed" or is derived from a "listed" hazardous waste Per the 40 CFR Part 261, subpart D or contamination that has been reasonably 'characterized as hazardous waste per 40 CFR Part 261, Subpart C (i.e., ignitablity, toxicity, corrosivity, or reactivity). [District Rules 2201 & 4102] 41 Petroleum contaminated soils shall consist solely of soils 'contaminated only by diesel, gasoline, jet fuel, crude oil,-waste oil and grease.. [District Rules 2201 and 4102] 51. VOC content of Petroleum contaminated soils shall not exceed 50,000 ppmw for diesel, 40,000 ppmw for gasoline, 50,000~ppmw for jet fuel, 100,000 ppmw for waste oil and grease, and 250,000 ppmw for crude oil. [District Rule 2201] 61 Petroleum contaminated soil shall not be received or accepted if the soil contains more than any of the following: 1.0 mg/kg of arsenic, 0.26 mg/kg chromium (VI), 1.0 mg/kg of lead, or 0.5 mg/kg of nickel. [District Rule 4102] 71 Operation shall not exceed 40,000 square feet area containing approximately 5,000 tons of petroleum contaminated soils under bioremediation/storage. [District Rule 2201] 81 Of the 40,000 square feet containing approximately 5~000 tons of petroleum contaminated soil, no more than 10,000 square feet containing approximately 1,250 tons shall be gasoli'ne contaminated soil. [District. Rule 22.01] 91 Ail petroleum contaminated soil received and stored shall be covered.by end of~work day with at least six (6) inches of clean soil with'a moisture content of at least 4%. Any portion of petroleum contaminated soil that is uncoverable due to slope of soil piles shall be covered with impermeable plastic sheeting. [District Rules~2201] 101 All stored clean soil shall maintain a moisture content of at least 4%. [District Rule 2201] 111 No more than 600 tons per day of washed petroleum contaminated soils shall be placed into windrows for bioremediation/storage. [District Rule 2201] 121 No more than'600 tons per day of washed soils shall be loaded into trucks for hauling' offsite. [District Rule 2201] 13i Moisture content of washed soil undergoing bioremedia~ion shall be maintained at least 12% as determined by daily monitoring and testing with a moisture meter. [District Rule 2201] 23 141 PM-10 emissions from the transfer of Washed Petroleum contaminated soils into windrows for bioremediation shall not exceed 0.00015 lb/ton. [District Rule 2201] 151 PM-10 emissions from the transfer of bicremediated soils into trucks- fcr shipping offsite shall not exceed 0.00015 lb/ton. [District Rule 2201] 161VOC emissions from this operation shall not exceed 25.8 lb/day. [District Rule 2201] 171VOC content of petroleum contaminated soils shall be measured as total petroleum hydrocarbons (TPH) and benzene, ethylbenzene, toluene, total xylene (BETX). using appropriate EPA ~test methods 8015B and 8021B or 8260B or gas chromatographic method in the Leaking Underground Fuel Tank (LUFT) Manual (October 1989), as determine by independent State certified laboratory. [District Rule 2201] 181 Metal content of petroleum contaminated soils shall be measured using EPA test method 6010 when testing for arsenic~ lead, nickel and use EPA test method 7196 when testing for chromium (VI). [District Rule 2201] 191 All analytical results provided by each generator shall be maintained on the premises, or.other location approved by the APCO, for at least two years and shall be made readily available for District inspection upon request. [District Rule 1070] ~ 201 Permittee shall maintain daily records of quantity (in tons) of petroleum contaminated soils placed into windrows, soil moisture content, daily maximum,area (in sq. ft.) of petroleum contaminated soils stored, daily quantity (in tons) of soil transferred into trucks for hauling offsite, and all analytical data from confirmation sampling. [District Rule 1070] 211 All required records Shall be maintained on the premises, or other location approved by the APCO, for at least two years and shall be made readily available for District inspection upon request. [District Rule 1070] 24 Dennis C. Fidler I~uildin8 Director (805) 326-3720 Fax (805) 325-0266 BAKERSFIELD Development Services Department Jack Hardisty, Director April 2, 1999 Stanley C. Grady Planning Director (805) 326-3733 Fax (805) 327-0646 Soil Rem Corporation PO Box 40764 South Station 524 Bakersfield, CA 93304-9998 RE: Conditional Use Permit No. P99-0053 Location: 408 East Pacheco Road Dear Applicant: Enclosed is a copy of the Board of Zoning Adjustment's final resolution approving your request for a conditional use permit. If I can provide any further assistance to you, please feel free to contact me at your convenience at (661) 326-3733. Respectfully, Louise Palmer "~ Project Planner CC: (Owner) Enterprise Zone One/Southwood 11 6570 N. Baker Avenue Fresno, CA 93710 Enclosure: Resolution City of Bakersfield · 1715 Chester Avenue · Bakersfield, California · 93301 Resolution No. 99-04 RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF ZONING ADJUSTMENT OF THE CITY OF BAKERSFIELD APPROVING A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO ESTABLISH A FACILITY THAT TREATS/CLEANS SOIL CONTAMINATED WITH HYDROCARBONS (GASOLINE, OIL, DIESEL). (Conditional Use Permit No. P99-0053) WHEREAS, Soil Rem Corporation, filed an application with the City of Bakersfield Planning Department requesting a Conditional Use Permit to establish a facility that treats/cleans soil contaminated with hydrocarbons (gasoline, oil, diesel). The proposal is located at 408 East Pacheco Road and is within a 7.3 (Heavy Industrial) zone district; and WHEREAS, the Board of Zoning Adjustment, through its Secretary, set TUESDAY, March 9, 1999 at the hour of 3;00 p.m. in the Council Chambers of City Hall, 1501 Truxtun Avenue, Bakersfield, California, as the time and place for a public hearing before them on the proposal, and notice of the public hearing was given m the manner provided in Title 17 of the Bakersfield Municipal Code; and WHEREAS, a public hearing was held before the Board of Zoning Adjustment on March 9, 1999, and testimony was received only in support of the project; and WHEREAS, the laws and regulations relating to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the City of Bakersfield's CEQA Implementation Procedures have been duly followed by city staff and the Board of Zoning Adjustment; and WHEREAS, for the abOve described project, an initial study was conducted and it was determined that the proposed project would not have a significant effect on the environment and a Negative Declaration was prepared and posted on February 10, 1999, m accordance with CEQA; and WHEREAS, the facts presemed in the staffreport, initial study, and evidence received both in writing and by verbal testimony at the above referenced public hearing(s), support the findings contained in this resolution; and WHEREAS, at the above mentioned public hearing(s), the proposal was heard and ali facts, testimony and evidence was considered by the Board of Zoning Adjustment, and they made the following findings regarding the proposed project: /S, ll renuired publk; notices have been _niven. Hearing notices regarding the proposed project were mailed to property owners within 300 feet of the project area and published in a local newspaper of general circulation 20 days prior to the hearing. The provisions of CEOA and Ci~tv_ofBakersfieid CEQA Implementation Procedures have been followed. Staff'determined that the proposed activity is a project and an initial study was completed. A Negative Declaration was prepared and properly noticed for public review. A Negative Declaration for the proposed project is the appropriate environmental document to accompan_v proj~,'t approval In accOrdance with CEQA, staff prepared an initial study for the proposed project and indicated that the project will not significantly impact the physical environment. The project must be ~anted a "de minimis: exemption with respect to the vavment of Fish. and Game Section 711 fees. Based on the absence of evidence in the record as required by Section 21082.2 of the State of California Public Resources Code (CEQA) for the purpose of documenting significant effects, it is the conclusion of the City as the lead agency, that this project will result in impacts that fall below the threshold of significance with regard to wildlife resources and, therefore, must be granted a "de minimis" exemption in accordance with Section 711 of the State of California Fish and Game Code. Additionally, the assumption of adverse effect is rebutted by the above- referenced absence of evidence in the record and the City's decision to prepare a Negative Declaration for this project. The pro_uosed use is essential or desirable to the _oublic welfare, The project is both esseutial and desirable to the public welfare as au aide in removing environmentally unsafe soil, cleaning the soil and redistributing it back into the environment, The approval of this proposal is consistent with the oumose and intent of the Casa Loma S_oecific Plan. The proposal is consistent with the heavy industrial designation which is intended to provide for uses which are incompatible with other land uses because of potential environmental effects. The nro_no~l is in harmony with the goals, objective~ and policies of the Metmoolitan Bakersfield 2010 General Plan. The proposal is consistent with the HI (Heavy Industrial) laud use designation which permits land sensitive activity that is usually incompatible with other land uses because of potential severe environmental impacts. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF ZONING ADJUSTMENT OF THE CITY OF BAKERSFIELD as follows: 1. That the above recitals, incorporated herein, are true and correct. That the Negative Declaration is hereby approved. That Conditional Use Permit No. P99-0053 as described in this resolution, is hereby approved subject to the conditions of approval contained in Exhibit A. On a motion by Board Member Fidler, by the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: Fidler, LaRochelle None Sherry the Board of Zoning Adjustment approved this resolution I I-~REBY CERTIFY that the foregoing resolution was passed and adopted by the Board of Zoning Adjustment of the City of Bakersfield at a regular meeting held on the 9* day of March, 1999. DATED: March 9, 1999 BOARD OF ZONING ADJUSTMENT OF THE CITY OF BAKERSFIELD DENNIS FIDLER, Chair 3 EXttmlT A CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL Conditional Use Permit No. P99-0053 The applicant's rights granted by this approval are subject to the following provisions: The project shall be in accordance with all approved plans, conditions of approval, and other required permits and approvals. ~411 construction shall comply with applicable building codes. All conditions imposed shall be diligently complied with at ali times and all construction authorized or required shall be diligently prosecuted to completion before the premises shall be used for the purposes applied for under this approval. This approval will not be effective untd ten (10) d~, s after the date upon which it is granted b.v the BZA to allow for appeal to the Ci.ty Council. Any permit or license for any approval granted shall not be issued until that effective date. This approval shali automatically be null and void one (1) year after the effective date unless the applicant or successor has actually commenced the rights granted, or if the rights granted are discontinued far a continuous period of one (1} year or more. This time can be extended far up to one (!) additional year by the approving body. The BZA may initiate revocation of the rights granted if there is good cause, including but not limited to. failure to comply with conditions of approval, complete construction or exercise the rights granted, or violation by the owner or tenant of any provision of the Bakersfieid Munic~pal Code pertaining to the premises for which the approval was granted. The BZ~ may also consider under the revocation addition to or modification of any conditions if there is sufficient cause, including but not limited to. complaints regarding the project or that the conditions are not adequate for the intended purpose. Unless otherwise conditioned, this approval runs with the land and may continue under successive owners provided ali the above mentioned provisions are satisfied. The following conditions shall be satisfied as Part of the approval of this project: The applicant shall line the proposed contaminated soil receivin8 cells and ben'ns with 40 mil plastic liners. This liner and all other waste holding and processing facility improvements shall be designed by a registered civil engineer who shall also certify that Construction of these improvements meet all requirements of the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB). No soil may be accepted until the RWQCB has approved this certification. The applicant shall submit a copy of the RWCQB's acceptance to the Plannin8 Division within 30 days of said acceptance. Air emissions shall be controlled by use of a chemical depressant and shall be subject to the regulations of the San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control Board. All unpaved areas of the site shall be treated with an approved dust binder to reduce ~fugitive dust. The facility may receive only soil that contains designated or nonhazardous concentrations of petroleum hydrocarbons, such as gasoline and its components (benzene, toluene, xylene, and ethyl benzene), diesel and its components (benzene), virgin oil, motor oil, aviation fuel and lead as an associated metal. Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) or California regulated hazardous waste as defined in Title 22 of the California Code of Regulations (Section 66261.3) shall not be accepted at the facility. The project shall comply with Title 27 of the California Code of Regulations (Section 20005 et seq) as required by the California Regional Water Quality Control Board. Unsaturated zone and groundwater monitoring shall be conducted in accordance with Title 27 of the California Code of Regulations as required by the California Regional Water Quality Control Board. The project shall comply with the General Construction Activity Storm Water Permit (SWRCB Order No. 92-08-DWQ) during construction of the facility. Unless storm water is retained on site, the project shall be required to comply with the Industrial Activities Storm Water General Permit (SWRCB Order No. 97-03-DWQ) during operation of the facility (California Regional Water Quality Control Board). The parking area shall be paved (including driveways, drive aisles and loading areas) with concrete, asphaltic concrete, or any other approved street surfacing material. The paving shall be a minimum thickness of 2 inches over 3 inches of approved base material with adequate drainage provided. The applicant shall establish and maintain financial assurance as required by the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) to ensure cleanup of the property in the event operations are vacati~l or abandoned. 5 me SITE PLAN COMPLIANCE LIST The following are specific items that the Site Plan Review Committee has noted that you need to resolve before you can obtain a budding permtt or be allowed occupant.. These items may include changes or additwns that need to be shown on the final butlding plans, alert you to spec~.fic fees. and/or are comments that will help you in complying with the city's development standards. Each item will note when it is to be completed and they have been grouped by department so that you know who to contact if you have questions. Ae DEVELOPMENT SERVICES - BUILDING (staff contact- Phil Burns 805/326-3718) The applicant shall submit 4 copies of grading plans and 2 copies of the preliminary soils report to the Building Division. You must submit a final soils report to the Building Division before they can issue a building permit. Include with the final site plan documentation or Changes to the plan showing that the project complies with all disability requirements of Title 24 of the State Building Code. Business identification signs are not considered nor approved under this review. A separate review and sign permit from the Building Division is required for all new signs, including future use and construction signs. Signs must comply with the Sign Ordinance. .. The Building Division will assess school district fees at the time they issue a building permit. B. DEVELOPMENT SERVICES - PLANNING (staff contact - Dave Reizer The minimum parking required for this project has been computed based on use and shall be as follows: 624 square foot officedl space per 230 square feet = 3 spaces (Note: 10 spaces are proposed on plan) The applicant shall SUbmit one (1) copy of the final landscape plan to the Planning Division, and include a copy of this final plan with each set of the final plans submitted for building 'permits.' Building permits will not be issued until the Planning Division has approved the final landscape plan for consistency with approved site plans and minimum ordinance standards (please refer to the attached standards - Chapter 17.61). Approvedlandscaping, parking and other related site improvements shall be installed and inspected before final occupancy of any building or site. Inspections are made on Fridays. Please call Dave Re/zer (805/326-3673) to schedule an appointment before the Friday you want your inspection. 4. Habitat Conservation fees shall be required for this project and will be calculated based 6 on the tee in effect at the time we issue an urban development permit (includes grading plan approvals) as defined in the ImplementationfManagement Agreement (Section 2.21) for the Metropolitan Bakersfield Habitat Conservation Plan. Upon payment of the fee, the applicant will receive acknowledgment of compliance with Metropolitan Bakersfield Habitat Conservation Plan (Implementation/Management Agreement Section 3.1.4). This fee is currently $1,240 per gross acre, payable to the City of Bakersfield (submit to the Planning Division). Open storage of materials and equipment shall be surrounded and screened with a solid wall or fence (screening also applies to gates). This fence shall be at least 6 feet in height and materials shall not be stacked above the height of the fence. (Note: .4 taller fence is allowed in commercial and industrial zones. ,4 bttiiding permit is required for all fences and walls over 6feet in height.) Areas used for outside storage (does not include vehicle parking areas which are required to be paved), shall be treated with a permanent dust binder or other permanent dust control meaSures consistent with air pollution control regulations. C. FIRE DEPARTMENT (staff contact - Greg Yates 80S/326-3939) Show on the final site plan all on,site fire hydrant locations and required fire flows. Based upon available information, the fire flow requirement may be 3,500 gallons per minute. To provide adequate fire protection during construction, the applicant shall install I fire hydrant as shown by staff on the returned site plan, or provide an alternative fire suppression program as approved by the Fire Department before fmal site plan approval. The applicant is required to purchase all fire hydrants from the Fire Department. The applicant shah give the Fire Department one set of the engineered water plans before the issuance of any building permit. The applicant shall obtain all necessary approvals from the Fire Department for fuel tanks or related facilities before they are installed on the site, All streets and access roads to and around any building under construction must be at least 20 feet wide, contain no vehicle obstructions, and be graded to prevent water p0nding. Barricades must be placed where ditches and barriers exist in or cross roadways. Emergency vehicle access must always be reliable. If you handle hazardous materials or hazardous waste on the site, the Environmental Services Division of the Fire Department may require a hazardous material management plan before you can begin operations. Please contact them at 805/326-3979 for further information. 7. If you treat hazardous waste on the site, the Environmental Services Division of the Fire 7 Department may require a hazardous waste "Tiered" permit before you can begin operations. Please contact them at 805/326-3979 for further information. If you store hazardous materials on the site in either an underground or a permanent aboveground storage tank, a permit from the Environmental Services Division of the Fire Department is required to install and operate these tanks. The Environmental Services Division may also require a Spill Prevention Control and Countermeasure Plan before you can begin operations. Please contact them at 805/326-3979 for further information. D. PUBLIC WORKS - ENGINEERING (staff contact- Harry Afshar 805/326-3576) The applicant shall construct or enter into an agreement with the City Engineer to construct curbs, gutters, cross gutters, sidewalks, and street/alley paving on East Pacheco Road according to adopted city standards for major collector streets. These improvements shall be shown on the final site plan submitted to the Building Division before any building permit will be issued. The applicant shall construct new connection(s) to the public sewer system (show on final plans). This connection shah be shown on the final site plan submitted to the Building Division before any building permit will be issued. If a grading plan is required by the Building Division, a building permit will not be issued until the grading plan is approved by both the Public Works Department and Building Division. Before you Occupy any building or site, you must reconstruct or repair substandard off- site improvements to adopted city standards as directed by the City Engineer. Please call the construction superintendent at (661) 326-3049 to find out what improvements will be required. You must obtain a street permit from the Public Works Department before any work can be done within the public fight-of-way (streets, alleys, easements). Please include a copy ofthis site plan review decision to the department at the time you apply for this permit. A sewer conneCtion fee shall be paid at the time a building permit is issued. We will base this fee at the rate in effect at the time a building permit is issued. A transportation impact fee for regional facilities shall be paid at the time a building permit is issued, or if no building permit is required, before occupancy of the building or site. This fee will be based at the rate in effect at the time the permit is issued. Based on the fee schedule in effect for the 1998-1999 fiscal year and the proposed use, the rate would be $38. for each vehicular trip. The Public Works Department will calculate an estimate of the total fee when you submit constructi°n plans for the project. PUBLIC WORKS - TRAFFIC (staff contact - George Gillburg 805/326-3997) Show on the final plan 40 ff (top-to-top) wide drive approach(es) as indicated by staff on the returned site plan. Drive approaches must be centered on drive aisles. PUBLIC WORKS - SOLID WASTE (staff contact - John Wilburn 805/326-3114) Show on the final plan one, 6' x 8' refuse bin location(s). Before occupancy of the building or site is allowed, one, 3 cubic yard fi'ont loading type refuse bin(s) shall be placed within the required enclosure (Detail #S43). Before building permits can be issued or work begins on the property, you must contact the staff person above to establish the level and type of service necessary for the colleCtion of refuse and/or recycled materials. The Solid Waste Division will determine appropriate service levels for refuse collection required for a project. The levels of service are based on how oRen collection occurs as follows: * Can or cart service -- , Front loader bin service -- * Roll-off compactor service -- 1 cubic yard/week or less 1 cubic yard/week - 12 cubic yards/day More than 12 cubic yards/day 9 PLANNING DEPARTMENT STAFF REPORT TO: FROM: DATE: SUBJECT: APPLICANT: OWNER: Chair and Members of the Board of Zoning AdjUStment Stanley Grady, Planning Director ~ov~ March 9, 1999 Conditional Use Permit No. P99-0053 A Conditional Use Permit to establish a facility that u'eats/cleans soil contaminated with hydrocarbons (gasoline, oil, diesel) within a 7.3 (Heavy Industrial) zone dismct. Soil Rem Corporation 408 East Pacheco Road Bakersfield, CA 93307 Enterprise Zone One/Southwood 11 6570 N. Baker Avenue Fresno, CA 93710 LOCATION: 408 East Pacheco Road RECOMMENDATION: Adopt the attached resolution with all f'mdings and conditions, APPROVING the Negative Declaration and APPROVING Conditional Use Permit No. P99-0053 as depicted in the project description. BZA Stajj/'Report Prepared by: (LAP) ~p99-0053) page 1 (~lIdjtln.nl [f~ Pprmit Mn Pqg-I]l]~ PROJECT ANALYSIS: Project Description/Facts The applicants are requesting a Conditional Use Permit to establish a facility that treats/cleans soil contaminated with hydrocarbons (gasoline, oil, diesel). The site is located within the Casa Loma Specific Plan area and is designated 7.3 (Heavy Industrial). The applicants plan to implement their plan in phases. Phase 1 of the facility is planned on a 10 acre portion of a 20 acre site; phase 2 will expand the facility into the remaining 10 acres of the property. There are no structures proposed on the site other than a 624 square foot office trailer, however, the site will be developed with necessary fencing, equipment and receiving cells for contaminated soil. The applicants propose to provide 10 off-street parking spaces for employees. 3 spaces are required by ordinance. 'The project is anticipated to receive approximately 4,000 tons of soil per month. The facility will operate 8 to 12 hours each day. The applicants have indicated that all incoming soil is required to be certified by an approved laboratory and must have what is known as a "Non-Hazardous Waste Manifest" before they will accept the waste soil. Before leaving the facility, the cleaned soil will undergo an additional laboratory analysis to verify that it is below the threshold requirements for treated soil. The project will utilize 40 mil plastic liners at all receiving cells for contaminated soil and a leachate collection and removal system to monitor and detect releases to ensure that they do not contaminate any public water supply, interfere with groundwater recharges or substantially degrade water quality. Zoning and General Plan Consistency The General Plan designation of the site is HI (Heavy Industrial), with existing zoning of 7.3 (Heavy Industrial). The HI (Heavy Industrial) General Plan designation permits land sensitive activity that is usually incompatible with other land uses because of potential severe environmental impacts. Therefore, the proposal is consistent with the Metropolitan Bakersfield 2010 General Plan policies and implementation measures. The 7.3 (Heavy Industrial) Casa Loma Specific Plan .designation also permits uses which are incompatible with other land uses because of potential environmental effects, but requires that waste and recycling facilities, such as the one proposed, obtain approval of a conditional use permit to operate. BZA Staff Report Prepared by: (LAP) (p99-0053) page 2 (~onditinnal [f¢~ P~rmit ~ Conclusion The Site Plan Review Committee has completed their review of the proposal and finds that it complies with the required codes, policies and standards for development as adopted by the City Council. The Committee has noted specific items (see attached Site Plan Compliance List) that the applicant will need to resolve before building permits can be issued. Staff recommends approval of the proposed soil cleaning facility at the proposed location. The mitigation measures proposed will prevent any potential adverse environmental effects on the surrounding area. With the existing regulatory controls in effect (through state water resources, city and county environmental health agencies) the project is subject to oversight by several agencies. The potential for the project to have an adverse effect on the surrounding uses is further reduced since the project is being proposed in an area designated tbr heavy industrial development where such uses may be incompatible with other uses and may have the potential severe environmental impacts. ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW AND DETERMINATION: The property is located within the Casa Loma Specific Plan in an area designated for Heavy Industrial development. It is located at the northwest comer of East Pacheco Road and South Cottonwood Road. The topography of the area is relatively flat. The general plan designation, zoning and existing uses of the site and surrounding properties are shown in the following table: LOCATION GENERAL PLAN · ZONING EXISTING LAND USE' DESIGNATION' DISTRICT SITE HI HI Vacant Land North A A Agricultural Land (not currently in production) South HI 7.3 Vacant Land East HI 7.3 Automobile Salvage Yard West HI 7.3 Vacant Land BZA Staff Report Prepared by: (LAP) o,99-o053) page 3 ("n~rtitin.n! ~[~, P~rmi! Nn Pqq-flfl ~ ~ Public notice for the proposed project and environmental determination was advertised in the Bakersfield Californian and posted on the bulletin board in the City of Bakersfield Development Services Building; 1715 Chester Avenue; Bakersfield, California. All property owners within 300 feet of the project site were notified by United States mail on February 10, 1999 regarding this public hearing in accordance with city ordinance and state law. Based upon an initial environmental assessment and evaluation according to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the City of Bakersfield's CEQA Implementation Procedures, it has been found that this project will not significantly affect the environment. A Negative Declaration has been prepared and is attached to this report. EXHIBITS: ho B. C. D. E. F. Vicinity Map Site Plan Initial Study Public/Agency Comments Draft Resolution Conditions of Approval and Site Plan Compliance List BZA Staff Report Prepared bv: (LAP) (p99-O055) page 4 EXHIBIT A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT P99-0053 EAST WHITE LANE ,5.6 I 7.,3/5.5 7.,3 -- 7.,3 ~-~, ,~x,x,~.,~,,~. ~,.,-,., I ~ EAST PACHECO 20 E(~/2)~s A E(1/2)RS E(1/2)RS R-1 7.3 o 0 7.,3 © 16 '21 ROAD o 6oo SC. ALE iN FE~T T30S, R28E 89711 EXHIBIT B VAGANT GENERAL NOTES ! I I M T-~H BiNS (~ ;~,LJNOFFWATE~tI.OOOGALLONTANK.J (~) 50' ~.-SUMP j (~ (~.) iOCT ..~. - CLEAN SOIL BINS : (~) 100' ,SQ. - S~IL WASH M~HINERY I (~) ;So' ~. - pim'r SOIL 50IL REM 408 EAST PAGHECO ROAD 20 AG. PARCEL 2 PARGE~P'P,,eNO. I~? FUTURE EXPANSION SPACE Itl¸@ EXISTINg, STORAGE YARD 2OAC. EXHIBIT C INITIAL STUDY/ NEGATIVE DECLARATION The City of Bakersfield Planning Department has completed an initial study of the possible environmental effects of the following described project and has determined that a Negative Declaration is appropriate. This determination has been made according to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the State CEQA Guidelines, and the City of Bakersfield CEQA Implementation Procedures. PROJECT NO: APPLICANT: LOCATION: Conditional Use Permit No. P99-0053 Soil Rem Corporation 408 East Pacheco Road Bakersfield, CA 93307 408 East Pacheco Road PROJECT DESCRIPTION: A Conditional Use Permit to establish a facility that treats/clean.q soil contaminated with hydrocarbons (gasoline, oil, diesel) within a 7.3 (Heavy Industrial) zone district. Phase 1 of the facility is planned on a 10 acre portion of a 20 acre site; phase 2 will expand the facility into the remaining 10 acres of the property. ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING: The property is located within the Casa Loma Specific Plan in an area designated for Heavy Industrial development. It is located at the northwest comer of East Pacheco Road and South Cottonwood Road. The topography of the area is relatively fiat.. MITIGATION MEASURES - Included in the proposed project to avoid potentially si~ificant effects (if required): 1) Lining the proposed contaminated soil receiving cells and berms with 40 mil plastic liners. 2) Air emissions shall be controlled by use of a chemical depressant. No. P99-0053 I. ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST ~ ~'~):~ ~ CUL~L RESOURCES Soils G~l~ic Ha~rds ErosioWS~imenmfion Top~raphy WA~R QUAE~IQUAN~ Groun~ater Su~ace Water Floodin~Drainage Climate/Air Movement Odors BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES '~,~: ~;~ ~,~ Sto~ Drainage Plants Animals Rare/Endanger~ Sp~ies (NOTE: ENVIRONMENTAL DISCUSSION REGARDING THE ABOVE IMPACTS IS ATTACHED.) S = Significant P = Potentially Significant I = Insignificant/No Effect Y = Yes N = No OR/) = Ordinance Requirement ill. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE · Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant Or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal species, or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? Does the project have the potential to achieve short-term, to the disadvantage of long-term, environmental goals? (A short term tmpact on the environment is one of vffnich occurs in a relative~, brief, definite period of time while long-term impacts V~ll endure well into the future.) Does the project have impacts which individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? (A project may. impact ~n two or more separate resources where the impact on each resource is relative~, small, but where the effect of the total of those tmpacts on the environment is significanO. Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, . either directly or indirectly? Y N Ill. FINDINGS OF DETERMINATION (Projects where a Negative Declaration or EIR has not been previously prepared, or where a previous document will not be utilized.) ON THE BASIS OF THIS INITIAL EVALUATION (check one): It has been found that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment; therefore, a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. It is been found that although the proposed project could have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because MITIGATION MEASURES, as identified in the Discussion of Environmental Impacts, have been incorporated into the project; therefore, a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. It has been found that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an Ell( (ENVIRONMENTAL'IMPACT REPORT) will be prepared. pREPARED BY (print): ~ouise. P:~lmer, Associate· , Planner DATE: February 9, 1999 ENVIRONMENTAL DISCUSSION Conditional Use Permit No. P99-0053 Earth Water ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS Soils - Construction of the project will result in 20 acres of soil to be disrupted, compacted, displaced, over covered and/or uncovered by grading, filling, trenching, installation of drainage facilities, and other necessary ground preparation activities. City ordinances require that soils and grading reports be prepared and approved before issuance of building permits to reduce impacts. In addition, adherence to applicable building codes will also reduce impacts. Therefore, this effect is insignificant. Geologic Hazards - The site does not contain any unique geologic or physical features. The proposed project will not create an unstable earth condition or cause changes to any geologic substructure. The project will not expose people, structures, or property to major geologic ha?ards such as landslides, mudslides or ground failure. Although no specific geologic hazards are known to occur within the boundaries of the project site, there are many geologic fractures in the earth's crust within the San Joaquin Valley which is bordered by major, active fault systems. Therefore, any development within the Metropolitan Bakersfield area may be subject to seismic ha:mrds. City development standards will require the project to comply with appropriate seismic design criteria of the Uniform Building Code, drainage facility criteria, and approval ofpreconstmction soils and grading studies. As the site is outside the Alquist-Pfiolo Seismic Zones, no special seismic studies are required for this site before building structures for human occupancy. Erosion / Sedimentation - The proposed development will not adversely affect rivers, streams, canals or beaches. City ordinances require that erosion, siltation or deposition of soils from the site by water runoff not occur either during development of the project, or through drainage of the site after construction. Wind erosion and fugitive dust may occur during the construction process; however, normal use of water spraying will control wind erosion impacts and should not be considered significant. Topography - The slope of the natural terrain of the site is fiat. Project development will not result in a significant change to the topography and/or ground surface relief features. Ouali~/Ouanti~ .Groundwater - The project will not alter the direction or rate of flow, or substantially deplete the quantity of groundwater resources, either through direct additions or withdrawals, or through interception of an aquifer by cuts or excavations. The project will utilize 40 mil plastic liners at all receiving cells for contaminated soils and a leachate collection and removal system to monitor and detect releases. Given the mitigation measures proposed, the project will not contaminate a public water supply, substantially interfere with groundwater recharges or substantially degrade water quality. The municipal water district will provide domestic water service to the development; however, the cumulative impact to the water table will be negligible and insignificant. Surface Water - The project will not result in discharge into any surface water, or significantly alter surface water quality, including but not limited to temperature, dissolved oxygen or turbidity. Surface water will be controlled using berms that are lined with the 40 mil plastic liners used in the receiving cells. The proposal will not contaminate any public water supply. The proposal will not result in changes in the currents or the course or direction of natural surface water movements. Environmental Discussion Conditional Use Permit No. P99-0053 Page 2 Floodin~Drainage - The project will not result in changes to the course or direction of freshwater currents, or result in changes to the mount of surface water as the site does not contain, nor will the proposal impact, any rivers, streams or canals, The site is not in an area subject to flooding. Therefore, the proposal will not expose people or property to water-related hazards such as flooding or tidal waves. Changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns, and the rate and amount of surface water runoff will change as the project is developed. However, City ordinances require that the project must comply with drainage facility criteria, and approval ofpreconstmction soils and grading plans according to City Public Works and Building Department standards. Air Ouali _ty - Air emissions will be controlled by use of a chemical depressant (Vapor Control) to eliminate air emissions. Therefore, the project will not substantially increase air pollution emissions, nor will there be a substantial deterioration of ambient air quality by development of this project. The proposal will not violate any ambient air quality standard, contribute substantially to existing or projected air quality violations, or expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations. The project is subject to review by the San Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution Control District. Short-term, non-significant, air pollutant impacts will be generated on and off-site during construction of the project, including sources such as: dust from trenching, grading and vehicles; exhaust emissions from motor vehicles and construction equipment; and, emissions from asphalt paving of parking lots and roadways. Normal use of water spraying as required by the San Joaquin Unified Air Pollution District will control dust impacts and should not be considered significant. Although there would be short and long-term air quality impacts fi'om mobile sources of pollutants generated by the estimated daily volume of vehicles (see transportation) produced by the proposal, there will not be a substantial increase in air pollution emissions, nor will there be a significant deterioration of ambient air quality. The proposal will not violate any ambient air quality standard, contribute substantially to existing or projected air quality violations, or expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations. Climate/Air Movement - The proposed project will not significantly alter air movement, moisture, temperature and/or results in any change to climates, either locally or regionally. Odors - The proposed use is not anticipated to create significant objectionable odors that would affect neighboring uses or residents. The project is located in an area designated fbr heavy industrial development. There are no residences within .5 miles of the project site. Odors created by the project will be controlled by use of chemical depressants to reduce them below a significant objectionable level. Biological Resources Plants - New plant species will be introduced because of ornamental landscaping. A barrier will be created to the normal replenishment of existing plant species as the site will be completely developed. Although existing species of plants on-site will be removed through urban development, the proposal will not entirely eliminate a plant community or substantially diminish or reduce wildlife habitats. These effects of urban development are not considered significant. Animals - A barrier will be created to the normal replenishment of existing animal species as the site will be completely developed. Although existing species of animals on-site would be removed through urban development, the proposal will not entirely eliminate a wildlife community or substantially diminish or Environmental Discussion Conditional Use Permit No. P99-0053 Page 3 significantly reduce wildlife habitats. These effects of urban development are not considered significant. Rare/Endangered Species - Permits and approvals for development associated with this project will be subject to the terms of the Metropolitan Bakersfield Habitat Conservation Plan and associated 10(a)(1)(B) and 2081 permits issued to the City by the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and State Department of Fish and Game, respectively. Terms of the permit require applicants for development projects to pay habitat mitigation fees, excavate known kit fox dens and notify agencies before grading. The Metropolitan Bakersfield Habitat Conservation Plan may be reviewed at the following location: City of Bakersfield, Planning Department, 1715 Chester Avenue, Bakersfield, CA, 93301, (805) 326-3733. Habitat Alteration - Urban development may alter the area's habitat by introducing domesticated or feral species of animals into the area. The project may result in the creation of a barrier to the migration or movement of animals from the surrounding urban lands. These impacts to wildlife habitats are considered in the Final Environmental Impact Report for the Metmpoiitan Bakersfield Habitat Conservation Plan (MBHCP), and are not considered significant for the project proposed. The proposed project is not "significant" according to CEQA, and a Certificate of Fee Exemption has been made with the California Department of Fish and Game. The project will not individually or cumulatively adversely affect wildlife resources, as defined in Section 711.2 of the Fish and Game Code. See attached De Minimis Impact Findings. Trilns_nortation Tritffic/Circulation - The proposed project will generate additional vehicular movement but will not cause an increase in traffic which is substantial in relation to the existing traffic load (volume) and capacity of the street system, and will not substantially affect existing transportation systems. The project will not significantly alter present patterns of circulation or movement of people and/or goods. The City Traffic Engineer has reviewed the proposal and determined that the traffic generated is less than significant to the existing transportation system and will not require a specific traffic analysis. The development is subject to both local and regional traffic impact fees adopted by the City Council to mitigate both on-site and off-site effects of the specific proposal on the city's street network to less than significant. Parking - The proposal will increase the demand for parking. However, present city ordinances require that the project contain sufficient on-site parking based on the specific use(s) so as not to adversely affect existing parking facilities in the area. Therefore, this effect is not considered significant. Traffic H~Tards - There will be no known significant increases in traffic hazards to motor vehicles, bicyclists, or pedestrians from the proposed project. Required traffic safety measures will reduce any hazards to be less than significant. Air/Wal~'/Rail Systems - The project will not significantly affect existing or planned waterborne, rail, or air traffic. Land Use Compatibili _ty - The existing land uses surrounding and adjacent to the project site are identified in Table A. These uses are compatible with the proposed project. Approval of the proposal will not conflict with adopted environmental plans or goals of the community, disrupt or divide the physical arrangement of an established community, or create a significant land use compatibility problem. Environmental Discussion Conditional Use Permit No. P99-0053 Page 4 TABLE A Land Uses and Zoning of Site and Adjacent Properties SITE HI (Heavy Industrial) ] HI (Heavy Industrial) I Vacant Land NORTH HI (Heavy Industrial) 7.3 (Heavy Industrial) Vacant Land SOUTH A (Agricultural) A (Agricultural) Agricultural Development EAST HI (Heavy Industrial) 7.3 (Heavy Industrial) Vacant Land WEST HI (Heavy Industrial) 7.3 (Heavy Industrial) Vacant Land General Plan/Zoning - The site is p/'esently desi~a~ed HI (Heavy Industrial) and zoned 7.3 (Heavy Industrial). The proposal will not result in a substantial alteration of the present or planned land use of the area, as no land use amendments or zoning changes are proposed with the project. The proposal is consistent with the Metropolitan Bakersfield 2010 General Plan policies and implementation measures and will not significantly conflict with present or planned land uses in the area. The project is also consistent with the purpose and intent of the Bakersfield Zoning Ordinance with respect to the use and related development standards. Growth Inducement - The proposed project will not induce substantial growth as it is consistent with the existing development pattern, established general planning and zoning in the area, and planned growth as examined in the Metropolitan Bakersfield 2010 General Plan. Prime Agricultural Land - No agricultural crops currently exist on the site and it does not contain prime agricultural soils. Removal of 20 acres of land through the proposed project will not convert prime agricultural land to nonagricultural use or impair the agricultural productivity of prime agricultural land in the area. C~tllr~l Resources Archaeological -The proposal is an infill development where the site has already been significantly disturbed from adjacent development, utility installation, street construction, and installation of other urban-related improvements. A surface survey is there~bre, not needed for this project. In the event unanticipated archaeological or paleontological resources are discovered during project construction, the developer will be required to retain a qualified archaeologist to evaluate the significance of the finding and appropriate course of action subject to the requirements of CEQA, and the Native American Heritage Commission regarding Native American remains. Historical/Cultural - No known historical/cultural structures or other resources are on the site that the proposal will affect. The project will not eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory, destroy historical/cultural resources, adversely affect physical or aesthetic characteristics, affect · unique ethnic cultural values, or restrict religious or sacred uses. Environmental Discussion Conditional Use Permit No. P99-0053 Page 5 Pqblic Services Police - The proposal will not decrease eXisting police protection in the area. These services are currently provided and planned to remain at their present level of support through property tax increases generated by this development; therefore, the effect is not significant. Fire - The proposal will not decrease existing fire service in the area. These services are currently provided and planned to remain at their present level of support through property tax increases generated by this development; therefore, the effect is not significant. In addition, the project must meet all requirements of the Uniform Building and Fire Codes regarding fire safety. Schools - The proposed project will not significantly affect existing or planned school facilities. The development is subject to appropriate school impact fees as adopted by the local districts affected to mitigate anticipated impacts. ~tl:g~_Ll~;~tlJ~ - The project will not affect the quality or quantity of existing recreational oppommities or create a substantial need for new parks or recreational facilities not already planned in the area. Solid Waste / Disposal - The proposed project will not result in a need for significant new or substantial alterations to existing solid waste disposal systems. The development will not breach published national, state or local standards relating to solid waste or litter control. The site is subject to mandatory solid waste pickup and onsite facility design will be required to meet minimum city standards. Facili _ty Maintenance - Street or other public facility improvements from the proposal will not result in a significant increase in maintenance responsibility for the City of Bakersfield. These services are currently provided and planned to remain at their present level of support through property tax increases generated by this development; therefore, the effect is not significant. Utilities Water - Domestic water service is presently available to the site with minimal on-site lines needed to attach to the delivery system. The proposed development will not result in a need for significant additional systems or substantially alter the existing water utilities in the area Wastewater - Wastewater services are presently available to the site with minimal on-site lines needed to attach to the system. The proposed development would not result in a need for significant additional systems or substantially alter the existing wastewater utilities in the area. The proposed project will not require the extension of any sewer trunk line that will serve new development. Storm Dr~tinage - Storm drainage facilities are presently available to the site with minimal on-site work needed to attach to the system. The proposed development would not result in a need for significant additional systems or substantially alter the storm drainage systems in the area. Expansion of storm drain utilities will be required to serve this development, but the impact is not considered significant. Nalm'al Gas - Natural gas services are presently available to the site with minimal on-site work needed to attach to the delivery, system. The proposed developmeni would not result in a need for significant additional systems or substantially alter the natural gas systems in the area Environmental Discussion Conditional Use Permit No. P99-0053 Page 6 Electfici _ty - Electric services are presently available to the site with minimal on-site work needed to attach to the delivery system. The proposed development would not result in a need for significant additional systems or substantially alter the electricity systems in the area. Communications - Communication services are presently available to the site with minimal on-site work needed to anach to the delivery system. The proposed development will not result in a need for significant additional systems or substantially alter the communications systems in the area. Population / Housing / Employment The project will not significantly alter present population patterns, distribution, density (existing or planned), or the growth rate. The proposal will also not adversely affect existing housing or create the need for additional unplanned housing in the area. The proposal may affect, in a beneficial way, the temporary and permanent income distribution, employment, and/or tax revenues of the city and county. The project will not, however, result in significant reduced employment opportunities for low and moderate income socioeconomic groups, or adversely affect social affiliation or interaction of the neighborhood. Health Hazards / Public Safety_ No health hazards or potential baTards to people or plant or animal populations will be created from the proposed development. Although the proposal does involve a risk of releasing hazardous substances (oil, gasoline, diesel) in case of an accident or upset conditions, the mitigation proposed by the applicant (40 mil plastic liner at receiving cells, continuous monitoring of soils conditions, etc.) should reduce these impacts to less than si~ificant The project will not attract people to an area and expose them to ha?ards found there, nor will the project interfere with emergency response plans or emergency evacuation plans. The project is not on the most current hazardous wastes and substance's site list according to Section 65962.5 of the California Government Code. Noise Ambient noise levels will increase through any urban type of development but not significantly by construction of this project. Typical development standards including building setbacks, walls, and landscaping will prevent substantial increases in the ambient noise levels of the adjoining area and will not expose people to severe noise levels. Some additional noise will be associated with construction of the project but current ordinances restrict this as to.the time it can take place, and it is temporary in nature. Therefore, noise impacts will be less than significant. Aesthetics The proposed use will alter the open space qualities of the area to a minor degree. The proposed project is not intending any development that would result in the obstruction of any scenic vista or view open to the public, nor will the proposal result in the creation of an aesthetically offensive site open to public view. Landscaping, overlook restrictions into residential areas, and rooftop screening of mechanical equipment are additional measures that will reduce effects to be less than significant. Development of the project will not have a negative affect on the aesthetics of the area. Environmental Discussion Conditional Use Permit No. P99-0053 Page 7 Recreation The proposal will not adversely affect existing or proposed recreational opportunities in the neighborhood or adversely affect regional facilities. Light and Glare Light and glare will increase from electrical lighting facilities necessary for the proposed use. Existing ordinance standards require that building location, material selection, lighting design, parking and sign placement is such to reduce effects and that buffer proposed light impacts from surrounding developments. Therefore, proposed uses should not cause significant light or glare to existing or future development surrounding the site. Nattlral Resources The proposed project will not significantly increase the rate of use of non-renewable natural resources or adversely affect such resources that may exist on the site. Energy Usage The proposed development will not result in significant irreversible environmental changes, including uses of nonrenewable energy resources, during the initial and continued phases of the project. The project will not result in significant energy requirements or lack of energy efficiency by mount or fuel type of a project's life cycle. The proposal will not result in significant effects on local and regional energy supplies or on requirements for additional energy capacity or sources, nor will the project result in significant effects on peak and base period demands for electricity and other forms of energy. The project will not conflict with existing energy standards, nor will it encourage activities which result in the wasteful or substantial use of significant mounts of fuel, water, or energy. The project will not result in significant effects on projected transportation energy requirements or in the project's overall use of efficient transportation alternatives. II. ~MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE Potential to Degrade the Environment: The project does not have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal, or affect important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory. Short-term vs. Long-term Effects: The project does not have the potential to achieve short-term environmental goals, to the disadvantage of long-term environmental goals as it is consistent with adopted environmental plans. Cllmulative Effects: The project does not have impacts which are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable or for which the incremental effects of an individual project are considerable when viewed concerning the efforts of past projects, then current projects, and possible future projects. Substan0al Allverse Effects: The project does not have environmental effects Which Will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly. Environmental Discussion Conditional Use Permit No. P99-0053 Page 8 o Reference List Metropolitan Bakersfield 2010 General Plan and Appendices, City of Bakersfield, Kern County, Kern COG, Golden Empire Transit, March 1990. Metropolitan Bakersfield 2010 General Plan DEIR, The Planning Center, July, 1989. Metropolitan Bakersfield 2010 General Plan FEIR, SCH #8907032, City of Bakersfield, County of Kern, KCOG, Golden Empire Transit, September, 1989. FEIR Metropolitan BakersfieM Habitat Conservation Plan, Thomas Reid Associates for the City of Bakersfield and Kern County, March 1991. Metropolitan Bakersfield Habitat Conservation Plan, Advisom, Notice to Developers. 10(a)(1)(B) and 2081 permits, 1994. Title 17, Zoning Ordinance, Bakersfield Municipal Code. Title 16, Subdivision Ordinance, Bakersfield Municipal Code. winston H. Hickox ~ Secretary for ~Environmental Protection EXHIBIT D California Regional Water Quality ontrol Board Central Valley Region Steven T. Butler, Acting Chair Fresno Branch Office http:llwww.swrcb.ca, govl-rwqcb5 3614 East Ashlan Avenue. Fresno, California 93726 · Phone (559) 445-5116 · FAX (559) 445-5910 Gray Governor Mr. Jim Eggert City of Bakersfield Development Services Department 1715 Chester Avenue 19 February1999 Bakersfield, CA 93301 _ CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT NO. P99-0053, DRAFT NEGA~"i~ DECLARATION, SOILREM CORP., INC., BAKERSFIELD, KERN COUNTY We have reviewed the draft Negative Declaration for the proposed Soilrem Corp. facility at 408 East Pacheco Road and have the following comments: 1. The project description should contain a statement that no RCRA or California regulated hazardous waste will be accepted at the facility. The groundwater and surface water sections (under the Water Quality/Quantity heading) should contain statements that .the project will be required to comply with Title 27, California Code of Regulations, Section 20005 et seq (Title 27). 3. The groundwater section should contain a statement that in accordance with Title 27, unsaturated zone and groundwater monitoring will be conducted. The surface water section should contain a statement that the project will be required to comply with the General Construction Activity Storm Water Permit (SWRCB Order No. 92o08-DWQ) during construction of the facility, and unless all storm water is retained on site, the project will be required to comply with the Industrial Activities Storm Water General Permit (SWRCB Order No. 97-03- DWQ) during operation of the facility. Thank you for the opportunity to comment on the draft Negative Declaration. If you have any questions, please call Doug Patteson at (559) 445-6191. Senior Engineerin2 Geologist WILLIAM PFISTER Supervising Engineering Geologist CEG No. 931 cc: Mr. Ralph Huey, City of Bakersfield Fire Department, Bakersfield Mr. John Arnold, Soilrem Corp., Inc., Bakersfield DKP: c:\~word\pac~negdec.srm California Environmental Protection Agency ~. Recycled Paper EXHIBIT E RESOLUTION OF THE BOARD OF ZONING ADJUSTMENT OF THE CITY OF BAKERSFIELD APPROVING A CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT TO ESTABLISH A FACILITY THAT TREATS/CLEANS SOIL CONTAMINATED WITH HYDROCARBONS (GASOLINE, OIL, DIESEL). (Conditional Use Permit No. P99-0053) WHEREAS, Soil Rem Corporation, filed an application with the City of Bakersfield Planning Department requesting a Conditional Use Permit to establish a facility that treats/cleans soil contaminated with hydrocarbons (gasoline, oil, diesel). The proposal is located at 408 East Pacheco Road and is within a 7.3 (Heavy Industrial) zone district; and WHEREAS, the Board of Zoning Adjustment, through its Secretary, set TUESDAY, March 9, t999 at the hour of 3:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers of City Hall, 1501 Truxtun Avenue, Bakersfield, California, as the time and place for a public hearing before them on the proposal, and notice of the public hearing was given in the manner provided in Title 17 of the Bakersfield Municipal Code; and WHEREAS, a public hearing was held before the Board of Zoning Adjustment on March 9, 1999, and { ~ testimony was received only in support of the project; ~ testimony was received only in opposition of the project; {ZI testimony was received both in support and opposition of the project; ~ no testimony was received either in support or opposition of the project}; and WHEREAS, the laws and regulations relating to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) and the City of Bakersfield's CEQA Implementation Procedures have been duly followed by city staff and the Board of Zoning Adjustment; and WHEREAS, for the above described project, an initial study was conducted and it was determined that the proposed project would not have a significant effect on the environment and a Negative Declaration was prepared and posted on February I0, 1999, in accordance with CEQA; and WHEREAS, the facts presented in the staff report, initial study, and evidence received both in writing and by verbal testimony at the above referenced public hearing(s), support the findings contained in this resolution; and WHEREAS, at the above mentioned public heating(s), the proposal was heard and all facts, testimony and evidence was considered by the BOard of Zoning Adjustment, and they made the following findings regarding the proposed project: All required public notices have been given. Hearing notices regarding the proposed project were mailed to property owners within 300 feet of the project area and published in a local newspaper of general circulation 20 days prior to the hearing. 2. The provisions of CEOA and City of Bakersfield CEOA Implementation Procedures have been followed. Staff determined that the proposed activity is a project and an initial study was completed. A Negative Declaration was prepared and properly noticed for public review. A Negative Declaration for the proposed project is the appropriate environmental document to accompany project approval. In accordance with CEQA, staff prepared an initial study for the proposed project and indicated that the project will not significantly impact the physical environment. The project must be ~anted a "de minimi.q; exemption with respect to the payment of Fish and Game Section 711 fees, Based on the absence of evidence in the record as required by Section 21082.2 of the State of California Public Resources Code (CEQA) for the purpose of documenting significant effects, it is the conclusion of .the City as the lead agency, that this project will result in impacts that fall below the threshold of significance with regard to wildlife resources and, therefore, must be granted a "de minimis" exemption in accordance with Section 711 of the.State of California Fish and Game Code. Additionally, the assumption of adverse effect is rebutted by the above- referenced absence of evidence in the record and the City's decision to prepare a Negative Declaration for this project. The proposed use is essential or desirable to the public welfare. The project is both essential and desirable to the public welfare as an aide in removing environmentally unsafe soil, cleaning the soil and redistributing it back into the environment. o The approval of this proposal is consistent with the purpose and intent of the Casa Loma Specific Plan. The proposal is consistent with the heavy industrial designation which is intended to provide for uses which are incompatible with other land uses because of potential environmental effects. The proposal is in harmony with the goals, objectives and policies of the Metropolitan Bakersfield 2010 General Plan. The proposal is consistent with the HI (Heavy Industrial) land use designation which permits land sensitive activity that is usually incompatible with other land uses because of potential severe environmental impacts. NOW, THEREFORE., BE IT RESOLVED BY THE BOARD OF ZONING ADJUSTMENT OF THE CITY OF BAKERSFIELD as follows: 1. That the above recitals, incorporated herein, are true and correct. 2. That the Negative Declaration is hereby approved. o That Conditional Use Permit No. P99-0053 as described in this resolution, is hereby approved subject to the conditions of approval contained in Exhibit F. .. 2 On a motion by Board Member Adjustment approved this resolution by the following roll call vote: AYES: NOES: ABSENT: , the Board of Zoning I HEREBY CERTIFY that the foregoing resolution was passed and adopted by the Board of Zoning Adjustment of the City of Bakersfield at a regular meeting held on the 9~ day of March, 1999. DATED: March 9, 1999 BOARD OF ZONING ADJUSTMENT OF THE CITY OF BAKERSFIELD , Chair bza_res.wpd STANLEY GRADY, Secretary City of Bakersfield Planning Director 3 EXItlBIT F CONDITIONS OF APPROVAL Conditional Use Permit No. P99-0053 The applicant's rights granted by this approval are subject to the following provisions: The project shall be in accordance with all approved plans, conditions of approval, and other required permits and approvals. All construction shall comply with applicable building codes. ,4# conditions imposed shall be diligentl, v complied with at all times and ali construction attthorized or required shall be diligently prosecuted to completion before the premises shall be used for the purposes applied for under this approval. This approval will not be effective until ten (10) days after the date upon which it is granted bv the BZA to allow for appeal to the City Council. Any permit or h'cense for any approval granted shall not be issued until that effective date. This approval shall atttomatically be null and void one (1) year after the effective date unless the applicant or successor has actually commenced the rights granted, or if the rights granted are discontinued for a continuota' period of one (I) year or more. This time can be extended for up to one (1) additional year by the approving body. The BZA may initiate revocation of the rights granted if there is good cause, including but not limited to, failure to comply with conditions of approval, complete construction or exercise the rights granted, or violation by the owner or tenant of an.v provision of the Bakersfield Municipal Code pertaining to the premises for which the approval was granted. The BZA may also consider under the revocation addition to or modification of any conditions if there is sufficient cause, inchtding but not limited to, complaints regarding the project or that the conditions are not adequate Jbr the intended purpose. Unless otherwise conditioned, this approval hms with the land and may continue under successive owners provided all the above mentioned provisions are satisfied. The following conditions shall be satisfied as part of the approval of this project: 1. The applicant shall line the proposed contaminated soil receiving cells and berms with 40 mil plastic liners. This lining shall be inspected by the Planning Department prior to coveting. Air emissions shall be controlled by use of a chemical depressant and shall be subject to the regulations of the San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control Board. All unpaved areas of the site shall be treated with an approved dust binder to reduce fugitive dust. 4 o Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) or California regulated hazardous waste as defined in Title 22 of the California Code of Regulations (Section 66261.3) shall not be accepted at the facility. The project shall comply with Title 27 of the Califorma Code of Regulations (Section 20005 et secO as required by the California Regional Water Quality Control Board. Unsaturated zone and groundwater monitoring shall be conducted in accordance with Title 27 of the California Code of Regulations as required by the California Regional Water Quality Control Board. The project shall comply with the General Construction Activity Storm Water permit (SWRCB Order No. 92-08-DWQ) during construction of the facility. Unless storm water is retained on site, the project shall be required to comply with the l_ndustdal Activities Storm Water General Permit (SWRCB Order No. 97-03-DWQ) during operation of the facility (California Regional Water Quality Control Board). The parking area shall be paved (including driveways, drive aisles and loading areas) with concrete, asphaltic concrete, or any other approved street surfacing material. The paving shall be a minimum thickness of 2 inches over 3 inches of approved base material with adequate drainage provided. 5 me SITE PLAN COMPLIANCE LIST The following are specific items that the Site Plan Review Committee has noted that you need to resolve before you can obtain a building permit or be allowed occupant.. These items may include changes or additions that need to be shown on the final building plans, alert you to specific fees, and/or are comments that will help you in complying with the ci.tv's development standards. Each item will note when it is to be completed and th~- have been grouped by department so that you know who to contact if you have questions. A. DEVELOPMENT SERVICES - BUILDING (staff contact - Phil Burns 805/326-3718) The applicant shall submit 4 copies of grading plans and 2 copies of the preliminary soils report to the Building Division. You must submit a final soils report to the Building Division before they can issue a building permit. Include with the final site plan documentation or changes to the plan showing that the project complies with all disability requirements of Title 24 of the State Building Code. Business identification signs are not considered nor approved under this review. A separate review and sign permit from the Building Division is required for all new signs, including furore use and construction signs. Signs must comply with the Sign Ordinance. The Building Division will assess school district fees at the time they issue a building permit. B. DEVELOPMENT SERVICES - PLANNING (staff contact - Dave Reizer 805/326-3673) The minimum parking required for this project has been computed baseci on use and shall be as follows: 624 square foot office/1 space per 230 square feet = 3 spaces Mote: 10 spaces are proposed on plan) The applicant shall submit one (1) copy of the final landscape plan to the Planning Division, and include a copy of this final plan with each set of the final plans submitted for building permits. Building permits will not be issued until the Planning Division has approved the final landscape plan for consistency with approved site plans and minimum ordinance standards (please refer to the attached standards - Chapter 17.61). Approved landscaping, parking and other related site improvements shall be installed and inspected before final occupancy of any building or site. Inspections are made on Fridays. Please call Dave Reizer (805/326-3673) to schedule an appointment before the Friday you want your inspection. 6 Habitat Conservation fees shall be required for this project and will be calculated based on the fee in effect at the time we issue an urban development permit (includes grading plan approvals) as defined in the Implementation/Management Agreement (Section 2.21) for the Metropolitan Bakersfield Habitat Conservation Plan. Upon payment of the fee, the applicant will receive acknowledgment of compliance with Metropolitan Bakersfield Habitat Conservation Plan (Implementation/Management Agreement Section 3.1.4). This fee is currently $1,240 per gross acre, payable to the City. of Bakersfield (submit to the Pl,nning Division). Open storage of materials and equipment shall be surrounded and screened with a solid wall or fence (screening also applies to gates). This fence shall be at least 6 feet in height and materials shall not be stacked above the height of the fence. (Note: A taller fence is allowed in commercial and industrial zones. A building permit is required for all fences and walls over 6feet in height.) Areas used for outside storage (does not include vehicle parking areas which are required to be paved), shall be treated with a permanent dust binder or other permanent dust control measures consistent with air pollution control regulations. C. FIRE DEPARTMENT (staff contact - Greg Yates 805/326-3939) Show on the final site plan all on-site fn'e hydrant locations and required fke flows. Based upon available information, the fire flow requirement may be 3,500 gallons per minute. To provide adequate fke protection during construction, the applicant shall install I fire hydrant as shown by staff on the returned site plan, or provide an alternative fire suppression program as approved by the Fire Department before final site plan approval. The applicant is required to purchase all fire hydrants from the Fire Department. The applicant shall give the Fire Department one set o'f the engineered water plans before the issuance of any building permit. The applicant shall obtain all necessary approvals from the Fire Department for fuel tanks or related facilities before they are installed on the site. o All streets and access roads to and around any building under construction must be at least 20 feet wide, contain no vehicle obstructions, and be graded to prevent water ponding. Barricades must be placed where ditches and barriers exist in or cross roadways. Emergency vehicle access must always be reliable. If you handle hazardous materials or hazardous waste on the site, the Environmental Services Division of the Fire Department may require a hazardoUs mater/al 7 management plan before you can begin operations. Please contact them at 805/326- 3979 for further information. If you treat hazardous waste on the site, the Environmental Services Division of the Fire Department may require a hazardous waste "Tiered" permit before you can begin operations. Please contact them at 805/326-3979 for further information. If you store hazardous materials on the site in either an underground or a permanent aboveground storage tank, a permit from the Environmental Services Division of the Fire Department is required to install and operate these tanks. The Environmental Services Division may also require a Spill Prevention Control and Countermeasure Plan before you can begin operations. Please contact them at 805/326-3979 for further information. D. PUBLIC WORKS - ENGINEERING (staff contact - Harry. Afshar 805/326-3576) The applicant shall construct curbs, gutters, cross gutters, sidewalks, and sweet/alley paving on East Pacheco Road according to adopted city standards for major collector streets. These improvements shall be shown on the final site plan submitted to the Building Division before any building permit will be issued. The applicant shall construct new connection(s) to the public sewer system (show on f'mal plans). This connection shall be shown on the final site plan submitted to the Building Division before any building permit will be issued. If a grading plan is required by the Building Division, a building permit will not be issued until the gracling plan is approved by both the Public Works Department and Building Division. Before you occupy any building or site, you must reconstruct or repair substandard off- site improvements to adopted city standards as directed by the City Engineer. Please call the construction superintendent at (661) 326-3049 to f~d out what improvements will be requi~ed. You must obtain a street permit from the Public Works Department before any work can be done within the public right-of-way (streets, alleys, easements). Please include a copy of this site plan review decision to the department at the time you apply for this permit. A sewer connection fee shall be paid at the time a building permit is issued. We will base this fee at the rate in effect at the time a building permit is issued. Ee A transportation impact fee for regional facilities shall be paid at the time a building permit is issued, or if no building permit is required, before occupancy of the building or site. This fee will be based at the rate in effect at the time the permit is issued. Based on the fee schedule in effect for the 1998-1999 fiscal year and the proposed use, the rate would be $38. for each vehicular trip. The Public Works Department will calculate an estimate of the total fee when you submit construction plans for the project. PUBLIC WORKS - TRAFFIC (staff contact - George Gillburg 805/326-3997) Show on the final plan 40 ft. (top-to-top) wide drive approach(es) as indicated by staff on the returned site plan. Drive approaches must be centered on drive aisles. PUBLIC WORKS - SOLID WASTE (staff contact - John Wilburn 805/326-3114) Show on the final plan one, 6' x 8' refuse bin location(s). Before occupancy of the building or site is allowed, one, 3 cubic yard front loading type refuse bin(s) shall be placed within the required enclosure (Detail #S-43). Before building permits can be issued or work begins on the property, you must contact the staff person above to establish the level and type of service necessary for the collection of refuse and/or recycled materials. The Solid Waste Division will determine appropriate service levels for refuse collection required for a project. The levels of service are based on how often collection occurs as follows: · Can or cart service -- · Front loader bin service -- · Roll-off compactor service -- 1 cubic yard/week or less 1 cubic yard/week - 12 cubic yards/day More than 12 cubic yards/day 9 BAKERSFIELD Development Services Department Jack Hardisty, Director Dennis C. Fidler Building Director (805) 326-3720 Fax (805) 325-0266 Stanley C. Grady Planning Director (805) 326-3733 Fax (805) 327-0646 February 10, 1999 TO: SUBJECT: Responsible, Trustee, or Other Interested Agency Notice of Public Hearing and Draft Negative Declaration [CUP P99-0053 - Soil Cleaning Facility] The City of Bakersfield as the Lead Agency under the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), has determined that a Negative Declaration is appropriate for the project identified in the attached Initial Study. We would appreciate your agency's comments regarding the scope, content and adequacy of the environmental information about the proposed project. Your agency may need to use this Negative Declaration when considering any permits or other approvals required for this project. The comment period begins on February 10, 1999 and ends March 5. To consider your comments regarding this project, please send your response to me before the comment period ends at the address shown below. If a response is not received from your agency, we will assume that you have no comment on the proposal.. We also give notice according to the Planning and Zoning Law of the California ~Government Code, that the City of Bakersfield Board of Zoning Adjustment (BZA) will hold a public hearing accepting comments regarding the proposed project and environmental determination at a public meeting. The BZA will hold this meeting TUESDAY, March 9, 1999, beginning at 3:00 p.m. in the Council Chambers at City Hall, 1501 Truxtun Avenue, Bakersfield, California. Any interested person or agency representative is welcome to attend. Sincerely, ert City of Bakersfield · 1 715 Chester Avenue · Bakersfield, California · 93301 PUBLIC HEARING NOTICE NOTICE OF PUBLIC HEARING BEFORE THE BOARD OF ZONING ADJUSTMENT OF THE CITY OF BAKERSFIELD The Board of Zoning Adjustment is giving notice that they will hold a hearing beginning at 3:00 p.m., TUESDAY, MARCH 9, 1999, in the Council Chambers of City Hall, 1501 Tmxtun Avenue, Bakersfield,. California, to accept public testimony regarding the following request: Project description: (File No. P99-0053) Conditional use permit to establish a facility that treats/cleans soil contaminated with hydrocarbons (gasoline, oil, diesel) within a 7.3 (Heavy Industrial) zone district. Phase 1 of the facility is planned on a 10 acre portion of a 20 acre site; phase 2 will expand the facility into the remaining 10 acres of the property. Project location: 408 East Pacheco Road Project apPlicant: Soil Rem Corporation 408 E. Pacheco Road Bakersfield, CA 93307 The Board of Zoning Adjustment is also giving notice that they will accept public testimony regarding the potential effect of this project on the environment. Following the regulations of the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), an initial study has been completed describing the degree of possible environmental impact of the project. This study has concluded that the proposal will not significantly affect the environment; therefore, the Board proposes to approve a Negative Declaration. You may review and/or obtain copies of the initial study and Negative Declaration at the Planning Department (contact Jim Eggert) in the Development Services Building at 1715 Chester Avenue, Bakersfield, California, or by telephoning the department at (805) 326-3733. The Board of Zoning Adjustment will consider all public comments regarding the proposed project and the environmental determination at the public hearing. They will also accept written comments but they must receive them on or before the hearing date..Written comments must refer to the file number and be directed to the City of Bakersfield Board o, fZonmg Adjustment, c/o Planning Department, 1715 Chester Avenue, Bakersfield, California, 93301. If you challenge the action taken on this proposal in court, you may be limited to contesting only those issues raised at the public hearing or in the written correspondence.received by the Board. DATED: February 3, 1999 POSTED: February 10, 1999 CONDITIONAL USE PERMIT P99-0053 EAST WHITE LANE 5.6 7.3/3.3 7.,3 E(1/2)RS E(1/2)RS COUNI'Y E(1/2)RS R-1 EAST PACHECO 20 A <:~ 7.,3 0 n/ 0 0 Z 0 7.3 16 ROAD A SCAJ.~ IN FEET 1305, R28E INITIAL STUDY/ NEGATIVE DECLARATION The City of Bakersfield Planning Department has completed an initial study of the possible environmental effects of the following described project and has determined that a Negative Declaration is appropriate. This determination has been made according to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA), the State CEQA Guidelines, and the City of Bakersfield CEQA Implementation Procedures. PROJECT NO: APPLICANT: LOCATION: Conditional Use Permit No. P99-0053 Soil Rem Corporation 408 East Pacheco Road Bakersfield, CA 93307 408 East Pacheco Road PROJECT DESCRIPTION: A Conditional Use Permit to establish a facility that treats/cleans soil contaminated with hydrocarbons (gasoline, oil, diesel) within a 7.3 (Heavy Industrial) zone district. Phase 1 of the facility is planned on a 10 acre portion of a 20 acre site; phase 2 will expand the facility into the remaining 10 acres of the property. ENVIRONMENTAL SETTING: The property is located within the Casa Loma Specific Plan in an area designated for Heavy Industrial development. It is located at the northwest comer of East Pacheco Road and South Cottonwood Road. The topography of the area is relatively flat., MITIGATION MEASURES - Included in the proposed project to avoid potentially significant effects (if required): 1) Lining the proposed contaminated soil receiving cells and berms with 40 mil plastic liners. 2) Air emissions shall be controlled by use of a chemical depressant. ect No. P99-0053 I. ENVIRONMENTAL CHECKLIST EARTH 8oi1~ / / Ar~h~i~l Beologio H~rd5 / / Hi~to~l Erosio~Sedimen~fion / / PUBUC SER~CES Topography ;:~ ~; ~ Fire WATER QUAB~IQUAN~ Groundwater Sudace Water Flooding/Drainage AIR Facili~ Maintenance Air Quali~ Climate/Air Movement Odors BIOLOGICAL RESOURCES Plants Animals Rare/Endangered Sp~ies Habitat Altera~on ~ANSPORTA~ON ~. ~. ~ ,:: (NOTE: ENVIRONMENTAL DISCUSSION REGARDING THE ABOVE IMPACTS IS ATTACHED.) S = Significant P = Potentially Significant I = Insignificant~No Effect Y -- Yes N = No ORD = Ordinance Requirement II. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE Does the project have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant Or animal community, reduce the number or ~estrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal species, or eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory? Does the project have the potential to achieve short-term, to the disadvantage of long-term, environmental goals? (A short term impact on the environment is one of which occurs in a relatively brief, definite period of time while long-term [mpacts v~ll endure well into the future.) Does the project have impacts which individually limited, but cumulatively considerable? (A project may impact On two or more separate resources where the impact on each resource is relatively small, but where the effect of the total Of those impacts on the environment is significant). Does the project have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either'directly or indirectly? Y N III. FINDINGS OF DETERMINATION (Projects where a Negative Declaration or EIR has not been previously prepared, or where a previous document will not be utilized.) ON THE BASIS OF THIS INITIAL EVALUATION (check one): It has been found that the proposed project COULD NOT have a significant effect on the environment; therefore, a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. It is been found that although the proposed project could'have a significant effect on the environment, there will not be a significant effect in this case because MITIGATION MEASURES, as identified in the Discussion of Environmental Impacts, have been incorporated into the project; therefore, a NEGATIVE DECLARATION will be prepared. It has been found that the proposed project MAY have a significant effect on the environment, and an EIR (ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACT REPORT) will be prepared. PREPARED BY (print): ~ouise Pa. lmer, Associate Planner DATE: February 9, 1999 ENVIRONMENTAL DISCUSSION Conditional Use Permit No. P99-0053 I. ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS Earth Soils - Construction of the project-will result in 20 acres of soil to be disrupted, compacted, displaced, over covered and/or uncovered by grading, filling, trenching, installation of drainage facilities, and other necessary ground preparation activities. City ordinances require that soils and grading reports be prepared and approved before issuance of building permits to reduce impacts. In addition, adherence to applicable building codes will also reduce impacts. Therefore, this effect is insignificant. ~ - The site does not contain any unique geologic or physical features. The proposed project will not create an unstable earth condition or cause changes to any geologic substructure. The project will not expose people, structures, or property to major geologic hazards such as landslides, mudslides or ground failure. Although no specific geologic hazards are known to occur within the boundaries of the project site, there are many geologic fractures in the earth's crust within the San Joaquin Valley which is bordered by major, active fault systems. Therefore, any development within the Metropolitan Bakersfield area may be subject to seismic hazards. City development standards will require the project to comply with appropriate seismic design criteria of the Uniform Building Code, drainage facility criteria, and approval ofpreconstmction soils and grading studies. As the site is outside the Alquist-Pfiolo Seismic Zones, no special seismic studies are required for this site before building structures for human occupancy. 'Erosion / Sedimentation - The proposed development will not adversely affect riven, streams, canals or beaches. City ordinances require that erosion, siltation or deposition of soils from the site by water runoff not occur either during development of the project, or through drainage of the site after construction. Wind erosion and fugitive dust may occur during the construction process; however, normal use of water spraying will control wind erosion impacts and should not be considered significant. To o__qLo_gr_~lhg - The slope of the natural terrain of the site is flat. Project development will not result in a significant change to the topography and/or ground surface relief features. Water Quality/0uantity ~ - The project will not alter the direction or rate of flow, or substantially deplete the quantity of groundwater resources, either through direct additions or withdrawals, or through interception of an aquifer by cuts or excavations. The project will utilize 40 mil plastic linen at all receiving cells for contaminated soils and a leachate collection and removal system to monitor and detect releases. Given the mitigation measures proposed, the project will not contaminate a public water supply, substantially interfere with groundwater recharges or substantially degrade water quality. The municipal water district will provide domestic water service to the development; however, the cumulative impact to the water table will be negligible and insignificant. ~ - The project will not result in discharge into any surface water, or significantly alter surface water quality, including but not limited to temperature, dissolved oxygen or turbidity. Surface water will be controlled using berms that are lined with the 40 mil plastic liners used in the receiving cells. The proposal will not contaminate any public water supply. The proposal will not result in changes in the currents or the course or direction of natural surface water movements. Environmental Discussion Conditional Use Permit No. P99-0053 Page 2 Floodin_~Drainage - The project will not result in changes to the course or direction of freshwater currents, or result in changes to the amount of surface water as the site does not contain, nor will the proposal impact, any rivers, streams or canals. The site is not in an area subject to flooding. Therefore, the proposal will not expose people or property to' water-related hazards such as flooding or tidal waves. Changes in absorption rates, drainage patterns, and the rate and amount of surface water runoff Will change as the project is developed. However, City ordinances require that the project must comply with drainage facility criteria, and approval ofpreconstmction soils and grading plans according to City Public Works and Building Department standards. Air Ouali _ty - Air emissions will be controlled by use of a chemical depressant (Vapor Control) to eliminate ak emissions. Therefore, the project will not substantially increase air pollution emissions, nor will there be a substantial deterioration of ambient air quality by development of this project. The proposal will not violate any ambient air quality standard, contribute substantially to existing or projected air quality violations, or expose sensitive recbptors to substantial pollutant concentrations. The project is subject to review by the San Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution Control District. Short-term, non-significant, air pollutant impacts will be generated on and off-site during construction of the project, including sources such as: dust from trenching, grading and vehicles; exhaust emissions from motor vehicles and construction equipment; and, emissions from asphalt paving of parking lots and roadways. Normal use of water spraying as required by the San Joaquin Unified Air Pollution District will control dust impacts and should not be considered significant. Although there would be short and long-term air quality impacts from mobile sources of pollutants generated by the estimated daily volume of vehicles (see transportation) produced by the proposal, there will not be a substantial increase in air pollution emissions, nor will there be a significant deterioration of ambient air quality. The proposal will not violate any ambient ak quality standard, contribute substantially to existing or projected air quality violations, or expose sensitive receptors to substantial pollutant concentrations. Climate/Air Movement - The proposed project will not significantly alter air movement, moisture, temperature and/or results in any change to climates, either locally or regionally. Odors - The proposed, use is not anticipated to create significant objectionable odors that would affect neighboring uses or residents. The project is located in an area designated for heavy industrial development. There are no residences within .5 miles of the project site. Odors created by the project will be controlled by use of chemical depressants to reduce them below a significant objectionable level. Biological Resources Plants - New plant species will be introduced because of ornamental landscaping. A barrier will be created to the normal replenishment of existing plant species as the site will be completely developed. Although existing species of plants on-site will be removed through urban development, the proposal will not entirely eliminate a plant community or substantially diminish or reduce wildlife habitats. These effects of urban development are not considered significant. Animals - A barrier will be created to the normal replenishment of existing animal species as the site will be completely developed. Although existing Species of animals on-site would be removed through urban development, 'the prOposal will not entirely eliminate a wildlife community or substantially diminish or Environmental Discussion Conditional Use Permit No. P99-0053 Page 3 significantly reduce wildlife habitats. These effects of urban development are not considered significant. Rare/Endangered Species - Permits and approvals for development associated with this project will be subject to the terms of the Metropolitan Bakersfield Habitat Conservation Plan and associated 10(a)(1)(B) and 2081 permits issued to the City by the_U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service and State Depathnent of Fish and Game, respectively. Terms of the permit require applicants for development projects to pay habitat mitigation fees, excavate known kit fox dens and notify agencies before grading. The Metropolitan Bakersfield Habitat Conservation Plan may be reviewed at the following location: City of Bakersfield, Planning Department, 1715 Chester Avenue, Bakersfield, CA, 93301, (805) 326-3733. Habitat Alteration - Urban development may alter the area's habitat by introducing domesticated or feral species of animals into the area. The project may result in the creation of a barrier to the migration or movement of animals from the surrounding urban lands. These impacts to wildlife habitats are considered in the Final Environmental Impact Report for the Metropolitan Bakersfield Habitat Conservation Plan (MBHCP), and are not considered significant for the project proposed. The proposed project is not "significant" according to CEQA, and a Certificate of Fee Exemption has been made with the California Depamnent of Fish and Game. The project will not individually or cumulatively adversely affect wildlife resources, as defined in Section 711.2 of the Fish and Game Code. See attached De Minimis Impact Findings. Transportation Tr'/lffic/Circulation - The proposed project will generate additional vehicular movement but will not cause an increase in traffic which is substantial in relation to the existing traffic load (volume) and capacity of the street system, and will not substantially affect existing transportation systems. The project will not significantly alter present patterns of circulation or movement of people and/or goods. The City Traffic Engineer has reviewed the proposal and determined that the traffic generated is less than significant to the existing transportation system and will not require a specific traffic analysis. The development is subject to both local and regional traffic impact fees adopted by the City Council to mitigate both on-site and off-site effects of the specific proposal on the city's street network to less than significant. P0yking - The proposal will increase the demand for parking. However, present city ordinances require that the project contain sufficient on-site Parking based on the specific use(s) so as not to adversely affect existing parking facilities in the area. Therefore, this effect is not considered significant. ~ - There will be no known significant increases in traffic hazards to motor vehicles, bicyclists, or pedestrians from the proposed project. Required traffic safety measures will reduce .any hazards to be less than significant. Ak/Water/Rail Systems - The project will not significantly affect existing or planned waterborne, rail, or air traffic. CompatibiliW - The existing land uses surrounding and adjacent to the project site are identified in Table A. These uses are compatible with the proposed project. Approval of the proposal will not conflict with adopted environmental plans or goals of the community, disrupt or divide the physical arrangement of an established community, or create a significant land use compatibility problem. Environmental Discussion Conditional Use Permit No. P99-0053 Page 4 TABLE A Land Uses and Zoning of Site and Adjacent Properties SITE I Hl(Heavylndustrial) I Hl(HeflvyIndustrial)I VacantLand NORTH HI (Heavy Industrial) 7.3 (Heavy Industrial) Vacant Land SOUTH A (Agricultural) A (Agricultural) Agricultural Development EAST HI (Heavy Industrial) 7.3 (Heavy Industrial) Vacant Land WEST HI (Heavy Industrial) 7.3 (Heavy Industrial) Vacant Land General Plan/Zoninff - The site is presently designated HI (Heavy Industrial) and zoned 7.3 (Heavy Industrial). The proposal will not result in a substantial alteration of the present or planned land use of the area, as no land use amendments or zoning changes are proposed with the project. The proposal is consistent with the Metropolitan Bakersfield 2010 General Plan policies and implementation measures and will not significantly conflict with present or planned land uses in the area. The project is also consistent with the purpose and intent of the Bakersfield Zoning Ordinance with respect to the use and related development standards. Growth Inducement - The proposed project will not induce substantial growth as it is consistent with the existing development pattern, established general planning and zoning in the area, and planned growth as examined in the Metropolitan Bakersfield 2010 General Plan. Prime Agricultural Land - No agricultural crops currently exist on the site and it does not contain prime agricultural soils. Removal of 20 acres of land through the proposed project will not convert prime agricultural land to nonagricultural use or impair the agricultural productivity of prime agricultural land in the area. Cultural Resources Archaeological -The proposal is an infill development where the site has already been significantly disturbed from adjacent development, utility installation, street construction, and installation of other urban-related improvements. A surface survey is therefore, not needed for this project. In the event unanticipated archaeological or paleontological resources are discovered during project construction, the developer will be required to retain a qualified archaeologist to evaluate the significance of the finding and appropriate course of action subject to the requirements of CEQA, and the Native American Heritage Commission regarding Native American remains. Historical/Cultural - No known historical/cultural strUctures or other resources are on the site that the proposal will affect. The project will not eliminate important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory, destroy historical/cultural resources, adversely affect physical or aesthetic characteristics, affect unique ethnic cultural values, or restrict religious or sacred uses. Environmental Discussion Conditional Use Permit No. P99-0053 Page 5 Police - The proposal will not decrease existing police protection in the area. These services are currently provided and planned to remain at their present level of support through property tax increases generated by this development; therefore, the effect is not significant. Fire - The proposal will not decrease existing fire service in the area. ~'hese services are currently provided and planned to remain at their present level of support through property tax increases generated by this development; therefore, the effect is notsignificant. In addition, the project must meet all requirements of the Uniform Building and Fire Codes regarding fire safety. Schools --The proposed project will not significantly affect existing or planned school facilities. The development is subject to appropriate school impact fees as adopted by the local districts affected to mitigate anticipated impacts. ~ - The project will not affect the quality or quantity of existing recreational oppommities or create a substantial need for new parks or recreational facilities not already planned in the area. Solid Waste / Disposal - The proposed project will not result in a need for significant new or substantial alterations to existing solid waste disposal systems. The development will not breach published national, state or local standards relating to solid waste or litter control. The site is subject to mandatory solid waste pickup and onsite facility design will be required to meet minimum city standards. 'Facili .ty Maintenance - Street or other public facility improvements from the proposal will not result in a significant increase in maintenance responsibility for the City of Bakersfield. These services are currently provided and planned to remain at their present level of support through property tax increases generated by this development; therefore, the effect is not significant. Utilities. Water - Domestic water service is presently available to the site with minimal on-site lines needed to att~h to the delivery system. The proposed development will not result in a need for significant additional systems or substantially alter the existing water utilities in the area. W~~ - Wastewater services are presently available to the site with minimal on-site lines needed to attach to the system. The proposed development would not result in a need for significant additional systems or substantially alter the existing wastewater utilities in the area. The proposed project will not require the extension of any sewer trunk line that will serve new development. ~ - Storm drainage facilities are presently available to the site with minimal on-site work needed to attach to the system. The proposed development would not result in a need for significant additional systems or substantially alter the storm drainage systems in the area. Expansion of storm drain utilities will be required to serve this development, but the impact is not considered significant. Natural Gas - Natural gas services are presently available to the site with minimal on-site work needed to attach to the delivery system. The proposed development would not result in a need for significant additional systems or substantially alter the natural gas systems in the area. Environmental Discussion Conditional Use Permit No. P99-0053 Page 6 ~ - Electric services are presently available to the site with minimal on-site work needed to attach to the delivery system. The proposed development would not result in a need for significant additional systems or substantially alter the electricity systems in the area. Communications - Communication services are presently available to the site with minimal on-site work needed to attach to the delivery system. The proposed development will not result in a need for significant additional systems or substantially alter the communications systems in the area. Population [ Hotlsing / Employment The project will not significantly alter present population patterns, distribution, density (existing or planned), or the growth rate. The proposal will also not adversely affect existing housing or create the need for additional unplanned housing in the area. The proposal may affect, in a beneficial way, the temporary and permanent income distribution, emplOyment, and/or tax revenues of the city and county. The project will not, however, result in significant reduced employment opportunities for low and moderate income socioeconomic groups, or adversely affect social affiliation or interaction of the neighborhood. Health Ha~z~rds [ Public Safety_ No health hazards or potential hazards to people or plant or animal populations will be created from the proposed development. Although the proposal does involve a risk of releasing hazardous substances (oil, gasoline, diesel) in case of an accident or upset conditions, the mitigation proposed by the applicant (40 mil plastic liner at receiving cells, continuous monitoring of soils conditions, etc.) should reduce these impacts to less than significant. The project will not attract people to an area and expose them to hazards found there, nor will the project interfere with emergency response plans or emergency evacuation plans. The project is not on the most current hazardous wastes and substance's site list according to Section 65962.5 of the California Government Code. Noise Ambient noise levels will increase through any urban type of development but not significantly by construction of this project. Typical development standards including building setbacks, walls, and landscaping will'prevent substantial increases in the ambient noise levels of the adjoining area and will not expose people to severe noise levels. Some additional noise will be associated with construction of the project but current ordinances restrict this as to the time it can take place, and it is temporary in nature. Therefore, noise impacts will be less than significant. Aesthetics The proposed use will alter the open space qualities of the area to a minor degree. The proposed project is not intending any development that would result in the obstruction of any scenic vista or view open to the public, nor will the proposal result in the creation of an aesthetically offensive site open to public view. Landscaping, overlook restrictions into residential areas, and rooftop screening of mechanical equipment are additional measures that will reduce effects to be less than significant. Development of the project will not have a negative affect on the aesthetics of the area. Environmental Discussion Conditional Use Permit No. P99-0053 Page 7 Recreation The proposal will not adversely affect existing or proposed recreational opportunities in the neighborhood or adversely affect regional facilities. Light and glare will increase from electrical lighting facilities necessary for the proposed use. Existing ordinance standards require that building location, material selection, lighting design, parking and sign placement is such to reduce effects and that buffer proposed light impacts from surrounding developments. Therefore, proposed uses should not cause significant light or glare to existing or future development surrounding the site. Natural Resources The proposed project will not significantly increase the rate of use of non-renewable natural resources or adversely affect such resources that may exist on the site. Ener Ugy.__~_~ The proposed development will not result in significant irreversible environmental changes, including uses of nonrenewable energy resources, during the initial and continued phases of the project. The project will not result in significant energy requirements or lack of energy efficiency by amount or fuel type of a project's life cycle. The proposal will not result in significant effects on local and regional energy supplies or on requirements for additional energy capacity or sources, nor will the project result in significant effects on peak and base period demands for electricity and other forms of energy. The project will not conflict with existing energy standards, nor will it encourage activities which result in the wasteful or substantial use of significant amounts of fuel, water, or energy. The project will not result in significant effects on projected transportation energy requirements or in the project's overall use of efficient transportation alternatives. II. MANDATORY FINDINGS OF SIGNIFICANCE Potential 1[o Degrade the Environment: The project does not have the potential to degrade the quality of the environment, substantially reduce the habitat of a fish or wildlife species, cause a fish or wildlife population to drop below self-sustaining levels, threaten to eliminate a plant or animal community, reduce the number or restrict the range of a rare or endangered plant or animal, or affect important examples of the major periods of California history or prehistory. Short-term vs, Long-term Effects: The project does not have the potential to achieve short-term environmental goals, to the disadvantage of long-term environmental goals as it is consistent with adopted environmental plans. Cllmulative Effects: The project does not have impacts which are individually limited, but cumulatively considerable or for which the incremental effects of an individual project are considerable when viewed concerning the efforts of past projects, then current projects, and possible future projects. Sllbstantial Adverse Effects: The project does not have environmental effects which will cause substantial adverse effects on human beings, either directly or indirectly. Environmental Discussion Conditional Use Permit No. P99-0053 Page 8 Reference List ° o o Metropolitan Bakersfield 2010 General Plan and Appendices, City of Bakersfield, Kern County, Kern COG, Golden Empire Transit, March 1990. Metropolitan Bakersfield 2010 General Plan DEIR, The Planning Center, July, 1989. Metropolitan Bakersfield 2010 General Plan FEIR, SCH #8907032, City of Bakersfield, County of Kern, KCOG, Golden Empire Transit, September, 1989. FEIR Metropolitan Bakersfield Habitat Conservation Plan, Thomas Reid Associates for the City of Bakersfield and Kern County, March 1991. Metropolitan BakersfieM Habitat Conservation Plan, Adviso~ Notice to Developers, 10(a)(1)(B) and 2081 permits, 1994. Title 17, Zoning Ordinance, Bakersfield Municipal Code. Title 16, Subdivision Ordinance, Bakersfield Municipal Code. The Brandt Company Separation Through Technology CF-1 and CF-2 Decanting Centrifuges The Brandt CF-1 and CF-2 decanting centrifuges combin, e precision engineering with quality materials in two high-capacity, compact units specifically built to provide long, reliable use in a variety of applications, including dewatering, process separations, and fine solids removal from drilling fluids. The CF-1 and CF-2 decanting centrifuges separate solids from liquids using centrifugal force. The feed slurry is introduced through a stationary feed tube into the centrifuge bowl, which rotates at high speed. The "G" forces created by this rotation cause the heavier, larger solids to separate from the fluid and forces them against the bowl wall. The scroll, a helical screw conveyor located within the bowl, rotates in the same direction as the bowl, but at a slightly different speed. This conveyor moves solids across the conical beach drying area and discharges them through pods at the end of the centrifuge bowl. The clarified liquid forms an inner ring called the pool, or pond. This fluid is continuously discharged from the bowl over adjustable ring dam plates. The dam plates allow the pond depth to be varied; deeper for improved clarification, shallower for maximum dryness. Slurry in Adjustable Ring Dam Plate Solids Liquids Discharge Beach Pond Discharge The Brandt CF-1 is designed for effective solids removal from both Iow- and high-density fluids. A 40:1 planetary gearbox provides the strength required to move heavy solids loads without torque overload. Coupled with the 18-inch x 28-inch contour bowl design, the CF-1 is ideally suited for weighted drilling fluids and other high-density applications. Its small size makes it attractive for applications where space is a premium. The CF-1 is rated at 125 GPM of 9.0 PPG slurries and can remove up to 4 tons of solids per hour in continuous operation. The Brandt CF-2 is designed for effective dewatering of Iow-density slurries, such as retention ponds, cooling towers, and unweighted drilling fluids. A 80:1 planetary gearbox and 24-inch diameter contour bowl provide the capacity to effectively clarify slurries up to 12 PPG (1.4 SG). The com- pact design provides effective separation in a minimum space. Ideally suited for maximum solids removal from unweighted drilling fluids and other Iow-density applications. The CF-2 is rated at 200~ GPM of 9.0 PPG slurries and can remove over 6 tons of solids per hour in continuous operation. When heavy solids loads are expected, the optional 40:1 gearbox provides additional torque capacity and increases solids removal to 7 tons per hour. Both the CF-1 and CF-2 decanting centrifuges can be provided complete with feed pumps, slurry tanks, and other installation equipment and accessories. Simple adjustments may be made to optimize performance for changes in slurry density, viscosity, solids content, or particle size distribution. All electrics are suitable for Class 1, Division 1 locations and include starter interlocks between the pump and centrifuge itself. HEIGHT W,DTH .i . SERVICE HEIGHT FEED- LENGTH 6" EFFLUENT DISCHARGE 1 HEIGHT Maximum recommended bowl speed; Vary bowl speed by changing sheave ratio. CF-1 CF-2 2100 RPM 1850 RPM Differential bowl/conveyor speed: other ratios available as options 40:1, fixed 80:1, fixed Electrics: Motor size: 40 HP 50 HP Start up amps, @ 460 VAC: Instananeous 200 amps 240 amps Momentary 100 amps 120 amps Running amps, @ 460 VAC: 45 amps 54 amps All explosion-proof, 230/460 VAC, 3-phase, 60 Hz. Console- mounted centrifuge starter can be interlocked with feed pump starter. Automatic shut-off with torque overload. Fluid coupling between motor and rotating assembly reduces start-up amps and electrical requirements. Physical Data: CF-1 CF-2 Length: 111 in 130 in 2819 mm 3302 mm Width: 63 in 66 in 1600 mm 1676 mm Service Width: 74 in. 79 in 1880 mm 2007 mm Height: 61 in 63 in 1549 mm 1600 mm Service Height: 63 in 68 in 1600 mm 1727 mm Bowl Size: 18" x 28" 24" x 38" 457 x 711 mm 610 x 965 mm Weight: 4700 lbs. 7500 lbs. 2136 kg 3409 kg The Brandt Company P. O. Box 2327 2800 North Frazier Street Conroe, Texas 77305-2327 (409) 756-4800 Fax: (409) 756-8102 Separation Through Technology D() I ~ -4-94 SC-35HS High-Speed Decanting Centrifuge The SC-35HS is specifically designed for oilfield service. The rotating assembly is a contour design, having both a cylindrical and a conical bowl section. This design, along with other proprietary features, yields performance advantages over other designs: · Oilfield designed for extra ruggedness · Higher "G" force at any given speed than that of competitive units · Higher solids capacity (6 tons/hr process rate of solids removal) · Higher flow rates at given separation point (180 GPM @ 9.0 PPG) Finer separation point at given flowrate (1-2 microns @ 3,500 PRM @ minimal flow) · Greater settling area in a smaller footprint (15" x 48" stainless steel bowl) In addition, the SC-35HS Centrifuge offers the following design features for long, reliable service. Standard, all electric drive simplifies installation and provides trouble-free operation. 40 HP drive motor and electrical components meet current NEMA and UL specifications for use in class 1, Group D hazardous locations. Other electrical configurations are available. A fluid clutch between motor and rotating assembly reduces start-up amperage. Cyclogear type gearbox that offers smoother, quieter operation than that of a planetary gear design. Simple, push button controls for the centrifuge and pump are located on the main control panel for added convenience. Either manual or automatic operation may be selected. A ball-detent torque limiter protects the unit from process overload damage. The limiter can be easily reset without shear pin replacement. The feed pipe assembly includes a dilution fluid or chemical insertion point. The large size solids underflow and effluent overflow discharge ports allow maximum process rates. Bolt-on design reduces contamination or downtime. Rugged skid mounting and a separate isolated rotating assembly frame assures vibration-free operation. Larger forged steel pillow block housing with oil bath spherical roller bearings produce cooler running temperatures for longer bearing life in high speed applications. Unique bowl & conveyor design, that allows easy disassembly with standard hand tools, and eliminates any media contamination to conveyor bearings. All stainless steel conveyor & bowl assembly to minimize wear and corrosion. Hardened 440C wear parts are supplied in the acceleration section. Independent, skid-mounted feed pumps increase flexibility for various process applications and simplify installation. An electric drive centrifugal pump is provided as standard; other feed pumps are available upon request. LIQUID POOL ACCELERATION CONVEYOR ROTATING BOWL DISCHARGE FIG. 1 Decanting. Centrifuges Remove Free Liquid From Separated Solids As shown' in Figure 1, a rotating bowl (1) creates very high G-forces-and forms a liquid pool inside the bowl. (2) The free liquid and finer solids flow towards the larger end of the centrifuge and are removed through the effluent overflow weirs (3). The larger solids settle against the bowl wall, forming a cake '(4). These solids are pushed by a screw conveyor (5) across a drainage deck (conical section), or beach (6). Dewatering or drying actually takes place during the process of the solids moving up the beach, with the de-liquefied solids discharged through a series of underflow ports (7). A gear box (8) connects the conveyor to the bowl, causing the conveyor to rotate in the same direction as the bowl, but at a slightly different speed. This speed differential is required to convey and discharge solids. High-Capacity And Maximum Solids Removal Today, environmental dewatering applications have added to the capacity and clarification demands of decanting centrifuges. The SC-34HS Centrifuge is designed for process rates up to 180 GPM or 4.5 yd3/hr (approximately 6 tons/hr) of solids. Specialized Application Centrifuges in addition to the SC-35HS centrifuge, Brandt/EPITM also offers a line of large bowl centrifuges for other high voJume oilfield and industrial applications. Other styles of high speed machines are available in the rental fleet. OUTER BOWL CENTRIFUGAL "G, FORCE COMPARISON CHART (MOST COMPETITORS VERSUS SC-35HS) RPM 14" I.D. BOWL (STANDARD) 2,000 2,250 2,500 2,750 3,000 3,250 3,500 795 1,006 1,242 1,503 1,789 2,100 2,435 FIG. 3: "G" FORCE ADVANTAGE OF SC:35HS OVER COMPETITIVE MACHINES TECHNICAL DATA Electric Drive Dimensions: (LxWxH) 120" x 61" x 60" (3.0m x 1.5m x 1.5mi Weight: 6,105 Lbs. (2,775Kg) Main Drive: (Bowl) 40 HP (30Kw), 3 PH, 60 HZ (50HZ), Direct Belt Driven, Sheave Changeable- (1,770- 3,220 RPM) Scroll Drive: 59:1 Leading - Fixed Rated Capacity: Approx. 180 GPM (45 M3/Hr.) "G" Force Range: 0 - 2,200 Solids Loading: Approx. 6 Tons/Hr. (5,400 Kg/Hr.) Hydraulic Drive 120" x 72" x 72" (3.Om x 1.8m x 1.8mi 7,600 Lbs. (3,454Kg) 60 HP (45Kw), 3PH 60 HZ (50HZ), Hydraulic Driven, infinitely Variable- (O- 3,500 RPM) Hydraulic Driven (0- 90 RPM) .Leading - Variable Approx. 180 GPM (45 M3/Hr. 0 - 2,610 Approx. 6 Tons/Hr. (5,400 Kg/Hr.) 180 160 140 120 100 80 60 40 20 0 8.5 PROCESS RATES SHOWN ARE OPTIMUM. ACTUAL RATES MAY VARY WITH BOWL SPEED. VISCOSITY & DENSITY PROFILE OF SOLIDS. SC-35HS 9 · 10 11 12 13 14 15 18 20 MUD WEIGHT - Lbs./Gal. FIG. 2: PROCESS RATES VERSUS MUD WEIGHT DATA Brandt / EPITM ....... "Separation Through Technology" P, O. Box 2327 2800 N. Frazier (77303) Conroe, Texas 77305-2327 (409) 756-4800 · Fax: (409) 756-8102 D047-08-96 ~ mm ~ ~ iB "" B h,,dt I illl l!l Ii I em ell lB mmmmmmmmmmmm ~mmmmmmmmlmw Company ~lllllllm~' ,~111 i1~11~' Separation Through Technology ATL-1000st" and ATL-CSsM Screen Separators The ATL-1000 and ATL-CS Screen Separators are part of the family of proven Advanced Linear Technology (ATL) high performance screen separators available from The Brandt Company. With over 20 years experience in liquid/solids separation equipment and fluid processing system design, The Brandt Company has built a reputation for dependable products, innovative solutions and technical services. The ATL-1000 provides sharp, consistent separations, from 24 to 250 mesh, or finer, over a wide range of drilling and other separation applications. Its compact design and higher capacity, combined with dependable performance has made the ATL-1000 the preferred .choice for liquid/solids separations. When multiple separations are required, such as sticky clays at high flow rates, the ATL-CS provides three-stage separation in a single unit. The two top screens are the Brandt Tandem of proven scalping ability, using circular motion and hook strip style screens. The bottom screen deck is the ATL-linear Which combines increased capacity with finer screening and decreased headroom re- quirements. Small Footprint ATL screen separators are compact. 'The smaller size, combined with advanced linear technology, saves rig-up space and provides more room for additional units. The result is higher throughput, reduced solids in the mud system and reduced operating expenses. Proven Linear Design, Adjustable DeckAngle The ATL-1000 utilizes Brandt's exclusive ATL screen separator technology and the repairable Blue Hex screen panels for maximum flexibility and higher capacity than other designs. ATL separators use a dual shaft drive motor and gearboxes to provide positive linear motion at 4.1 G's for effective separation and continuous conveyance of solids across the screen surface, from feed to discharge. The ATL deck angle is ~l~fjustable, ranging from horizontal to 100 up hill to accommodate a variety of drilling conditions. When combined with linear motion, the uphill slope increases capacity without reducing separation per- formance. Screen angle can be changed in 2- 1/2° increments while the unit is operating. Dual Pitch Screen Plane, Flat Screen Surface Unlike other designs, the ATL basket includes a dual pitch screen plane to reduce pool depth and regrinding of solids, yet provides maximum solids dryness. The design of the ATL basket and Blue Hex screen panel eliminates the crown required to properlytenSion the screen on other units. The result is no. channeling of fluid along the sides of the screen. Solids are discharged across the entire 'surface of the screen to increase solids load' capacity and increase screen life. Exclusive Blue 'Hex Screen Panels Brandt's Blue Hex screen panels are the most advanced design available and-are offered in a variety of mesh sizes from 24 'to 250, or finer. Single layer and multi-layered panels are available in square or oblong weave, depending on the application. Easily recognized by their distinctive, blue color, Blue Hex screens are pre-tensioned on a unique .tubular support frame and hexagonal shaped support grid. This design maximizes screen area and offers up to 50% longer life than other types. When a screen beginsto wear or is damaged and a hole appears, the hole can be easily repaired with Brandt's exclusive Screen Plug. These repairs can be completed with the screen in place, on the unit, to reduce downtime. Quick Change Screens, Tight Seal Screen changes are quickly completed with Brandt exclusive Camlock latches. These latches are fast, consistent and dependable. Their simple mechanical design requires no special tools, air or hydraulics. The positive latch, along with the design of the screen bed and the Blue Hex screen panels, provides an excellent seal and curtails fluid bypass. Dependable Performance, Long Life Brandt equipment has established a reputation for rugged, reliable performance. The ATL family of separators;l~ATL- i 000, ATL-1200, ATL-CS, ATL-2800, ATL-1 6/2 and ATL-Dryer continue this tradition. All units are standard with explosion proof electrics, suitable for Class 1 Division 1 atmospheres, .corrosion resistant coatings and materials and easily replaced consumables. Custom units may be designed to meet specific flow, solids loading and discharge requirements. They can be integrated into ISCS systems, fitted with conveyors, integral spray systems, weatherized for extreme temperatures and outfitted with 50 or 60 Hz electrics. Specifications: ATL-1000 ATL-CS Screen Area: 35.8 sq ft 65.0 sq ft G Force: Top Deck N/A 4.5 G's Lower Deck 4.1 G's 4.1 G's Electrics: Motor size: 5 HP Start up amps, @ 460 VAC: 12 amps All electrics are explosion-proof, 230/460 VAC, 3-phase, 60 Hz unless otherwise requested (2) 5 HP 12 amps (each motor) Physical Data, nominal: Length: 100 in 100 in (2540 mm) (2540 mm) Width: 71 in 77 in (1803 mm) (1956 mm) Height: 64 in 87 in (1626 mm) (2210 mm) Weir Height: 43 3/4 in 79 1/4 in (1111 mm) (2013 mm) Weight: 4300 lb 8000 lb (1950 kg) (3629 kg) RO. Box 2327 2800 North Frazier Street Conroe, Texas 77305-2327 (713) 350-4799 (409) 756-4800 Fax: (409) 756-8102 Separation Through Technology The Brandt Company Separation Through Technology ATL-2800sa Drying Separator The ATL-2800 Drying Separator is part of the family of proven Advanced Linear Technology (ATL) high-performance vibrating screen separators available from The Brandt Company, a leader in liquids/solids separation technology. Rated at 1680 GPMprocess capacity, the ATL- 2800 combines 4" hydrocyclone separators and an advanced, linear-motion screen separator into a single, compact unit, designed for use in a variety of applications. These include closed- Iccp mud systems, waste water cleanup, dewatering of river soils, waste minimization, liquid clarification and recovery, and primary classification of granular products to name a few. The ATU2800 directs the underflow from the primary 4-inch cone separation stage to process it through fine-mesh screens. Oversize solids are removed or dewatered by the screen. The liquid, which passes through the screen is returned to the system or further processed by supplementary equipment. The result is removal of fine solids and minimized liquid loss from the system. If desired, the underflow from the hydrocydones can be directed to bypass the screens. For example, in oilwell drilling or horizontal boring applications, the ATL-2800 can be used to remove fine drilled solids during top-hole drilling, as part of a closed-loop processing system, as an additional primary separator connected to the flowline, or to replace existing mud cleaners. Proven Linear Design, Adjustable Deck Angle The ATL-2800 utilizes Brandt's exclusive ATL screen separator technology and repairable Blue HexTM screen panels for maximum flexibility, higher capacity, and smaller footprint than other designs. ATL separators use a dual-shaft'drive motor and gearboxes to provide positive, linear motion for effective phase separation and continuous conveyance of solids across the screen surface. The ATL deck angle is adjustable, ranging from horizontal to 10° uphill to accommodate a variety of process conditions. When combined with linear motion, the uphill slope increases capacity without reducing separation performance. Screen angle can be easily changed while the unit is operating. Dual Pitch Screen Plane, Flat Screen Surface Unlike other designs, the ATL screen frame includes a dual-pitch Screen plane, to reduce pool depth and regrinding of solids, yet provide maximum solids "dryness". The design of the ATL frame and Blue Hex screen panel eliminates the crown required for proper screen tension on other units. The result is effective use of the entire screen width. Exclusive Blue Hex Screen Panels Brandt's Blue Hex screen panels are the most advanced design available. Easily recognized by their distinctive blue color, Blue Hex screen panels are pre-tensioned with a unique tubular support frame and hexagonal-shaped support web. This design maximizes screen area and offers up to 50% longer life than other types. When a screen is damaged, the hole can be easily repaired with Brandt's exclusive Screen Plug without removing the screen from the unit. These repairs can be completed with the screen in place on the unit to reduce downtime. Screen tensioning is quickly completed with Brandt's exclusive cam type latches. These latches are fast, consistent, and dependable. Their simple mechanical design requires no special tools, air, or hydraulics. The camlock latch, along with the design of the screen bed and Blue Hex screen panels, provides a positive seal and eliminates fluid bypass. Better Hydrocyclones The ATL-2800 uses Brandt's proven hydrocyclones, known for their superior phase separation and long life. The 4" cones include a ceramic insert molded into the cone apex and an involute feed to reduce wear and improve performance. Dependable Performance, Long Life Brandt equipment has established a reputation for rugged, reliable performance. The ATL family of separators -- the ATL- 1000, ATL-1200, ATL-CS, ATL-16/2, and the ATL-2800 -- continue this tradition. All units are standard with explosion- proof electrics suitable for Class 1, Division 1 atmospheres, corrosion-resistant coatings and materials, and easily replaced parts. Custom units are also available to meet your material, volume and application requirements. 11/16" ~,/-HEADER ROTATED 180 DEG. 16'" Specifications Rated Capacity: 1680 GPM Screen Area: 25.0 square feet G Force: 4.1 "G's" Header Connections: Desilter stage Shaker backtank 6-inch Victaulic groove (6.625 in OD) Customer specified Hydrocyclone feed pump requirements: 1680 GPM 75 feet of head at cone header Electrics: Motor size: 5 HP Start up amps, @ 460 VAC: 12 amps All electrics are explosion-proof, 230/460 VAC, 3-phase, 60 Hz. Physical Data, nominal: Length: Footprint: 100 in (2540 mm) Overall: 122 in (3099 mm) Width: 77 in (1956 mm) Height: 92 in (2360 mm) Weir Height: 40 in (1016 mm) Weight: 7500 lbs (3409 kg) The Brandt Company P. O. Box 2327 2800 North Frazier Street Conroe, Texas 77305-2327 (409) 756-4800 Fax: (409) 756-8102 Separation Through Technology D026-11-94 T REC. EIVl/V6 1"0~ VIE. W F · . "TENTATIVE" BEING ADIVISION OF LOT 2G OF"IHE KERN cOUNTY sA~S M~ NO. i ~' ~NDS ~ - J. B. HA~N DASD M~CH 16. 1~9. n~ IN ~E 0~ ~ ~E KERN C~' PARCELS 27;68 ACRES CL RO. ~ 782) F~$£MENTS NOT PLO[TABL~ SHEET 1 OF 1 SHEET ..... ,2 ~.,~. ,/ ......... ,~×:~,:c~?-.: ,.. :.~:~,.:. ANALYTICAL REQUIREMENTS FOR SOIL& WATER The soil and/or waler proposed tm'remedbflon/recycling must be cefl~fied as not being a 'RCRA' listed waste as defined in 40 CFR 261. or a California Hasardous Waste as defined by Title 22 CCR. The goUowing analyses must be_performed by a stage certified laboratory, with a copy of the test results forwarded to ~'o~q ! lot review: Labor~tor~ tests shall be accompanied by necessary quality control information, including duplicaM uml~es, spike sample resulu, and chain of custody. Te~t RequiremeMe EPA 8O2O (BTEX) EPA 801S Modified Gasoline-Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons If Leaded- EPA 6010 - Total Lead ~ FUEL AND DIESEL FUEL Test Requir .emen~ EPA 8015 Modified Diesel- TotAl Petroleum Hydrocarbons Test Requirements: EPA 8015 Modified Diesel- Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons EPA 418.1- Total Recoverable Pewoleu~ Ll~lrocarbons TTLC- Total Metals C. oncentrat~ Crmfe can conuin a wide ranfe of carbon choa~j This is logical because it b the unrefhed raw product from which all of the above products are refined. TILIt is why. in many instances, ref~lator3 want to know about TPH-D~esel (8015 Mod. g). and 418.1 or 413~ In concert, these tests cover the entire carbon chah of interest. .~RJ~~ATED _WASTEWATER Suspended Solids T.DS. Fats.-Oils and Grease I~O.D. C.O.D. : NOTE: Hydrocarbou contaminated water must be certified as being cont~mha ted solely by virgin, non-chlorinated, petroleum hydrocarbons. The following levels are in accordence with CCR, Title 22 and are subject t° cb. snge Antlmbny (Sb) 500 15 Arsenic (As) 500 5 5 Barium (Ba) 10,000 100 100 Beryllium (Be) 75 0.75 Cadmium (Cd) 100 .1. 1 Chromi~m VI (CRV]) 500 5 Chromium (Ct) 2.500 560 5 Cobalt (Co) 8.000 80 Copper (Cu) 2.500 ~5 Lead (FPo) 1.000 5 5 Mercury (Hg) ~0 0.~ 0.~ Molybdenum (Mo) 3.500 ~ Nickel (Ni) 2.000 ~0 Selinium (Se) 100 1 1 Silver (Ag) 500 5 5 Thallis~m (TI) 700 7 Vanaduim (V) 2A00 2~ Zinc (Zn) 5.000 250 .~O.R reserves the right to require additional testing and a representative sample on soils and/or water if deemed necessary. Page 2 of 2 SOILREM Manager : Location: 408 E PACHECO RD City : BAKERSFIELD CommCode: BAKERSFIELD STATION 05 EPA Numb: BusPhone: Map : Grid: SIC Code: DunnBrad: SiteID: 015-021-001975 (661) 397-9641 CommHaz : FacUnits: 1 AOV: Emergency contact / Title John Arnold / Operation Manag ~Business Phone: (661) 397-9641x 24-Hour Phone : (661) 393-5478x Pager Phone : ( ) - x Emergency Contact Title Shelly Alverado / Office Mgr Business Phon( (661) 397-9642x 24-Hour : (661) 393-5478x Pager Phon~ : ( ) - x Hazmat Hazards: Contact : MailAddr: 408 E PACHECO RD City : BAKERSFIELD Phone: (661) 397-9641x State: CA Zip : 93307 Owner Address : 408 E PACHECO RD City : BAKERSFIELD Phone: (661) 397-9641x State: CA Zip : 93307 Period : to TotalASTs: = Gal Preparer: TotalUSTs: = Gal Certif'd: RSs: No ParcelNo: Emergency D~ves: ?¥ me attache(~ hazardous materials manage- and that it along with p)an foF any corrections constitute a complete and correct man- agement plan for my facility. E;i{~na~ure Date -1- 10/28/2003 ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH SER~ES DEPARTMENT STEVE McCALLEY, R.E.H.S., Director 2700 "M" STREET, SUITE 300 BAKERSFIELD, CA 93301-23704. ~ Voice: (661) 862-8700 Fax: ,(661) 862,8701 TTY Relay: (800) 735-2929 e-mail: eh~co, kern. ca. us SOURCE MANAGEMENTAGENCY DAVID PRICE III, RMA DIRECTOR Community Development Program Department Engineering & Survey Services Department Environmental Health Services Department Planning Department Roads Department November 27, 2002 Mr. Wayne Massey South Enterprise Zone 828 E. Goshen Avenue Fresno, CA 93720 ~-~'S~jECT: ~A~-PToV~il~6f Sit-ffRb-gtoY'ation Cbm'pleti~n-R:eport'tand'Closure'Request ................. ~ SoilRem, Inc., 408 East Pacheco Road, Bakersfield, California SWIS No.: 15-AA-0356 Dear Mr. Massey: As the Local Enforcement Agency (LEA) for the California Integrated Waste Management Department, we have reviewed the Site Restoration Completion Report .and Closure Request submitted for the SoilRem, Inc., facility. This site received non-hazardous soil impacted with petroleum hydrocarbOns from off-site sources.. SoilRem developed and provided plans for the on- site treatment of these soils; however, no soil was ever treated and/or discharged from the site. The report concludes that from July 15 to July 26, 2002, VERTEX completed the site restoration activities in a manner consistent with the work plan approved April 17, 2002, and the monitoring and closure requirements specified by the Facility Compliance Plan (FCP), dated April 15, 1999, established and approved for the site. The site restoration activities included: o All subject soil at the site was characterized in accordance with the FCP Post Treatment Monitoring Requirements. Soils not meeting the Post Treatment Monitoring _Re. quiremen_ts_.w~e~r~ tr_ ~sp.o_rte~d 9ff_s.it_e for_ disposal at an app~p~ate_ly pe_ .rmitted dis- posal facility. A total of 3,080.18 tons of soil were transported and disposed of at the McKittrick Waste Treatment Facility in McKittrick, California. ° The soil management unit was removed in accordance with the FCP requirements for site closure. A total of 29.79 tons of liner materials, leachate collection and vadose monitoring system piping, and polyethylene sheeting for temporary soil stockpiles were transported off site and disposed of as non-hazardous construction waste at the Bakersfield Metropolitan (BENA) Sanitary Landfill, Kern County, Califomia. Approximately 2,250 cubic yards of concrete were transported off site for recycling at the Kem Crushing & Recycling facility, located in the Bakersfield Green Waste Center on Mt. Vernon Avenue, Bakersfield, California. The two (2) former on-site groundwater monitoring wells were abandoned in accor- dance with Kern County Environmental Health Services Department requirements. Mr. Wayne Massey Re: Approval of Site Restoration Completion Report and Closure Request SoilRem, Inc. - SWlS No.: 15-AA-0356 November 27, 2002 Page 2 5. Leachate from the leachate collection and vadose monitoring systems was removed, sampled, and transported off site for disposal at an appropriately permitted disposal facility. A total of 104 gallons of leachate were transported off site and disposed of as non-hazardous waste at the Filter Recycling Services, Inc., facility, Rialto, California. 6. The areawas backfilled to surrounding grade with the remaining clean soil (soil that met the FCP post-treatment levels for on-site reuse). 7. No additional concerns were discovered during site restoration activities. As' LEAl we concur that the site has been adequately clean closed. In accordance with this finding, SoilRem, Inc., no longer meets the criteria of a Contaminated Soil Transfer/Processing Operation and is not subject to the requirements of Title 14, California Code of Regulations, Article 5.6, - SeCtions 17360 through 17366. No further action is warranted. Please be advised that this letter does not release any responsibility to abate or mitigate previously unidentified conditions at the site which may pose a threat to public health and'safety or the environ- ment. The Kern County Health Permit has been closed, and the site is no longer inspected by our staff. If you have any questions, please contact Diana Wilson at (661) 862-8734. WO:DW:jrw Sincerely, Steve McCalley, Director ~ Environmental Health Specialist IV Solid Waste Program Supervisor CCi Mr. Chris Deidrick, California Integrated Waste Management Department Mr. Ralph Huey, City of Bakersfield Mr. Robert Fitzburgh, Vertex Engineering Services Mr. Terrence A.' Fox, California Regional Water Quality Control Board, Central Valley Region (sol\wilsonXsoilremfinalappr.ltr.wpd) winston H. Hickox Secretary for Environmental Protection California Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Valley Region Robert Schneider, Chair Fresno Branch Office Intemet Address: http://www.swrcb.ca.gov/rwqcb5 3614 East Ashlan Avenue Fresno California 93726 Phone (559) 445-5116 · FAX (559) 445-5910 Gray Davis Governor 15 August 2002 Mr. Wayne Massey 828 E. Goshen Avenue Fresno, CA 93720 FORMER SOILREM INC. FACILITY, KERN COUNTY Vertex Engineering Service, Inc. submitted a Site Restoration Work Plan dated 17 April 2002 for the former SoilRem, Inc. facility in Kern County. The Facility Compliance Plan (FCP) regulates the facility. The work plan, which was approved 17 May 2002, outlined the proposed work to close the facility in compliance with the FCP. Site closure activities began on 16 July 2002. On'23 July 2002, Regional Board staff inspected the facility to observe the ongoing closure activities. Based on the inspection observations, the closure agtivities appear to conform to the Site Restoration Work Plan. Included is a copy of the inspection report. If you have any questions, please contact Terry Fox at (559) 445-6191. TERRENCE A. FOX Registered Geologist RG No. 5029 cc: Mr. William O'Rullian, Kern County Environmental Health Mt. Ralph Huey, City of Bakersfield, Bakersfield California Environmental Protection Agency The energy challenge facing California is real. Every Californian needs to take immediate action to reduce energy consumption. For a list of simple ways you can reduce demand and cut your energy costs, see our Web-site at http://www.swrcb.ca.gov/rwqcb5 OFF:lICE NO 5F ;'INSPECTOR; FOXT FACILITIES INSPECTION REPORT SWRCB 001 (REV.S-91) Program Type: SUB15 5D152244001 WDS NUMBER NPDESNUMBER 02,07 06 (YY) i(MM) (TYPE) SCHEDULED INS. DATA 020723 (YYMMDD} ACTUALINS. DATE SOILREM CORP, INC NAME OF AGENCY OR PARTY RESPONSIBLE FOR DISCHARGE 'PO BOX 40764 AGENCY STREET BAKERSFI ELD,CA 93304- AGENCY CITY AND STATE JOHN ARNOLD AGENCY CONTACT PERSON AGENCY PHONE NO. SOILREM CORP, INC NAME OF FACILITY 408 E PACHECO RD FACILITY STREET BAKERSFIELD 93307- FACILITY CITY AND STAT JOHN ARNOLD ONSITE FACILITY CONTACT PERSON FACILITY PHONE NO. S Inspection agency (State = S, State / EPA Joint = J) If this inspection is a Compliance Inspection of an NPDES facility, send a copy of this report to SWRCB's Division of Water Quality, Program Support Unit INSPECTION TYPE (Check One) A1 [] 02 [] 03 · [] 04 [] os [] 06 [] · "A" type compliance -- Comprehensive inspection in which samples are taken. (EPA Type S) "B" type compliance -- A routine nonsampling inspection. (EPA Type C) Noncompliance follow-up -- Inspection made to verify correction of previously identified violation. Enforcement follow-up -- Inspection made to verify that conditions of an enforcement action are being met. Complaint -- Inspection made in response to a complaint. Pre-requirement -- Inspection made to gather info. relative to preparing, modifying, or rescinding requirements. Miscellaneous -- Any inspection type not mentioned above. If this is an EPA inspection not mentioned above, please note type. (e.g. -- biomonitoring, performance audit, diagnostic, etc.) (Type) N N N, Were VIOLATIONS noted during this inspection? (Yes/No/Pending Sample Results) Was this a Quality Assurance-Based Inspection? (Y/N) Were bioassay samples taken? (N = No) If YES, then S = Static or F = FIowthrough INSPECTION SUMMARY (REQUIRED) (100 character limit) Closure inspection, to observe closure activities. INspEcToR'S DATA: DATE For Internal Use: Reviewed by: WDS Data Entry Date: Regional Board File Number: (3) Inspection ID Reg. WDS Coordinator 2218 FACILITIES INSPECTION REPORT SWRCB 001 (REV.S-91) Page 2 VIOLATION .(IF APPLICABLE) VIOL (A-G): (See pages IK05.0 and IK05.1 of the Micro Waste Discharger System Users Manual) Date V. Io!ation Occurred (YYMMDD): Date Violation Determined (YYMMDD): DESCRIPTION (200 CHARACTER LIMIT): EPA SUGGESTED INSPECTION CHECKLIST S N S: Permit Records/Reports Facility Site Review (S= Satisfactory, M= Marginal, U= Unsatisfactory, N= Not Evaluated) N Flow Measurement N . Pretreatment N Laboratories S Compliance Schedules N Eff./Receiving Waters N Self-Monitoring N Operations and Maintenance N Sludge Disposal Other 3 Overall Facility Operation Evaluation (5= Very reliable, 3-- Satisfactory, 1= Unreliable) HISTORICAL INFORMATION MOST !RECENT ORDERS ORDER NO. DATE ADOPTED TYPE 99-059 6/11/99 WDR MOST RECENT INSPECTIONS: MOST RECENT VIOLATIONS: DATE TyPE VIOLATONS? VIOL. TYPE DATE RPT 2/25/00 PRMC 2/25/00 RPT 10/4/99 ADDITIONAL-COMMENTS,SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS, ITEMS FOR_FOLLOWUP_ ON FUTURE INSPECTIONS, NOTES, ETC. (Attach additional pages, if necessary) SoilRem Inc. is no longer in business. 'The insurance company that supplied the financial assurance mechanism is paying for the 'site to be closed. Vertex Engineering Services, Inc. (Vertex) had submitted a Site Restoration Work Plan Ito close the site. The plan was approved and site restoration activities began on 16 July 2002. I visited the site on 23 July 2002 and met the Vertex representative Jason Olsen onsite. Gas61ine- and diesel-impacted soil had been stockpiled in the treatment cell in two separate piles. Confirmation sampling indicated that the gasoline-impacted soil met treatment goals and was going to be used to backfill the excaVation of the treatment cell. The diesel-impacted soil was going to be hauled to an appropriate disposal facility. The finer was to be removed and the clay layer above the geosynthetic liner was to be stockpiled and sampled to determine if it met the treatment goals. Photographs were taken to document the conditions of the site on the day of the inspection. FACILITIES INSPECTION REPORT SWRCB 001 (REV.5-91) Page 3 OBSERVATIONS: I arrived onsite at approximately 10:45 AM. The gasoline and diesel stockpiles had been removed from the treatment celk The gasoline-impact soil was reportedly stockpile adjacent to the treatment cell (Photo 1) and the diesel soil was repO/tedly hauled from the site. The clay layer above the geosynthetic liner was being removed (Photo 2) and stockpiled (Photos 3), and the geosynthetic liner was being exposed (Photo 4). The drilling rig to be used for the well abandonment was onsite but the drillers were waiting parts before proceeding. At about noon, abandonment of Well MW2d began (Photo 5). Jane warren from Kern County Environmental Health arrived to witness the well abandonment. At approximately 2:00 PM, Vertex began excavating the LCRS and vadose zone sumps (Photo 6). Reportedly, some liquid had been removed from the sumps and stored in drums (Photo 7). The pea gravel in the sumps was removed (Phpto 8). All the concrete debris in the back portion of the property had been previously removed (Photo 9). I left the site at approximately 2:30 PM. CONCLUSIONS' Site closure activities appeared to be in accordance with the approved Site Restoration Work Plan. Former SoilRem Facility Photo 1 Gasoline Stockpiled Soil Former SoilRem Facility Photo 2 Excavation of Clay Layer Above Geosynthetic Liner Former SoilRem Facility Photo 3 Stockpiles of Excavated Clay Layer Former SoilRem Facility Photo 4 Exposed Geosynthetic Liner Former SoilRem Facility Photo 5 Abandonment of Well MW2d Former SoilRem Facility Photo 6 Excavation of LCRS and Vadose Zone Sumps Former SoilRem Facility Photo 7 Drums of Liquid Removed From Sump Former SoilRem Facility Photo 8 Excavated Pea Gravel From LCRS and Vadose Zone Sump Former SoilRem Facility Photo 9 Back Portion of Property Where Concrete Debris Was Stored -HOLGUIN' 'FAHAN & ASSocIATF , INC. ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT CONSULTANTS November 15, 2000 Mr. Terrence A. Fox California Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Valley Region 3614 East Ashlan Avenue Fresno, California 93726 Subject: THIRD QUARTER 2000 GROUNDWATER MONITORING REPORT FOR SOILREM CORPORATION, 408 PACHECO ROAD, BAKERSFIELD, CALIFORNIA Dear Mr. Fox: Holguin, Fahan & Associates, Inc. (HFA) is pleased to present the following Third Quarter 2000 Groundwater Monitoring Report for the above-referenced site (see Figure 1 - Site Location Map). These activities are being required by the California Regional Water Quality Control Board, Central Valley Region (5) (CRWQCB-CVR) for the continued operation of SoilRem Corporation's (SoilRem) facility for the remediation of hydrocarbon-containing soil at the above-referenced site. SITE DESCRIPTION The SoilRem facility is located at 408 Pacheco Road in the community of Bakersfield, Kern County, California. The topography of the sites is relatively flat, with a slight slope to the southwest (see Figure 1 ). The site is located in the southwestern quarter of the southeastern quarter of Section 17, Township 30 North, Range 28 East, MDBM. The site is situated within a mixed area of commercial, rural, and residential properties flanking Pacheco and Cottonwood roads (see Figure 2 - Plot Plan). The property owner contact is Mr. John Arnold, Post Office Box 40674, South Station 524, Bakersfield, California, 93304-9998, (661) 397-9641. The consultant contact is Mr. Mark R. Magargee, Holguin, Fahan & Associates, Inc., 2820 Pegasus Drive, Suite 1, Bakersfield, California, 93308, (661) 391-0517. ENVIRONMENTAL: SCIENTISTS * GEOLOGISTS · ENGINEERS Contaminated Slto Assessments · Phase I Audits * Site Romediatloll * HazardotJs Wasle Managemont (8051 652-021 g (8.05) 85:2-0793 lrvine,, california 92606 (g4gl ~2.666~ [940} 724~46 FAX [~akersfleld, California 03308 (805~ 391 ~517 (~5) 39t~26 FAX }'~} HOLGUIN, F,A, HAN & ~TES, INC. ENVIrONMeNTAl- MANAGI~MF:N? CON~ULTANT~ Mr. Terrance A. Fox CRWQCB-CVR November 15, 2000 - Page 2 TOPOGRAPHY, GEOLOGY, AND HYDROGEOLOGY The site is located in the southern portion of the Great Valley geomorphic province. The Great Valley is a north-south-trending valley, approximately 400 miles long by 50 miles wide. The surface of the San Joaquin Valley is composed primarily of unconsolidated Pleistocene (1.6 million to 11,000 years ago) and Recent [11,000 years ago to the present), alluvial sediments. Beneath the alluvial sediments are older, predominantly lake bed deposits. These lie unconformably on Mio-Pliocene, marine sediments, which extend to a crystalline basement at a depth of approximately 50,000 fbg. At the subject site, surface deposits consist of Quaternary (recent), unconsolidated alluvium overlying Quaternary (Pleistocene), nonmarine'sediments. Geologic deposits in the study area include Pleistocene alluvial sediments that form a homocline dipping gently to the southwest. The deposits are alluvium consisting of poorly indurated and dissected fan deposits [California Division of Mines and Geology, 1965, Geologic Map of California, Bakersfield Sheet). The alluvium consists of silty sands and fine-grained to coarse-grained sands and gravels, with intervals of finer grained, sandy silts, along with significant development of clay overbank and lake bottom deposits. Surface and groundwater in the San Joaquin Valley is derived predominantly from the Sierra Nevada mountain range to the east, and is transported by five major rivers, the closest to the site being the Kern River. The depth to the regional unconfined aquifer is approximately 135 fbg, and the direction of groundwater flow is predominantly to the southwest [Kern County Water Agency (KCWA), 1998, 1997 Report on Water Conditions, Improvement District No. 4, February 1, 1998). Perched groundwater is present beneath the property at a depth of less than 30 fbg in the abandoned Kern River channel to the ancient Kern Lake Bed [KCWA, 2000, 1996 Water Supply Report, July 2000). PREVIOUS WORK On October 14, 1999, Soils Engineering Inc. (SEI) drilled and completed the shallow perched aquifer groundwater monitoring well MW-1S and the deep aquifer groundwater monitoring well MW-2D. The shallow perched groundwater monitoring well, MW-1S, was positioned near the northeastern corner of the fenced-in portion of the SoilRem facility, downgradient of the soil treatment area, and the deep aquifer groundwater monitoring well, MW-2D, was positioned to the west of the soil treatment area (see Figure 2 for the groundwater monitoring well locations). I]HOLGUIN, ~ FAHAN & ~TES, INC. Mr. Terrance A. Fox CRWQCB-CVR November 15, 2000 - Page 3 On October 19, 1999, SEI sampled the two newly constructed groundwater monitoring wells and measured the groundwater elevations in six off-site groundwater monitoring wells at the adjacent CleanSoils property. The groundwater samples were analyzed for TPH as gasoline and TPH as diesel using EPA Method 8015 (M), BTEX and MTBE using EPA Method 8020, CCR Title 22 metals, and general physical and chemical characteristics. Dissolved-phase TPH as gasoline, TPH as diesel, BTEX, and MTBE concentrations were not detected in the groundwater samples collected from the two on-site groundwater monitoring wells, with the exception of a trace dissolved-phase benzene concentration of 0.38 /~g/I in the groundwater sample collected from monitoring well MW-2D (see fable 1 - Summary of Groundwater Sample Analytical Results for Organic Constituents). On March 2, 2000, the two on-site groundwater monitoring wells were again sampled, and the groundwater elevations were measured in the six off-site CleanSoils groundwater monitoring wells. The groundwater samples were analyzed forTPH as gasoline andTPH as diesel using EPA Method 8015 (M), BTEX and MTBE using EPA Method 8020, VOCs using EPA Method 8260, CCR Title 22 metals, and general physical and chemical characteristics. Dissolved-phase TPH as gasoline, TPH as diesel, BTEX, and MTBE concentrations were not detected in the groundwater samples collected from the two on-site groundwater monitoring wells, with the exception of trace, dissolved-phase BTEX concentrations detected in the groundwater sample collected from monitoring well MW-2D. However, laboratory analysis of the groundwater samples using EPA Method 8260 did not confirm the positive results of the analysis using EPA Method 8020. Dissolved-phase BTEX concentrations were not detected in the groundwater sample collected from monitoring well MW-2D using EPA Method 8260, with the exception of trace dissolved-phase m and p-xylenes concentrations of 5.81 /~g/I (see Table 1 ). SEI's First Quarter 2000 Monitoring Status Report, dated April 19, 2000, did not convey that the BTEX concentrations were confirmed using EPA Method 8260. in addition, on Page 2 of the report, the units were erroneously reported as parts per million instead of the actual reporting units, which were parts per billion for the EPA Method 8020 analysis. Additionally, the groundwater analytical summary table indicated that the results reported were the results from the EPA Method 8260 analysis, when the results reported in the table were actually the results from the EPA Method 8020 analysis. Subsequent laboratory analysis of groundwater samples collected during the second quarter 2000 did not indicate hydrocarbon concentrations in the groundwater samples (see Table 1 ). & ASSOCJATES, INC. ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT CONSULTANTS Mr. Terrance A. Fox CRWQCB-CVR November 15, 2000 - Page 4 THIRD QUARTER 2000 GROUNDWATER MONITORING AND SAMPLING RESULTS In order to determine the direction of groundwater flow within the shallow perched and deep groundwater zones at the time of sampling, the depth to groundwater within the two on-site and six off-site groundwater monitoring wells was measured to an accuracy of _+0.01 foot on August 24, 2000. The wells monitored were the two on-site groundwater monitoring wells (MW-1S and MW-2D) at the SoilRem facility and off-site groundwater monitoring wells MW-1 through MWo6, which were previously installed at the adjacent CleanSoils property (see Figure 2). The depth to the shallow perched groundwater zone in the wells at the SoiIRem facility and the former CleanSoils facility was measured to vary from approximately 23 to 30 fbg (see Figure 3 - Shallow Perched Groundwater Elevation Contour Map). The depth to the deep groundwater zone in the wells at the SoilRem facility and the former CleanSoils facility was measured to vary from approximately 1 20 to 139 fbg (see Figure 4 - Deep Zone Groundwater Elevation Contour Map). On August 24, 2000, representative groundwater samples were collected from the two on-site monitoring wells (MW-1S and MW-2D) at the SoilRem facility. No groundwater samples were collected from off-site groundwater monitoring wells MW-1 through MW-6 at the adjacent CleanSoils property. The wells were purged prior to extracting a sample representative of the in-situ groundwater. During the purging process, the conductivity, temperature, and pH of the groundwater were monitored and recorded on water sample logs. Purging continued until a minimum of 2.9 casing volumes was produced and the measured parameters had stabilized. Groundwater samples were collected after the wells had recharged to greater than 80 percent of their initia~ 'static water levels (see Attachment 1 for the well purging and groundwater sampling procedures and Attachment 2 for the water sample logs). Disposable TeflonTM bailers were used to sample each well. All groundwater samples were placed in VOA vials, amber bottles, and poly containers, which contained appropriate preservatives supplied by the analytical laboratory; labeled; sealed; and recorded on a chain-of-custody record in accordance with the procedures outlined in the CRWQCB-CVR guidance documents. The groundwater'samples contained no visible suspended matter, and no headspace was observed in any of the containers. The samples were placed in a container filled with Blue-lc'eTM for cooling purposes and transported to a California state-certified laboratory for analysis. QA/QC sampling included a trip blank, instrument blanks, spikes, and duplicates. HOLGUIN, FAHAN & ASSOC~TES, INC. Mr. Terrance A. Fox CRWQCB-CVP, November 15, 2000 - Page 5 The groundwater samples were analyzed for TPH as gasoline and TPH as diesel using EPA Method 8015 (M), VOCs using EPA Method 8260, CCR Title 22 metals, and general physical and chemical characteristics. Dissolved-phaseTPH as gasoline, TPH as diesel, BTEX, MTBE, and VOC concentrations were not detected in the groundwater samples collected from monitoring wells MW-IS and MW-2D (see Figure 5 - TPH as Gasoline/Benzene/MTBE Concentrations in Shallow Perched Groundwater Zone, Figure 6 TPH as GasoNne/Benzene/MTBE Concentrations in Deep Groundwater Zone, Table 1, and Attachment 3 for the laboratory report), The CCR Title 22 metals were not detected at or above the detection limits in the groundwater samples collected from on-site groundwater monitoring wells MW-1S and MW-2D, with the exception of an arsenic concentration of 0.02 mg/I in the groundwater sample collected from monitoring well MW-2D; barium concentrations of 0.18 and 0.26 mg/I in the groundwater samples collected from monitoring wells MW-1S and MW-2D, respectively; a chromium concentration of 0.06 mg/I in the groundwater sample collected from monitoring well MW-2D; a cobalt concentration of 0,03 mg/I in the groundwater sample collected from monitoring wen MW-2D; a vanadium concentration of 0.12 mg/I in the groundwater sample collected from monitoring well MW-2D; and zinc concentrations of 0.12 and 0.18 mg/I in the groundwater samples collected from monitoring wells MW-1S and MW-2D, respectively (see Table 2 - Summary of Groundwater Sample Analytical Results for Inorganic Constituents and Attachment 3). The pH of the groundwater samples collected from the two on-site monitoring wells, MW-1S and MW-2D, was measured in the field to be 7.7 and 7.4, respectively. The electrical conductivity of the groundwater samples collected from the two on-site monitoring wells, MW-1S and MW-2D, was measured in the field to be 0.49 and 0.41 /~mhos/cm @ 25°C, respectively, TDS was measured in the field to be 446 and 375 mg/I in the groundwater samples collected from monitoring wells MW-IS and MW-2D, respectively. Calcium was detected at concentrations of 66 and 32 mg/I in the groundwater samples collected from monitoring wells MW-1Sand MW-2D, respectively, Magnesium was detected at concentrations of 27 and 24 mg/I in the groundwater samples collected from monitoring wells MW-1S and MW-2D, respectively. Sodium was detected at concentrations of 55 and 6.2 mg/I in the groundwater samples collected from monitoring wells MW-1S and MW-2D, respectively. Potassium was detected at concentrations of 7.7 and 13 mg/l in the groundwater samples collected from monitoring wells MW-1S and MW-2D, respectively. Hydroxide and carbonate concentrations were not detected in the groundwater samples collected from monitoring wells MW-1S and MW-2D. Bicarbonate was detected at concentrations of 500 and 220 mg/I in the groundwater samples ~ollected from monitoring wells M W-1S and M W-2D, respectively. Chloride was & ASSOCIATES, INC, Mr. Terrance A. Fox CRWQCB-CVR November 15, 2000 - Page 6 detected at concentrations of 12 and 14mg/lin the groundwater samples collected from monitoring wells MW-1S and MW-2D, respectively. Sulfate was detected at concentrations of 57 and 56 mg/I in the groundwater samples collected from monitoring well MW-1S and MW-2D, respectively. Total hardness in the form of calcium carbonate was measured to be 280 and 180 mg/l in the groundwater samples collected from monitoring wells MW-1S and MW-2D, respectively. Total alkalinity was measured to be 410 and 180 mg/I in the groundwater samples collected from monitoring wells MW-1S and MW-2D, respectively (see Table 3 - Summary of Groundwater Sample Analytical Results for Physical and Chemical Characteristics and Attachment 3). CONCLUSIONS OF THE GROUNDWATER MONITORING Laboratory analysis of groundwater samples collected during the second and third quarters of 2000 did not indicate hydrocarbon concentrations in the groundwater samples. The CCR Title 22 metals and general physical and chemical characteristics analyses indicate that the groundwater in both the shallow perched groundwater zone and the deeper groundwater zone is potable, with concentrations that do not exceed applicable MCLs. RECOMMENDATIONS FOR MODIFICATIONS TO THE GROUNDWATER MONITORING PROGRAM Based upon the laboratory analytical results of the groundwater samples collected from the upper and lower groundwater zones, on behalf of SoilRem, HFA recommends that no additional monitoring wells are warranted at this time; sounding of the depth of groundwater in the two on-site monitoring wells and six off-site monitoring wells should continue on a quarterly basis, with the results reported to the CRWQCB-CVR on a quarterly basis; and the frequency of laboratory analysis should be modified to include quarterly laboratory analysis of groundwater samples for TPH as gasoline and TPH as diesel using EPA Method 8015 (M), and BTEX and MTBE using EPA Method 8020, with MTBE confirmed using EPA Method 8260, with pH, temperature, and electrical conductivity measured in the field at the time of sample collection; and annual laboratory analysis of groundwater samples for VOCs using EPA Method 8260 as well as the CCR Title 22 metals and general physical and chemical characteristics. & ~TES, INC. Mr. Terrance A. Fox CRWQCB-CVR November 15, 2000 - Page 7 FATE AND TRANSPORT MODIELING Based upon air emissions modeling, SoilRemhasreceivedapprovalfrom the San Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution Control District to increase the acceptance criteria limits for the metals arsenic, chromium IV, lead, and nickel to 500, 189, 1,000, and 2,000 rog/kg, respectively. These concentrations are set at or less than the CCR Title 22 TTLCs for these metals. However, prior to implementing these revised acceptance criteria limits, the CRWQCB-CVR has requested that fate and transport modeling be performed to determine whether the increased concentrations for these four metals presents a threat to groundwater resources. The scenario to be evaluated is that all of the 10,000 tons of soil permitted to be at the site contains the proposed increased acceptance criteria concentrations of the four metals and is available to impact the underlying native soils and potentially migrate to the underlying groundwater resource at a depth of approximately 30 fbg. it is important to observe that the facility is equipped with a liner system and that the purpose of the liner system is to virtually preclude the migration of the organic and inorganic constituents from the impacted soil to the underlying native soils. The liner system consists of a basal 40-millimeter liner, overlain by a 40-millimeter geomembrane, overlain by a cloth cover, which is in turn overlain by 2 to 6 feet of a soil buffer, with the entire liner system sloped to a single Iow point where a leachate collection well is present. Additionally, the soil buffer layer between the impacted material and the liner is inspected every time the impacted soil is removed and transferred to the process equipment, and any soil buffer layer, which has been impacted is also removed and treated and subsequently replaced by additional soil buffer materials, prior to placement of new untreated soil in the storage area. This periodic removal of the untreated soil and the upper portion of the soil buffer layer reduces the potential that organic and inorganic constituents are liberated from the impacted soil to even migrate to the liner itself. Furthermore, because the acceptance levels for the organic and inorganic constituents has been set at Iow levels, the ability to mobilize these organic and inorganic constituents to even impact the soil buffer layer is iow. Additionally, if any leachate was to migrate to the liner surface, it would collect in the iow point of the liner where it would be removed via the leachate collection well. Therefore, the ability to mobilize organic and inorganic constituents to even significantly impact the soil buffer layer, much less to travel the distance to the liner itself, is very remote, and to have a breach in the JJnef whereby organic and inorganic constituents were to migrate into the underlying native soils is virtually precluded. Similar liners and leachate collection systems have a long track record of providing a significant degree of protection from the occurrence of a breach as envisioned in the CRWQCB-CVR scenario. & ASSOCIATES, INC. ENVIF:IONMI;NTAL. MANAGEME~NT CONSULTANT~ Mr. Terrance A. Fox CRWQCB-CVR November 15, 2000 - Page 8 A monitoring well has also been installed adjacent to the Iow point of the liner and is screened beneath the liner to monitor the vadose zone soils. If the breach described above was to occur, then it would be detected by the vadose zone monitoring well, and the liner would be repaired prior to a significant impact to the underlying soils occurring. Therefore, even if the entire footprint beneath the liner was to become impacted, a cleanup to a depth of 5 fbg is virtually precluded due to the liner and soil buffer layer, leachate collection well, and vadose zone monitoring well in association with the limits for the organic and inorganic concentrations within the impacted soil placed on this temporary pre-treatment storage area and the frequent removal of the untreated soil from the storage area. These engineered systems virtually preclude a scenario whereby the 10,000 tons of soil would be in contact with the native soils with inorganic constituents permitted to mobilize through the subsurface toward the groundwater resource. However, to satisfy the CRWQCB-CVR request, fate and transport modeling of this scenario has been conducted in conformance with the American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM) Designation: E-1 739. HFA utilized the fate and transport modeling algorithms in the Groundwater Services, Inc. (GSI) Risk Based Corrective Action (RBCA) Tool Kit for Chemical Releases, Version 1.0a (Tool Kit), to assess the potential for these metals to migrate through a 30-foot soil column to groundwater and subsequently exceed the MCLs. The entire 10,000 tons of soil is assumed to contain the proposed maximum acceptance criteria concentrations for the metals arsenic, chromium IV, and nickel of 500, 189, and 2,000 mg/kg, respectively. The model assumes that the 10,000 tons is configured over a 150-foot square to a thickness of 10 feet, with an initial separation of 30 feet to groundwater; rainfall at 5.72 inches, which is the annual average in the vicinity of Bakersfield; neutral pH; and sandy soils with the default characteristics provided for in ASTM Designation: E-1739. The Tool Kit does not include lead as one of the chemicals of concern that are modeled due to the exposure mechanism. HFA as contacted GSI for assistance in utilizing the Tool Kit's fate and transport algorithms to determine whether the MCLs are exceeded without addressing the physical aspects of exposure. HFA will submit a supplementaI Fate and Transport report for lead once this issue is resolved. Given the scenario described above, the fate and transport modeling indicates that the increased maximum acceptance levels do not present a significant risk of migrating to the depth of groundwater and exceeding theMCLs. The site-specific target levels for arsenic, chromium IV, and nickel derived from the model are 1,700, 2,200, and 7,500 mg/kg, respectively (see Attachment 4 for the RBCA Tier 2 fate and transport modeling worksheets). Each of these concentrations is significantly greater than the proposed acceptance criteria levels. T~herefore, on behalf of SoilRem, HFA recommends that the CRWQCB-CVR permit the implementation of the proposed maximum acceptance levees for arsenic, chromium IV, and nickel, FAI-IAN & ASSOCIATES, INC. ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT CONSULTANTS Mr. Terrance A. Fox CRWQCB-CVR November 15, 2000 - Page 9 Holguin, Fahan & Associates, Inc., trusts that this Third Quarter 2000 Groundwater Monitoring Report provides you with the information you require, if you have any questions or require additional information, please contact Mr. Mark Magargee at (661) 391-0517 or at e-mail address Mark_Magargee@hfa.com. Respectfully submitted, Bradley C, Skenfield Assistant Environmental Technician Hdguin, Fahan & Associates, Inc. Mark R, Magargee, CHG, RG Senior Hydrogeologist Holguin, Fahan & Associates, Inc. MRM:rri Enclosures: CC: Figure 1 Figure 2 Figure 3 Figure 4 Figure 5 Figure 6 Table 1 Table 2 Table 3 Attachment 1 Attachment 2 Attachment 3 Attachment 4 Site Location Map Plot Plan Shallow Perched Groundwater Elevation Contour Map Deep Zone Groundwater Elevation Contour Map TPH as Gasoline/Benzene/ MTBE Concentrations in Shallow Perched Groundwater Zone TPH as Gasoline/Benzene/ MTBE Concentrations in Deep Groundwater Zone Summary of Groundwater Sample Analytical Results for Organic Constituents Summary of Groundwater Sample Analytical Results for Inorganic Constituents Summary of Groundwater Sample Analytical Results for Physical and Chemical Characteristics Wall Purging and Groundwater Sampling Procedures Water Sample Logs Laboratory Report RBCA Tier 2 Fate and Transport Modeling Worksheets Mr. John Arnold, SoilRem FAHAN . & AS_qYJATES, INC. ENVIRONMENTAL MANAGEMENT CONSULTANTS Mr. Terrance A. Fox CRWQCB-CVR November 15, 2000 - Page 10 LINE__ LEGEND 0 0.5 1 MILE E_-'-_--[ :-~_ '_' :1 ....... ~- ...... ~ I-----i ".b--~t., 0 ~.000 2,000 3,000 4,000 5,000 FEE~ -ET.F-~I.-_-..F_q:~.~'~'~_ '___j -.. __ -~ I , -" T' 0 0.5 I KILOMETER C-' I =': :'~-7 '-?~-2~-..-A~-:T' :'_' I-.'::~__L----~ USGS L^MONT 7.5 MINUTE SERIES QUADRANGI E d 2:2 40f~. PACHECO RO,~,D BAKEFiSF' ~it.D CALIFORNIA FIGURE I - SITE I.£;CAT Ot~ MAP HOLGUIN, FAI-IAN &ASSOC. I:A'I'ES, 'L'0.., HOLGUIN, FAHAN & ASSOCAATES, INC. Mr. Terrance A. Fox CRWQCB-CVR November 15, 2000 - Page 11 MW-2 ~ MW-6 ~ MW~4 FORMER CLEAN SOILS FACILITY VACANT LAND MW-3 MW-2d VACANTLAND CONTAMINATED SOIL TREATMENT AREA CHAIN-LINK FENCE VACANTLAND /ACANTLAN[ MW-ls PACHECO ROAD SCALE IN FEET 0 150 300 LEGEND MONITORING WELL REVISION DATE: NOVEMBER 15, 2000: RRI SOILREM CORPORATION 408 PACHECO ROAD BAKERSFIELD CALIFORNIA FIGURE 2 - PLOT PLAN HOLGUIN, FAHAN & ASSOCIATES, INC. & ASSOC_JATE, S, INC. Mr. Terrance A. Fox CRWQCB-CVR November 15, 2000 - Page 12 \ 343.45 RMER C S FACiLiTY VACANT LAND ~ ANT LAND VACANT LAND t.O VACANT LANE I ~ ,333.79 CONTAMINATED SOIL CHAIN-LINK FENCE PACHECO ROAD GROUNDWATER LEVELS SCALE IN FEET MEASURED AUGUST 24, 2000 0 150 300 LEGEND SOILREM CORPORATION MONITORING WELL ~ GROUNDWATER 408 PACHECO ROAD ~ FLOW DIRECTION BAKERSFIELD CALIFORNIA GROUNDWATER ELEVATION FIGURE 3 - SHALLOW PERCHED GROUNDWATER CONTOUR (FEET ABOVE MSL) ELEVATION CONTOUR MAP \ GROUNDWATER ELEVATION (FEET ABOVE MSL) HOLGUZN, FAZ"LA~ & ,ASSOC[AT~_,~, INC. REVISION DATE: NOVEMBER 15.2000: RRI HOLGUIN, FAHAN & ~TES, INC. Mr. Terrance A. Fox CRWQCB-CVR November 15, 2000 - Page 13 ~ MW-6 / ~[~:533.43 230.73 /~ / I FORMER CLEAN SOILS FACILITY ~ VACANT LAND · ' VACANT LAND / / // ~/ACANT LANe MW-2d 245.11 CONTAMINATED SOIL CHAIN-LINK FENCE PACHECO ROAD GROUNDWATER LEVELS SCALE IN FEET MEASURED AUGUST 24, 2000 0 150 300 LEGEND SOILREM CORPORATION ~ MONITORING WELL ~ GROUNDWATER FLOW DIRECTION 408 PACHECO ROAD ~.~/), J BAKERSFIELD CALiFORNiA GROUNDWATER ELEVATION CONTOUR (FEET ABOVE MSL) FIGURE 4 - DEEP ZONE GROUNDWATER ELEVATION CONTOUR MAP # GROUNDWATER ELEVATION (FEET ABOVE MSL) HOLGUIN, FAHAN & ASSOCIATES, INC. REViSiON DATE: NOVEMBER 15, 2000: RRI & ASSOC~TES, INC. Mr. Terrance A. Fox GRWQCB-CVR November 15, 2000 - Page 14 ~ MW-2 f NS ~ FORMER CLEAN SOILS FACILITY VACANT LAND MW-4 NS ~MW-1 NS VACANT LAND VACANT LAND ~/ACANT LANE ~MW-ls ND/ND/ND I , ~ I CONTAMINATED SOIL I ~ TREATMENTAREA I CHAIN-LINK FENCE " PACHECO ROAD SCALE IN FEET SAMPLED AUGUST 24, 2000 ~ 0 150 300 LEGEND SOILREM CORPORATION ~ MONITORING WELL 408 PACHECO ROAD BAKERSFIELD CALIFORNIA ND NOT DETECTED FIGURE 5 - TPH AS GASOLINE/BENZENE/MTBE CONCENTRATIONS IN SHALLOW PERCHED NS NOT SAMPLED GROUNDWATER ZONE #/#/# TPH AS GASOLINE/BENZENE/MTBE CONCENTRATIONS IN GROUNDWATER (pg/I) HOLGUIN, FAHAN & ASSOCIATES, INC. REVISION DATE: NOVEMBER 15, 2000: RRI HOLGUIN, FAHAN & ~TES, INC. Mr. Terrance A. Fox CRWQCB-CVR November 15, 2000 - Page 15 MW-3 ~ MNV~'6 NS~I i ' FORMER CLEAN SOILS FACILITY I VACANT LAND MW-5 NS VACANT LAND i I VACANT LAND I VACANT LAND MW-2d ND/ND/ND CONTAMINATED SOIL I r~ TREATMENT AREA I O CHAIN-LINK FENCE PACHECO ROAD SCALE IN FEET SAMPLED AUGUST 24, 2000 0 150 300 LEGEND SOILREM CORPORATION ~ MONITORING WELL 408 PACHECO ROAD BAKERSFIELD CALIFORNIA ND NOT DETECTED FIGURE 6 - TPH AS GASOLINE/BENZENE/MTBE NS NOT SAMPLED CONCENTRATIONS IN DEEP GROUNDWATER ZONE #/#/# TPH AS GASOLINE/BENZENE/MTBE CONCENTRATIONS IN GROUNDWATER (pg/I) HOLGUIN, FAHAN & ASSOCIATES, INC. REVISION DATE: NOVEMBER 15, 2000: RRI TABLE 1. SUMMARY OF GROUNDWATER SAMPLE ANALYI'ICAL RESULTS FOR ORGANIC CONSTITUENTS SOILREM CORPORATION, BAKERSFIELD, CALIFORNIA DEPTH TO FLOATING GROUND- OTHER WELL ID AND DATE GROUND- PRODUCT WATER TPH AS TPH AS ETHYL- TOTAL ETHYL- TOTAL VOLATILE ELEVATION* SAMPLED WATER THICKNESS ELEVATION GASOLINE DIESEL BENZENE TOLUENE BENZENE XYLENES MTBE BENZENE TOLUENE BENZENE XYLENES MTBE ORGANICS REF~ (feet-USE) (fbg) (feet) (feet-USE) (pg/I) (pg/I) (l~g/I) (pg/I) (pg/I) (pg/I) (pg/I) (pg/I) (pg/I) (~1) (~g/I) (p~l) (p~l) EPA ANAL~ICAL METHOD 8015 (M) 8020 8260 N/A CCR TITLE 22 DRINKING WATER MCL I " I 1001 ~1 100~ 680~ 1,7501 **35 11 100~ 680~ 1,750~ *'35~ *** N/A MINIMUM DETECTION LIMIT ~ VARIES-SEE ~BORATORY REPORTS N/A MW-ls 10-19-99 29.80 0.00 333.61 ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ........ A 363.41 3-2-00 29.80 0.00 333.61 ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND B 6-29-00 29.81 0.00 333.60 ND ND ND ND ND ND ND NDi ND ND ND ND ND C 8-24-00 29.62 0.00 333.79 ND ND ........ ND~ ND ND ND ND ND D MW-2d 10-19-99 121.00 0.00 243.89 ND ND 0.38 ND ND ND ND ...... A 364.89 3-2-00 120.00 0.00 244.89 ND ND 2.17 3.17 1.4E 8.23 ND ND ND NDi 5.81 ND B 6-29-00 119.34 0.00 245.55 ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND C 8-24-00 119.78 0.0C 245.11 ND ND ........ ND ND ND ND ND ND D MW-I~ 1~19-99 28.00 N/A 342.33 ................ A 370.33 3-2-00 29.90 N/A 340.43 ................ B 6-29-00 28.81 N/~ 341.52 ................ C 8-24-00 28.36 N/A 341.97 .............. D MW-2 10-19-99 27.83 N/A 343.18 ................ A 371.01 3-2-00 30.20 N/A 340.81 .............. 6-29-00 28.27 N/A 342.74 .................... C 8-24-00 27.56 N/A 343.45 .................... D MW-3 10-19-99 138.01 N/A 231.73 .................... A 369.74 3-2-00 136.00 N/A 233.74 ...................... B 6-29-00 135.62 N/A 234.12 .................... C 8-24-00 136.31 N/A 233.43 .................... D MW-4 10-19-99 22.16 N/A 348.93 .......................... A 371.09 3-2-00 26.3C N/A 344.79 ...................... B 6-29-00 22.99 N/A 348.10 ...................... C 8-24-00 22.57 N/A 348.52 ..................... D MW-5 10-19-99 139.08 N/A 229.85 ...................... A 368.93 3-2-00 136.90 N/A 232.031 .................. B 6-29-00 136.67 N/A 232.26 .................. C 8-24-00 137.41 N/A 231.52 ................ D MW-6 10-19-99 140.58 N/A 228.81 .................... A 369.39 3-2-00 138.20 N/A 231.19 .................... B 6-29-00 137.80 N/A 231.59 .................. C 8-24-00 138.66 N/A 230.73 .............. D TB-~ 8-24-00I N/A N/A N/A ...... I .... ND ND NDI NDI NDI ND D ~port ~t applicable. ND = Not detected. -- = Not analyzed. *Measured to the top of the well casing. **No CCR Title 22 MCL established for TPH as gasoline and MTBE. Concentration listed for MTBE is the State of California Office of Environmental Health Hazard Assessment drinking water advisory level. ***Varies-See laboratory reports. 1-Monitoring wells MW-1 throught MW-6 are depth to water readings only. A = Soil Engineering, Inc.'s (SEI's) report dated May 25, 1999. B = SEI's report dated April 19, 2000. C = Holguin, Fahan & Associates, Inc.'s (HFA's) report dated August 15, 2000. D = HFA's current report. z 0 < TABLE 2. SUMMARY OF GROUNDWATER SAMPLE ANALYTICAL RESULTS FOR INORGANIC CONSTITUENTS SOILREM CORPORATION, BAKERSFIELD, CALIFORNIA DEPTH TO FLOATING GROUND- (mg/I) (mg/I) WELLID AND DATE GROUND- PRODUCT WATER ELEVATION* SAMPLED WATER THICKNESS ELEVATION Sb As Ba Be Cd Cr Co Cu Pb Hg Mo Ni Se Ag TI V Zn REF (feet-MSL) (fbg) (feet) (feet-MSL) (mg/I) (rog/I) (mg/I) (mg/I) (mg/I) (mg/I) (rog/I) (mg/I) (mg/I) (mg/I) (rog/I) (mg/I) (mg/I) (mg/I) (mg/I) EPA ANALYTICAL METHOD 6010 N/A CCRTITLE22TTLC I 500 500 10,000 0.7505 10012,5008,000 2,5001 1,000 2013,500 2,000 1001 500 700 2,400 5,000 N/A REPORTING LIMIT [ 1.0 0.1 0.5 0.05 0.25 0.5 0.25 0.3 0.01~ 0.5 0.25 0.25 0.1 0.25 0.5 0.25 N/A MW-ls 10-19-99 29.80| 0.00 333.61 NDi ND ND 0.67 ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND A 363.41 3-2-00 29.80I~-~ 0.00 333.6~__ NDI ND 1.8 ND ND ND ND ND ND ~ ND ND N~D ND__NC ND ND B 29.81! 0.00 333.60 ND ND 0,87 ND NC 1.7 ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND NC ND ND C 6-29-00 -- 29,621 0,00 333.79 NDI il 8-24-00 ND 0.18 ND NC ND ND ND ND ND' ND ND ND ND ND ND 0.12 D MW-2d3~.89 10-19-99 3-2-00 121.001 0.00 243.69 N~t ND ND ND 0.43ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ND N ND NDA 120.001 0.00 2,~.69 N --,D NDN--~N--~- ,D ,D ND ND ND ND ND ND ND ,,~'ND NDB 6-29-00 --119.341 0.00 245.55 ND 0.11 1.7 ND 0.05_ 0.36 ND 0.30 ND ND ND ND ND ND 0.67~'D C 8-24-00 119.78II 0.00 245.11 N~)~.02 0.26 ND NC 0.06 0,03 ND ND ND ND ND ND ND NDi 0.12 0.18 D Sb = Antimony. As = Arsenic. Ba = Barium. Be = Beryllium. Cd = Cadmium. Cr = Chromium. Co = Cobalt. Cu = Copper. Pb = Lead. Hg = Mercury. Mo = Molybdenum. Ni = Nickel. Se = Selenium. Ag = Silver. TI = Thallium. V = Vanadium. Zn = Zinc. REF = Report reference. N/A = Not applicable. ND = Not detected. A = Soils Engineering, Inc.'s (SEI's) report dated May 25, 1999. B = SEI's report dated April 19, 2000. C = Holguin, Fahan & Associates, Inc.'s (HFA's) repod dated August 15, 2000. D = HFA's current report. Z 0 TABLE 3, SUMMARY OF GROUNDWATER SAMPLE ANALYTICAL RESULTS FOR GENERAL PHYSICAL AND CHEMICAL CHARACTERISTICS SOILREM CORPORATION, BAKERSFIELD, CALIFORNIA DEPTH TO FLOATING GROUND- WELL IDAND~eKeet~DATE GROUND- PRODUCT /f~e INWATER pH (pm~o~/crn)HA~mDgN/I~SS (Tm~I)C~!!IAULM MA!m~o??UM s~OOmDTaI~I~I PO~;ILuM ALI~L~ILTy IRON BORON HYDROXIDE CARBONATE CARB~(~NAT c~OLOoD~E SULFATE CHLOR DE SULFIDE EPA ANALYTICAL METHODREPORTiNG LIMIT -- )0401 9050 I " ~ 6010 -- r 310.1 300.0 MW-is 0,00 ~ VARIES-SEE LABORATORY REPORTS 3.4 220 580 0 67 - 363.41 333.61~.1 .... 333,60],0 - 333.79t.7 MW-2d 243.89~._7 - REF Z o < HOLGUIN, FAHAN & Agoq)C~TES, INC. ATTACHMENT 1. WELL PURGING AND GROUNDWATER SAMPLING PROCEDURES WELL PURGING AND GROUNDWATER SAMPLING PROCEDURES The regulatory agency with jurisdiction over the subject site is notified 48 hours prior to sampling. WATER LEVEL MEASUREMENTS Prior to purging the monitoring wells, water level measurements are collected according to the following procedures: · All wells are checked for floating product with an acrylic bailer or oil/water interface meter. · Water levels within each well are measured to an accuracy of _+0.01 foot using an electric measuring device and are referenced to the surveyed datum (well cover or top of casing). · All wells are monitored within a short time interval on the same day to obtain accurate measurements of the potentiometric surface. · All measurements are reproduced to assure validity. PURGING PROCEDURES The monitoring wells are purged using either a submersible electric pump, bailer, hand pump, or bladder pump. A surge block is used if it becomes apparent during pumping that the well screen has become bridged with sediment or the produced groundwater is overly turbid. During the purging process, groundwater is monitored constantly for temperature, pH, conductivity, turbidity, odor, and color. These parameters are recorded on a water sample log, Purging continues until all stagnant water within the wells is replaced by fresh formation water, os indicated by removal of a minimum number of well volumes and/or stabilization of the above outlined parameters. Purge water is stored on site in 55-gallon Department of Transportation-approved drums until water sample analytical results are received from the laboratory, or the water is treated and disposed of on site. If permanent pumps are installed in the wells for groundwater remediation, the pumps are operated for at least 24 hours before sampling to ensure adequate purging. Well Purging and Groundwater Sampling Procedures Page 2 SAMPLE COLLECTION PROCEDURES Measurements collected in the field before sampling include water level, pH, conductivity, temperature, and turbidity (all in conformance with the Environmental Protection Agency's publication "A Compendium of Superfund Field Operations Methods"). Sampling is performed after the well recharges to at least 80 percent of hydrostatic waterlevel. After purging and adequate recharge, groundwater samples are collected as follows: · A l-liter TeflonTM bailer is lowered and partially submerged into the well water to collect a groundwater sample. For volatile organic analyses, groundwater samples are collected in chilled, 40-milliliter, VOA vials with Teflon~M-lined caps. Hydrochloric acid preservative is added to all vials by the laboratory to lower sample pH to 2. Samples are held at a temperature of 4°C while in the field and in transit to the laboratory. Other appropriate containers, preservatives, and holding protocols are used for non-volatile analyses. HOLGUIN, FAHAN & ~TES, INC. NV~FIONM~NTAL M~,NAGEMENT r'ON~ULTANTS ATTACHMENT 2. WATER SAMPLE LOGS WATER SAMPLE LOG CLIENT NAME: SoilRem Corporation DATE: August 24, 2000 PROJECT NAME: Bakersfield facility WELL NUMBER: MW-ls WELL DEPTH: 37.87' WELL CASING DIAMETER: 2" WEATHER CONDITIONS: Sunny and warm OBSERVATIONS/COMMENTS: No floating layer, no odor (e.g., floating la/er, odor, color) QUALITY WATER SAMPLING METHOD: TeflonTM bailer AS S U R A N C E WATER LEVEL MEASUREMENT METHOD: Electronic water level meter PUMP LINES / BAILER ROPES-- NEW OR CLEANED?: Cleaned METHOD OF CLEANING BAILER / PUMP: QA/QC METHOD OF PURGING WATER: Bailer pH METER: Hydac CALIBRATED: Yes SPECIFIC CONDUCTANCE METER: Hydac CALIBRATED: Checked COMMENTS: ~H STD CALIBRATION STD. FIELD TEMP °F 4.0 34170-127 4.0 84.3 7.0 34170-130 7.0 84.3 CONDUC- DATE TIME DISCHARGE TEMP. pH TIVITY COLOR ODOR TURBIDITY (pmhos/cm) (gallons) (°F) field @ 8-24-00 1410 DEPTH TO GROUNDWATER AT START OF PURGING: 29.62' 8-24-00 1420 2 79.4 7.37 422 tan odorless Iow 8-24-00 1430 4 76.2 7.29 473 tan odorless Iow 8-24-00 1440 6 77.1 7.71 491 tan odorless Iow 8-24-00 1440 DEPTH TO GROUNDWATER AT END OF PURGING: 30.25' 8-24-00 1445 DEPTH TO GROUNDWATER AT TIME OF SAMPLING: 29.62' TOTAL DISCHARGE: 6 gallons CASING VOLUMES REMOVED: 4.5 METHOD OF DISPOSAL OF DISCHARGED WATER: stored on site in 55-gallon drums AMOUNT AND SIZE OF SAMPLE CONTAINERS FILLED: two VOA vials, one amber, three P.E. bottles WATER SAMPLE DESCRIPTION (e.g., color, turbidity): tan color, Iow turbidity SAMPLE IDENTIFICATION NUMBERS: MW-ls DATA COLLECTED BY: Nicholas Rosenberger HOLGUIN, FAHAN & ASSOCIATES, INC. 2820 Pegasus Drive, Suite 1, Bakersfield, California (661)391-0517 F WATER SAMPLE LOG CLIENT NAME: SoilRem Corporation DATE: August 24, 2000 PROJECT NAME: Bakersfield facility WELL NUMBER: MW-2d WELL DEPTH: 144.51' WELL CASING DIAMETER: 2" WEATHER CONDITIONS: Sunny and warm OBSERVATIONS/COMMENTS: No floating layer, no odor (e.g., floating la'/er, odor, color) QUALITY WATER SAMPLING METHOD: TeflonTM bailer AS S U R A N C E WATER LEVEL MEASUREMENT METHOD: Electronic water level meter PUMP LINES / BAILER ROPES-- NEW OR CLEANED?: Cleaned METHOD OF CLEANING BAILER / PUMP: QA/QC METHOD OF PURGING WATER: Bailer pH METER: Hydac CALIBRATED: Yes SPECIFIC CONDUCTANCE METER: Hydac CALIBRATED: Checked COMMENTS: ~H STD CALIBRATION STD. FIELD TEMP °F 4.0 34170-127 4.0 84.3 7,0 34170-130 7.0 84.3 CONDUC- DATE TIME DISCHARGE TEMP. pH TIVITY COLOR ODOR TURBIDITY (pmhos/cm) (~lallons) (°F) field @ 8-24-00 1300 DEPTH TO GROUNDWATER AT START OF PURGING: 119.78' 8-24-00 1315 4 73.7 6.71 397 tan odorless Iow 8-24-00 1335 8 72.6 7.24 422 tan odorless Iow 8-24-00 1355 12 72.4 7.36 413 tan odorless Iow 8-24-00 1355 DEPTH TO GROUNDWATER AT END OF PURGING: I 120.04' 8-24-00 1400 DEPTH TO GROUNDWATER AT TIME OF SAMPLING:I 119.78' TOTAL DISCHARGE: 12 gallons CASING VOLUMES REMOVED: 2.9 METHOD OF DISPOSAL OF DISCHARGED WATER: stored on site in 55-gallon drums AMOUNT AND SIZE OF SAMPLE CONTAINERS FILLED: two VOA vials, one amber, three P.E. bottles WATER SAMPLE DESCRIPTION (e.g., color, turbidity): tan color, Iow turbidity SAMPLE IDENTIFICATION NUMBERS: MW-2d DATA COLLECTED BY: Nicholas Rosenber~ler HOLGUIN, FAHAN & ASSOCIATES, INC. 2820 Pegasus Drive, Suite 1, Bakersfield, California (661)391-0517 I~IFAHANHOLGUIN' & ASSOCJATES, INC. ATTACHMENT 3. LABORATORY REPORT _ ALCO LABORATORiI:!! c;, INC. Analytical ~. Consulting Services 4309 Armour Avenue Bakersfield, California 93308 (SS 1 ] '295-05:.~9 FAX (881) 3S5-S059 Soil Rem Corp. PO Box 40764~ South Station 524 Bakersfield, CA 93304 Attention: Jack Jones Sample Type: Water LaboraSory Ko: 0008420-~_' ])ate Received: 08/29/00 Date Repcrted: Contract No. : Date Sam'cled : 08/2%/00 :Time Sam'.uled : 14:45 Description: MW-ls, Shallow Well Sampled by N. Rosenber~er REPORT OF AN,tLYTICAL RESULTS Constituents Res:..lt:~ Uni ts DLR ,tet ::.c<i/~.'.,..' ' TPH Gasoline (C4-C12) GRO TPH Diesel (Cll-C25) DRO 8015 ];'D rog/] 0 5 GAf; L!.!..:"T ." :. ]VD rog~! 0.5 [:0;.:':17/1 ,Analyzed : 09/18/00 JMM cc: Mark Magargeu,Eo].guin, Fahan & Associates '2820 Pegasus Drive Ste. 1, Bakersfield, CA !~'..'e t hod Re~erence 1. EPA SW-846, 199~ 3rd Edition 18. Manufacturers Proprietary Methods · m E erton, Lab Operaticr. s t[9/n : micrograms pe%' I,iter (~ar~s per bi~l~ ~tlshos/c~ : ~icromho$/cm .~2 25 ~mhos/cm ; mitlimho~/C~ :lc 25 C ND : NOne Detected *N/A : Not Ap~l!ca.:le NSS : NOt Sufficient Sam)?.le l~or Analy~:ls DLR : Detection LimiL fO~; Rep0r~tng ~urpc.~ss THi~ :eport is ~urn;$hecl fro? the excIusiue use oF our Cus!omer and oppl;e$ only to the sa:'npj.:~, tested. Zorco is not responsible For r~,~orl olte'otion or ,"erocl~r' e~lt .,: ..... .., ..... , ~- ........ ~:..,j-~ ~ ............ ZALOO LAI ORATORII:!!E , INC, Analytical ~ Oonsulting Ser~J¢)es 4-309 Armour Avenue Bakersfield, California 93308 (661) 3D5-:.5EI§ FAX (S6~1) 3D5-5069 Soil Rem Corp. PO Box 40764 South Station 524 Bakersfield.. CA 93304 Attention: Jack Jones Sample Type-: Water Labora(-c.ry No: 0008420-: Date Received: 08/29/00 Date R(.~ported: 09/t8/D0 Contract lqo. : Date Sampled : 08/24/30 Time Sampled : 14':45 Description: MW-ls, Shallow Well Sampled by N. ~osenberper REPORT OF ANALYTICAL RESULTS Constituents Res'alt~ Units Di chlorodi fluoromethane 1,1- Dichloroethane !, 2-Dich].oroethane -1,1- Dich].oroethene cis-l,2-Dichloroethene transol,2-Dichloroethene 1,2-Dich]oropropane 1,3-Dichloropropane 2,2-Dichloropropane 1,1-Dichloropene cis-l,3-E, ichloropropene trans-l,3-Dichloropropene E~hylbenzene Hexachlorobutadiene 2-Hexanon.e Isopropylbenzene p-Isopropyltoluene Methylene Chloride Methyl reft-Butyl E~her (MTBE) 4-Methyl-2-Pentanone Naphthalene n-Propylbenz~ne Styrene 1,1,1,~-Tetrachloroethane 1,1,2,2-TetrachloroeChane Tetrachloroethene Toluene Analyzed : 08/31/00 SV~4 cc:.Mark Magargee,Holguin, Fahan & Associates 2820 Pegasus Drive Ste. 1, Bakersfield, 'Method Reference 1. ~PA $W-846, 1994 3rd Edit;on . ~. DOMS LUFT Manual 18. Manufacturers Proprietary CA 825' } / 1 8260 1 U2GO t H26:}/L ~t26t)/L B263/.L '~" :.~f . / ~L [ 2 ( )i' i :[ 2(; )/ i : 2(, :)/iL ,: 2 (, } / ' ~ : milli/~ram~ pe'.- bi:er (parts pt, r mihi:::.' mh0s/cm : m!llimhos.,'c:n NSS : No~ Sufficient Sample for Analysis DLR : Decec~iofl Limit ZALE30 LABORATORIF!:S, Analy~ioal & Oonsulting Services 4309 Armour Avenue Bakersfield, California 93308 (661) 3EI5-D5~J9 FAX (661) 3EI5-2:06!) Soil. Rem Co:?p. PO Box 40764 South Station 524 Bakersfield, CA 93304 Attention: Jack Jones Sample Type: Water Laborat¢,::¥ No: Date Received: 08/29/00 Date Re~.orted: 09,/18/90 Contract No. Date Sampled : 08/24/30 ~ime Sampled .' 14:45 Description; MW-is, Shallow Well Sampled by N. Rosenberger REPORT OF AN;~LYTICAL RESULTS Constituents Results Unit..=... D LP, [,]e: }':..':~ d/' ?'::.. :, 1,2,3-TrJ. chlorobenzene t,2,4-TrJ, chlorobenzene C,l~l-TrJ. chloroethane 1,1,2-Trichloroethane Trichloroethene Trichlorofluoromethane 1,2,3-Tr~chloropropane 1,2,4-Trimethylbenzene 1,3,5-Tri. methylbenzene Vinyl chloride m and p-xylenes o-Xylene Total Xylenes ..'I-D 'u.~/ ".ID 'wa./ .[, .~.I'D u?/L ::,,'D t ~c.'/ [, :',rD ug/~ ::rD -j.~/[. )~[D ug/L )::D u g / (. >'D ug/L b'D u!~/:'_ ug/.L Analyzed : 08/31/00 SVM cc;' Mark Ma~ar~ee,Holguin, Fahan & Associates 2820 Pegasus Drive Ste. 1, Bakersfield, Method Reference 1. ~.PA SW-846, 1994 3rd ~dition 8. ~OH$ LUFT Ma~]ual 18. Manufac~ure3~$ Proprie~az-¥ ~e~hods CA ug/L ; micro, rams pc'.: biter (paris u~hos/cm : micromhos,'Cln 3!.~. 25 C m~hos/c~ : mlllimhos/c'm ac 25 C N~ : None Detected N/A : NOt A~t.l. ica:,le NSS ~ NOt Sufficien~ S.{m~].e roi-Analysis DLR : Detection Lilnl,. for Reuorting ~urpD~ es This report is fumishec for the exclusive use of our Customer and applies anly to the sam/: I~s lm;'ed. Zalco is not ,'esponsibl~ F:~r ~epo,l alteration or de.-'.xhr'~en!. - ~ [[ ~ I ' ';i ...... 11 '[ :ill ZALC;O LABORATORIE!!S;, Analytical ~ Oonsulting Ser,¢ioes 4.309 Armour Avenue E:ekersfie[d, California 93308 FAX (661 ) 395-30--_.9 Soil Rem Coru. PO Box 40~6~! South Station 524 Bakersfield, CA 93304 Attention: Jack Jones Sample Type: Water Laboratory A:o: 0008,t2()-~ Date Receive. d: 08/2!7/00 Date Repc. rted: 09/I!)/00 Contract No. : Date Sam..::~ed : 08/24/~)0 ~Fime ,'3'am.~led : 14: 4fi Description: MW-Is, Shallow Well Sampled by N. Rosenberger Constituents REPORT OF ANg,LYTICAL RESULTS Results General Mineral Total Hardness as CaC03 Calcium, Ca Magnesiums, M~ Sodium, Na Potassium, K Alkalinity, Total Hydroxide Carbonate Bicarbonate Sulfate, SO4 Chloride Date Analyzed: 09/18/00 Mark Ma~a~ee. Holguin, Fahan & Associace~ ~620 Pegasus Drive Ste. 1, Bakersfield0 CA M~thod Reference 8.. DOHS LUFT Manu~.l ~5. California DO~[S Titl~ ~2 93308 / mg/L : milligram:~ per L;cer ug/L : microqram.': pet' Lite~- '~p~.,:I:~: p~u. ~LLI. i~" umhos/cm : m~cro[,f%os/cm a~ 25 C ~luhos/Cm ;' ~%illi~lho~/cm a~ 25 C N/A : Nob DLR : l]etecti, on LLmit for Re~or'::.u.~ l', This repoFI is furnished for Ihe excJusive use of our Customer and applies orly fo the samp~.$ tes'.'ed. Zolco is not responsib!~, fa' r,:port olte:allcn or delcch~r ent · · ~ ltl.,' I I ' ':~ ..... ZALOO LAE ORATORIF!-_'S, INO. Analyt;ioal S, Consulting Services 4309 Armour Avenue Bakersfield, California 93308 Soil Rem Co:up. PO Box 40764 South SCation 524 Bakersfield, CA 93304 Attention: Jack Jones Sample Type: Water Labor,tory No Date Re c~;i~.red Date Report:ed Contract No. Da~e Sampled Time Sampled Description.: MW-ts, Shallow Well Sampled by N. Rosenberger CAM - Title 22, Chapter 30 Article II Constituents Total Conc~n~ rat i on {TC) (6B t ] :BE: 5-.: 5S9 FAX (661) 3~ 5-'.:. 3D.q 00084~ 0-:.: 08/29/30 09/18/20 08/24/30 14:45 Uni ts ?TLC DLR Me t:hc :i / 2e f To~al Concentration Antimony, Sb Arsenic, As Barium, Ba Beryllinm, Be Cadmium, Cd Chromium, Cr Cobalt, Cc Copper, Cu Lead, Pb Mercury~ R~ Molybdenum, MO Nickel, Ni Selenium, Se Silver, Ag Thallium, TI vanadium, V Zinc, Zn 0.2 mg/1 500 0.2 0.02 mg/1 500 0.02 60!0A 0.18 mg/1 10000 0.t 60LOA 0,01 m9/1 75 0.01 0.01 m9/1 100 0.01 0.05 m9/1 2500 0.0S 0.1 m~/1 8000 0.1 0.05 mg/1 2500 0.05 60~0A 0.05 mg/1 1000 0.05 60]0A 0 002 -~/~ ~ ' .... ~ ~ 0.002 74',iA 0,1 m~/1 3500 0,1 0.05 m~/1 2000 0.05 6'0LOA 0.05 m~/1 ~00 0.05 0,02 rog/1 500 0.02 0.5 rog/1 700 0.5 0.1 m~/1 2400 0.1 0.12 mg/1 5000 0.05 ,/L / ]. /:L /:L /i Date A/~alyzed: 09/01/00 SMS :cc: Mark Magargee,Holguin, Fahan & Associates .2B20 P~,~asus Drive Ste. 1, Baker.~field, ~e~hod Reference EPA $w-$45, ~-~'4 3rd Edition DO:4S L~JFT Manua~l Manufac~-u~ers Proprietary Methods DLR : De~ection Limii for TTLC : Total Threshold Limit C;):~.cenzratio~, STLC ; Soluble Threshold Limit Concentration, W~T : Waste Extraction Test ; ND : Non,~ Detected ; II,{ionized 'l'h[s repod is furn[shed for the exclusive use of our Customer and applies otiS,' to the san;pl,-s '~es'ed. Zalcc is not responsibl.-" fo" ~'cport alteration or detoc~ment Soil Rem Corp. PO Box 4076.~ South Station 524 Bakersfield, CA 93304 Attention: Jack Jones Sample Type: Water ZALCO LARORATOROES,. INO, Analytical & C:onsultir D Ser,vi(:es 4-309 Armour Avenue Bakersfield, California 93308 (661) 3D5--=r' FAX (661) 35'5- Laboratory No Date Received Date Reported Contract ~oo Date Eampled Yime Sampled 00084L0-2 08/29/00 09/~8/00 08/24/00 14 ~ O0 Description: MW-2d, Deep Well Sampled by N. Rosenber9er REPOItT OF A/g;kLYTICAL RESULTS ~ons%.i.suent~; Results UnJ ts DLR Ple L~-oJ/.qc F TPH Gaso].ine (C4-C12) GRO TPH Dies~;1 (C11-C25) DRO 8015 _ . GA :, ..UFT, .~ lID m,~'/i f', . G 301 '~,~?./1 Analyzed : 09/18/00 JMM cc: Mark Ma~ar9ee,Holguin, Fahan & Associates 2820 Pegasus Drive Ste. 1, Bakersfield, Me~hod Reference 1. EPA SW-B46. 1994 ,'~:~'d Edition 18. Manufsctu~e):$ Proprietary Me%hods CA m Etkertor:, Lab 0peraticrt.'~ milligrams p~r bitzr ~par~5 micrograms p~r bi,er ~arts u~oG/c~ : micromhos,.'c[,% a~ 25 C NO~ S~fficien~ Sam::~,le ~e~' Detection Li.lil ~oz Reporbin Th;s r~pod it, ~Curnished f~r ~he excJusive use of our Customer ond oppJies or I¥ to Ihe ~clnlp ,:s tesled. Za!co is not responsible. Fo,' ,',;poet olteraf:an or clet¢:c~n'ent. ZALCO LABORATORIE!! cl , Analytical & (Donsultin~ Services 4309 Armour Avenue Bakersfield, California 93300 (661) FAX (661) Soil Rem Corp. PO Box 4076<[ South Station 524 Bakersfield, CA D3304 Attention: Crack Jones Sample Type: Water 5aborat:ory No: 000842D-? Date Rece~ived: Date Reported: 09/18/ Contrac~ No. : .'3ace Sampled : 08/'24/)0 Time Sampled : 14 Description: MW-2d, Deep Well Sampled by N, Rosenberger REPORT OF ~hLYTICAL RESULTS Constituents: Resdltz Units Volatile Or~lanics Acetone Benzene Bromobenzene Bromochloromethane 'Bromodickloromethane Bromoform Bromomethane 2-Butanon. e (MEK) n-Butylbenzene sec-Butylbenzene ter~-Buty'lbenzene carbon Disulfide Carbon Tetrachloride Chlorobenzene Chtoroethane Chloroform Chloromethane 2-Chlorocoluene 4~'Chlorototuene Dibromochloromethane 1,2-Dibromo-3-Chloropropane {DBCP) 1,2-Dibromoethane (EDB) Dibromomethane 1,2-Dichlorobenzene 1,3-Dichlorobenzene 1,4-Dichlorobenzene Analyzed : 08/31/00 cc: Mark Magargee,Holguin, 2820 Pegasus Drive SVM Fahan & Associates Ste. 1, Bakersfield, Method Reference ~. EPA SW-846, 1994 3rd Edition S- DOHS LUFf Manual 18. Manufacture]-s ?rop~'ietar¥ Methods CA ms//L : millisrams lO~:.' Liter (parts pe~' mi..li(,;~ ~/~ : micrograms per biLer (parts p[:~' bi:.li:m' ~n'.hos/C~ : micro~o~/cm at 25 C ~os/cm : milli~os..'cm 5t 25 C NE : None Detected ~/A : Not Ap~:i%ca;~2e NSS : NOt Sufficien~ Samc:2e fDr Analysis DLR : Detection Li~i~ fo(' Re~:or~infl P,~Yp~>es report is furnished [or ~he exclusive use of our Customer and applies ZALCO LABORATORIFES, Analyticel & Oonsulting Ser,vioes 4.309 Armour Avenue Bakersfield, California 93308 (661) 395--D5~t9 r "-' FAX (661) 3J5-~,0,.x3 Soil Rem Corp. PO Box 40764 South Station 524 Bakersfield, CA 93304 Attention: Jack Jones SamPle Type: Water Labocat(; ry No Date Received Date RepDrted Contract No. Date Sam'ol ed Time S amloled Description: MW-2d, Deep Well Sampled by N. Rosenberger REPORT OF ANALYTICAL Rw. SULTS ConstiCuent.s Re.='21t s Un:. O00 ~,4 :-'0-. 08/2._9, 09/18, 08/24:.: O0 14: C (I Dichlorodifluoromethane 1,1-Dichloroethane 1,2-Dichloroethane 1,1-Dichloroethene cis-l,2-]Dichloroethene trans-l,2-Dichloroethene 1,2-Dichloropropane l, 3 -Dich~Loropropane 2,2 -DJ chloropropane 1,1 -Dich[Loropene cis-l,3-Dichloropropene trans-l,3-Dichloropropene Ethylbenzene Hexachlorobutadiene 2-Hexanone Isopropy!benzene .p-Iaopropyltoluene Methylene Chloride Nethyl tert-Bu:yl Ether (MTBE) 4-Meth¥1-.2-Pentanone ~aphthalene n - Propy lbe nzene Styrene I/l,I,2-Tetrachloroethane 1,1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane Tetrachloroethene Toluene Analyzed : 08/31/00 SVM cc: Mark Magarge:e,Holguin, Faha'n & Associates 2820 Pegasus Drive Ste. 1, Bakersfield, CA Method Reference 1. ~'PA SW-~4G. 1994 3rd Edition 8. O0HS LUF? Manual 18. Manufacturers Proprietary Methods 82(,0/ 3. 82(;0/] 82(:0/]. 82('0.']. 82( O,/]. 82('0/1 82(: O//] 82(0/1 82(0/! 92( 0/1 32~0,/1 32 5' {)/1 H2,SU/l [;260 ,' L is Ethp(ton, Lab Operat-_,on!; m~.~L ; milligrams p,"r ;,i'_er {par~s pa.u mi[li~::,' umhos/cm : micromho~;Ic.3 ,~a 2~ C mmhos/cm : miilimho~:/o~ ~.~ 25 C ND ; None Detected b/A : Nc.~ Ap]',Ltce NE;S : NOt SufticienL S)mgle ~or Analy:4~s DLR : Detection Lis:.;% ~Or Reportin~ This report is furn~sheo for the exclusive use of our Customer or,d applies o,'ly to the sampl-:.s re.' :ed. Zol¢o is nat responslb.~.~ for reDort a=.teration or de~ach, nen' I Ill I I : 71 ....... ZALCO LABORATORI[F_F~, INI~, ~nalytical & C;onsuitin9 Ser'vk~es 4309 Armour Avenue Bakersfield, California 93308 [661) F~E5-[)5:]9 FAX (661) 3~:5-[!0[~B Soil Rem Corp. PO Box 40764 South Station 524 Bakersfield, CA 93304 Attention: Jack Jones Sample Type: Water Laboratory No: 0008420 Date Received: Date Re]~:orte~: Cont]:'acn No. : Date Sampled _- 08/2,[,'00 Time Sampled : 14 Description: MW-2d, Deep Well Sampled by N. Rosenberger REPORT OF ~)ALYTICAL RESULTS ConStituents Res~lts Un.i ~:-~ DLF. Me 1,2,3-Trichlorobenzene 1,2,4-Trichlorobenzenm 1,1,1-Trichloroethane 1,l,2-Trichloroethane Trichlor.oethene Trichloroiluoromethane 'l,2,3-Trichloropropane 1,2,4-Tr£methylbenzene 1,3,5-Trimethylbenzene Vinyl chloride m and p-]~ylenes o-Xylene Total Xylenes Analyzed : 0B/31/00 SVM cc: Mark Magargee,Holguin, Fahan & Associates 28~0 Pegasus Drive Ste. 1, Bakersfield, Ne thud' Reference 1. EPA SW-$46, 1~94 3rd Edition B. DOHS LUFT Manual 18- MaaufacEure~e Proprieta~-y MethQds CA %~/b ~icrograms p~r L:3:er ',par%~ per ur~hos/cm ~ micromho~F/cm ~t 25 C mr~os/cm : mi2.1~mho:s/cm i~ 25 C ND : None Del:ec~ed K/A NeE NSS : Not Su~.icien~ San~p[e J~or This report iS furnished for the e~cluslve use oF our Customer and applies only to the saml:l.-'-s tested. Z. al¢o is not responsiOle for ~epor" a!~eration or do-a~:k,neet · -- [ TI: 'i [ ' '" ...... Il '( .... ZALCO LABORATORII:ES, INC. Analytical & (Donsultimg Services 4309 Armour Avenue Bakersfield, California 93308 (661) 3.q5-"~539 FAX (68!3 395-~-~069 Soil Rem Co'~p. PO 'Box 4076.~ South Station 524 Bakersfield, CA 93304 Attention: Jack Jones Sample Type: Water Laboral:o::y No Date Rec~ived Date Re~ or ted Co~lt2~act No. Date Sampled ~ime Sampled Description: MW-2d, Deep Well Sampled by N. Rosenberger REPORT OF ANALYTICAL RESLLTS Constituents 0008420 -] O8/29/00 09./19/'00 08/24/00 14:G0 Results ~eneral Minstrel Total Hardness as Cat03 Calcium, Ca Magnesiur~, M~ Sodium, Na Potassium, K Alkalinity, Total Kydroxid~ .Carbonate ' "Bicarbona~e Sulfate, S04 Chloride Date Analyzed: 09/18/00 JMG Mark Magargee,Hol)uin, Fahan & Associates 28~0 Pegasus ~riva Ste. 1, Bakersfield, CA Method Reference 1. EPA SW-846, 1~4 3rd ~di~ion ~. DO~S LUFT Manual 25. California DO'qS Title 22 93308 n~3/L : milli..-'lrar.~:, per ~it:e~ ~LI.::~L-; f~-: ;.:!]i.. :~' Ug/t. : micro,:l.~am~, pe~' Liter .~)a~ ~ ~:L' [:i1~:..:2 umhos/cm : 1,11crc-[l~hos/cm a~ ~:~ m~ahoBt'c~ ; m~iiimhos/c~ a~ 2;~ C ND : bione DLR : DeLect. ior~ i,imiL for Ke~3,Dr~iu,j MBAS : Methy[~:~ ~lu[. Active This repoct is furnbhed for the exclusive use of our Customer and oppl[es only to the sampl ts reCtO. Zorco is not r,._-sponsib ~:~ I:er ,'.~,_~ol't a tero'tio~l ar det,3ch'-en. ~ [[; I i ''T': ...... !I1 'f .... ; ZAL. C:;C) LABOP, ATOFllE:S, INC., Analytical & Oonswlting Services 4.309 Armour Avenue Bakersfield, California 9:3308 FAX (661) 3E 5-:'-: 539 (661) 3E:5-2 0El9 Soil Rem Corp. PO Box 40764 South Station 524 Bakersfield, CA 93304 Attention: ,Jack Jones Sample Type: Water Laboratory Date ReceJ.ved: Date Reporned: Contract Date Sampled Time Sampl~d 000~420- :: 08/2~,'0C 09/!E~,'OC 08/24/'00 ia- :00 Description: MW-2d, Deep Well Sampled by N. Rosember9er CAM - Title 22, Cha[':.er 30 Article II: Cons t ituent ,J Total Concentration (TC) Units TTLC DLR Me 2h::.~,R~[ -~ ' = ' Total Concentration Antimony, Sb Arsenic, As Barium, Ba Beryllium, Be Cadmium, Cd Chromium, Cr Cobalt, Co Copper, LeAd, Pb Mercury, Molybdenum, Mo Nickel, Ni Selenium, Se Silver, A9 Thallium, Vanadium, v Zinc, Zn 0.02 0.26 < 0.01 < 0.01 0.06 0.03 < 0.05 < 0.05 < 0. 002 < 0.1. <OCS < 0 05 <002 <05 0 -12 0 18 rog/1 500 O. 2 50 LO.% /1 mg/1 500 O. 02 '5~ t. OA /1 mD/1 i0000 0.3. ,SD:iOA /1 m~/1 75 0.01 6 ):.0.~. /l mg/1 100 0.01 50:_0A /1 mg/1 2500 0.05 6 O:.0,~ mD/1 8000 0. i 50:.0A /i mg/1 2500 0.05 mD/1 1000 0.05 G0'.0A /1 m~/1 20 0. 002 V4 m~/1 3500 0.1 60:.0~% ./]. mD/1 2000 0.05 m~/1 100 0.05 60].C~ /l mD/1 500 0.02 mg/t 700 0.5 50 L0A / L ag/1 2400 0. 1 60 ].0A / L m9/t 5000 0 · 05 ,Date Analyzed: 09/07/00 JMG cc:. Mark Magargee,Holguin~ Fahan & Associates 2820 Pegasus Drive Ste. I, Bakersfield, CA ' Meghod Reference %. EPA S~-846o %994 5rd Edition B. DOMS LUFT Manu~l !8. Manufacturers Propvietary Me~ods 93308 DLB g~ction Limi~ for TTLC : To:al Threshold Lie:LC C)nce~:r.r~]~ion. ~ET Waste Extraction Tes; . .:pH 5.0 $oiuSzoK, ND : No~e Da~ected 3aioni~ed Water f:.r This reporf is ~mished far the exclusiw use of our Customer end applies o.ly to the setup ,,s tes;'¢d, Zalco is not ,-eaponsib;e · -- '' j II' I ZALCO L BORATORIEiiS, INC:, Analytioal ~, C~onsuIting Set'vices 4309 Armour Avenue ~ekersfield, California 93308 (661] 3:~ 5-11529 FAX (661) 355-::{C)59 Soil Rem Corp. PO Box 40764 South Station 524 Bakersfield, CA 93304 Attention: Jack Jones Sample Type: Water Laboratory No: 000842 Date Received: 08/29/ Date Reported: 09/18/ Contract No. ]Date SamDled : 08/24/)0 Time Sam~.led Description: TB-1, Test Blank Sampled by N. Rosenberger REPORT OF ANKLY'FICAL RESULTS Constituents; Res .~lt ~ Units Volatile Organics Acetone Benzene Bromobenzene Bromochloromethane Bromodichloromethane Bromoform Bromomethane 2-ButanoK.e (MEK) n-Butylbenzene sec-Butylbenzene tert-Butylbenzene Carbon Disulfide Carbon Tetrachloride Chloroben. zene Chloroeth. ane Chlorofozm Chlorometkane 2-Chlorotoluene 4-Chloro~oluene Dibromochloromethane 1,2-Dibromo-3-Ch!oropropane (DBCP) 1,2-Dibromoethane (EDB) Dibromomethane 1,2-Dichlorobenzene 1,3-Dichlorobenzene 1,4-Dichlorobenzene 'Analyzed : 08/31/00 SVM cc: Mark Magargee,Holguin, Fahan & Associates 2820 Pegasus Drive Ste~ 1, Bakersfield, Method Reference 1- EPA 8W-846. 1994 3rd Edition CA 200 5 0 $ 0 5 0 5 0 5 0 5,0 5.0 5.0 5.0 5. [} 5.0 5.0 5.0 5.0 S. 0 5 , 0 5 . C: 5.0 5.o 5.C' 5.C. /~ ucJ/L 5.0 :.: 2t I.' i :. / / m~li~rams per Lire_ :parts p~.:' mi~].i:,n' umhos/~ : micromhos..'cm .~ 2] C m~hos/~m : mlllimhos/cm i~ 25 C None De~ecged W/A : Not Applica:~le Not Sufficient ~am.>le f~r Analysis De ~ecgion Limit This repod is ~turnished for the exclusrve use of our Cuslomer and app;ies only !o the samp ,~s les!ed. Zoko is not responsibh, for rnp,r~ alter'orion or detoc.m:~enl. ;7ALSO LABORATORII!ES, INC, Anmly'tical ~ Consulting Ser',vices 4309 Armour Avenue Bakersfield, California 93308 (661) FAX (661 ) ,,c ~ .", ...... Soil Rem Corp. PO Box 40764 South Station 524 Bakersfield, CA 93304 Atffention: Jack Jones Sample Type: Water Laboratory No Date Rec,=ired Date Ret)Drt ed Contract No. Date Sampled Time Sampled 0B/29/0(, 09/IB.,Or. 08/24,'0C Description: TB~i, Test Blank Sampled by N. Rosenber~er REPORT OF ANALYTICAL RESULTS Constituents Di chi oro,ii f luo rome t bane 1,1-DichLoroethane 1,2 -Dichioroethane 1,1 -Dichloroethene cis-1,2-Dichloroethene trans- 1,2 -Dichloroethene 1,2-Dichloropropane 1,3 -Dichi4oropropane 2,2-Dick~k oropropane 1,1-DJ ch~Loropene tis - 1, 3 -Dichloropropene trans- 1,3 -Dichloropropene .E~hylbenzene Hexachlorobut adi ene 2 - Ilexanone I sopropyZbenzene p- I sopropyl to luene Methylene Chloride Methyl tert-Butyl Ether 4-Methyl- 2-Pen~anone Naphthalene n- Propylbenzene Styrene 1, 1,1, 2-Tetrachloroethane 1, 1,2,2-Tetrachloroethane TetrachloroeChene Toluene Analyzed : 08/31/00 SVM cc ~ Mark MaGarg~:e0Holguin, Fahan & Associates 2820 Pegasus Drive Ste. 1, Bakersfield, Method Reference 1. EPA SW-846, 199~ 3rd Edi~i0n alt. s Un'[ ts DLR M( i h,.,d "It..~:. .~D ug/'L 5 . 0 82:10 ~ :. .~ID ug/L 5.0 82(,':) .' 'eTD ug/L .5. O 82(,C .' >ID uq/L S.0 82~.(3.']. lCD ugr/L !5.0 82(.':)/1 .ND u~.]/]~ 5 . 0 82~: 2.'1. )qD ug/L, 5.0 82~.3 '1 )~ ug/L 5.0 82L 3,-']. l~ ug/L 5.0 82L.:)/] T~ ug/h 5.0 ~2('3."] I~ tt~l/]J 5. O 32(: ;),'1 ND ug/L 5.0 t~ ug/I, 100 32f.(':. i I~ U~[/L 5.0 32~;C,"i [ID 'aEf/L 5-0 32!;3. 1 trD usr/I, 100 ~2 !,:: ~[D ug/]:; S.0 ~2 >ID u~/L 5.0 32F:).. ] ND u~'/[, 5. 0 :32 ~ '3 .,' 1 3ID ug'/[, 5.0 CA /--- / ..... ::- ..... ' mr~',os/cm : mi..l~mbo~/Cm a~ 25 C ND : None Detected ~t./A : l~ot Appi:.c'~.~l~. N~3S : NO~ Surf. iciest San~?2e for DLR : Detection bimJt for R.e~ortin~ This report. ~s furnJshed fcr the exclusive use of our Customer ~nd applies orly Io the sampl ?s fe.,:fed. Zalco is not responsible ;or ,aport cltero~ian or detm hrnem -; liem Name ontr~ct Code am. ptJ-~s Na me .; Project Name Sam.p ler'.._.s Signature HF.A Sample # ~)ate Sample( Time ampled Other Information (e.g.. sampling location, depth, soil befog or MW if, etc.) Sample Matdx Isoil, ground water, air. wager) /'qdO CHAIN-OF-CUSTODY RECORD Client Contact/Phone No. No. and Type of Conlainer z ;.,o~ Page { of_L_ Send report to: Holguin, Fahan & Associates, Inc. 2_82_0 Pegasus Drive, %ut"ge 1 Bakersfield, CA 93308 At'tn:/'¢~../¥ ,z~r&~'¢~/&_.~E--6- SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS (i.e., turnaround time. etc.) -'Fo -So,l REQUIRED DETECTION LIMITS Los Angeles County L_~ Californ,a LtJFT ~ Santa ~a. doara County ~ SW-846 [7'-} Venluta Counb/ L-..~ O~'her see reverse/or required detechon ia~l~ts SAMPLE RECEIPT YeS No Sample Seal IntAct ~'~; Sample Condition Acceptable ~ ~ Sample Temperature A~¢opria~e __"---' ~ PRESERVATIVE ADDED? [] yes type:__ Ali sampi,Js sloled uverl'lighl al, HFA are re!n~.ef-',ted the laborato¢/in coolers Delivered to HFA's re[rigerator tot tempo.'a ry storage on (Initials) I HOLGUIN, FAHAN & ~TES, INC. ATTACHMENT 4. RBCA TIER 2 FATE AND TRANSPORT MODELING WORKSHEETS -i RBCA Tool Kit for Chemical Releases, Version 1.0a '?::::.~=~[oeatiot~l Bakersfield CA -' ..................................... [~::! .................. ' :~i~ "I1 ~ ~: .. . . !::~::~::i:~!i::~iit!~!~ii::!!::!!!!i!::::!!i::::::i::::::~iii~iiiii!!!~i~!!iii::ii~!i!ii!ii!::::::!!::i::::~:~!~i!~!ii~i!~.:~.:.::::~::i:::f:i:i Concern (COC~) i ~: .' .' '. ..... ..' ... ill!:: :::::~ -' ~, -, ~;,:?:::: -i~ ~=;~ ,~-'=-' :: ...... . Input Data Summa~ ............... ~ .......... :~t' =~: :' ....... ~=~~ -'= ...... .:! .... ::.:; ~ ~¢,, ? ' .' ~ *. '~ ::.::.. :3:: x '.. :*, ,,,~:***,~c~.:~.:,,z .;:, ............... ..... .................. .. .................. .................. - ...... = ............................................ m .... Soil Paramete~ .... ~,~ ...................................................................................................................... ~*~..~ ~.~.t~' ~ ...... ~t~d~,,, :::::::~1~:~ U~~q~:::::: .................................................... ~:, *=~ . ~,uP ~ . ~" .... · :,::::~:::~¢~=~tean .~a~E~Y~6~::. :: :::.:*:: ~; Print Sheet ~ . Set Um~ ~] Custom Chem. Data.. ~=~ He/ ~: .... ::~:~:::~<~?:~::~:~:~.~.::::::~.~:~::;:~:~:~:~.~:~:;:::::~.:::::. -:-:::-:::':*'::::': ......... ,.:.. ::. ...... ~,: ..... . .... :::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: ..... : ..... :...: ...::: : ..... .. :.;:~..: RBCA Tool Kit for Chemical Releases, Version 1.0a .i:iiiiiiiiil~~ ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: ................. ~! ~ :; :: ::::::::::::::::::::::::::: :::: ::; t : ::: :; ::::: :::=~ :::::~ ;: ': =~;: ': :: .... ~ :" :: .............. :':" ':";' "': ..... :'t" :":~::~-::~f~{~:~:~:~:~::t:~ ;F;::~::'':tt~::::t:r:::~':'':': ..... :f'~: ........ : ..................... ~'~ ............... ~ ..... ~,~',~,~F, - :::::::::::::::::::::::::: ....................................... :;=;~;:::::: .....; ............ :::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: : ?;~?~ ~:~ ~:::::::: :~: ~:~:~ ~~ ~ ~' ~ ~ ~ ': F: E?::m:::::::;::':~F;~;?~'':::::::~:~'''::::~'::~::*:::;;;;:i ? ':d::~:::~:~'~'~:~::~::;;::::::::::::::;::::;::~::::::;~:::m~:;~'~'~; ........... · .~ ............ :::::":::'--.':': ..... ,::~:::::::-.:::-:- ..... ",-.:-=====================================:':;:~ Mare Screen ~ p,infSheet ~* Set Units ~, Help .~' ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: ~:;;:=:::.::~:: ..... ======================================= ~. Exposure Factors &Target R~sks ~. Exposure Flowcha~ RBCA Tool Kit for Chemical Releases, Version 1.0a !~iii'~'~'~8~i ~'~'~i!0- .......................................... ?."i'"! i'"': :""';':':':'~: '?: "-':'::' ,.. :':::::::.: .:. ::::::::'. ======================================== ::: :::::: :; '~] ]~[~[::-[]~[ :~ ~Fi'":'":F;'[::::"":':: ........ .':::~H:~::~h~ tH.':~F~.~- .['~[F.~Fi F ~:~ ~::."."':::" Delete 2.0E+3 : '~ :: ] :. :: :: ;, :.:'[;~:,~[:.[~: :. ::[~ :.'~[:: :::.::::- ..... ~ ......... ~~], .... ~ ............... ,..~...:,.,.,,,~,.., ....... , ..... ~.~ ....................... , .............................................. , .................. ~ ........ RBCA Tool Kit for Chemical Releases. Version 1.0a 0 .__ E '- [ IIi I I ' ;i ..... Ii" '" il[ RBCA Tool Kit for Chemical Releases, Version 1.0a :JiJ!!!!?JJii! !!:r i! ~ i : '!'-':~i:::"r::;::;:i; ........................... ffii .............. ';:'i;:Ji' :..:....'::::x ;'::.'.:::':. ":.: .... .. : ..'-:.::.::-::-':': ".:~.".'~f.~i~'; ";?~-' -:'.::'~.S;:¢:~",~. : ::: · . : :;:::-~..: ,::~::~£::::::::i;~;r~;;:i~::; Enter Directly j ~.;:.: ..... :.:..::.:...:-..;~;+::;~,.;;;:;:: ~,.-, ~:,:;;::. -:..:: :.. ~ :.: : .....:::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: .... . ..:..: ~; f5}j~{}}~}~j~b~jj~f~ks~sF::~:::~}}~;:~::;:~:~.~;.~::::~::F: ..... :,:,, :;.:,:;.:f~Ef;:.i!~X'.;;i~J;]fj;f];;~;5] 6~;]~i~'-~;~.jjS;:;;j,~NZ;~;~:;':': "::" · :::: · :::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: ;;:::;: :; :~:::: ; ..... ~g:~'.:.'~'.*::l-. ~:;:~:1 ,.;: '.. ;:. ". ' ..: :::.::;~:~t~]~;~l;~:~;:~l~l .............. ::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: ~f~l~ :=':'::::H;;?~::::'';:' :': ';:::F :::::~.~:~.:;':;:' ;~c~;.::~:~,~::.:.: ~L:;:. ~.~.f~[~}~ ~e~ units ~-,,'~,~, .............................. ~. Hel~ ....... : ..... :":'" :::-:':": ......... :.'--": ........ : ...... :::: ....... :,,:--::: :: :.---:-,:,.: .......... : ...... '.. :...:..:.'::: ;:~ ............................................. ~:~=~¢:~=~f~j!~j~::~it~z:~*~, ~ RBCA Tool Kil for Chemical Releases, Version 1.0a :': ~t'~lad~Ce~r(mg~m'~day~ · '- :~::;::::'~ ' ?:::: ' ' : :..:.:;:,,:;.::.: :.::::..~ ............... : ......... :~H :: :::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::::: :.::::":::'::'::. , ;: :: :.:~ ~ii~i;i;;;;~:~::~:~:~:::~a~i~:~~:::~::::~i~~.i~ :: -* ................ : ..... : ..... 2.;[:L.;:::::L:~}:~;::': ..... ;;;7 ....... ' ' - ~*. ' "~::~::::~: Use DefaUlt }~NFN ...' .'.~ ..'~' -- .'[~' ~L{~ ' RBCA Tool Kit for Chemical Releases, Version 1,0a RBCA Too{ K{t tar Chemical Releases, Version Page 3 of 4 Fhysicat Property Cens~ituent NiC.~ el Chromium {Vi) lA,sen c Malec.~lar Weight CAS (g/mole) Number t¥1~e MW 74,m-o2-o N j 58.a~ 1854or~-~ N 52 7~0-38- 2 ~' ' 74.9 D~uslon Coefficients in air in water (cm2/~} (cm2/s) ref [~air ref Owat ref 0 O.00E+00 0 O.OOE*O0 0 4 O.OOE*00 0 O.O~E+0O 0 f(pH) Site Name: SoaRem Corporation Site L~cation: 13akersfield. CA Completed By: Mark Maga~Cjee Date Completed: 14~Nov-O0 tog (Ko~ or 'Vapor teglKd) Henry's Law Constant Press~e Solubility (~ 20.2s c) (~ ~0 - 2s cl (~ 20 - ~ c) (~ 20 - 25 c) bg(U~) (~m.m3) (mm Hg] (~) pa~iti~ ret mol {unitles~) r~ r~ rd Kd 30 O.O~+O0 0.0OE*00 0 O.~E+~ 14 1.57E+05 27 Kd 24 O.~E+00 0.~E+00 0 0.~E+00 14 4.41E+05 27 acid pKb rM JoblD: Sl10 RBCA T001 Kit for chemical Release~, Version 1.0a page 2 o~' 4 Toxicity Data JNJckel C~hro._m_ !~m Site Name: ,SoilRee) Corporation Site Location: Bakersfield. CA Rel'e~ence Dose Relerence Conm Slope Factors Un~ Risk Factor (mg/l(g~day) (mglm3) 1 ;{mglkg/day) lt(l~g/m3) Img~.glday) tt( rn g~'kQi~day) EPA Weight Oral Den~al tnhalafion Oral Dem~al InhalatiOn ~f Rf'D oralref E~ ~msl ref R~ inhM ref S~ oral re{ ~F dermal ref URF inhal ref Evidence 3~E~ R 1.05E-~ R 7.30E-03 0 2.g2E-01 TX 1 20E. 02 R A 3.00E-~ R 0 1.50E+00 R 7.50E~00 'IX 4,31E-03 R A Carcinogenic ? TRUE TRUE RBCA Tool Kit for Chemical Releases, Version 1.0a page 3 of 4 Miscellaneous Chemical Data Constituent INickel Chromium (VI) Arsenic Site Name; So,Rem Corporation MCL ~'m~lLL r~f I 1.00E-01 51 FH31776(1?JuI02) 1.00E-01 56 FR 3526 (30 Jan 91) 5.00E-02 50 FR 46936 (13 Nov 85} Site Location: Bakarsfield, CA TIme-Weighrad Cl~teria 'P~A [mgfm:3) ref 5.00E-02 ^CGI H 2.00E-03 NIOSH Aquatic Lit'a Biocor~. Factor AQL {mg/L) mi' (L.wat/kg-fi~h~ L 1.40E*00 33 l 1 1.50E-02 33 ! 3.00E-01 33 1 RBCA TOOt Kit for Chemical Releases, Version 1.0a Page 4 of 4 Miscellaneous Chemical Data J constituent Nicket .. Arsenic Site Name: So,Rem Corporation Site Location: Bakersfield, CA Derma[ Water Der~',al Penne[bility Data Relative Dermal Lag time tot C r;~tical Relative Watel'/$kiR Ab~orp, Permeability O~mM Exposure Contr of De~ De~ Adso~ Fac~ Coe~. Exposu~ ~me Pet~ Co~ Factor (unitte~3) ~cm~r) (hr~ (hr) ~unitless) fcm~.event) 0 O.0~ .... : ...... ~;p~-4 0 ~.001 3.0E-3 0 0.0~1 3.0E-3 Detection Limits Groundwater Soil ~mg/L} {mglkg) re! O 0_05 C 0.015 0 0.O1 C 0.007 D 0.01 C 0.0.53 Half Life (First-O~der Dec.~ y} (days) ret Saturated Unsaturated rel RBCA 'Tool Kit for Chemical Releases, Version 1.0a User-Specified COC Data REPRESENTATIVE COC CONCENTRATIONS IN SOURCE MEDIA CONSTITUENT INickel Chromium (VI) Arsenic Site Name: SoilRem Corporation Site Location: Bakersfield, CA Completed By: Mark Magargee value (mB/L) Representative COC Concentration Groundwater note value (mg/kg) 2.0E+3 1.9E+2 5.0E+2 Soils (0 - 1 ft) note Date Completed: 14-Nov-00 Job tD: Sl10 RBCA Tool Kit for Chemical Releases, Version ~ ,0a I OF5 TIER :2 EXPOSURE CONCENTRATION AND INTAKE CALCULATION SQ~LS (0 · 't 0 It): LEAC-HrNG GROUNDWATER INGESTION 1) ~o~ce Medium 2) NAF Va lue (Ln<g) 3) Exposure Medium Receptor Groun~,ater~ POE Conc (mg/L On-site Off-site 1 "~:s[te ~ On-site Off-site 1 ~-s[te 2 Soil Conc. {o ~) {0 ~ ~0 ~1 re ~ (0 ~1 Const~uents of Concern (m~kg) MCL None None MCL None None NiSei 2.0E+3 7.5E~4 2.7E-2 Chro~i_~.~V~) 1.9E+2 ............. 2,2E~ ............... ". ~.~E_3 Amenic 5.0E+2 3.3E+4 1.5E-2 Site Name: SoilRem Corporation Completed By: Mark Magargae NOTE: NAF -- Natural atlenuation factor POE -- Point of exposure Date Completed: 14-Nov-00 RBCA Tool Kit for Chemical I=.elea~4es, Version 1.0a Chemical-Specific Tier 2 Cleanup S~= Site Name; SoilRem Corporation Completed By: Mark Magargee Job ID: S1 Site Location: Bakersfield, CA Date Com31eted: 14~Nov-00 3 r,f Constituent: Arsenic CAS No.: 7440-38-2 ........... Ch(;mical Parameters UrlltS Vei~e :-~ele re-~ce ,~ite. Specific Target Level (SSTL) Concentrations On.site Off-site1 Off-s t ~2 Receptor Ty~,e I D stance ~'ft) i None None Nor, .gST L.~. THQ = lo+0 NA NA .. ~gq~p.tor Typ~ I Distance (fi). MCL / 0 N .o~.e .................. N_or_ n ..... SSTI~ THQ = te+O 1_7E+3 NA (lng/kg) TR = le-.6 1.7E+3 NA Receptor T~'pe / Distance ~fl) ..... Nqne Off-slt~ Receptors SST:.,, rHQ = lo+0 NA (mglkg) TR = le-6 NA I ---,-,,----~ Receptor Type / D s ance (rt). U.o..n..e ..................... .N.o.n_e Nor RBEL,~, THQ = le~-0 NA NA N.~, (pglm") TR = le-6 NA NA Nl, Receptor Type 1 Distance *'fi) ..... .Np_n.e. .............. None Nar(~ SSTL, THQ · le~-0 NA NA N.~', (mg/kl}) - TR ~- le-6 NA MA N.z.` __ Rece_.p_t~ r.'[~,~ ./.D!s!a n ce ~ ft) ;. None None Nor~: $STL~, 'rHQ = to+0 NA NA N {mg/L) TR = le.6 NA NA Receptor Type ! Dist.a..n.c.e_.~.~ ..... None No Off-site Receptors RBEL,., THO = re+0 (Hglmm) TR = le.-6 N..A. ................. Receptor Type / Distance ~'fl) None No Off-site Receptors $STL. 'ridQ = le.~0 NA (rog/kg) TR = le-6 . NA ,~ ....................... .~. Receptor Type I Distance [fl) None No Off-site Receptors 'SSTL~ THO ~ le+0 NA (rog/L) TR = 1e-6 NA Units Residential C¢,mmerc[a) Constrt4:'Jon VF~ (kg-sorer/L-air) NA NA vF~,,, ,~kg-so IL.air) NA NA VF~...,, (L.waL'L-air) NA NA ~ NA VF,,, (kg - so t/L-air) NA NA Vt'~,, {L-~t'L-air) .... ~ . NA ......... ~ NA LF (~g-so:l~-wat) All exposures: 3.0E-5 N~. Unila On-Site Off-Site1 0ff-$ IDAFgw (.,, NA NA ' N.~, I DAFs/gW (-) 1.0E'+O NA N.", j MW ( .c.~m(~l'J ~,ol (r"lg/L) P~,:, lmn',Hg) H~,,, '~~ ~ ITl- m:~''r rlOI} pK, (I,)g[mel.~'~ol]) pKu, (h~g[moI;~ol]) D,, (cm:!se,:) D,~ (¢m2/se~) 7.5[ 41 4 4.4[-'+5 27 0.t)E.+ID 14 0.0E~3 0 0.0E+,3 RAF, ( g/rig' ! 0.DE'+'3 [) K, [cra/hr) I 1.0E-3 tau~ (n.devert} MCL r.sf= 50 FR 46936 (13 Nov 85) Notes' 1) NA -' Not applicable; NC = Not calculated. 2) Defiritions and references presented on page 4 of 4. RBCA Tool Kit for Chemical F'r;leases, Version 1.0a Chemical-Specific Tier 2 Cleanup S~.nmary __ .I Job ID S1' 0 Site Name: So[IRern Corporation Completed By: Ma~k Magargee Site Location: Bakersfield, CA Date Corn :31etecl: 14-Nov-00 ........... 2 of 4 Constituent: Chromium (VI) CAS No.: 18540-29-9 Site-Spec[tic Target Level ($STL) Concentrations On-,*i[e Off-site1 Off. s.]~2 ..... RF~pt.or Type I Distance (fl)I None . .. No~e Nor'~ SSTL~ [HO = le+O NA NA N~', (q,g/L) TR ~ le-6 NA NA NY, R~e. ptor Type I D stance (fi) MCL ~' (~ ............ None ................. H~,!... $$~'L, THO ~ le*O 2.2E+3 NA N (mglKg) TR - le. 6 2.2F-+3 NA N~'.. Receptor ~y__.p...e I.~!~_ta..i~ce (fi) None No Oil'-site Receptors $~T~,, tHO: le~0 NA (mg,"kcJ) 'FR = le-G NA Receplor Type ! Did!a_ .nc~..(.f!) ......... None None .i ...... ~_o_r ~, ..... RBEL~. THQ ~ le~-0 NA NA [Hglmm) TR = le-6 NA NA :, Nf. . ..Receptor type t Distance(fl); No..n_? ............. None Nor~, ... $,~TL, THQ = lo+0 NA NA (rng/kg) TR = le.6 NA NA N.~, ..R._e~_e@.t.or ~¥pe ! Distance dr)! No.r).e ................ None No[~,. ...... $STL~,, I'HQ = lee0 NA NA [rog/L) TR = le-6 NA NA Receptor Type I.D!~t_a~.ce <ft). None No Off-site Receptors RBEL,, TI-IQ = le*O (l'lgfm''~) TR = le-6 NA ............ ,,..,..,,,.,,,___:: -. ,~ .._,::--,...,~-- :~; ......................................................................, Receptor Type I Distance (fl) None i No Off-site Recep/o~ ,,rog/kg) 'rR = le-6 NA Receptor Type t Oist.a~.c..e...(_ff.}... None No O~site Receptors SE, TL,~ THQ = la+0 NA {me/L) TR = 1e--6 NA Units Residential Commercial CmstrL ,:t/on VF,~ (k g - so.i/L-air) NA NA ti/. VF,,-,, (kg-so i/L-air) NA NA N/-'. VF~,,,~ eL-war L-air) NA NA VF~,. {kg-sod/L-air) NA NA NA VF.~.,. (L-year:L-air} ..... NA .... N._A~. ......... ' ~.'F ' ' (kg-so;l/L-war) All exposureS: 4.5E-5 I' Nt,,~' Units On.Site Off-Site1 Off-S t,:..2 DAFs/gw (-) t_0E+O NA Chemical Parameters LJuits V'~)ue 5.2[E~ 1 0 1 .;'E~5 ;:7 O.C4; + :3 14 0.Or' + 3 '} f(oH) :!0 0.(1£.~0 t) D., (cm;/se,:) 0.qt:+'_~_ .......... !L Wt of Evd. A SF. (I :[m;tk~/day]) 7.:",1_-3 o SF, (1 ![mg/k.~c.m'dayj) 2.s~]'-'l '; X URF~ (1 :[ug!n' :'~) 1.2 L---2 i? RtD~ (nra/kg/day) 3.0E-3 H RfD~ ~mglkg/dey) 1.i F-4 ;~ RfC, (mOll'~) ........ ~ .................... :.~..~__ MCL r;f = 56 FP, 3526 ~ ~0 .lan 911 Notes. 1) NA = Not applicable; NC = Not calculate. 2) Deficit/OhS and references presented on page 4 of 4. I llI [ I RBCA Tool Kit for Chemical Eeleases, Version 1.0.B Chemical-Specific Tier 2 Cleanup SLm~ ~ nj Site Name: SoilRern Corporation Complete:' By: Mark Magargee Job ID: S1' 0 Site Location: Bakersfield, CA Date Cornl;leted: 14-Nov-00 1 c,f4 Constituent: Nickel CAS No.: 7440-02-0 Chemical Parameters Site-Specific Target Level (SSTL) Concentrations On-site Off-site1 Off-sit Receptor Type / D stance ~fl~ None Norm I NOr ~;$TL~,.,. rltQ = lo+0 NA NA Receptor Type I O st@n ~e.~.f!). .......... MCI. J0 None .... j .........N._o_r!! ...... SSTL, THQ ~ le~-0 7.5E-~3 NA N~', {mg/kg) TR = le-6 NC NA : NA / Distance fit) N ~.n_e. ......... [ No Off-site Receptors R~?eptor Type SSTL,~ THQ = lo+0 NA (mgf,~g) TR = le-6 NA I ...... R99 .ep.tgr Type / Distance tft}. None ............ None No~'~, ......... RBEL,, I'HO = le~'0 NA NA NA (uglrn~) 'rR = le-6 NA NA Receptor TyRff ~'. E~is.t.a. n ce fit): None ............. ~.o.n. e Nar $STL, THQ = lo+0 NA NA NA 0'rig;kg) TR ~ le-6 ; NA NA NA .......... R~ceptor Type I Distance ~.ff} .......... .N. one None ............... SSTL,~. THQ = le+O NA NA N, (rog/L) TR ~ 1 e-G NA NA NA None No Off-site Receptors. ...... Receptor Type 1 D stance {ft): ......... RREL,~ THQ = le.+O NA {IJghn~) TR = 1e-6 NA Receptor Type / Distpn~:e.t..ft)! None No Off-site Receptors SSTL, THQ = lo*0 NA (rog/kg) TR = le-6 . NA Receptor type / Distance Iff} ........ None [ No Off-site Receptor~ .qSTL~, THQ = lo+0 NA I (rog/L) TR = le-6 NA Units Residential Commercial Constr[ ~ n. lon VFt, {kg-sod.IL .air] VF=,,=~ {kg. so4/L-air] VF~,,,,~ iL-wot'L-air) VI"',..~. Ikg-SO yF.,,~, (L-wat/L-air) L~ (kg-sO NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA NA All exposures: 1,3E-5 NA N.Z. Nt, N/, Units On.Site Oil-Site1 Off-S to2 DAFgw (.) NA NA I DAFs/gw (-) i 1.0E+0 NA NA j iMCL r~f= 57 FR 3t77G ~17 Jul 92) H (L-wat/i -,dFJ K,. (L wat/k.'_.' soil) C,,t C,,,x,., (~'gtl O~ff, t,l~ {Cill21Sel;) R,~ (.:. Z (c m/even L) #N;A 3.0[-4 Notes' 1) NA = Not applicable: NC -- Not calculated. "' 2) Dent itions and references presented on page 4 of 4. Sit e Name: ,5o;IRem C, erporaMo~ Completed By' Mark Magorgee ~,1;, ID' Location: Bake~sf~e~, CA Dale Compleled: 14-Nov-00 f OF SOIL (0 - 10 fi) SSTL VALUE S J Ta'-..,et ~isk [Class C) COi'~TtTU ENTS (~' CONCERN CAS N o. Nam,~ 18540-29-9 ] Chromium (Vi) 74 .,~.. T3§-2 Facility ID (WDID): Facility Name: · ~ ~- - STATE'WATER RESOURCES CONTROL BOARD INVOICE Annual Fee for Waste Discharge Requirements Required by SECTION 13260 of the CalifOrnia Water Code 5D152244001 Invoice No: SOILREM CORP, INC Billing Period: BAKERSFIELD, CA Invoice Date: 0131270 07/01/01-06/30/02 09/2~/01 Total Amount Due by 10/21/01 ......................................................... $4,000 SOILREM CORP, INC ATTN: JOHN ARNOLD PO BOX 4O764 BAKERSFIELD, CA 93304 STATE WATER RESOURCES CONTROL BOARD Annual Fee for Waste Discharge Requirements Required by SECTION 13260 of the California Water Code Facili~ ID: 5D152244001 Billing Period: 07/01/01-06/30/02 Invoice No 0131270 Amount Due: $4,000 Due By: Sunday, October 21 2001 ?~:~ ; PLEASE REMIT YOUR.PAYMENT oN OR BEFORE THE DUE DATE SHOWN ABOVE:: . ~ LATE pAYMENT COULD RESULT IN pENALTiES UNDER PROVISIONS OFTHE ~WATER COD '": ::~ SECTION 13261.' ~HESE ACTIONS COULD INcLuDE DAILY PENALTIES IN ADDITION TO ~ ~ YOUR FEE, OR OTHER ACTIONS DEEMED APpROpRiATE BYTHE REGiONAL~BOARD. ~ Make your check payable to SWRCB FEES If you have any questions about this invoice, please call your Regional Water Quality Control Board at (559) 445-5357 __ ~ __~._e.~Ln_~_h_!.s_._P_.°_~!.°?__~.°__r_~O__u._r.??_.°.~d_.s_ ........................................................................ ~ Please detach and return this portion with your payment CHECK HERE FOR ADDRESS CORRECTION ON THE BACK Invoice No: 0131270 (~=='~ PLEASE PRINT THIS NUMBER ON CHECK OR MONEY ORDER SOILREM CORP, INC' ATTN: JOHN ARNOLD PO BOX 40764 BAKERSFIELD, CA 93304 (661 ~ 834-8471 SWRCB ACCOUNTING OFFICE ATTN: AFRS P. O. Box 100 SACRAMENTO, CA 95812-0100 AMOUNT DUE: $4,000 BILLING PERIOD: 07/01/01-06/30/02 DUE BY'. 10/21/01 FACILITY ID (WDID): 5D152244001 FACILITY NAME: SOILREM CORP,,INC BAKERSFIELD, C~,., STATE WATER RESOURCES CONTROL BOARD INVOICE DETAILS Progr~m ID Program Region ! Fee Fee Annual Pretreatment Application Application Application Months Credit Type Order No ~ ~Type Rating . Fee Surcharge Number Date Fee Credited Amount 265~11 SUB15 5F/99-059 51 2 B $4,000 $0 671 24-FEB-99 $4,000 0 $0 : Invoice Totals by Charge: $4,000 $0 $0 INVOICE TOTAL: I $4,000 1 -- f-you-have'-any~questions-ab0~t-tl'i s~ ,nvo,ce?p ea,~e-call-yoar-EegionaI-Water-Quality~¢ontroI-B~0ard-at-(559)-445-5357. BILLING ADDRESS CORRECTIONS Please print the new billing address information in the space provided below' FACILITY ID (WDID): 5D152244001 BILLING NAME: CONTACT PERSON: STREET: CITY: STATE: ZIP: PHONE: Winston H. Hickox Secretary for State Water Resources Control Board Division of Administrative Services 1001 I Street · Sacramento, California 95814 · (916} 341-5247 · FAX (916) 341-5248 . Mailing Address: P.O. Box 100'; Sacramento, California 95812-0100 Gray Davis Governor. _2.2'~.'Envirohntetithl ............. i ......... ' .... lnternet Address: http://www.swrcb.ca.gov .... '. :.';'r°l?~°,-(~g :-~.'.The:energy 'c, hallengefacing~California is real:,~Every Californian needs to,take.immediate action to reduce energy, consumption For a hst of stmple ways you c~ reduce den~nd a~ cut your energy costs, see our webstte at http://www, swrcb, ca. gov. To Persons With Waste Disch~ge Requirements: FISCAL YEAR (FY) 2001-02 INVOICE FOR WASTE DISCHARGE REQUIREMENT FEES The California Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) for your area has notified us that it has issued a waste discharge requirement (WDR) order to you or your company. As the hol~r of a WDR 3~-d~, State law requires that you pay'an annum tee to tne~otate -vV'a[er -- Resources Control Board (SWRCB) for each WDR order, whether or not. you have been, or will be, discharging wastes. Fee AmoUnt: The enclosed invoice shows the WDR fee due for FY 2001-02, for the WDR order shown on the invoice. This fee amount was computed according to the schedule of fees established by State law, and based on criteria determined by the RWQCB, which regulates your facility or operation. The brochure entitled "Some Frequently Asked Questions About WDR Fees" briefly explains the fee regulations and criteria (Enclosure A). When, Where, and How to Make Your Payment: Please dethch (along the dotted line) the bottom portion of the enclosed invoice, and send it with your fee payment in the enclosed envelope. Please write your invoice number on the front of your check or money order. The due dateis shown on the invoice. All outstanding fees will be considered delinquent sixty. (60) days after the date of the invoice. Failure to pay the required fee is a misdemeanor and will result in the RWQCB seeking collection of the fee through the enforcement provisions of the California Water Code. If You Have Questions: Your local RWQCB has all of the records pertaining to your WDR ~order~l~uest. ion s,~oul:&be~ ad~e~ sed~to~the--approPfiate~.P.,-WQCB;-either~:,n~w~fi~fing~or~by~ ~-~-~--~- ~ .... : ~-~-~-- - telephone. The telephone number is listed on the right side of the invoice, above the dotted line. A map showing RWQCB jurisdictions, mailing addresses, and telephone numbers is shown on the reverse side of this letter. Enclosure A may also answer other WDR fee questions. Thank you for you? prompt payment of the FY 2001-02 WDR fee. Sincerely, .... ' i 1 rown, Chief Division of Administrative Services California Environmental Protection Agency Recycled Paper STATE WATER RESOURCES CONTROL BOARD - .. ... RO. BOX 100, Sacramento, CA95812-0100 ,. www. swrcb.ca.gov .. Office of Legislative and Public'Affairs: (916) 341,5250 -~ _ . . . Clean Water Prog.r~ms'lnformation: (916)'341,5700 Water Qua!ity !nfprmation: (916) 341-5455 . :- . . . Water Rights Infdrmation: (916) 341-5300 " CALIFORNIA REGIONAL WATER QUALITY CONTROL BOARDS " '- NORTH COAST REGION (1) CENTRAL COAST REGION (3) LAHONTAN REGION (6) 5550 Skylane Blvd., Ste. A 81 Higuera Street, Ste. 200 2501 Lake Tahoe Blvd. Santa Rosa, CA 95403 San Luis Obispo, CA 93401-5427 South Lake Tahoe, CA 96150 (707) 576-2220 (805) .5/49-3147 (630) 542-5400 SAN FRANCISCO BAY REGION (2) 1515 Clay Street, Ste. 1400 Oakland, CA 94612 ~(510)'6~2:2300' SISKJYOU SHAS~ LOS ANGELES REGION (4) 320 W. 4th Street, Ste. 200 Los Angeles, CA 90013 --~'"~.?~---(213)-576:6600 ..... MOD(X; PLUMAS CENTRAL VALLEY REGION (5) 3443 Routier Road, Suite A Sacramento, CA 95827-3098 (916) 255-3000 FRESNO BRANCH OFFICE 3614 East Ashlan Avenue Fresno, CA 93726 (559) 445-5116 REDDING BRANCH OFFICE 415 Knollcrest Drive, Suite 100 Redding, CA 96002 (530) 224-4845 VICTORVILLE BRANCH OFFICE 15428 Civic Drive, ~te. 100 Victorville, CA 92392-2383 . :(760)'24'1'-6583'~ COLORADO RIVER BASIN REGION (7) 73-720 Fred Waring Dr., Ste. 100 Palm Desert, CA 92260 (760) 346-7491 SANTA ANA REGION (8) California Tower 3737 Main Street, Ste. 500 Riverside, CA 92501-3339 (909) 782-4130 SAN DI~GO REGION (9) 9771 Clairemont Mesa Blvd., Ste. A San Diego, CA 92124 (619) 467-2952 2 TUOLU~E FRESNO SAN'~ Tdt. ARE \. \ STATE OF CALIFORNIA Gray Davis, Governor CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY Winston H. Hickex, Secretary STATE WATER RESOURCES CONTROL BOARD Arthur G. Baggett, Jr., Chair KERN SAN 8ERNARDINO RIVER3DE 7 3/O1 SoME FREQUENfL YA~KED QUESTIONS ABOUT WDR FEES (and the answers to them) 1. Why did I get (in invoice ? A/mual WDR fee invt~ices are sent to persons who l~old a WDR order issued by a Regional Board. The order number issued to you is shown on the invoice. (There are three types of WDR orders: NPDES, Chapter 15, and Non-chapter 15 orders; see Question 5). Your name, company name, and agency and billing address was obtained from Regional Board records or from an address change you or your company submitted with prior year fee remittances. 2. What'is an "annual WDR fee"? Annual WDR. fees are assessed for the privilege of discharging wastes; pursuant to a WDR order, that may affect California's surface and ground water. State law (California Water Code Section 13260.) req6ires that every holder of a WDR order pay a Yearly fee for each order to SWRCB. 3. What is the fee for? Annual fees are assessed to dischargers (sometimes also called 'permittees") for each WDR order they hold. The total WDR fee revenue partially supports the costs of the SWRCB and the Regional Boards' regulatory programs. General state and federal tax revenues support the majority of the ~osts of these regulatory programs. 4. How is the fee determined ? SW, RCB developed a schedule of fees to implement the annual WDR fee law (Section 13260 of the California Water Code). The current schedule establishes a range of fees based on certain ratings. These are: the threat to water quality OTWQ) associated with the discharge; the complexity (CPLX) of the discharge; and the program type for the WDR order. 5. What is the schedule of fees ? Current regulations set forth the following schedule of fees: ANNUAL 'FEE SCHEDULE.. PROGRAM TYPE '1-trWQI NON- CPLX NPDES CHAP 15 CHAP 15 RATING PERMIT · WDR b WDR ¢ I-a $10,000 $10,000 $10,000 I-b 7,000 5,500 7,500 I-c 5,500 ' 3,000 6,000 II-a 4,000 ~ 2,000 5,000 II-b 2,000 . · 1,200 4,000 II-c 1,200 900 3,000 III-a 1,000 75'0 2,000 III-b 750 400 1,500 III-c 400 200 750 The three program types are defined as: (a) National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permits are issued to point sonrce discharges of pollutants to surface waters and are issued pursuant to Water Code Chapter 5.5 which implements the federal Clean Water Act. Examples include, but are not limited t6, public wastewater treatment facilities, industries, power plants, and ground water cleanups discharging tO surface waters. (b) Non-Chapter 15 Waste Discharge Requirements (Non-Chap 15 WDRs) are those discharges of waste to land which are regulated through waste discharge requirements that do not implement the requirements of.~2bapter 15 of Division 3 of Title 2'3. Examples include, hut are not limited to, waste water treatment, plants, erosion control projects, and septic syi terns. i (c~ Chapter 15 Waste Discharge Requirements (C. hap 15 WDRs) are those discharges of waste to lait~ whY'ch are regulated through waste discharge ret uirements that implement the requirements of Ci apter 15 of Division 3 of Title 23. Examples in~ lude, but are not limited to, landfills--both active an closed--and mining operations.. 6 What is threat to water quali~, or TTWQ ? Threat to Water Quality (TTWQ) is a relative ca?gorization of the waste discharge's potential efi~ect upon surface or ground water quality and the be~eficml uses of those waters. Category ! includes th.~se discharges which could cause long-t~erm loss of a ~enefi{~ial use, such as a drinking water supply, a4~atic habitat, etc Category II includes those dtscharges, which could ~mpa~r the designated b6beficial uses, cause short-term violations of water qU~ality' objectives, violate secondary drinking water standards, etc. Category Ill are those dis~:harges w~ich could degrade water quality without violating objectives or could cause minor impairment of beneficm! uses. 7'1 What is complexity or CPLX? Category "a~ inch;des any major NPDES digcharge,~ any influent involving priority pollutants ' orltoxics, those discharges having numerous di4charge points or ground water monitoring, etc. C~tegory~ (b) includes those dischargers Inot in (a)] wlio have physical, chemical, or biological treatment systems, any Class 1I or III waste management uni~ ~ , etc. Category (b) treatment systems exclude septic systems, with subsurface disposal. All other ditcharges are ranked in Category (c). ~. ~[qiO' ~e~ides ,viiat ratin~,s apply Wb~ drdet? Wlio do i Co~itact abOUt : '~. g' 'hal Bolm mit isiUed your WDR d~e[mmed ~e rating criterii sh'o~n oh yb'ur leg m~oice ~eir t~lephOni hd~r is sho~h on ino0ice.' ~e first digit of your ~AF~S C6de" allb indicates Which Regionai BOard' tegulat~i your hCi~ity o? 0Nta/ibn. ~ mir ihowihg Regi0ha1 B0~d j.urisdieti4m (keyld by fih~;r~,' ~d [elephone hdm~rs is sho~n on th~ }~ve~s~ bf th~ invoice COOer leiter. 9. ~at ~o i do ~ I think thi3 ihvOi'c? i~h mine ? our re&}ds indicate thfii y6h 6~ y6fir' ~6mp~y or agency ii homed as thl dischfi?ger (i.e.; N?nfitiee) iff th~ i~ci0ed WD~ Order. The p~rsO!i~ br CPmpany .9i~ned may ~ th~ ~?iOn, fi~partmeht;~ or office res~nsible for o~rati~g the regulate~ wfistk t?eatment ~d disposal;works. HoWeOe}; iff many ifistances, bills are paid bY a differ~hi OffiCe and w~.Nay have ~en instructed t0 hse thai na~ ~d address. ~ If the invoice has beefi migtakeniy seni io the wrong office within your compaiiy, ple~is.e, re:roUte it to the ProOf per. son. Remind that pei-s~Jn i0 updaie the nam~and address info?morion'On the remiitance stulsi': Piease use titles rather than personal names. 10. Shouldn't the net(, OWner get the invoice ? Not necessarily. If you sold your facility or operation, state law requires that you notify the R~gional Board m writing, l. Jnder law. the new riCvliel/o~ratormusi-alsonotffy the-l~egibi~aH]oard that,sThe.accepts responsibility fo/cbm~lia//c6 ~,'i~ th6~- WDR order. ~/,.,i: th~:-tr~nsfer of proper/), and who' should p~ay · il~d Nfl is' a prDate' m'atter between the sellii and b'~yer,.~6 mus.t.biiI the di'sChai~iii·/aamed in thd WDR order. The' named l~.i/hittee is resP~nsibl'~ i~0? Paymeni of the annual WDR fee until tlie .R~gi0nai BOard trafi~fers or re-issues the/WDR order. i 1. i.f l'th not discharging, is ti fee YbS.. T~le annual ¢/Di~ fee pertiiins tb.ybur Order~ fii~i the fr¢queh~Y 6t. duraiian_o~ your diScha/§e: Since.... yOOr WD~R ¢rder aH0ws you to discharge wastes as specified, yOu must Pay ah ~dal fee long ai ~,ilti~- WDR otdi~r reffiains in fOrce. Siaie law requires that You report any m~itedai change~ ih your discha?ge to the Regional Boaid. If you are no longer disCharging and thifik ymi Should hot be assessed future fees, yoi~ musi notify Regional Board: As appropriate; and after you haVi: E~ini31ied ~kiih all laws and permi[ cOnditiohs, the Regional Board may determine that your WDR older can be rescinded. If rescinded, yoU Will noi be assessed futur~ fees but you may Still be required t0 pay current and past annual WDR fees.. i2. ~f I dispUte my fee, What shouM I do ? If you disagree With the assessmeht or tile amouht o}' the fee, you niust pay the fee t6 SWRCB and, most importantly, Submit a Written description 0f your dispute along With any key facts to the Regional B~ard. The Regional Board may require additional information from you so it can resolve your dispute. The Regional Board will notify you if a portion or all of the disputed fee should be refunded. SWi~e'fi~wiii~ihe~iefund-any-m'ohigS'd'ue yoa~ as the law :ill°Ws. 13. ~ itite~e~t charges accrue after due dtite ? No', bui b~i~afisd of toe serioUs cgnsequenb//s' of not Paying, y6u should immediatel~,~contact the Regional Board by ~e flue date. .~ M but~t~d~g, lies will ~Z°~id&ed elmqoent fOrty-five (45) days ~'fl0r :~e ~ie 6f ~e invoik& ~iiifire to Pa~ m~ required re0 is a . ·. mi~dimi~o? ~d ~ill resUli in 5~e' Reglonal Board 10eking c6[j~ction of ~i fee m?ou~ me. ~- 0nfff~N0ni piovi~ions of ~e caiffomia Water what a tae Smca, ident~c~tion aumber ? :., For ~r~om ~r COmplies that require bur taxpfiy~t identification numar for tax pu~ses, ~ sWRCB's numar is 68-0281986. State Water Resources Control Board Accounting Office Attn: Annual WDR Fees P.O. Box 100 Sacramento, CA 95812-0100 SWRCB ACCOUNTING OFFICE ATTN: Annual WDRFees. P.O. BOX 100 .~,, SACRAMENTO, CA 95812-0100 Ihh,,hhh,h,,,Ih,hllh,,,,,lllh,,Ih,,,h,II MEMORANDUM March 14, 2001 TO: FROM: SUBJECT: RALPH HUEY, DIRECTOR, OFFICE OF ENVIRONMENTAL SERV.~ SOIL REM CORPORATION Enclosed for your review, please find documentation which was received by me related to Soil Rem Corporation and its facility on Pacheco Street in Bakersfield. Once you have had an opportunity to review this documentation, please call me should you have any questions concerning the same. WHP:alj Enclosure S:\FIRE\MEMOS\Huey. SoilRem.wpd ~'~NT BY: ANNEX 1ST#; 66t'324 7483; NORADco o xio UAR-14-01 g:O3PM; PAOE o~inatlng tfftice: 2020 E. Roclo,vood Blvd. Spokane, WA 99203 (509) 921-9150 fax: (5o90 927 4081 February 16, 2001 William O'Rullian, R.E.H.S. Environmental health Specialist IV. Solids Waste Program' Supervisor County of Kern l~nvironmental Health Services Department 2700 "M" strew, Suite 300 Bakerstield, CA 93301-2370 Dear Sir: Enclosed please find thc return of your' invoice number 0162532-IN concerning Soil Rem Corporation and its facility on Pacheco St., Bakersfield, It appears that the various agencies involved in this facili.ty are still laboring under the false and ......... :i~-o~¥.~dulent-representat/,on of.lohn Anold that Norad Corporation purehased.tl_'.m, property. At no time had Norad assumed ownership of Soil Rem or its liabilities and does not have any interest in this facility or Soil Rem exc~pt as an unsecured creditor. In January of 2000 Norad had intended to acquire Soil.Rem. However, 'several conditions precedent, warranties, and representations were not met by the sellers (John Arnold and Glenn MacQueen) and the company itself. Retying on Further representations by the sellers that these conditions would be met We advanced substantial funds.by way of unsecmed loans, in August of 2000 we believed that these conditions were met, or would be met, within a short period of time and issued a Notice To Proceed. At that time Soft Rem filed its 90 day advance notice ora pending change of ownership with thc appropriate agencies. However, in a subsequent field trip by Norad representatives to Bakersfield further matters were uncovered clir~tly related to seller representations and Norad withdrew from any intention to complete this transaction. The atternpt of Arnold to represent that Norad had completed the purchase' of Soil Rgm in January 2000 despite his written representations to your agencies in August 2000 to tiao contrary is indicative of the types of problems we continued to uncover in a seemingly endless parade of "surprises". ~NT BY: ANNEX iST#; 88i 324 7483; NORAD col ognx os MAR-14-01 g:O4PM; PA~E 3/~ At no time did we indicate Norad acquixed control oi' Soil Rem. In addition to the attached documentation you should note that the officers and shareholders of Soil Rcm had not changed-in any corporate recoxds, nor with its banks, nor with any other public agency. Be assured that hM Norad assume ownership it would have acted to file appropriate notifications and assume direct management control of the company and its facility. Therefore we ask' that you remove us from your mailings and seek such reme.~ies as may be appropriate from Soil Rem and its true owners, John Arnold and Glenn MacQueen. As for its part, Norad will undoubtedly bc faced with a write off of its unsecured loans to Soil Rem. Sincerely Norad Corporation per: Walter Wolf. President Marian P. Shaw Civil Engineer IV -Subdivisions Bakersfield Public Works Depastment 1501 Traxton Ave Bakersfield, CA 93301 Manning W. Puette PO Box 11172 Bakersfield, CA 93389-1172 Wayne Massic 828 E. Goshen Avc.~ Fresno, CA 93720 · Shelt°n R. Gray Senior Engineering Geologist California Regional Water Quality Control Board 3614 E. Ashlan Ave. Fresno, CA 93726 ~ ANN~× ~ST#~ NORAD co. oaA O MAR-14 9:04PM; PArlE 4/5 Oril~natin$ offl¢ ~,: 2020 E, Rockwood Blvd. Spokane, WA 99203 (~09) 335 4514 email: Rdl~rals.net August 3, 2000 John Arnold, President Sell'Rem Corporation. 408 E. Pacheco PO Box 40764 Bakersfield, CA 93304 NOTICE OF INTENT TO PROCEED Dear John: Congratulations on the progress you have made resolving outstanding regulatory matters. Please be advised that Norad Corporation ia now prepared to proceed with final closing due diligence and reviews. This process is anticipated to take approximately 3 to 4 months. As we do not foresee any major hurtles in completing our intention to acquire the shares of Soil Rem from you and Management Ventures please notify the appropriate agencies of this pending traru~ction. In our final review we will need to meet with the control agency, review your operating plan and permits, receive signed audited financial statements, and determine tha full extent o feapital investments required to bring the facility to a premium state of operation. [ plata to be in Bakersfield the late afternoon of August 16=. An advance team engineers will visit with you prior my arrival. We would like to meet with your regulatory control agency the late afternoon of the 16a. Further ple~ise be advised that Norad Corporation has signed definitive agreements to be acquired by 'Semper Resources lnc (SRCR). This transaction is expected to close within 60 days. I will become the CEO of Semper. Again, congratulations on the results of your hard work and I look forward to meeting you on the 16th. Sincerely Norad Corporation Galen Dean Levco President ~ENT BY: COB ANNEX 1ST#; bb£Y~/Ybd~ 66t 324 7483; MAR-t4. §:04PM; ~O[L R£M $oilRem Corporation P.O. B°x 40764 South station 524 Bakersfield, Ca. 93304-9998 PAGE 5/5 Au~tst 3, 2000 Galen Loven Norad Corporation Dear Mr. Lov¢~ Soil Rem Corporation is notifying you of°ur F.C.P. regulations, No,cad and Soil Rom has to abide by ~ F.C.P. book. Your Company has to have thc F.C.P. book in possession ax ail times as well ss Soil Rem Corpornfio~ Your booklet is ail the ~ set foxth by the board, watcr boan/and cnvbonmental l~lth and cupa. Pleasc bc advised ofthis, our companies are in a 3 to 4 month ~gotiatioris of Norad purchasing Soil Rem Corporaiion. Thank yo~, E. Arnold SoiiRem@aol.com RECORD OF TELEPHONE CONVERSATION Location: Business Name: Contact Name: ID# ~s~ss Phone: '~ .~ - ~-~-72 Inspector's Name: Time of Call: Date: f~/~//~ Type of Call: Incoming Time: /~7.. -. ~O Outgoing # Min: Returned [ ] Actions Required: ~- ~,v~..m-~c~ jo~,.J TUFT' --r~E C,~,v-r?:~ A~w~,~ ,z~.~-- Time Required to Oomplete Activity # Min: RECORD OF TELEPHONE CONVERSATION Location: ID# Business Name: Contact Name: Business Phone: Inspector's Name: Time of Call: Type of Call: Incoming [~'~ Outgoing [ ] Returned [ ] Content of Call: Actions Required: Time Required to Complete Activity # Min: BAKERSFIELD FIRE DEPARTMENT ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES 1715 Chester Ave. · Bakersfield, CA 93301 Business Phone {661) 326-3979 · FAX {661) 326-0576 FAX Transmittal TO: COMPANY: FROM: "~~z.~ FAX No. ~---~ ,. COMMENTS: From: To: Date: Subject: Morals.net - GD Loven <gdl@morals.net> "Howard Wines" <Hwines@ci.bakersfield.ca.us> Mon, Nov 20, 2000 10:04 AM Re: SoilRem Insurance As you may be aware, Norad Corporation has not concluded its purchase of Soil Rem and may not do so in the immediate future as we have been waiting for clarification or events to transpire. Please direct your inquiry to Glenn MacQueen or John Arnold. ..... Original Message ..... From: "Howard Wines" <Hwines@ci.bakersfield.ca.us> To: <gall@morals.net> Sent: Monday, November 20, 2000 9:46 AM Subject: SoilRem Insurance Current environmental clean-up insurance policy is due to expire on Dec. 3rd. (two weeks from now). Please be aware that financial responsibility has to be in place for the Facility Compliance Plan to remain in effect. The FCP has to be valid in order to complete the modification to lower the metals acceptance thresholds. Please let me know how you're going to keep SoilRem's financial responsibility from lapsing during this critical modification review period. Thanks. 11/22/00 10:13 8661 326 0576 BFD HAZ MAT DIV ~001 ACTIVITY REPORT TRANSMISSION OK TX/RX NO. CONNECTION TEL CONNECTION ID START TIME USAGE TIME PAGES RESULT 8158 15594455910 11/22 10:12 00'55 2 OK California Regional Water Quality control Board Central Valley Region Fresno Branch Office l.ntamct Addre~; h~tp://www.swrcb.et~.~ovt~rwqcb$/hom~.hunl 3614 ~t Ashlan Awnue, F~no, C~ifom~a 93~26 Phon= (559) ~5-5116 · F~ (559) aa5-5910 FAX COVER SHEET Pages including cover: Please Recycle Comments: P. 02 November 8, 2000 Shelton R. Gray Senior Engineering Geologist California Regional Water Quality Control Board 3614 E. Ashland Ave. Fresno, CA 93726 Gentlemen, Over the last few months I have been overseeing transitional business from Soil Rem Corp. Inc., to Norad Corp. which is the new owner. Per guidelines, I have kept our zone administrator Ralph Huey, Bakersfield Fire Dept., Office of Environmental Services, apprised of the change in ownership of Soil Rem Corp, Inc. I am no longer associated with ,Soil Rem or it's parent company. Please send inquiries to Galen D. Hoven, Owner Norad Corp., 2020 E. Rockwood Blvd. Spokane, WA 99203-3853. Phone # 509-535-4514. Effective 11-01-2000 I have disconnected the phone and PO Box #. Sincerely, E. Arnold Cc: Christopher Burger Attorney at Law Klein, DeNatalie TOTRL P. 02 · ~ENVI~ONMENT'AL I~IE~LTH sE~V~ DEPARTMENT STEVE McCALLEY, R.E.H.S., Director 2700 "M" STREET, SUITE 300 BAKERSFIELD, CA 93301-2370 Voice: (661) 862-8700 Fax: (661) 862-8701 'FrY Relay: (800) 735-2929 e-mail: eh~_.co, kern. ca. us J~3. URCE MANAGEMENT AGENCY DAVID PRICE III, RMA DIRECTOR Community Development Program Department Engineering & Survey Services Department Environmental Health Services Department Planning Department Roads Department January 12, 2001 Mr. Wayne Massie 828 E Goshen Avenue Fresno, CA 93720 SUBJECT: Closure of SoilRem Corporation, Inc., Facility. 408 E. Pacheco Road, Bakersfield, Califomia SWlS #15-AA-0356 Dear Mr. Massie: Our Department has received a copy of a letter from Shelton Gray, California Regional Water Quality Control Board, Central Valley Region, to you dated January 4, 2001. That letter discussed the following issues: 1. As the current property owner, you are considered to be the responsible party for out- standing financial and closure issues relating to SoilRem, Inc. SoilRem is abandoning its fixed remediation site at 408 E. Pacheco Road, as stated in the memo dated May 25, 2000, summarizing action taken during a meeting of the directors and shareholders. 3. Approximately 3,000 cubic yards of untreated soil remains on site. 4. Two groundwater morfitoring wells remain on site. Our Department has been designated by the California Integrated Waste Management Board (CIWMB) to be the Local Enforcement Agency (LEA) for Kern County. As the LEA, we are required to administer Title 14, California Code of Regulations (CCR), California Integrated Waste Management Board. Contaminated soil operations are regulated by Sections 17360 thru 17366, Title 14, CCR, Nonhazardous Petroleum Contaminated Soil Operations and Facilities Regulatory Requirements. SoilRem stipulated in their Facility Compliance Plan that site operations would be conducted so as to comply with these requirements. Our staff have continued to inspect the facility on a quarterly basis. As of the June 23, 2001, inspection, the gates have been locked and no personnel have been observed on site. Staff have also noted a large amount of concrete rubble at the location in addition to the untreated petroleum-contaminated soil. Mr. Wayne Massie Re: SWlS #15-AA-0356 January 12, 2001 Page 2 Based on the above information and site inspections, the LEA has concluded that the SoilRem facility has ceased receipt of waste and is no longer conducting business at 408 E. Pacheco Road, Bakersfield, Califomia. Therefore, this site is required to close in compliance with Section 17366, Title 14, CCR: All contaminated soil operations and facilities shall meet the following requirements: (a) The operator shall provide the enforcement agency written nOtice intent to perform site restoration, at least 30 days prior to beginning site restoration. (b) The operator(s) and owner(s) shall provide site restoration necessary to protect public health, safety, and the environment. (c) The operator and shall ensure that the following site restoration procedures are performed upon completion of operation and termination of service: (1) the operation grounds shall be cleaned of all contaminated soil, construction scraps, and other materials related to the operation, and these materials legally recycled, reused, or disposed of. (2) all machinery shall be cleaned of contaminated soil, and (3) all remaining structures shall be cleaned of contaminated soil. Mr. Shelton Gray of the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) has informed us of a meeting held January 4, 2001. During that meeting, the RWQCB provided the option of leaving the soil on site. This option may be approved if analytical testing indicates that the chemical constituents do not exceed water quality goals. We have no objection to this option. However, our Department is concerned about the large pile of concrete rubble stockpiled at the site. Concrete rubble, although inert, provides prime rodent and vector habitat. We will require this material be removed, or immediately processed, rather than be lef~ on site. The monitoring wells were drilled under a permit from our water program. Abandonment of the subject wells must be conducted under permit as well. You may contact Tom Hardy at (661) 862-8768 for further information concerning water well abandonment requirements. We understand that you will be providing the RWQCB written information regarding the SoilRem operation. We request that copies of all correspondence to the RWQCB, City of Bakersfield and San Joaquin Unified Air Pollution Control District be forwarded to us. It is our objective to coordinate closure activities with the RWQCB to ensure that all closure requirements are met without duplication of effort. Mr. Wayne Massie Re: SWIS #15-AA-0356 January 12, 2001 Page 3 If we may be of any further assistance to you, please contact Diana Wilson at (661) 862-8734. Sincerely, Steve McCalley, Director By: William O'Rullian. R.E.H.S. Environmental Health Specialist IV Solid Waste Program WO:DW:jrw CC; Ms. Chris Kinne, Cai EPA, Sacramento Ralph Huey, Zone Administrator, Bakersfield Shelton Gray, Regional Water Quality Control Board, Fresno Ms. Judy Dempsey, Walter Mortensen Insurance, Lake Isabella Galen Loven, Spokane, Washington John Arnold, Bakersfield Glenn MacQueen, Calgary, Alberta, Canada Tom Golf, SJVUAPCD, Bakersfield Florentino Castellon, Permit Assistance Center, Bakersfield Chris Burger, Attorney at Law, Klein, DeNatalie, Bakersfield (sw~lw~so~¢los.ltr. wlxl) Winston H. Hickox Secretary for Environmental Protection California RegionalcentralWatervalleyQUalitYRegion Control Board Steven T. Butler, Chair Gray Davis Fresno Branch Office Governor Internet Address: http://www.swrcb.ca.gov/-rwqcb5 3614 East Ashlan Avenue, Fresno, California 93726 Phone (559) 445-5116 · FAX (559) 445-5910 OCT 0 5 000 3 October 2000 ~NV~RON. SERVICES Mr. John Arnold SoilRem Corporation P.O. Box 40764 South Station 524 Bakersfield, CA 93304-9998 COST ESTIMATE FOR CORRECTIVE ACTION FOR THE SOILREM CORPORATION FACILITY, BAKERSFIELD, KERN COUNTY In a letter dated 10 December 1999, we requested that SoilRem Corporation (SoilRem) submit a revised cost estimate for corrective action that included provisions in the event groundwater is impacted at'its facility in Bakersfield. Staff received and reviewed your revised cost estimate for corrective action included in the Second Quarter 2000 Groundwater Monitoring Report. The cost estimate of $350,000 for reasonably foreseeable corrective action meets the requirements of Title 27 and appears adequate for the remediation scenario described in the report. Title 27 requires that the California Regional Water Quality Control Board (CRWQCB) be named beneficiary on the corrective action, and closure and post-closure maintenance financial assurance mechanism. The current certificate fails to name the Regional Board as beneficiary. You need to submit from your insurance carrier a signed letter stating, "Pursuant to California Code of Regulations, Title 27, Sections 22207 and 22222, the California Regional Water Quality Control Board, Central Valley Region (Regional Board) is a beneficiary to corrective action and closure coverage. In addition, the attached Certificate of Insurance (CIWMB Form 106) is hereby, amended to include a reference to the Regional Board wherever the CIWMB is referenced." By 30 OCTOBER 2000, please submit the requested letter. The consultant's report indicated that SoilRem would obtain the necessary additional insurance and provide staff with proof of insurance. You need to make sure that the CRWQCB is named as the beneficiary on the new financial assurance mechanism. The new financial mechanism needs to be submitted on or before 3 DECEMBER 2000 so there is no lapse of financial assurance. California Environmental Protection Agency Recycled Paper Mr. Arnold SoilRem Page 2 2 3 October 2000 Under Discharge Specifications in Attachment A of the Facility Compliance Plan, Sections 19 and 20 require that a report demonstrating the adequacy of the financial assurance mechanisms for both the corrective action, and the closure and post closure maintenance, be submitted annually by 31 January. The corrective action, and closure and post-closure cost estimate amounts should be adjusted for any changes in the reasonably foreseeable corrective action or inthe closure and post closure maintenance plan. The amounts should also be adjusted for inflation on an annual basis as required by Title 27. If you have any questions, please contact Terry Fox at (559) 445-6191. TERRENCE A. FOX Registered Geologist RG No. 5029 Cc~ Mr. Ralph Huey, City of Bakersfield Ms. Nancy Kampas, Cai/EPA, Sacramento Mr. Tom Goff, San Joaquin Valley APCD Mr. William O'Rullian, Kern County Environmental Health Services, Bakersfield Mr. Florentino Castellon, Cai/EPA, Bakersfield Calif°rnia'Regi°nalcentralWatervalleyQUalitYRegion C. ntrol Board Steven T. Butler, Chair Winston It. Hickox Secretary for Environmental Protection Fresno Branch Office Internet Address: http://www, swrcb.¢a, gov/~xwqcb5 3614 East Ashlan Avenue, Fresno, California 93726 Phone (559) 445-5116 · FAX (559) 445-5910 Gray Davis Crovcrnor 18 August 2000 Mr. John Arnold SoilRem Corporation P.O. Box 40764 South Station. 524 Bakersfield, CA 93304-9998 COMMENTS ON PROPOSED MODIFICATIONS TO FCP FOR THE SOILREM CORPORATION FACILITY, BAKERSFIELD, KERN COUNTY Staff has received and reviewed your proposed modifications to the Air Quality Section of the Facility Compliance Plan (FCP) dated 24 July 2000 for the SoilRem Corporation (SoilRem) facility in Bakersfield. The proposed modifications are: 1. Increase allowable incoming contaminated soil concentrations for arsenic, chromium VI, lead, and nickel 2. Change requirement that laboratory analytical samples for incoming contaminated soil must be no more than 3 65 days old 3. Testing for metals only be'required for gasoline contaminated soil 4. Limit annual days of operation to 252 days per year 5. Testing for MTBE (to be included in the total VOC concentration in the soil) be required only for gasoline contaminated soil Based on the review, we have the following comments: Proposed Modification #1. The requested metals concentrations are equal to the Total Threshold Limit Concentrations (TTLC) and, as defined in Title 22, Division 4.5, Article 3, 66261.24, would, therefore, be considered hazardous. The FCP currently states that soil cannot be accepted by the facility containing waste constituents that exceed the stated limits for the four metals. If the proposed limits were inserted intO the FCP, the upper limits would be considered hazardous. The San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District (APCD) performed an air risk analysis on the four metals. The APCD study determined that arsenic, lead, and nickel at the proposed concentrations met the risk analysis criteria. Chromium VI met the'criteria of the air risk analysis at a concentration of 189 mg/kg. The Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB), however, has primary responsibility for the protection of water quality. The APCD assessment does not address these concerns. RWQCB staff is California Environmental Protection Agency ~.~,oilRem - 2 - 18 August 2000 concerned that the proposed levels are not protective of water quality, especially considering the solubility of arsenic and chromium VI. Soils in the area of the facility are classified as moderately permeable and groundwater is present beneath the site at approximately 30 feet below ground sUrface. Groundwater quality in the area is generally good and the beneficial uses include municipal and domestic supply, agricultural supply, and industrial process and service supply. SoilRem's consultant would need to perform an assessment such as a detailed Fate and Transport Study to determine the metals concentrations that would be protective of water quality at this'site. 'The study would need to incorporate the range of possible incoming soil contaminants, concentrations, and other Physiochemical parameters that could affect the fate and transport. Proposed modification #2 N° comment. 'Proposed modification #3 Since all incoming soil contains concentrations of metal's, the metal analysis .... requirements under the' Monitoring and Reporting Requirements for Incoming Waste needs to remain the same. Proposed modification #4 No comment. Proposed modification #5 The MTBE analysis included with the VOC's is required to be performed "For all other contaminated soil." This is soil that does not fit into one of the other categories. It is typically a combination of petroleum contamination or an unknown petroleum contamination. In either case, gasoline may constitute a part of the petroleum hydrocarbon contamination and, therefore, MTBE needs to continue to be analyzed as part of the VOC analysis. In summary, there is insufficient information to assess the maximum allowable metals concentrations for incoming waste with respect to water quality. An assessment, such as a Fate and Transport Study needs to be performed in order to propose metals concentrations that would be pr°tective Ofwater quality at this site. The metals analysis requirements under the Monitoring and Reporting Requirements for · Incoming Waste. should remain the same. MTBE should remain included in the VOC analysis. If you .have any questions, please contact Terry Fox at (559) 445-6191. SHELTON R. GRAY . ' (._.) Senior Engineering Geologist TERKENCE A. FOX Registered Geologist KG No. 5029 Cc~ Ralph Huey, City of Bakersfield Nancy Kampas, Cal/EPA, Sacramento Tom Goff, San Joaquin Valley APCD William O'Rullian, Kern County Environmental Health Services, Bakersfield Florentino Castellon, CaVEPA, Bakersfield ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH SE~CES DEPARTMENT STEVE McCALLEY, R.E.H.S., Director 2700 "M" STREET, SUITE 300 BAKERSFIELD, CA 93301-2379 Voice: (661) 862-8700 Fax: (661) 862-8701 TrY Relay: (800) 735-2929 e-mail: eh~_~co.i,'ern, ctaus August 21, 2000 Jchn-Amold;-Prcsidcm- SoilRem Corporation P.O. Box 40764, South Station 524 Bakersfield, California 93304-9998 ESOURCE MANAGEMENT AGENCY DAVID PRICE III, RMA DIRECTOR Community Development Program Department Engineering & Survey Services Department Environmental Health Services Department Planning Department Roads Department RE: Facility Compliance Plan Modification (FCP) for SoilRem Corp. 408 East Pacheco Rd., 'Bakersfield, California Dear Mr. Arnold: We have reviewed your revised FCP modification and have determined it to be complete. We will forward a copy to the City of Bakersfield, Environmental Services. Sincerely, cc:. Ralph Huey, City Of Bakersfield, Environmental Services FIRE CHIEF RON FRAZE ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES 2101 "H' Street Bakersfield, CA 93301 VOICE (661) 326-3941 FAX (661) 395-1349 SUPPRESSION SERVICES 2101 'H' Street Bakersfield, CA 93301 VOICE (661) 326-3941 FAX (661) 395-1349 PREVENTION SERVICES 1715 Chester Ave. Bakersfield, CA 93301 VOICE (661) 326-3951 FAX (661) 326-0576 ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES 1715 Chester Ave. Bakersfield, CA 93301 VOICE (661) 326-3979 FAX (661) 326-0576 TRAINING DIVISION 5642 Victor Ave. Bakersfield, CA 93308 VOICE (661) 399-4697 FAX (661) 399-5763 D July 24, 2000 Ms. Chris Kinne Cai/EPA 555 Capitol Mall, Suite 525 Sacramento, CA 95814 Facility Compliance Plan (FCP) Modification for SoilRem Corp. 408 East Pacheco Road in Bakersfield, California Dear Ms. Kinne, Attached, please find the revised modification to SoilRem's FCP. Please insert the attachment as section III.3.c.(1).b under the heading: Operations / Environmental Objectives and Targets / Air Quality. Soil Rem has made the necessary corrections to return to compliance with the existing provisions of the FCP in order to effect this modification. Only the attached portion of the FCP (the part being modified) is subject to review at this time. Participating permitting agencies have 30 days from receipt of this revised FCP modification to transmit a written determination of completeness to SoilRem, with a copy also forwarded to this office. If you have any questions, please call me at (661) 326-3979. Sincerely, Ralph E. Huey, Director Office of Environmental Services Zone Administrator Permit Consolidation Zone REH/hw attachment CCi Tom Goff, SJVUAPCD Shelton Gray, CVRWQCB William O'Rullian, KCEHSD Gordon Innes, SWRCB Florentino Castellon, Cal/EPA ,0 FIIIE FIRE CHIEF RON FRAZE ADMINISTRATIVE SERVlCF..8 2101 'H' Street Bakersfield, CA 93301 VOICE (805) 326-3941 FAX (805) 395-1349 SUPPRESSION SERVICES 2101 'H' Street Bakersfield, CA 93301 VOICE (805) 325-3941 FAX (805) 395-1349 PREVENTION SERVICES 1715 Chester Ave. Bakersfield, CA 93301 VOICE (805) 325-3951 FAX (805) 326-0576 ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES 1715 Chester Ave. Bakersfield, CA 93301 VOICE (805) 326-3979 FAX (eo5) 326-0576 TRAJNING DMSION 5642 Victor Ave. Bakersfield, CA 93308 VOICE (805) 399-4697 FAX (805) 399-5763 D July 24, 2000 Mr. Florentino Castellon Cal/EPA Permit Assistance Center 2700 M Street, Suite 125 Bakersfield, CA 93301 Facility Compliance Plan (FCP) Modification for SoilRem Corp. 408 East Pacheco Road in Bakersfield, California Dear Mr. Castellon, Attached, please f'md the revised modification to SoilRem's FCP. Please insert the attachment as section III.3.c.(1).b under the heading: Operations / Environmental Objectives and Targets / Air Quality. Soil Rem has made the necessary corrections to return to compliance with the existing provisions of the FCP in order to effect this modification. Only the attached portion of the FCP (the part being modified) is subject to review at this time. Participating permitting agencies have 30 days from receipt of this revised FCP modification to transmit a written determination of completeness to SoilRem, with a copy also forwarded to this office. If you have any questions, please call me at (661) 326-3979. Sincerely, Ralph E. Huey, Director Office of Environmental Services. Zone Administrator Permit Consolidation Zone REH/hw attachment CC: Chris Kinne, CaVEPA Tom Goff, SJVUAPCD Shelton Gray, CVRWQCB William O'Rullian, KCEHSD Gordon Innes, SWRCB FIRE CHIEF RON FRAZE ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES 2101 'H' Street Bakersfield, CA 93301 VOICE (805) 326-3941 FAX (805) 395-1349 SUPPRESSION SERVICES 2101 'H' Street Bakersfield, CA 93301 VOICE (805) 326-3941 FAX (805) 395-1349 PREVENTION SERVICES 1715 Chester Ave. Bakersfield, CA 93301 VOICE (805) 326-3951 FAX (805) 326-0576 ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES 1715 Chester Ave. Bakersfield, CA 93301 VOICE (805) 326-3979 FAX (805) 326-0576 TRAINING DMSION 5642 Victor Ave. Bakersfield, CA 93308 VOICE (805) 399-4697 FAX (805) 399-5763 D July 24, 2000 Mr. Gordon Innes State Water Resources Control Board P.O. Box 944212 Sacramento, CA 94244-2120 Facility Compliance Plan (FCP) Modification for SoilRem Corp. 408 East Pacheco Road in Bakersfield, California Dear Mr. Innes, Attached, please find the revised modification to SoilRem's FCP. Please insert the attachment as section III.3.c.(1).b under the heading: Operations / Environmental Objectives and Targets / Air Quality. Soil Rem has made the necessary corrections to return to compliance with the existing provisions of the FCP in order to effect this modification. Only the attached portion of the FCP (the part being modified) is subject to review at this time. Participating permitting agencies have 30 days from receipt of this revised FCP modification to transmit a written determination of completeness to SoilRem, with a copy also forwarded to this office. If you have any questions, please call me at (661) 326-3979. REH/hw attachment Sincerely, Office of Environmental Services Zone Administrator Permit Consolidation Zone CC: Chris Kinne, Cal/EPA Tom Goff, SJVUAPCD Shelton Gray, CVRWQCB William O'Rullian, KCEHSD Florentino Castellon, Cai/EPA FIRE CHIEF RON FRAZE ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES 2101 'H' Street Bakersfield, CA 93301 VOICE (661) 326-3941 FAX (661) 395-1349 SUPPRESSION SERVICES 2101 "H" Street Bakersfield, CA 93301 VOICE (661) 326-3941 FAX (661) 395-1349 PREVENTION SERVICES 1715 Chester Ave. Bakersfield, CA 93301 VOICE (661) 326-3951 FAX (661) 326-0576 ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES 1715 Chester Ave. Bakersfield, CA 93301 VOICE (661) 326-3979 FAX (661) 326-0576 TRAINING DIVISION 5642 Victor Ave. Bakersfield, CA 93308 VOICE (661) 399-4697 FAX (661) 399-5763 D July 24, 2000 Mr. Shelton Gray Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board 2614 East Ashlan Av. Fresno, CA 93726 Facility Compliance Plan (FCP) Modification for SoilRem Corp. 408 East Pacheco Road in Bakersfield, Califomia Dear Mr. Gray, Attached, please find the revised modification to SoilRem's FCP. Please insert the attachment as section III.3.c.(1).b under the heading: Operations / Environmental Objectives and Targets / Air Quality. Soil Rem has made the necessary corrections to retum to compliance with the existing provisions of the FCP in order to effect this modification. Only the att'ached portion of the FCP (the part being modified) is subject to review at this time. Participating permitting agencies have 30 days from receipt of this revised FCP modification to transmit a written determination of completeness to SoilRem, with a copy also forwarded to this office. If you have any questions, please call me at (661) 326-3979. Sincerely, Ralph E. Huey, Director Office of Environmental Services Zone Administrator Permit Consolidation Zone REH/hw attachment CC: Chris Kinne, Cal/EPA Tom Goff, SJVUAPCD William O'Rullian, KCEHSD Gordon Innes, SWRCB Florentino Castellon, Cai/EPA FIRE CHIEF RON FRAZE ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES 2101 'H" Street Bakersfield, CA 93301 VOICE (661) 326-3941 FAX (661) 395-1349 SUPPRESSION SERVICES 2101 uH" Street Bakersfield, CA 93301 VOICE (661) 326-3941 FAX (661) 395-1349 PREVENTION SERVICE~ 1715 Chester Ave. Bakersfield, CA 93301 VOICE (661) 326-395 FAX (661) 326-0576 ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES 1715 Chester Ave. Bakersfield, CA 93301 VOICE (661) 326-3979 FAX (661) 326-0576 TRAINING DIVISION 5642 Victor Ave. Bakersfield, CA 93308 VOICE (661) 399-4697 FAX (661) 399-5763 D July 24, 2000 Mr. William O'Rullian Kern County Environmental Health Services Department 2700 M Street, Suite 300 Bakersfield, CA 93301 Facility Compliance Plan (FCP) Modification for SoilRem Corp. 408 East Pacheco Road in Bakersfield, California Dear Mr. O'Rullian, Attached, please find the revised modification to SoilRem's FCP. Please insert the attachment as section III.3.c.(1).b under the heading: Operations / Environmental Objectives and Targets / Air Quality. Soil Rem has made the necessary corrections to remm to compliance with the existing provisions of the FCP in order to effect this modification. Only the attached portion of the FCP (the part being modified) is subject to review at this time. Participating permitting agencies,have 30 days from receipt of this revised FCP modification to transmit a written determination of completeness to SoilRem, with a copy also forwarded to this office. If you have any questions, please call me at (661) 326-3979. Sincerely, Ralph E. Huey, Director Office of Environmental Services Zone Administrator Permit Consolidation Z~ne REH/hw attachment Chris Kinne, Cal/EPA Tom Ooff, SJVUAPCD Shelton Gray, CVRWQCB Gordon Innes, SWRCB Florentino Castellon, Cai/EPA FIRE CHIEF RON FRAZE ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES 2101 'H" Street Bakersfield, CA 93301 VOICE (661) 326-3941 FAX (661) 395-1349 SUPPRESSION SERVICES 2101 'H" Street Bakersfield, CA 93301 VOICE (661) 326-3941 FAX (661) 395-1349 PREVENTION SERVICES 1715 Chester Ave, Bakersfield, CA 93301 VOICE (661) 326-3951 FAX (661) 326-0576 ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES 1715 Chester Ave. Bakersfield, CA 93301 VOICE (661) 326-3979 FAX (661) 326-0576 - TRAINING DIVISION 5642 Victor Ave. Bakersfield, CA 93308 VOICE (661) 399-4697 FAX (661) 399-5763 D July 24, 2000 Mr. Tom Goff San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District 2700 M Street, Suite 275 Bakersfield, CA 93301 Facility Compliance Plan (FCP) Modification for SoilRem Corp. 408 East Pacheco Road in Bakersfield, California Dear Mr. Goff, Attached, please find the revised modification to SoilRem's FCP. Please insert the attachment as section III.3.c.(1).b under the heading: Operations / Environmental Objectives and Targets / Air Quality. Soil Rem has made the necessary corrections to return to compliance with the existing provisions of the FCP in order to effect this modification. Only the attached portion of the FCP (the part being modified) is subject to review at this time. Participating permitting agencies have 30 days from receipt of this revised FCP modification to transmit a written determination of completeness to SoilRem, with a copy also forwarded to this office. If you have any questions, please call me at (661) 326-3979. REH/hw attachment Sincerely, Ralph E. Huey, Director Office of Environmental Services Zone Administrator Permit Consolidation Zone CC: Chris Kinne, Cal/EPA Shelton Gray, CVRWQCB William O'Rullian, KCEHSD Gordon Innes, SWRCB Florentino Castellon, Cal/EPA California gional Water Qualit ontrol Board Central Valley Region Steven T. Butler, Chair Winston H. Hickox Secretary for Fresno Branch Office Environmental Interne1 Address: hltp://www.swrcb.ca.gov/-rwqcb5 Protection 3614 East Ashlan Avenue, Fresno, California 93726 Phone (559) 445-5116 · FAX (559) 445-5910 7 April 2000 NOTICE OF VIOLATION Gray Davis Governor Mr. John Arnold SoilRem Corporation P~O. Box 40764 Soutn Station 524 Bakersfield, CA 93304-9998 Attached is a copy of the staff inspection report conducted on 25 February 2000 at your soil recycling facility at' 408 East Pacheco Road in Bakersfield. Based on the inspection, we believe that contaminated soil was discharged at the facility in violation of the Monitoring and Reporting Section of your Facility Compliance Plan (FCP). The Monitoring and Reporting Section lXL3.c.(3)b, of the FCP requires that each lot of contaminated soil be analyzed for specific constituents as a minimum to demonstrate the waste is not hazardous. Many of the files reviewed during the inspection did not contain the minimum laboratory analytical data specified in the FCP. You need to submit a plan detailing how and when this required data can be submi, tted. All future waste needs to have adequate laboratory analytical data prior to acceptance by the facility. By 5 May 2000, please provide this office with your plan, and a time schedule to submit the required laboratory analytical .data. If you have any questions, please contact Terry Fox at (559) 445-6191. SHELTON ~. ~R~"~- . ~ - - ............ TERRENcE A. FOX Senior Engineering Geologist ' Cc; Registered Geologist RG No. 5029 Ms. chris Kinne, CaIEPA, Sacramento Mr. Ralph Huey, City of Bakersfield, Bakersfield Mr. William O'Rullian, Kern County Environmental Health Services, Bakersfield Mr. Ray Rodriquez, San Joaquin Unified Air Pollution Control District, Bakersfield Mr. Wayne Massie, South Enterprise Zone, 6570 North Becket, Fresno, CA 93710 California Environmental Protection Agency Recy~led Paper OFFICE NO INSPECTOR: 5F TAF FACILITIES INSPECTION REPORT SWRCa 00~ IREV.S-gl) PCA System Task No. 5D152244001 WDS NUMBER NPDES NUMBER 00 02 B1 ('YY) (MM) (TYPE) SCHEDULED INS. DATA 000225 (YYMMDD) ACTUAL INS. DATE $ N' SOILREM CORP, INC NAME OF AGENCY OR PARTY RESPONSIBLE FOR DISCHARGE PO BOX 40764 AGENCY STREET BAKERSFIELD ,CA 93304- AGENCY CITY AND STATE JOHN ARNOLD AGENCY CONTACT PERSON (661) 8348471 AGENCY PHONE NO. Inspection agency (State = S, State / EPA Joint = J) SOILREM CORP, INC NAME OF FACILITY 408 E PACHECO RD FACILITY STREET BAKERSFIELD ,CA 93307- FAClMTY CITY AND STAT JOHN ARNOLD ONSITE FACIUTY CONTACT PERSON (661) 834-8471 FAClUTY PHONE NO. If this inspection is a Compliance Inspection of an NPDES facility, send ~ copy Of this report to SWRCB's Division of Water Quality, Program Support Unit INSPECTION TYPE (Check One) 'Al B1 02 03 04 05 06 "A" type compliance - Comprehensive inspection 'in which samples are taken. (EPA Type S) 'B' type compliance-- A routine nonsampling inspection. (EPA Type C) Noncompliance follow-up -~ Inspection made to verify correction of previously identified violation. Enforcement follow-up - Inspection made to verify that conditions of an enforcement action are being met. Complaint -- Inspection made in response to a complaint. Pre-requirement - Inspection made to gather info. relative to preparing, mod!fying, or rescinding requirements. Miscellaneous -- Any inspection tyPe not mentioned above, If this is an EPA inspection not mentioned above, please note type, (e.g. -- biomonitoring, performance audit, diagnostic, etc.) (Type) Y N' N Were VIOLATIONS noted during this inspection? (Yes/No/Pending Sample Results) Was this a Quality Assurance-Based Inspection? (Y/N) Were bioassay sar~ples taken? (N = No) If YES, then S = Static or F = Flowthrough INSPECTION SUMMARY (REQUIRED) (100 character limit) Initial inspection. Violations noted due to inSufficient lab' data for accepted waste.. INSPECTOR'S DATA: · INITIALS TAF SIGNATURE~ .~ ~ DATE WDS Data Entry Date: Regional Board File Number; (2) (3) Reg.' WDS Coordinator FACILITIES INSPECTION REPORT SWRCB 001 {RE¥.5-91) Parle 2 VIOLATION (IF APPLICABLE) VIOL (A-G): A (See pages IK05.0 and IK05.1 of the Micro Waste Discharger System Users Manual) Date Violation Occurred (YYMMDD): Date Violation Determined (YYMMDD): 000225 DESCRIPTION (200 CHARACTER UMIT): Did not have complete laboratory analytical results in file for some of the accepted soil as required by FCP and Special Order No. 99-059. EPA SUGGESTED INSPECTION CHECKLIST (S= Satisfactory, M= Marginal, U= Unsatisfactory, N= Not Evaluated) U Permit N Flow l~ieasurement N Pretreatment S Operations and Maintenance U Records/Reports -N Laboratories S Compliance Schedules N Sludge Disposal S Facility Site Review N EffJReceiving Waters N Self-Monitoring N Other 2 Overall Facility Operation Evaluation (5= Very reliable, 3= Satisfactory 1= Unreliable) HISTORICAL INFORMATION MOST RECENT ORDERS ORDER NO. J~ TYPE 99-059 6/11/99 WDR MOST RECENT INSPECTIONS: DATE TYPE VIOLATONS? MOST RECENT VIOLATIONS: VIOL. TYPE ~ ADDITIONAL COi~Irv;ENTS, SPECIAL INSTRUCTIONS, ITEMS FOR FOLLOWUP ON FUTURE INSPECTIONS, NOTES, ETC. (Attach additional pages, if necessary) On 25 FebruarY 2000, I inspected the SoilRem facility located in Bakersfield in Kern County. I was accompanied by Jack Jones of SoilRem. Present at the site was John Arnold of SoilRem. Photographs were taken to document conditions on the day of the inspection. SoilRem opei'ates a nonhazardous, hYdrocarbon-impacted soil remediation facility. The facility is regulated by a Facility Compliance Plan (FCP). The facility received approval to start accepting waste in December 1999. The waste is stored in a lined waste management unit (WMU). When I inspected the site, I observed two soil stockpiles in the WMU. Jack Jones of SoilRem said one was a gasoline pile and one was diesel. Mr. Jones also stated that there was approximately 1800 cubic yards. A soil- washing unit was not present at the site. I asked Mr. Jones when the equipment might be brought to the site. He said they were bidding on some soil jobs 'and the equipment could be brought within the next six months, depending on when it was economical to rent the soil-washing equipment. FACILITIES INSPECTION" REPORT SWRCB 001 (REV.E-91) Pa~e 3 At the time of the inspection, the site was clean and well kept. The well boxes for the two onsite wells appeared in good condition. Behind the fenced area, concrete and asphalt debris were placed in a berm around the remainder of the property. I asked Mr. Jones about the debris and he said SoilRem had to put up the berm to keep people from dumping garbage on its property. As Part of the inspection, I reviewed SoilRem's files on the accepted waste. From the' review of the files, I noted that the documentation for some of the accepted wastes was lacking the analysis required by the Facility Compliance Plan (FCp). The sampling of incoming waste is covered under Section I]].3.c(3)b. Monitoring and Reporting Requirements. The FCP, under the Monitoring and Reporting Section, requires that known gasoline contaminated soil be analyzed for TPHg, BTEX, MTBE, and total lead. In addition, if the total lead concentration exceeds ten times the STLC, then the FCP requires that the extractable concentration be determined using the WET procedure. For known diesel contaminated s°il, the FCP requires the soil be analyzed for TPH-dieseFoil and BTEX. Files that did not have complete laboratory analytical results are: * Martin Chevrolet/Oldsmobile fi-le-di~i n~¥ha(t~e leac~ r~sult~ for app~6-~i-mateiy -' 19 tons of gasoline-impacted soil. * Tejon Ranch Co. file did not have lab data or manifests for approximately 75 tons of soil rePortedly from a diesel surface spill. * The Van Construction file had a total lead cOncentration of 72 ppm but no STLC results were inCluded for the 153 tons of diesel-impacted soil. * Soils Engineering file did not have lead or MTBE results in the file for the approximately 300 tons of gasoline-impacted soil. * Loung Chao file did not have lead results for the 11 tons of ga~soline-impacted soil. Not all the files were reviewed completely. Kern County Environmental Health Services Department issued an Area of Concern regarding waste containing the total lead concentration, presumed to be the Van Construction site, greater than 50 ppm (ten times the STLC value) ~and noSTLC ~n~aiy-sis having been done. Conclusion: SoilRem is in violation of its FCP by accepting/discharging waSte without the proper dOcumentation in the file to demonstrate that the waste is not a hazardous waste. SoilRem needs to submit a plan detailing how the proper documentation can be supplied. SoilRem needs to comply with the analytical requirements included in Monitoring and Reporting Requirements D December 21, 1999 FIRE CHIEF RON FRAZE .~d)MINISTRATiVE SERVICE8 2101 'H' Street Bakersfield, CA 93301 VOICE (805) 326-3941 FAX (805) 395-1349 SUPPRESSION SERVICES 2101 'H' Street Bakersfield, CA 93301 VOICE (805) 326-3941 FAX (805) 395-1349 PREVENTION SERVICES 1715 Chester Ave. Bakersfield, CA 93301 VOICE (805) 326-3951 FAX (805) 326-0576 ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES 1715 Chester Ave. Bakersfield, CA 93301 VOICE (805) 326-3979 FAX (805) 326-0576 TRAINING DIVISION 5642 Victor Ave. Bakersfield, CA 93308 VOICE (805) 399.-4697 FAX (805) 399-5763 Mr. John Arnold SoilRem Corporation P.O. BoX 40764 South Station 524 Bakersfield, CA' 93304-9998 RE: Correction Notice No. 232, Issued October 5, 1999 Dear Mr. Arnold: I am in receipt of a 10 December, 1999 memorandum from the Central Valley ~ Regional Water Quality Control Board. The memorandum indicates that you have completed the requirements contained in the Water Quality Control section of the Facility Compliance Plan. Correction Notice No. 232 has therefore been satisfied. Sincerely, Howard H. Wines, III Hazardous Materials Specialist Office of Environmental Services HHW/dm 0 California o Water ua ontrol B6hrd :~i~:./..~.: Central Valley Region. ~ Winston IL Hickox Secretary for Environmental Protection 10 December 1999 Mr. John Arnold SoilRem Corporation, Inc. P.O. Box 40764, South station 524 Gr~y Davis Fresno Branch Office Governor www.swrcb.ca.gov/~rwqcb5 3614 East Asldan Avenue, Fresno, California 93726 (559) 445-5116 · FAX (559) 445-5910 Bakersfield, CA 93304-9998 REQUIREMENTS OF THE SOILREM FACILITY COMPLIANCE PL ~AI~.., SOILREM Attached is a staff-memorandum regarding requirements contained in the Water Quality Control section of the Facility Compliance Plan for your soil recycling facility. The memorandum indicates that you have completed the req~c?ments and may now.accept waste in accordance with the Facility Compliance Plan. The memorandum indicates that you need to re-evaluate the groundwater detection monit6,~g program after four quarters of data have been collected (third quarter of 2 ~OQO): ,You also n~ ,.to r~2~-valuate the cost for corrective ac'ti6h Of a Potential release if groundwater we~:~ to be impacted. 'The and a proposed'financial assurance mechanism need to be submitted prior to expi?a-ti0n of your'~/~r~nt financial assurance mechanism in August 2000. ' Thcref°re, by. ! ~.uly 2000, plebe submit, for review and approval a revised cost estimate for initiating and completing'c~r~ective actio6 if groundwate~ beneath your facility were to be impacted. By 15 October 2000, following completion of four quarters of groundwater monitoring, please submit for review and approval a report that evaluates whether the groundwater monitoring program is effective and capable of detecting a release to groundwater,. The evaluation needs to include a determination of whether the wells are located in a consistently downgradient direction from the waste management unit. If you have any questions, please call Doug Patteson at (559) 445-6191. SHELTON R. GRAY Senior Engineering Geologist WILLIAM PFISTER ~ Supervising Engineering Geologist CEG No. 931 CC.' Ms. Chris Kinne, California Environmental Protection Agency, Sacramento Mr. Ray Rodriquez, San Joaquin Unified Ak Pollution Control District, Bakersfield Mr. William O'Rullian, Kern County Environmental Services, Bakersfield Mr. Ralph Huey, City of Bakersfield, Bakersfield California Environmental Protection Agency 0 Recycled Paper .~ California ~I~ gioncal:."StevenWatei;T.Butler,QUa~-' ntro r entral valley Region Winston H. Hlckox ..... Governor Secretary for Fresno Branch Office Environmental www.swrcb.ca.gov]~rwqcb5 Protection 3614 East Ashlan Avenue, Fr~no, California 93726 (559) 445-5116 · FAX (559) 445-5910 TO: DATE: Shelton R. Gray Senior Engineering Geologist 10 December. 1999 FROM: SIGNATURE: Douglas K. Patteson Assoc. WRCE SUBJECT: 'REQUIREME~ OF 'll-IE SOILREM FACILITY COMPLIANCE PLAN, SOILREM CORPORATION, INC., BAKERSFIELD, KERN COUNTY The Water Quality Control Plan section of thc SoilRem Facility Compliance Plan requires several items to be submitted before waste can be accepted at SoilRem's'soil recycling fac:'.dity .at 40~8~_~t Pacheco Road. The reqUirements are contained in' the following specifications from the?~:lllty C(~ii~iii~e Plan: ~.....:. .., . .... . , :'.~ ~ . ' c?~i~i.;~,- S_~p~., ification 8'. submit plans and specifications ~r:review and app~6val pri0r':to. ~c~.figtruction, "': ~: and a quality' aSsurance/quaii~f~ie01 report fOllowiii~"construcii~:~f the ..~-' "" waste management unit. ... sp~ioa ~:.su~t ~ pr~i~se~ ~ns~ur~:~ ~ne mo~or~g p~ for r~w a~a'~pprov~. .~' S~ification ~a. Sabot a pio~;o~ groundwater momtormg plan for rev,ew and approval.. ~he " plan'is to include a hydrogeologic Characterization demonstrating that the ..... ".: groundwater aquifer beneath the SoilRem site and the :adjacent former CleanSoils site are interconnected and that groundwater quality data from the CleanSoils site is suitable as background data for the SoilRem site. Specificat';on !5. Specification 19. Submit a proposed load-checking program, for review and approVal. Submit proof of financial assurance for the cost of initiating and completing corrective action for any reasonably foreseeable release. speCification20. Submit proof of financial assurance for the cost of initiating and completing clOsure and post-closure maintenance of ihe'soil storage and treatment areas. SoilRem has submitted all the documents required by the above specifications. The submittals required by specifications 8, 12, 15, and 20 are complete and have been approved. Specifications 13 and' 19 are complete but require further assessment as discussed below. California Environmental Protection Agency 0 RecYcled Paper :' SOILREM FACILITy CO CE · - 2 :?5?:' PLAN Specification 13 10 D~m~r 1999 SoilRem submitted a groundwater monitoring plan containing hydrogeologic information from installation of two on-site monitoring wells. The plan also contains information from the adjacent CleanSoils site, which was a soil recycling facility o. perated in '1994 and 1995. The facility wa~ ? approximately a quarter mile northeast of the SoilRem site and has had no activity since 1995. There are three shallow groundwater monitoring wells and three .deeper monitoring wells at the CleanSoils site. SoilRem's report concludes that the shallow and deep wells installed were in the same or similar aquifers as beneath the CleanSoils site, and that analytical results of samples from the wells were similar to data. · 7?.'_..- frOTM the CleanS0ils wells. Based on a revieTM of the data in SoilRem's report, it al~l~ears that the two new w. ells were installed~in, the .... same water bearing zones as beh6~ith CleanSoils, and ~t:~ 1~Seated generally downgradient from the waste management unit. Groundwater samples from the SoilRem wells are of similar mineral composition to groundwater from beneath the Cle'anSoils~gite. However, the concentrations of several of the mineral constituents in the SoilRem sample were outside the maximum/minimum range of historical data from the CleanSoils site. :, .':.' ' of~e groufidwater gradie_nt'are:l~d on a single sa~ling :.~.: · Both the ~ .m!~.analysis and:'th:~ Calculation '"{~"~'" . · event at the Ss.~e_:m siteaha;6 .d anon ous ori_ ght oyer Therefore, SOmem to" mOnitOring program after four quarters of data have been'collected (third Quarter 2000). ' SoilRem st~tted a plan and cost estimate for initiating and completing corrective action for a reasonably fOreSeeable release. The estimated cost of $33,250 was based on excavation and disposal of soil contaminated as a result of a potential leak through the waste management unit liner. The financial mechanism is an insurance policy in the amount of the estimated cost. The cost estimate is reasonable for the proposed work. However, a potential leak through the liner over a long time period could eventually migrate to and kmpact grou.~dwater. The amount of financh] assurance needs to reflect the cost for potential groundwater evaluation and corrective action. In a letter dated 3 November 1999, SoilRem stated that when the current insurance policy expires in August 2000, they would re-evaluate the cost for corrective action. The revised estimate and proposed financial assurance mechanism will include the cost to evaluate and Clean-up a potential groundwater impact. A potential release from the waste management unit would take considerable time to reach groundwater. The current cost estimate and financial assurance mechanism should be adequate to initiate and complete corrective action for any potential release that could occur before August 2000. Conclusion SoilRem has completed the requirements of Specifications 8, 12, 13, 15, 19, and 20 of the W. ater Quality Control Plan section of the Facility Compliance Plan. SoilRem may now accept waste in accordance with their Facility Compliance Plan. SOILREM FACILITY-:~- .... ..- - 3 - PLAN ' 10 December 1999 SoilRem needs to continue the sampling and monitoring program to gather sufficient data to determine whether further Work (i.e. additional well(s)) will eventually be necessary.' ~ SoilRem needs to re-evaluate the groundwater detection monitoring program after four quarters of data have been collected (third quarter of 2000). · SoilRem needs to re-evalUate the cost for corrective action of a Potential release if groundwater were to be impacted. The revised estimate and a proposed fmancial assurance mechanism need to be submitted for review and approval prior to expiration of the current financial assurance mechanism in August 2000. D FIRE CHIEF RON FRAZE ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES 2101 'H" Street Bakersfield, CA 93301 VOICE (661) 326-3941 FAX (661) 395-1349 SUPPRESSION SERVICES 2101 'H" Street Bakersfield, CA 93301 VOICE (661) 326-3941 FAX (661) 395-1349 PREVENTION SERVICES 1715 Chester Ave. Bakersfield, CA 93301 VOICE (661) 326-3951 FAX (661) 326-0576 ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES 1715 Chester Ave. Bakersfield, CA 93301 VOICE (661) 326-3979 FAX (661) 326-0576 TRAINING DIVISION 5642 Victor Ave. Bakersfield, CA 93308 VOICE (661) 399-4697 FAX (661) 399-5763 November 2, 1999 Mr. John Amold Soikem Corporation 408 E. Pacheco Rd Bakersfield, Ca 93307 Dear Mr. Arnold: Per your request, this office conducted a visual inspection of your facility on Friday, October 29, 1999, at 7:00 a.m. The purpose of this inspection was to verify the removal of approximately 20 tons of contaminated soil from your containment area. It appears that all soil has been removed from containment area. If this office can be of further assistance, please feel free to call our office at 661-326-3979. Sincerely, Ralph E. Huey, Director Office of Environmental Services Steve Underwood, Inspector Office of Environmental Services 11/12/1999 14:13 6613979643 SOIL REM PAGE 01 P.O. BOX a0764 BAKERSFIELD, CA. Phone: 1~:~>834-8471 JOHN ARNOLD o~~ o e,~.se n~c~e I 11/12/1999 14:13 6613979643 SOIL REM ~,~OU-~2-Z999 ~1:A8 ~ C CR~LI~:~TY PAGE P.02 82 UNXTED CAPXTOL XNSURANCE COMPANY l,,b, Lc, ri H~er ~1,~ ~, F~,u~roa Sxr~. Sulr~ 6~ Los ^~-e.~s~ CA Dcn,~' Please sm the a~ta¢l'te,4 r~vh, sd e:~ti~'~c~:e for ~i~ ;~e covr~e prov~ by Uni~ ~p~oi ~ ~ a 'pay ~r, ~vcr~z req~re~ ~Y ~he ~e~ofl~ ~ater ~ity Control Be~ that t~y ~te the b~ef~ xO c~s Covgra~. ~/{ce Pres~jc~z 11/12/1999 14:13 6613979643 SOIL REM PAGE 83 NOU-i~-1999 11:48 C CASUALTY Po03 CERTIFICATE OF INSURANCE FOR PG~I'CLO~URE MAINTENANCE RF.A$C)NAi~LY FORESE~aL~ CORRECTIVE ACTION INSL,IRI[R 11/12/1999 14:13 6613979643 SOIL REM PAGE 84 '.~uL~-- l Z- l~t:e~. 11:49 C CAF/JflLTY P.05 ~ec) ~e~ ~y~e. ~r.~r ~ill~ [y ~ cliP,il I~la ~1~1 ~nq~mt Oea~ of ~ S~ Of C41~4~18. ~e TOTAL P. ~ D November 10, 1999 FIRE CHIEF RON FRAZE ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICE8 2101 'H' Street Bakersfield, CA 93301 VOICE (805) 326-3941 FAX (805) 395-1349 SUPPRESSION SERVICE~ 2101 'H' Street Bakersfield, CA 93301 VOICE (805) 326-3941 FAX (805) 395-1349 PREVENTION SERVICES 1715 Chester Ave. Bakersfield, CA 93301 VOICE (805) 326-3951 FAX (805) 326-0576 ENVIRONMENTA4. SERVICES 1715 Chester Ave. Bakersfield, CA 93301 VOICE (805) 326-3979 FAX (805) 326-0576 / TRAINING DIVISION 5642 Victor Ave. Bakersfield, CA 93308 VOICE (805) 399-4697 FAX (805) 399-5763 Mr. John Arnold, President SoilRem Corporation P.O. Box 40746 Bakersfield, CA93304-9998 RE: Correction Notice No. 0293 Dear Mr. Arnold: I am in receipt of a letter sent to you by Jim Eggert, Principal Planner for the Bakersfield Development Services Department, dated November 2, 1999. Based on the indications therein that SoilRem is no longer accepting construction waste at the site and has therefore returned to compliance with the approved conditional use permit, .you are deemed to have also returned to compliance with the Facility Compliance Plan, in so far as the conditional use permit is referenced. Correction Notice No. 0293 has therefore been satisfied. Sincerely, Howard H. Wines, III Hazardous Materials Specialist Office of Environmental Services HHW/dm attachments Dennis C. Fidler Building Director (661) 326-3720 Fax (661) 325-0266 BAKERSFIELD Development Services Department Jack Hardisty, Director Stanley C. Grady Planning Director (661) 326-3733 Fax (661) 327-0646 November 2, 1999 Mr. John Arnold, President SoilRem Corporation P.O. Box 40746 South Station 524 Bakersfield, California 93304-9998 RE: 408 E. Pacheco Road iDear Mr. Arnold: This letter is to confirm that your plan to use the concrete brought to your property to construct a barrier to prevent unauthorized entry and dumping is acceptable to this department. You stated that this barrier will surround the site and will be covered with dirt and sloped to ensure water runoff remains on your property. The use of the remaining concrete for road base is also acceptable. This work in conjunction with you no longer accepting construction waste at the site will bring your operation back into compliance with the approved conditional use permit satisfying the corrections stated in our letter of October 1, 1999. I appreciate your working with our office in correcting these issues. ~~nner cc: 14oward Wines, Environmental Services Ter .ry Bt,ss, Code Enforcement City of Bakersfield · 1715 Chester Avenue · Bakersfield, California · 93301 November 3, 1999 Doug Patteson California Regional Water Quality Control Board 3614 East Ashlan Ave. Fresno, Ca. 93726 Re~ Current Insurance and Proposed Coverage's Based on our numerous telephone conversations and tentative agreements, we propose the following: We will obtain additional insurance for Reasonably Foreseeable Corrective Action in the amount of $33,250.00. This sum was arrived at by our consulting geologist and was submitted in our closure/past closure plan of May 5, 1999. This amount will remain "as is" until the end of our current policy period on August 3, 2000. Between now and then, we will contract with Soils Engineering Inc.; to develop an estimated cost should on site activity result in contamination of ground water. That estimate will be submitted for review / comments prior to seeking the insurance. The proposed policy will also be submitted for review/approval prior to purchasing the coverage. Please call me if additional information is required. Thank you, John E. Arnold President November 3, 1999 Doug Paneson California Regional Water Quality Control Board 3614 East Ashlan Ave. Fresno, Ca. 93726 Re; Modifications to Existing Insurance Policy We have instructed our agent to obtain from the carrier written confirmation that the $2500 deductible on the closure coverage is not coming fi.om the insured before insurance funds are paid. The deductible will be billed directly to Soil Rem. The current policies will be amended to name the Regional Water Quality Control Board as the beneficiary. Our agent advises these changes are easily obtained and will do so expeditiously. Thank you, John E. Arnold President October 25, 1999 Load - Checking Program The main goat of implementing this program is to ensure that no hazardous wastes are accepted or discharged at Soil Rems facility. This goal is readily obtainable through the concurrent operation of two interrelated programs. *Pre - Acceptance Protocol Each generator who proposes to dispose ofcontanfinated soil at our facility must: Collect and Submit representative samples to an independent state certified laboratory for analysis utilizing appropriate EPA test methods. Provide to Soil Rem the laboratory analysis in a timely manner along with a Generator Certification Sheet (GCS) Prepare a Non-Hazardous Waste Manifest to accompany each load delivered. Upon arrival, the manifest is reviewed for completeness and accuracy as well as its consistency with the previously submitted documents. Soil Rem reserves the right to reject any load offered for delivery. A load checking station has been established at the facility entrance. A visual load inspection is performed at that time. Each load is sampled fi~r Hydrocarbon Content, LEL, and Hydrogen Sulfide 0-I2S) on a daily log. Each waste st:em is maalyzed by a certified laboratoD' as to it's content and the results provided to our facility. Along with a Generator Certification Sheet and a Non- Hazardous Waste Manifest. These controls documem and demonstrate that the waste is not hazardous pursuant to 40 CFR 261 and title 22 CCR All employees and new hires are required to attend a Safety Orientation meeting. The }lazard Communication Program is cxovered in detail. Each person attending the orientation is required to sign a certificate of attendance. Refresher training is conducted annually or when a new hazardous substance is introduced into the workplace. Safety ~,raining is conducted monthly. Representative topics include: How to read and use MSDS Personal Protective Equipment · Job safety procedures, Safety Rules and Code of Safe Practices · Injury/Illness Prevention Program · Site specific training is also included in the program. Contaminated soil pre-acceptance protocol, the use of PPM/LEL Hydrocarbon detection meters and site control procedures are included in this category of training. Each load entering the facility is recorded on the Summary Incoming Soil Log. A Non- hazardous Waste Manifest and a weight ticket also accompany the load. Upon arrival, readings of the LEL, PPM, and H2S are taken and recorded on the Summary Incoming Soil Log. Once the soil is dumped on site, readings are taken three (3) times daily and recorded on the FID Air Monitoring Record. Attachment 3 shows other data collected and additional monitoring points as well as the weekly monitoring report. Attachment 4 reflects outgoing Soil data. These records are utilized to compile data for reporting purposes as required. lhis program, as it pertains to load checking, will be implemented upon receipt of the first contaminated soil. On-site prepatory training is now in progress. A "Company Sign" has been posted at the facility entrance, which includes the following information: Name of Operation - Soil Rem Corp. · Name of Operator - JOhn Arnold · Hours of Operation - 8-5 M-F · Emergency Phone Number- 1-(661) 393-5478 Notice- Only Non-Hazardous Contaminated Material Accepted Proposition 65 signs posted at front gate.' "No Smoking beyond this point" sign posted at load checking station. (Fifty feet inside gate, Adjacent to office trailer) iFire extinguisher signs have been placed as required by the local fire department. Waste found to be in noncompliance with the FCP remains the property of the Generator who is solely responsible for its removal. · Load Checkin~ For every 1000 yards accepted, a sample fi.om an incoming waste load is collected and analyzed for volatile organic compounds (EPA method 8240 or 8260), semi - volatile organic compounds (EPA method 8270), and total cadmium, chromium, lead, mercury, nickel, and zinc using EPA approved analytical methods. This random sampling procedure is intended to confirm the generators nonhazardous characterization of the waste. Samples are taken fi.om the selected load concurrently with the load - checking described above. The sample will be a composite sample comprised of four equal sized individual representative samples from the waste load. The person collecting the samples will dig one foot into the load and then take the samples. The four individual samples are combined and mixed in a clean container and then placed in a sample jar and packed down to ensure there is no headspace in the container. It is then sealed and placed in an ice chest for delivery to a state certified lab for analyses. The load fi.om which the sample is taken is then dumped on the WMU in a segregated location. Once lab results are received, they are evaluated to confirm the non-hazardous nature of the material. If the results confirm the generators characterization (i.e.; nonhazardous) the segregated load is then processed. Should the results indicate the waste is hazardous, the generator will be immediately notified to remove it fi.om the site. The RWQCB will also be notified within seven days from the time the waste is determined to be hazardous. The notification shall include the reason that the load was rejected and the name, address, phone number and contact name of the generator. October 25, 1999 Unsaturated Zone Monitorina Plan A leak detection sump was installed according to plans: 'with a bottom (secondary) 40 ml HDPE liner and a 2"- diameter HDPE pipe (secondary monitoring well) extending from the top of the secondary liner to the surface covered with l'ofgravel. The primary 40 mi HDPE liner was placed over the gravel with a primary monitoring will (2'- diameter HDPE pipe) placed on top of the liner and extending to the surface, both covered with 2' of gravel. Once a week a swab is inserted down the primary and secondary tubes to check for moisture. The swab consists ofa 11/2 diameter cotton ball 6" in length attached to a PVC pipe for insertion. A FID monitor probe is also used to check for LEL & H2S The results are recorded on the attached form. If moisture is detected in the primary sump, it is pumped out and discharged into a 55-gallon drum(s) where it will be preserved on site pending analysis. Should the analysis prove to be hazardous, the liquid will be manifested and removed by a Hazardous Waste hauler to a Hazardous Waste Disposal Facility. Agency notification will occur immediately upon receipt of the lab analysis. Non- Hazardous liquid will be disposed of on-site by utilizing it in our closed loop processing system as make up water. The first time moisture is detected in the primary sump, samples will be collected and preserved in appropriate container, sealed and placed in an ice chest for delivery to a certified lab for analysis. The samples will be analyzed for volatile organic compounds (EPA method 8240 or 8260), semi-volatile organic compounds (EPA method 8270), and soluble cadmium, chromium, lead, mercury, nickel, and zinc using an EPA approved analytical method. Thereafter, the liquids from the primary sump will be pumped out at least monthly, and more often if necessary. The contents will continue to be sampled and analyzed annually. If moisture is detected in thc secondary sump, it is pumped out and discharged into a 55- gallon drum(s) and handled as described above. Samples will be collected and preserved in appropriate containers, sealed and placed in an ice chest for delivery to a certified lab for analysis. The samples will be analyzed for volatile organic compounds (EPA method 8240 or 8260), semi-volatile organic compounds (EPA method 8270), and soluble cadmium, chromium, lead, mercury, nickel, and zinc using an EPA approved analytical method. Appropriate regulatory, agencies wilt be notified within seven days from the time moisture is detected. Data collected weekly is used to compile the reports required by the FCP. SoilRem Corporatio P.O. Box 40764 South Station 524 Bakersfield, Ca. 93304-9998 October 25, 1999 Mr. Doug Patteson California Regional Water Quality Control Board 3614 East Ashlan Ave. Fresno, Ca. 93726 Subject: Notice of Violation dated 18 October 1999. The following is submitted regarding the items listed in the Subject Notice of Violation. 1. Install Groundwater Monitoring Wells Two monitoring wells were installed on October 14& 15, 1999. Soils Engineering, Inc. performed the installation in accordance with the Groundwater Well Installation and Sampling Plan submitted to your office May 10,1999 and the revised proposal of June 22, 1999. No significant deviations from the plan were encountered. Please see the enclosed Soils Engineering, Inc. letter for details. The well installation report and water sample analyses will be provided your office upon receipt. Groundwater monitoring will be conducted quarterly. The same groundwater sampling procedures and constituents monitored for during the installation will be monitored and reported on a quarterly basis in accordance with the Water Quality Control Plan. 2. Unsaturated Zone Monitoring Plan Originally the plan was submitted with our revised FCP dated April 15, 1999. At that time we had proposed a neutron moisture detection probe. At the meeting held 4-22-99 at your office, Mr. Gray suggested the neutron probe system be removed from the FCP in favor of the design as depicted on the grading and lining plan dated 4-30-99. Unfortunately, we neglected to formally submit a revised plan. The new plan is enclosed. 3. Random load-checking program Revised program is enclosed. 1-661-397-9641 office Ct 1-661-397-4508 fax Ct SoilRem@aol.com 4. Marker Layer A layer of blue-green dye has been placed on the ground to distinguish the top of the liner from the overlying contaminated soil. This was completed on 10-25-99. We utilized a "checkerboard" pattern to ensure that a loader operating on the WMU can easily detect it. 5. Financial Assurance This subject is currently being addressed by our insurance represemative by separate correspondence. Thank you, John E. Arnold President CC: Mr. Ralph Huey, City of Bakersfield SoilRem Corporatio P.O. Box 40764 South Station 524 Bakersfield, Ca. 93304-9998 October 25, 1999 Unsaturated Zone Monitoring Plan A leak detection sump was installed according to plans: with a bottom (secondary) 40 mi HDPE liner and a 2"- diameter HDPE pipe (secondary monitoring Well) extending from the top of the secondary liner to the Surface covered with l'ofgravel. The primary 40 ml HDPE liner was placed over the gravel with a primary monitoring will (2'- diameter HDPE pipe) placed on top of the liner and extending to the surface, both covered with 2' of gravel. Once a week a swab is inserted down the primary and secondary tubes to check for moisture. A FID monitor probe is also used to check for L)EL & H2S. The results are recorded on the attached form. If moisture is detected, it is l~ll~ped out, samples collected and sent to a ~'t~tified lab for analysis. Appropriate'regulatory ageflcies are notified at that time if a leak in the liner is suspected. Data collected weekly is used to compile the reports required by thee l~cP. 1-661-397-9641 office # 1--66t-397-4508 fax Ct SoilRem@aol.com SoilRem Corporatio P.O. Box 40764 South Station 524 Bakersfield, Ca. 93304-9998 October 25, 1999 Load - Checking Program The main goal of implementing this program is to ensure that no hazardous wastes are accepted or discharged at Soil Rems facility. This goal is readily obtainable through the concurrent operation of two interrelated programs. *Pre - Acceptance Protocol Each generator who proposes to dispose of contaminated soil at our facility must: · Collect and Submit representative samples to an independent state certified laboratory for analysis utilizing appropriate EPA test methods. · Provide to Soil Rem the laboratory analysis in a timely manner along with a Generator Certification Sheet (GCS) · Prepare a Non-Hazardous Waste Manifest to accompany each load delivered. Upon arrival, the manifest is reviewed for completeness and accuracy as well as its consistency with the previously submitted documents. Soil Rem reserves the right to reject any load offered for delivery. A load checking station has been established at the facility entrance. A visual load inspection is performed at that time. Each load is sampled for Hydrocarbon Content, LEL, and Hydrogen Sulfide (H2S) on a daily log. Each waste stream is analyzed by a certified laboratory as to it's content and the results provided to our facility. Along with a Generator Certification Sheet and a Non- Hazardous Waste Manifest. These controls document and demonstrate that the waste is not hazardous pursuant to 40 CFR 261 and title 22 CCR. All employees and new hires are required to attend a Safety Orientation meeting. The Hazard Communication Program is covered in detail. Each person attending the orientation is required to sign a certificate of attendance. Refresher training is conducted annually or when a new hazardous substance is introduced into the workplace. Safety training is conducted monthly. Representative topics include: 1-661-397-9641 office Ct 1-66'1-397-4508 fax Ct SoilRem@aoI.com · How to read and use MSDS · Personal Protective Equipment · Job safety procedures, Safety Rules and Code of Safe Practices · Injury/Illness Prevention Program · Site specific training is also included in the program. Contaminated soil pre-acceptance protocol, the use of PPM/LEL Hydrocarbon detection meters and site control procedures are included in this category of training. Each load entering the facility is recorded on the Summary Incoming Soil Log. A Non- hazardous Waste Manifest and a weight ticket also accompany the load. Upon arrival, readings of the LEL, PPM, and H2S are taken and recorded on the Summary Incoming Soil Log. Once the soil is dumped on site, readings are taken three (3) times daily and recorded on the FID Air Monitoring Record. Attachment 3 shows other data collected and additional monitoring points as well as the weekly monitoring report. Attachment 4 reflects outgoing Soil data. These records are utilized to compile data for reporting purposes as required. This program, as it pertains to load checking, will be implemented upon receipt of the first contaminated soil. On-site prepatory training is now in progress. A "Company Sign" has been posted at the facility entrance, which includes the following information: · Name of Operation - Soil Rem Corp. · Name of Operator- John Arnold · Hours of Operation - 8-5 M-F · Emergency Phone Number- 1-(661) 393-5478 · Notice- Only Non-Hazardous Contaminated Material Accepted Proposition 65 signs posted at front gate. "No Smoking beyond this point" sign posted at load checking station. (Fifty feet inside gate, Adjacent to office trailer) Fire extinguisher signs have been placed as required by the local fire department. Waste found to be in noncompliance with the FCP remains the property of the Generator who is solely responsible for its removal. *Load Checking Periodically, e.g. for every 1000 yards accepted, a sample from an incoming waste load is collected and analyzed for volatile organic compounds (EPA method 8240 or 8260), semi - volatile organic compounds (EPA method 8270), and total cadmium, chromium, lead, mercury, nickel, and zinc. This random sampling procedure is intended to confirm the generators nonhazardous characterization of the waste. Samples are taken from the selected load concurrently with the load - checking described above. The person collecting the samples will dig one foot into the load and then take the sample. It will be placed in a sample jar and packed down to ensure there is no headspace in the container. It is then sealed and placed in an ice chest for delivery to a state certified lab for analyses. The load from which the sample is taken is then dumped on the WMU in a segregated location. Once lab results are received, they are evaluated to confirm the non-hazardous nature of the material. If the results confirm the generators characterization (i.e.; nonhazardous) the segregated load is then processed. Should the results indicate the waste is hazardous, the generator will be immediately notified to remove it from the site. The RWQCB will also be notified. SOILS ENGINEERING, INC. October 25, 1999 File Number 99-8987 Regional Water Qua~l 3614 East Ashlan Avenue Fresno, CA 93726 Attn.: Mr. Doug Patteson ~e;im~.~ary Monitoring Well _~nsmllation & Sampling Report So/1Rem Facili!y 408 Pacheco Rd. Bakersfield, California Mr. Patteson: Soils Engineering, Inc. (SEI) has prepared this Preliminary Monitoring Well Installation & Sampling Report for SoilRem Corp. describing the field activities completed during the installation and sampling of 2 groundwater monitoring wells at the site (see Plate 1 for Location Map). The work was conducted in accordance with the May 10, 1999 Groundwater Well Installation & Sampling Plan for the facility prepared by SEI. FIELD WORK CONDUCTED The following describes the procedures conducted to drill and install the 2 monitoring wells (1 deep (160') and 1 shallow (40') and the water sampling protocol that was utilized. INSTALLATION OF 2 GROUNDWATER MONITORING WELLS (1-160', 1- 40') Shallow Aquifer Well MW-IS On October 14, 1999 SEI drilled and completed the shallow perched aquifer monitoring well MW-1S near the northeast comer of the fenced in portion of the SoilRem facility down-gradient (northeasterly) of the soil treatment area. The soil boring was advanced with a CME-75 Hollow-stem auger drilling rig to a depth of 40' below ground surface (bgs). Soil cuttings were described in 5 foot intervals by a State of California Registered Geologist and recorded on a Boring Log in accordance with the Unified Soil Classification System (USCS). Once the boring was advanced a minimum of 10' beneath the first groundwater encountered (30'), 2"-diameter schedule 40 PVC casing was placed to the bottom of the boring (40' bgs.). The bottom 20 feet of PVC casing was screen interval (0.02" slots) with a threaded bottom cap attached to threaded blank schedule 40 PVC casing to the surface. A sand filter pack (#3 sand) was placed in the annular space 4700 DISTRICT BLVD. " BAKERSFIELD, CALIFORNIA 93313 ' PHONE (661) 831-$100 · FAX: (661) 831-21 ENGINEERING, INC. Preliminary Well Install & Sampling Plan File No. 99-8942 SoilRem Facility October 2.5, 1999 .4.08 Pach¢¢o Rd. Bakersfield. CA. Pa~e ~ from the bottom of the boring to a minimum of 2-feet above the slotted interval as the augers were removed from the boring. Partial development of the well was conducted prior to setting the bentonite seal by utilizing a 2-inch vented surge block and bailer to remove a minimum of 3 well volumes of water to settle out the sand pack. No additional sand was needed to maintain the sand 2-feet above the screen interval. A 4' seal of bentonite chips was placed above the sand pack through the augers. The bentonite was hydrated prior to the placement of neat cemem grout to within 1 foot of the surface. The well head was protec,ed ,..~;~tL ~ !o~;l'hn.~ l:a':'~,¢-cat~.;a well bt.x c~ncreted in place and sloped to provide rain-water runoff. A Boring Log of MW-IS (Pending) is attached showing the completion of the monitoring well. Deep Aauifer W~il MW-2D On Octobc;' 14, ~999 ~;Ei began the .~.~:ling of the deep aquifer well MW-2D which was placed ~e~,~...,,<,,:~:o/e.$t (S87W) of thc soil treatment area with a depth of 160' below ground .,;:Irfac¢: (b3s). The soil bori[:~g ~v;~s ad~mnced with a CME-75 Hollow-stem auger drilling rig. Soil cuttings were described in 5 foot intervals by a State of California Registered Geologist and recorded on a Boring Log in accordance with the Unified Soil C!as,,,.i,i.~,,:at!c_~: Syster~ (USCS). On Oc,~.o~r 15, 1999 SEI completed the boring by placing 2"-diameter schedule 40 PVC casing to the bottom of the boring (160' bgs.). The bottom 30 feet of PVC casing was screen interval (0.02" slots) with a threaded bottom cap, attached to threaded blank schedule 40 PVC casing to the surface. Centralizers were attached to the PVC casing at 20 foot-intervals to maintain the PVC casing within the center of the borehole. A sand filter pack (#3 sand) was placed in the annular space from the bottom of the bt)ring to a minimum of 2-feet above the slotted interval as the hollow- stem augers were removed from the borehole. An adjustment to the casing brought the bottom of the well to approximately 156' bgs.. Partial development of the well was conducted prior to setting the bentonite seal by utilizing a 2-inch vented surge block and a bailer to remove a minimum of 3 well volumes of water to settle out the sand pack. No additional sand was needed to maintain the sand 2-feet above the screen interval. A 4 foot interval of bentonite was placed above the sand pack through the augers. The bentonite was hydrated prior to the placement of neat cement grout to within 1 foot from the surface. The well head is protected with a locldng traffic-rated well box concreted in- place and sloped to prevent rainwater collection. A Boring Log of MW-2D (Pending) is attached showing the completed monitoring well. See Plate 2 for well locations. Well Development & Water Sampling On October 18, 1999 the wells were fully developed by surging with a bailer and purging a minimum of 3 well volumes with a submersible pump until the water ran clear or had consistent pr, conductivity and temperature readings. On October 19, 1999 the wells were purged with a submersible pump a minimum of 3 well volumes or until the pr, conductivity and temperature readings were consistent. After the water levels had recovered to 80% of original measurements a water sample i~lL$ ENGINEERING, INC. Preliminary Well Install & Sampling Plan File No. 99-8942 SoilRern Facility October 25, 1999 408 Pacheco Rd. Bakersfield, CA, Pa~.e 3 was collected with a new disposable bailer attached to a dedicated sample line. Water from the disposable bailer was decanted into appropriate containers and placed into an iced cooler at 4-degrees centigrade. The water samples (MW-1S and MW-2D) from the two (2) on-site groundwater monitoring wells were analyzed for Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons as gasoline (TPHg) and diesel (TPHd) by EPA method 8015m and for volatile organics and MI'BE by EPA Method 8260, for gc,~.¢ra! ma:e;a~,~, a~,J ~o~' Ti:~ 2£~ ~.el~ ~.t Zalco Laboratories in Bakersfield, CA.. GROUNDWATER GRADIENT On October 19, 1999 the depth to water in the 2 on-site wells and the six (6) neighboring Cle;~nSo~.i;3 moniio~_'i~g wells were e~easured to calculate an accurate groundwater gradient ber~e.,~t?~ the. SoiLRem site. Thc: 2 on-site monitoring wells were surveyed for locatioa ~;-~d ~:op o:g c,,;;ing elevatio.qs~ a.n~ tie;d into the 6 existing CleanSoil facility monitoring wells by Martin-Macintosh. G.;-o,.~,adwa;¢~: ~,:v¢~s in tb.c .,?~:,~i::w ;~qu~f~; ranged from 22.2' (MW-4 (CS)) to 29.8' (MW-1 S) from the top of well casings. Groundwater levels in the deep aquifer ranged from 121.0' (MW-2D) to 140.7' (MW-6 (CS)) from the top of well casings. Plates 3A and 3B presents the approximate groundwater gradients of the shallow and deep aquifers on October 19, 1999. The shallow aquifers gradient is approximately 0.0158'/' in a N38E direction. The deep aquifers gradient is approximately 0.003'1' at the CleanSoil site in a S17W direction. The SoilRem deep well (MW-2D) is slightly higher (approximately 10') in water level elevation than the CleanSoil deep wells indicating a steeper groundwater gradient from the SoilRem site toward the CleanSoils site. Additional monitoring of the wells may provide better data over time. See Plates 3A and 3B for estimated groundwater gradients. Preliminary Conclusions It appears that the SoilRem wells are in the same or similar aquifers as the CleanSoil wells and should represent similar aquifer properties beneath the site. Both on-site wells appear to be located down-gradient of the treatment pad as required. SCHEDULE OF WORK Once the analytical results of the water samples are received this report will be finalized. Quarterly monitoring will be performed in accordance with the Groundwater Well Installation & Sampling Plan with the same constituents analyzed for as during this sampling event. elLS ENGINEERING, INC. Preliminary Well Install & Sampling Plan File No. 99-8942 SoiIRem Facility October 25, 1999 408 Pctch¢co Rd. Bakersfiel(~ CA, Paee 4 If you have any questions concerning this SEI at (661) 831-5100. Sincerely, Envh'onmental Divici,:n,: ~;.an~ :,,.:.~e :' Enclosure: Table 1, Groundwater Results 1 Plate 1, Location Map Phte 2, Plot Phn with Well Locations Plate 3.6. & 3B, Groundw~ter Gradient, Shallow & Deep Aquifers TABLE'1 .... ' SOILREM Corporation GROUNDWATER RESULTS 10/19/1999 PVC I EthylI Monitoring Sample Casing Depth Of l Depth to Volume t Water TPHg TPHd j Be, zl~ene Toluene Benzene Xylene MTBE Date No. Elev. Well I Water Of Well !Elevation (ppb) (ppb) I {Pl~?) (ppb) ~ (ppb) (ppb) (ppb) SoilRem Wells I '~ ; Analytical Re~J#.e C)~nding 10/19/1999 MW-lS 363.41 '40 '~ 29.8 6.80 3,33.61 ' - __ ': ,~' i0/19/1999 MW-2D 364.89 156 121 23.35 243.89 Analytical Results Pending CleanSoil Wells ' · 10/19/1999 MW-1 370.33 40 28 8.00 342.33 Analytical Results Pending 10/19/1999 MW-2 371.01 40 27.83 8. ~ 2 343.18 ' /'m3.1ytical Results ;'ending 10/19/1999 MW-3 369.74 150 138.01 8.00 231.73 /~,~lytical Results_p_ending 10/19/1999 MW-4 371.09 40 22.16 11.90 348'.9~3 ^r~h/tical Results Pending 10/19/1, 999: MW-6 369.39 150 140.58 6:28-- 228.81 - Analytical Re-suits ~ending Wells surveyed on 10/2~,,99 ultilizin~l previously surveyed elevation of MW-5 as base elevation,ppb = parts per billion,M ! BE ,--"~,~leth~l Tertian-Butyl Ether Page I c;RAPH|C $~11~ C.L. EAST .Clean SOils p.d 444~ ''l - CL. EAST PACHECC RO~D (CO RD. NO. $t60 &1339) c.,, ,~,,.. s ~. Mc -. ~,,"~ ,o ,.' ¢~:....m ,, · BASIS Of' BlARiNG: Location Map MW-2~W-6 CLEAN SOILS FACILITY VACANT LAND VACANTLAND SOILS ENGINEERING, INC. 4700 District Blvd. Bakemfi®ld, CA 93313 VACANT LAND VACANT LAND Leachate Collection Sump MW~'~Mw'IS ,3f~fice $oilRem ~Treatment Area l (150' x 150') ~ PN3HECO ROAD SoilRem Facility 408 Pacheco Rd. Bakersfield, CA PLATE Plot Plan PROJECT NUMBER: 99-8942 MW-2_~, 343.18' 348.9~ MW-6 \ \ \ CLEAN SOILS FA01LITY \ \ '~ ShaIIow Well Deep Aquifer Well o,o' 2 o' 3?0' VACANT LAND VACANT LAND \ VACANTLAND \ Lj~I e~i teen Sump (~o n~ d Soil T re'~tment Area (150' x 150') SollRem Office VACANT LAND -MW-1S 333.61' k~ Approx. Scal~ _ PACHECO SOILS ENGINEERING, NC. 4700 District Blvd. Bakersfl®ld, CA 93313 IPROJECT NU, MBER: 99-a942 .... I MW-~._MW-6 ~ MW-~ ~ CLEAN SOILS~FAClLITY -'~ ~ VACANT LAND 228.81' ~ 231. 73' MW-I~W-5 ~ 229'85' ,,, VACANT LAND / I 239' VAC~T / / I It Leachate VACANT LAND Collection Sump / / ~ , -MW-IS Soil Treatment Area ~ Deep Aquifer Well / / ~ (150'x 150') Approx. S~le ~ / ~:~ffice PA~E~ ~AD SoilRem Facility 408 Pach®co Rd. Bakersfield, CA DEEP AQUIFER GF{ADIENT 10/19199 California l gional Water Qualityl ontrol Board · . Central Valley Region Steven T. Buffer, Chair Winston H. Hickox , Secretary for Fresno Branch Office Environmental www.swrcb.ca.gov/~rwqcb5 Protection 3614 East Ashlan Avenue, Fresno, California 93726 (559) 445-5 ! 16 · FAX (559) 445-5910 18 October 1999 Gray Davis Governor NOTICE OF VIOLATION Mr. John Arnold SoilRem Corporation P.O. Box 40764 South Station 524 Bakersfield, CA 93304-9998 Attached is a staff memorandum regarding' violations at your soil recycling facility at 408 East Pacheco Road in Bakersfield. The memorandum indicates that contaminated soil was discharged at the facility in violation of the Water Quality Control Plan section of your Facility Compliance Plan. Until the items listed below are submitted and approved by Board Staff, acceptance and storage of waste at your facility is a violation of the Water Quality Control Plan section of the FCP. Provision 8 of the Water Quality Control Plan states that "SoilRem shall remove to an appropriate waste management unit or other appropriately permitted facility, any wastes that are discharged at this site in violation of this section of the Facility Compliance Plan." Regional Board Special Order No. 99-059 orders compliance with the Water Quality Control Plan section of the FCP. 1. Install groundwater monitoring wells and submit a groundwater and unsaturated zone monitoring plan for review. Obtain approval of a proposed financial assurance mechanism for corrective action following a potential release, and for closure and post-closure maintenance. A copy of the proposed mechanism was submitted on 15 October 1999. 3. Submit a random load-checking program for review. 4. Complete construction of a marker layer of colored soil or other material on top of the waste pile liner to identify the top of the liner and distinguish it from the overlying contaminated soil. You are not permitted to accept any waste or contaminated soil until all requirements in the Water Quality Control Plan section of the Facility Compliance Plan have been complied with and approved. Provision 8 of the Water Quality Control Plan requires you to immediately remove all waste or contaminated soil accepted at the facility and dispose of it at an appropriately permitted facility. California Environmental Protection Agency 0 Recycled Paper M?. John Arnold -2- 15 October 1999 By 29 October 1999, please provide this office with your plans and a time schedule to promptly attain compliance with the Water Quality Control Plan section of the FCP. Please call Doug Patteson at (559) 445-6191 if you have any questions. SHELTON R. GRA f'"k Senior Engineering Geologist (.~ WILLIAM PFISTER Supervising Engineering Geologist CEG No. 931 Ms. Chris Kinne, Ca[EPA, Sacramento Mr. Ralph Huey, City of Bakersfield, Bakersfield Mr. William O'Rullian, Kern County Environmental Health Services, Bakersfield Mr. Ray Rodriquez, San Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution Control District, Bakersfield California R egional Water Quality ontrol Board central Valley Region Steven T. Butler, Chair Winston H. Hickox Gray Davis Secretary for Fresno Branch Office Governor Environmental www.swrcb.ca.gov/-rwqcb5 Protection 3614 East Ashlan Avenue, Fresno, California 93726 (559) 445-5116 · FAX (559) 445-5910 TO: Shelton R. Gray Senior Engineering Geologist DATE: 18 October 1999 FROM: SIGNATURE: Doug Patteson Staff Engineer d SUBJECT: NOTICE OF VIOLATION, SOILREM CORPORATION, BAKERSFIELD, KERN COUNTY On 4 October 1999, William O'Rullian of Kern County Environmental Health Services notified us that he had received a complaint that SoilRem Corporation accepted liquid waste at their soil recycling facility at 408 East Pacheco Road in Bakersfield. The SoiiRem facility is regulated by a Facility Compliance Plan (FCP), under CalEPA's Permit Consolidation Zone process. The City of Bakersfield is the Zone Administrator for the Permit Consolidation Zone. The FCP is for operation of a Class II waste pile for the discharge of petroleum contaminated soil and prohibits acceptance of liquid waste. The FCP also contains provisions that require SoilRem to address various regulatory requirements before accepting any contaminated soils at the facility. On 4 October 1999, I discuSsed the complaint regarding acceptance of liquids at the facility With Terry Gray of Kern County Environmental Health Services. At that time, he informed me that SoilRem had previously accepted contaminated soil at the facility. On 5 October 1999, I inspected the SoilRem facility accompanied by Terry Gray. Also present were, Howard Wines of the City of Bakersfield and Ray Rodriquez of the San Joaquin Unified Air Pollution Control District. No liquids were found at the facility during the inspection. Two plastic tanks (each approximately 1000 gallons capacity) were observed and found to be empty. During the inspection I observed a pile of soil, and several drums of soil on the facility's waste pile unit. There was also a significant amount of concrete rubble and several piles of soil stored on SoilRem's property, outside of the facility's fence. John Arnold of SoilRem stated that the soil on the waste pile unit was petroleum contaminated' soil and that the soil outside the fence was soil from on-site excavation during construction of the Waste pile unit. A sample from the soil pile stored on the waste pile, and from one of the soil piles outside the fence line were collected and submitted for chemical analysis. The analytical results are attached and ~ndicate that the soil stored on the waste pile contains Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons consistent with petroleum contaminated soil. California Environmental Protection Agency O Reo, cled Paper S~.OILREM NOTICE OF VI~TION -2- 18 October 1999 Until the items listed below are received and approved by Board staff, acceptance and storage of waste at the SoilRem facility is a violation of the Water Quality Control Plan section of the FCP. Regional Board Special Order No. 99-059 orders compliance with the Water Quality Control Plan section of the FCP. 1. Install groundwater monitoring wells and submit a groundwater and unsaturated zone monitoring plan for review. 2. Obtain approval of a proposed financial assurance mechanism for corrective action following a potential release, and for closure and post-closure maintenance. A copy of the proposed mechanism was submitted on 15 October 1999. 3. Submit a random load-checking p.rogram for review. 4. Complete construction of a marker layerof colored soil or other material on top of the waste pile liner to identify the top of the liner and distinguish it from the overlying contaminated soil. The City of Bakersfield issued a Correction Notice requiring SoilRem to comply with all parts of the FCP that require approval before acceptance of waste. The City also issued a Correction Notice regarding the acceptance of concrete and asphalt rubble at the site. Both notices are attached. The Air Pollution Control District section of the FCP requires contaminated soil stored at the facility to be covered with either six inches of clean soil or impermeable plastic sheeting. The soil pile observed at the facility did not have any cover. Conclusion: SoilRem is in violation of their FCP by accepting/discharging waste before all requirements of the Water Quality Control Plan section of the FCP have been complied with and approved. SoilRem is also in violation of Regional Board Special Order No. 99-059, which orders compliance with the Water Quality Control Plan section of the FCP. Provision 8 of the Water Quality Control Plan states that "SoilRem shall remove to an appropriate waste management unit or other appropriately permitted facility, any wastes that are discharged at this site in violation of this section of the Facility Compliance Plan." The required groundwater detection monitoring system for SoilRem's waste pile has not been installed. Also, financial assurances and final construction requirements have not been completed. 10/07/99 13:27 ~66! 326 0576 BFD HAZ ]fAT DIv ,.' ORRECTIONeNOTICE OO2 BAKERSFIELD FIRE DEPARTMENT N-° 0293 · . You am ~e~eby reqtdmd to make th~ follow[n~ co~mcfions at the above location: Completion Date for Corrections / [~-! Inspector 326-3979 10/07/99 13:28 "~661 326 0576 BFI) HAZ MAT DI¥ ORRECTION IJklOTICE ~0o4 BAKERSFIELD FIRE DEPARTMENT N° 0'232 Sub Div. _ . Blk. , . Lot You are hereby required to make' the following corrections at the above location: Completion Date for Corrections~ 326-3979 0C~-15-1999 88:48 FROM:TWINING LASS, INC. 559 L:~ 974& T0:5'59 445 5910 P.B~Ex011 WINIJ L~A_B O R A 1'C) R I E $, IN A,'r, lAt~AI. CHEAIISTRY - (NYtAONtI~NI'AL GEo'rECHkllCAL ENQIHEERING 'lAMS)LING $ERVICKS CON~TAU(~TION INSPECTION & MATE~IAI,~ TESTIN0 PROJECT COVER SHEET REPORT DATE · October 13, 1999 LABORATORY ID': 699-5946.1-2 INVOICE # 69905946 AMENDED REPORT: OCTOBER 15, 1999 ATTENTION CLIENT : BETTY YEE RWQCB 3614 E. ASHLAN AVE. FRESNO CA 93726 The Twining Laboratories is accredited by the State of California Department of Health Services for the analysis of Drinking Water, Wastewater and Hazardous Waste under Certificate No. 1371. In accordance with your instructions, the samples submitted were analyzed for the components specified. The analytical results are enclosed on the following pages. Please contact us if you have any questions concerning the analyses or results. Thank you for letting us serve you. rs FAX: BETTY YEE FAX#: 445-5910 Robert I~. Cortez0 Laborat6ry Director CORPORATE OFFICE 2527 Freano ~ Ff~'to. CA ~!.1~4 (5..~ 26&1021 · Fax 2~.7~26 MODES10 4230 ~ Ava.. #10S GIC~] S4S.IO~Q · Fax S4,,~1147 BAKERSFIELD 3101 Pega~ua {~r4, 112¢ ~)l) 393._.'-':~_ · Fax 393.484,1 SAUNAS S20 IA C(a,ty I4C)~G ~ (6:)1) 44~4~.04 · Fu 0CT,-15-1999 E}8:4~ FROH:TNINING LRBS, INC. 559 E68 87'~ T0:559 445 59i0 P.~011 REPORT DATE LABORATORY ID DATE SAMPLED DATE RECEIVED CLIENT ANALYZED BY REVlEVVED BY DATE PREPARED DATE ANALYZED CLIENT SAMPLE ID : October 13, 1999 : 699-5946.1 : 10/05/99 at 1400 by D, Patteson : 10/06199 at 1700 from Client : RWQCB : D, Radu, J. Creager : J. Perdita. F. Hoevertsz : 10/08/99 through 10/11/99 : 10/08/99 through 10111/99 THE TWINING LABORATORIES. INC. PAGE 1 of 8 SAMPLE TYPE: Solid/Soil CONSTITUENT RESULTS DLR METHOD {mg/kgl {mg/kg) Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons- Gasoline Range' 1,9 1,0 GC/FID Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons- Diesel Range °° 400 100 GC/FID Prg;nrm~n leTEX& TPH-Ga~oEr~I: 5030 .NON-TYPiCAL ~AS PATTERN TPH: Totd Pe~oleum Hydmcmbo.~ .'CHROMATOGRAPHY 16 NOT CONSISTENT WiTH THE DIESEL STANDARD. m~/~g: M~gra~l per kllo~r~ ~ 0CT-15o1999 88:48 FR~M:TWINING LAB~, INC. 559 E68 0740 T0:559 445 5910 P.804x011 REPORT DATE LABORATORY ID DATE SAMPLED DATE RECEIVED October 13, 1999 699-5946.2 : 10/05/99 at 1400 by D. Patteson : 10/06/99 at 1700 frOm Client CLIENT : RWQCB ANALYZED BY REVIEWED BY DATE PREPARED DATE ANALYZED : D. Radu, J, Creager : J. Peralte, F. Hoevertsz : 10/08/99 through 10/11/99 : 10/08/99 through 10/11/99 CLIENT SAMPLE lO : S2 THE TWINING LABORATORIES, INC. PAGE 2 of 8 SAMPLE TYPE: Solid/Soil CONSTITUENT RESULTS DLR METHOD (rog/kg) (rog/kg) Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons- Gasoline Range ND 1.0 GC/FID Total PeTroleum Hydrocarbons- Diesel Range °' 280 100 GC/FID P~.pMm:,en IBTEX & TI'H-GaK~FmoI:. 5030 TPH: TotM Peo'oleum Hydroc4,~.,,-~ '.CHROMATOGRAPHY IS NOT COI~ISTENT WITH TI~ DIESEL 6TANDARD. rog/Kg: Mi~gt'~l$ I~' kilogram 0C?-15-1999 88:49 FROM:TWINING LP/~S, INC. 559 E68 0740 T0:559 445 5910 P.0~5/011 REPORT DATE LABORATORY ID DATE SAMPLED DATE RECEIVED CLIENT ANALYZED BY REVIEWED BY DATE PREPARED DATE ANALYZED CLIENT SAMPLE ID October 13, 1999 699-5946.1 10/05/99 at 1400 by D. Pa~teson 10/06/99 at 1700 from Client RWOCB G. Barrett, E. Abalos F. Hoevertsz 10111/99 through 10/12/99 10/11/99 through 10/12/99 S1 THE TWINING LABORATORIES, INC. PAGE 3 of 8 SAMPLE TYPE: Solid/Soil CAM Metals- TOTAL Antimony ISb! Arsenic (As) Barium (Sa) Beryllium {Be) Cadmium (Cd) Chromium (Ct) Cobalt (Col Copper ICu) k~d (Pb) Mercury (Hg) MolybdenumlMo) Nickel {Nil Selenium {Se) Silver lAg) Thallium 'lTl) Vanadium (V) Zinc (Zn) RESULT (mg/kgl ND 4.3 140 0.63 ND 45 5.7 13 17 ND ND 48 ND ND ND 27 55 DLR I METHOD (rog/kg) 1.0 6010 0.8 6010 5.0 6010 0.1 6010 1,0 6010 5.0 6010 5.0 6010 $.0 6010 5.0 7420 0.1 7471 20 6010 5.0 6010 0.3 7740 1.0 6010 2.0 6010 $ 6010 5 6010 0CT-15-1999 88:49 FROM:TWINING LABS, INC. 5S9 E68 8748 T0:S59 445 S910 P.E~011 REPORT DATE LABORATORY ID DATE SAMPLED DATE RECEIVED CLIENT ANALYZED BY ~- REVIEWED BY DATE PREPARED DATE ANALYZED CLIENT SAMPLE ID : October 13, 1999 : 699-5946.2 : 10105/99 at 1400 by D. Patteson : 10/06/99 at 1700 from Client : RWQCB : G, Barrett, E. Abalos : F, Hoevertsz : 10/11/99 through 10/12/99 : 10/11/99 through 10/12/99 : S2 CAM Metals- TOTAL i RESULT (mg/kg} THE TWINING LABORATORIES, INC. PAGE 4 of 8 SAMPLE TYPE: Solid/Soil DLR ! METHOD (rog/kg) Antimony (Sb) Arsenic (As) Barium (Ba) Beryllium (Be) Cadmium lCd) Chromium (Ct) Cobalt (Co) Copper (Cu) Lead (Fo) Mercury (Hg) Molybdenum(Mo) Nickel (NJ) Selenium (Se) S~ver L6.g) Thallium ITl) Vanadium (V) Zinc (Zn) ND 1.0 6010 4.6 1.0 6010 110 5.0 6010 0.54 0.1 6010 ND 1.0 6010 11 5.0 6010 4.3 5.0 6010 13 5.0 6010 48 5.0 7420 0.100 0.1 7471 ND 20 6010 6.4 5.0 6010 ND 0.3 7740 ND 1.0 6010 NO 2.0 6010 35 5 6010 62 5 6010 THE TWINING LABORATORIES. INC. CONBTITU~ NY REPORT DATE LABORATORY ID OATE SAMPLED OATE RECEIVED ANALYZED BY REVIEWED BY CLIENT SAMPLE iD 1.1. $.2-TLrr/~c HLOP. OETffAt~ 1,1. t -TRICHI. OROETHANE 1,1.Z.2-TE T~&CNt. Od~.DETHAf~ 1,1.2-1RiCHL0~,C !THANE 1,1,OtC:Ifl. OROE1HYLE NE 1,1.OICKOR'0P~QF~N~ ! ,2.1.TRK;;HLOROa~OPAHE 1,2.4-TRICflLOIq. Q ~ NZIK NE 1,2.-[~ N~OM O-3.CHLOROPROPAllE 1,2Ol ~OMO~THA N~ I~DI~ 1,2-C)ICHLOflOETHAI~ 1,2~.ICHLOF~OPROPA N[ I, ~OICHLOROPflOi~A tlir 2,2-OICHLOflOPROPAI~ 2-HEXAI/O N~ 44VITHYL.2-~[NT&NON[ A.C~TON! &CETONIIflLIr ACROLEIN &CRYLO ALLYL BENZE fl[ B~OMOCHt. OROf. I!THAN! G ROMODICI~.OROM ~ T~.r~ I~OMOF'C.~M CAReOtl DISULFIDE CARBON TEI~,ACHLORIDE CHLORO !ENZ" N( CHLOROtORM ¢HLOROPRIrNE ¢~ 1,2.0 ICH[ CBOETHY[EN! ppb p&r~ pM I~S~ll~ C) DIh~l : October 13, 1999 : 699-5946.1 : 10/05/99 : 10/06/99 : J. Peral~:a : D. Redu :61 I ~SUrLTS IFPM NO ND ND NO NO NO NO f~ NO ND ND ND NO ND 6.0 ~..O ~.0 ~.0 S.0 S.O S.O S.O S.0 S.O 6.0 6.0 SoO ~.O S.O S.O S.0 S.0 S.0 S.0 CLIENT: RWQCB PAGE 5 of 8., EPA 8260 DATE ANALYZED: 10/07/99 -SAMPLE TYPE: Solid/Soil c.P to3-DICHLOROPROPENE ~ LO ~Of~C~tA~l~ ~ S.0 DIC~O~ ~~AM ~ H~C~OK~JTA~t~ ~ 6.0 ~ORO~NZEflE ~ ~HAC~Of;~R~E ~ ~ CKOR~ ~ S.O MtT~ ~( ~OM ~ ~ t .O fl~A~NE ~ ! .0 o-DICHLO~DBEHZEN~ ~ ~.o ~-DICHLOA:BE~ZE~ ~ ~.0 PRC PIONI~LE ~ S.0 T~UENE ~ S.0 UI~4' 1,2-DiC~O~OET~EM ~ S.0 . [~ ' 1,3 ~ lC ~ORO~O~ ~ ~ ' I. 0 ~RI~OAOET~E I~ ~ S. 0 TRICHLORO FLU~QM ETHAflE ~ S.O VKhX A.~TA~ r~ S.O VK-~L C ~ORIDE ~ ~LEfl[ h~ S.O : October 13, 1999 CLIENT: RWQCB LABORATORY ID : 699-5946.2 DATE SAMPLED 10105/99 EPA 8260 OATE RECEIVED :. 10/06/99 L A B O R ~' T 0 'R I E S ' I"N ~-~ ANALYZED BY J. Peralta DATE ANALYZED: 10/07/99 ' .... RWIEWED BY : D. Radu CLIENT SAMPLE ID : S2 SAMPLE ~PE: Solid~l I. 1. I ~-Tl~O~ f~ S .0 0 ~8~&~ ~O~ T ~ ~ S .0 ~ S.0 D 1.1.2,2.Te~OR~AM ~ S.0 E ~YL KNZE ~ lid · .0 HE XAC~ORC IlO S.O KI~TK~CR~ONffK~ S.O METHYL C~O~ I.~,-~.1 ~-3~0~ ~ S.O 1.2-~O.V-CETflAt~ · C ~ ~ S.O M~T~L ~ S.O klET~L ~ S.O hIETflYLf NE I~ ~.O METflYLEN~ C~O~ ~ 1.0 I~PH[~ L[ NE 2-fl{ ~NO tie ~ t .0 e~ ~ EORO Bi IIZ[~ ~ t.O &M E1~-~PE IITANO~ (M~ ~ S.O ~ S.O ~-D[C~OflOS~NZE ACE TO~ ~ S.O ~ ~ .0 T~ T~C~C ET~E~ ~ S.O AC~IRIL~ NO t.0 TOL~NE A~ C~OR~E ~ I.O KI~L~ ~ 1.0 ~ S .Q .am-I .3.DIC~OK~OP[IdE 5.0 ~O~.OD ~ t~ S .0 ~IC~O~OET~ HO S .0 ~iC~OK~RO~ (TflANe C~BON O~UL~E lid S .0 VINYL ACE C~BON ~1flAC~O~E ~.Q ND 6.0 V'I~L C~O~IDE fid C~OROBEf~E~ e~ ~.0 flO S.O ~[NE CHL~ROE T~NE fid 5.0 CHLO~O~ HD 6.0 C~DROPRE fie ND S.O cie. 1. ~OlCHLOROET~ THE REPORT DATE DATE SAMPLEO DATE RECEIVEO L A B O R A T 0 R I E S'. ' '('"N ~ DATE PREPARED ANALYZED BY CLIENT SAMPLE ID : S1 CONStitUENT RESULT CONSTITUENT Aoenaphthene ND 330 1.4.Diohlorobenzene Aoe~aphthyfarm ND 330 1,2-Diehlorobenzene A~lllne ND 330 3.3'-Oiclgomb. nzldine Antl~aeane ND 330 2.4-Dichlorophenol Oenzldi~e ND 330 2,6.Diolderophenol Beflzolo Aold ND 330 Dieth14phthelela Ben[o (a) anthracene ND 330 Dimetht4phthalate Be~ze (a) pyrene ND 330 2,4-Dtmethyfpherml Benzo (bi Iluora~thene ND 330 2,4.04nitrophenol Benzo (g,h,~ perylene ND 330 2,4-Oirdtrotolue~e Bento (k) Ifuo~aMhene ND 330 2,~-Oinlteotol~ene Benzyl Aleohol ND 330 1,2.01phenylhydfazlne(Azobenzene) B;~ (2-chloreethoxy) methane ND 330 Di-~oetyfphthslete Bie (2-chloroethyI) ethel ND 330 F~uomnthene Bi~ (2-chloral$opfop¥1) ethel ND 330 FJuorene Bis (2-ethvIhexy0 phthaf&te ND 330 HexechlOrobenzene 4-emmophenVl phony1 ether ND 330 Hoxechlorobutadiene Butyl benzyI phlhalate NO 330 Hexechlomc¥olopentadiene 4-CMofolnil~e - ND 330 Hexachloroethane 2-Clgom~aphthalene ND 330 Indenoll.2,3-~d)Pwene 4-C hie fo-3-methylphenol ND 330 I;ophomne 2-Chiomphenol NO 330 ' 2-Met hyl-4,e-dinit;oph · no! 4-Chlompherwl phenyl ether NO 330 2-1VJethyfnaphthatene Ch~yeene NO 330 2-Methyfphenol (o-cresol) Olbengo (a,h) A~th~acene ND 330 4-Mothyfphenol (p-cresol) Oibanzolufan ND 330 Nephlhelene OI.n-butylpht h al'qe ND -330 2- Nltroardli~e 1.3-Dichlo;obenzepe ,~. ,~ ~tD , :~30 3-~itroa~illne ug/kg: rnto;og;&ma per kltog~am DLR: Deteotlon Limit ~o! Rel~orttng ND: None Oeteeled Rev. 2 09/96 (8270) : October 13, 1999 : 699-5946.1 : 10/05/99 at 1400 by D. Patteson :.10/06/99 at 1640 from Client : 10108/99 : J. Peralta RESULT CONSTITUENT ND 330 4-Nit mm'diane ND 330 Nitrobenzene ND 330 2-Nitfopl~nol ND 330 4-Nitfopbenol ND 330 H-Nitfos~thyl~ ND 330 N-Nitroa~iphen~a~ne NO 330 N-Nitro ~odt-n-~yl~ ND 330 Pen~o~o~ophen~ ND 330 NO 330 Phenol ~O 330 ~e~ HO 330 1,2,~Tirohl~obenzene ND 330 2.4,5-Tdoh~ophe~ HO 330 2,4,6-Trlchlo~opho~, ND 330 Alden ND 330 ~eHC ' ND 330 b-SHC ND 330 ~BNC ND 330 NO 330 DDD ND 330 D~ ND 33O DDT ND 330 ~elddn ND 330 E~oaulfan I ND 330 E~oeullan ND 330 E~osulfan Sulfate ND 330 E~rin ND 330 E~rin Aldehyde ~,pt~o~or~Doxide CLIENT: RWQCB PAGE7ol8., METHOD: EPA 8270 UNITS: ug/kg DATE ANALYZED: 10/12/99 REVIEWED BY: F. Hoevertsz SAMPLE TYPE: Solid/Soil RESULT DLR ND 330 NO 330 ND 330 ND 330 ND 330 ND 330 ND 330 NO 330 NO 330 ND 330 ND 330 NO 330 ND 330 NO 330 ND 330 ND 33O ND 33O ND 330 ND 330 ND 330 ND 330 ND 330 ND 330 ND 330 ND 330 NO 330 ~ 330 ND 330 ND 330 330 THE REPORT DATE : October 13, 1999 DATE SAMPLED : 10/05199 at 1400 by D. Patteson DATE RECEIVED : 10/06199 at 1640 Irom Client I. A s o R A T 0 R I E S i'N C~ DATE PREPARED : 10/08/99 · ANALYZED BY : J. Peralta CLIENT SAMPLE ID : S4 CONSTI~ENT RESULT CON~T~ENT RESULT CONST~UENT Acenephlhene ND 330 1, ~D~Norobenzene ND 330 Acenaphthylene ND 330 1.2-D~Norob~zene ND 330 Nltr~enzene A~a~ ND 330 ~.3'-~oM~enz~e ND 330 2-Nittop~l Ant~aoene HO 330 2,4.~Norop~ ND 330 ~Hit~ophe~ 8enzMi~ ND 330 2,6-D~Norop~l ND 330 N-~tros~i~t~a~e. Benzolo Ac~ ND 330 Oleth~phthdele ND 330 Benzo (al ant~e~ ND 330 Olmeth~hth~te ND 330 N.Nitm~l-~op~amlne Beflzo let pylon. ND 330 2.4.~th~phenol ND 330 Pe~tac~arop~l Benzo (b) Ilu~anthe~ ND 330 2.4.~tmphenol ND 330 Phen.nthre~ Banzo Ig.h.i) ~e~ ND 330 2,4-~tmtotuena ND 330 Phenol B~zo (k) Iluera~the~e ND 330 2,6.~trotelu~ne ND 330 ~nzyI ~oo~ ND 330 t.2-~p~lh~ra zl~e(Az~enze~) ND 330 1.2.4-~chlor~zen= ~ t2-cMometho~t ~t~ne ND 330 Di.~eet~phthalate ND 330 2.4.S-T~cMo~henol ~a ~Z.a~lomethyl) el~r ND 330 Fluor~thene ND 330 2.4.6-T~aMo~henol ~ ~Z-=hlo~op~Y)) ether ND 330 Fluomne ND 330 Alden ~. (Z-ethylhex~} ~th~ete ND 330 Hex~o~anzene ND 330 ~BHC 4-Br~phen~ phanyl athe~ ND 330 Hexac~o~ut~iene ND 330 ~SHC Butyl benzyl phthalate ND 330 Hex~No~yol~penta~ene ND 330 d-BHC 4-Chl~osNgne ND 330 Hex~No~thane ND 330 ~DHC(Ll~an.) 2-Chi~onaphthle~ ND 330 I~eno(1.2.3-~Pyte~ ND 330 ODD 4.Ch~or~3-~t~lp~nol ND 330 Is~one ND 330 DDE 2-CN~ophe~ ND 330 2.Meth~-4.6~trephe~ ND 330 DDT 4-Chlorophenyl phen~ ethel ND 330 2-~th~phtha~e~ ND 330 Oield;in C~.ne ND 330 2-Meth~n~ ~o.ar.ol) ND 330 Endosul/~n I Oibenzo (..hl Anthraoene ND 330 4-Meth~p~n~ Ip-or.ol) ND 330 Endosullan Dibenzofuran ND 330 Naphlhalene ND 330 Dl-~butylpht~late . NO 330 2-~it;aaniline ND 330 Endnn 1.3.DIc~oroben;~ne , ,. NO' , 330 ~Hitroa~llne, , , .,,, ,,, , ,ND 330 End~n Ndehyde ug/kg: ~arogmm= per ~iogr~ DLR: Deteotlon U~t for Rep~i~g ND: No~ Detected Rev. 2 O9196 18270) CLIENT :RWQCB PAGE 8 of 8 METHOD: EPA 8270" UNITS: ug/kg DATE ANALYZED: 10/12/99 REVIEWED BY: F. Hoevertsz SAMPLE TYPE: Solid/Soil RESULT DLR ND 330 NO 330 ND 330 NO 330 ND 330 ND 330 ND 330 ND 330 ND 330 ND 33{) ND 330 ND 330 ND 330 ND 330 ND 330 ND 330 ND 330 ND 330 ~ 330 ND 330 ND 330 ND 330 ND 330 I~) 330 ND 330 NO 330 ND 330 ND 330 IlHep{ach]o! ND 330 ~le~tachlo~ e;)oxide , . ND . ,, 330 0CT-15~-1999 BS:SB FROM:TWINING LASS, INC. 559 E68 0740 T0:559 445 S91B P.011~011 SEMIVOLATILE ORGANICS METHOD- 8270 LABORATORY CONTROL SAMPLE QUALITY CONTROL REPORT Analyzed by: J. Peralta Reviewed by: D. Radu Twininq Laboratories, Inc. Examination Number: .6.9,9059_4_6,1.-2 Constituent Method LCS LCS LCS LCS LCS Range Blank Expected Result Duplicate % R Duplicate Result Conc. (ug/L) Result % R (ug/L) (ug/L) _ (ug/L) Phenol < 10 200 138 134 69 67 5-112 2-.Chlorop, henol < 10 200 140 127 70 64 23-134 1,4-Dichlorobenzene < 10 100 69 61 69 61 20-124 n-N'~osodi-n-propylamine,, ~. <.10 ....... 100 104 102 104 102 ,.10-230 .1,2.4-THchlorobenzene < 10 100 __ 67 .... ,61, 67 61 44-142 4-Chloro-3-methylphenol < 10 ,, · 20~0 .... ! 68 174 84 87 22-1.47. Ace napthene_ .... < 10 100 83 84 83 84 47-145 4-Nitrophenol < 10 200 75 78 38 ,, 39 10-132 2,4-Dinitrotoluene .... < 10 100 69 71 ..... 69 71 39-138 Pentachlprophenol < 10 - j. 20p ...... 54 63 27 32 177.1~ ?_6 Pyrene ...... . < 10 100 80 86 ...80 86 52-115 EXPLANATIONS: ug/L: micrograms per liter (parts per billion) ND : none detected % R: percent recovery Method Blank: The me[hod blank is used to determine if method analytes or other interterences are present in the laboratory environment, the reagents or apparatus. Laboratory Control Sample: A laboratory control sample (LCS) is generated by spiking the analyte into a relatively inert matrix Iclean sand or blank water). The laboratory control sample is analyzed exactly like a sample, and its purpose is to determine whether the methodology is in control and whether the laboratory is capable of making accurate and precise measurements. $oilRem CorporI P.O. Box 40764"S~ Bakersfield, Ca. 93304.9998 September 25, 1999 Mr. I-Iow~d Wines Bakersfield Fire Dept. Office of Environmental Services 1715 Chester Ave. Bakersfield, Ca. 93301 Mr. Wines, We have requested a modification to our current Facih~ Compliance Plan (FCP) which would permit us to accept Hydrocarbon Contaminated Water (Rinsate) at our facility. To assist in that process, the following details are submitte~. Rinsate products will be generated primarily from tank ;ashout and removal activities, other vessels which store or process PetroleuTM products such as gas, diesel, and oil. We plan to utilize two dos to ly tanks for rinsate St rage One tank has a 3500- gallon capacity; the other holds 3000 gallons. Both tan~s~~ have pressure relief valve systems (Sentinel UFG Co.16oz pressure model S 22). ~The tanks will be located inside our approved WMU as indicated on the attached drawing. A 250-gallon open top- receiving tank will also be utilized. When product is delivered, it is off-loaded into the 250 ~allon receiving tank. This permits a brief period for solids to settle out before the liquid is pumped into the Storage tanks. The receiving tank (8x10x3) sits on a shght anglle allo.wlng~h~e s.o!lds to sea, e, at the "low end". The liquid is pumped out at the" high e ~nd" wa a 3 fill l~,,ne and a centrifugal pump. The product enters the storage tank from the top. A 3 line interconnects the two storage tanks where another pum~ and feed line is utilized to move the rinsate from storage to the closed loop processing p[~nt. Flow rates from the receiving the outlet tank is 600 GPM maximum. While in the storage tanks, an enzyme product is introduced into the rinsate to expedite hydrocarbon consumption. This process is further enhahced by utilizing aerators located at the base of both storage tanks. 1-661-397-9641 office # 1.661-397-4508 fax # ' SoilRem@aol.com We propose a rinsate contaminant acceptance level be established at no more than 1.0% (10,000 PPM). Estimated daily maximum volume accepted on site is 6,500 gallons. Please advise Mr. Jones of this office if additional information is desired. Yours Truly, President SOILS ENGINEERING, INC. June 22, 1999 File Number 99-8942 Mr. Howard Wines City of Bakersfield Fire Dept. Office of Environmental Services 1715 Chester Avenue Bakersfield, CA 93301 Subject: Liner Installation Report SoilRem Facility 408 Pacheco Rd. Bakersfield, California Mr. Wines: Soils Engineering, Inc. (SEI) has prepared this submittal for SoilRem describing the work conducted to install a liner and leak detection sump beneath the contaminated soil treatment area at the subject site (see Plate 1 for Location Map). The liner system was installed in accordance with the California Code of Regulations (CCR) Title 27 requirements. Installation of Liner On June 2, 1999 SEI examined the excavation bottom of the contaminated soil treatment area (150' by 150') for slope, depth, and stability. It appeared to meet the specifications of the plans for the installation of the liner. The base of the excavation was predominately clayey silt with some sand and appeared to be well compacted and smooth. The slope of the bottom was to the northeast at approximately 2% toward the leak detection sump. Anchor trenches were dug around the perimeter to stabilize the liner after installation. See Plate 2 for Plot Plan. On June 5, 1999 SEI observed the installation of the 40 ml HDPE liner by Alpine Lining Limited. The lining was overlapped a minimum of 6" across seams and welded together with either extrusion welds (leak detection sump area) or fusion welds (flat surfaces). Three samples of the fusion welds (bones) were tested for strength while SEI was present and 5 additional bones were tested during the installation process. All of the weld strength tests passed and are included on the attached Destructive Test Log. Pressure tests were also performed by Alpine Lining on the welded seams at 8 locations with all of them passing. See attached Non-Destructive Testing Form for these air-pressure test results. The leak detection sump was installed according to plans: with a bottom (secondary) 40 ml HDPE liner and a 2"-diameter HDPE pipe (secondary monitoring well) extending 4700 DISTRICT BLVD. ' BAKERSFIELD, CALIFORNIA93313 " PHONE (805) 831-5100 ° FAX: (805) 831-2111 SOILS ENGINEERING, INC. Liner Installation Report File No. 99-8942 SoilRem Facility June 22, 1999 408 Pacheco Rd. Bakersfield, CA. Page 2 from the top of the secondary finer to the surface covered with 1' of gravel. The primary 40 ml HDPE finer was placed over the gravel with a primary monitoring well (2"- diameter HDPE pipe) placed on top of the liner and extending to the surface, both covered with 2' of gravel. The primary liner was covered by a 197 ml drainage net and then 6 ounce filter fabric over the entire treatment area in accordance with the plans. See Plates 3 & 4 for finer details. Backfilling & Compaction Testing Native soil was used as backfill material to anchor the liner in-place and to provide a compacted working surface over the liner. On June 9 and June 11, 1999 SEI took compaction tests on the top 1-foot of compacted native soil within the contaminated soil treatment area. All compaction tests passed the recommended 85% minimum relative density for the native soil utilized. See attached compaction test results. At the time of this report the contaminated soil treatment area was not asphalted as indicated on the plans. Certification This report has been prepared by a licensed Civil Engineer familiar with the requkements of the California Code of Regulations Title 27 and that the construction is in compliance with these requirements & the design plans and specifications provided to SEI by SoilRem. If you have any questions concerning this letter please contact SEI at (805) 831-5100. Sincerely, , Robert J. Becker, R.G. 5076 Environmental Division Managcl~ ~ ~_ ~x,:~,~ ~~~?,~_ Enclosure: Plate 1, Location Map Plate 2, Plot Plan Plate 3, Grading & Lining Plan Plate 4, Grating & Lining Plan - Detail AlpNe Lining Testing Form Results SEI Compaction Test Results EAST WHI~ ' LANE GI~APHIC S~ "TENTATIVE_" BEING ADIV~SIOH OF' LOT 20 OF' THE KERN COUNTY SALES UAP NO. i OF LANDS O~ J. B. HAGGIN DATED MARCH 16, 1889. F'ILED IN 'I~IE OFF~CE OF' 'DiE KERN COUNTY SURVEYOR. IN SEC~ION 17, T..~0 S.. R. 28 E., M.D.M. IN THE CITY OF BAKER~F'IELD. CC)UN'Df OF KERN, STATE OF' CALIFORNIA. 27.68 ACRES 2 PARCELS L'EGEND: " ~' JCle ·SOil " ": PM. 444~ ~ -~, AC,.k,, HT '4 I P I q' ~: ~:~ ,,~-,o, Location Map · ~T?~. (dB. ~ (IQ'i) l~14tl~ STAIiSTICCJ BASIS OF' BEARING: SHEET 1 OF I SHEET '~SOILS ENGINEERING, INC CLEAN SOILS FACILITY VACANT LAND VACANT LAND Leachate VACANT LAND Collection Sump VACANT ~100'..~ LAND ueep J I Shallow Well i ~ Treatment Area ICells 40~0, ~) ~o,o' 200' :: ~ (4so' x ~so') ~ Approx. Scale i Office PACHECO ROAD SOILS ENGINEERING, INC. 4700 District Blvd. Bakersfield, CA 93313 PROJECT NUMBER: 99-8942 SoilRem Facility 408 Pacheco Rd. Bakersfield, CA Plot Plan PLATE 630' I00' -- FO. %. = TOP OF --~O.~,. = TOP --/dbP~ PA~JE L L~¥OUr PLATE 3 TREATMENT AREAS p-~. p..,~ (~..o, x,.,'x e#) 'PLATE 4 LINER DETAIL IPROPO~£D GRAD~IV& +LI/UIA/G PI..AN$ l,~-., ~Ts I"'"~": I~'~ r'., I I'~-~:-. SOILS ENGINEERING, INC. Soil Rem Contaminated Soil at 408 Pacheco Road File No. 99-8942 June 22, 1999 TABLE 1 IN-PLACE DENSITY - RELATIVE COMPACTION ASTM TEST METHOD D2922 Test Date No. 1999 1 6/9 2 6/9 3 6/9 4 6/11 5 6/11 Location Moisture Depth Below Content Fin Suberade % of dry wt. Contaminated Soil 50'No., 30~. Of SW crnr 120'No., 40'E. Of SW cmr 75'No., 80'E. Of SW crnr 35'No., 120'E. OfSW crnr 125~No., 130'E. OfSW cmr In-Place MaXimum Density Density lbs/cu.ft. Ibs/cu.ft. 0.0'-1.0° 8.7% 108.3 120.3 0.0'-1.0' 8.0% 104.0 120.3 0.0°-1.0' 12.2% 108.8 120.3 0.0'-1.0' 11.6% 102.4 120.3 0.0'-1.0' 6.8% 112.0 120.3 Relative Specified Retested Compaction Compaction By Test 9O% 85% 86% 85% 91% 85% 85% 85% 93% 85% SOILS ENGINEERING, INC. Soil Rem Contaminated Soil at 408 Pacheco Road File No. 99-8942 TABLE 2 MAXIMUM DENSITY - RELATIVE COMPACTION ASTM D1556-78 (Method A) SANDY CLAY: fine to medium; high Stockpile Random 12.3% 120.3 plastic; light yellowish brown. S ENGINEERING, INC. EN-PLACE DENSITY- RELATIVE COMPACTION ASTM TEST METHOD D2922 Project: ~'0 :L ~ ~ File No.:_ ~7~ ~/Z Location: 40~ ~ c/~ < a ~ ~f Date: ~ ~////~'~ Depth Moisture In-Place Test Maximum Relative Req. No. Location Below Content, Density,Density Comp. Comp. % lbs/cu.ft. ~ r~,<.,~- o- ~ //, ,~ /o2 ,-t /?o .z ,~,_---~.> ~3'-, Remarks: SOILS ENGINEERING, INC. IN-PLACE DENSITY - RELATIVE COMPACTION ASTM TEST METHOD D2922 Project: _~ ~ ,~ ~ ~ File No.: ~ ~ Location: qOg~c~t'n~. Date: ~?,~'/~ ~' By: Test Depth Moisture In-Place Maximum Relative Req. No. Location Below Content, Density, % lbs/cu.ft. Density Comp. Comp. ! ? Remarks: PROdECT NAME: ".O. BOX 12007-234- BAKERSFIELD. CA 93389-201:)7. (661} 587-7150- FAX (661)587.5337 TRIAL WELD INFORMATION P~"- / - °' PROJECT NUMBER: ~ MATERIAL DESCR[PTtON:_ F. XTAUSION WELDS FUS,IOht WELDS I[AI~.L I;)~::IJEHEAT WEOGE PF__EL VAU. IE$ TEMP TEMP TELtp P'~O t. OS'I INCH SP..AMER MACHINE I~VI'IALS NUI~R COUME " I ALPINE LINING LIMITEB RO. BOXI200]-234 BAKERSHELO, CA 93389 PROJECT NAME: DATE/ ,SEAM TESTER TI'ME NO. INITIAL NON-DESTRUCTIVE TESTING AIR TESTING ~ PRESSURE TIME ~/BOX START ENO ENO P/F PIF FORM . PAGE _ / OF ,, /' MATERIAL D[SCRIPTION: ~ LO CATiON I COMMENTS ALPINE LINING Lt~ITED P&I. BOX I2001-234 BAKERSFIELD, CA 93389 'PAGE / OF PANEL PLACEMENT FORM PROJECT NAME: .~,.~,~'_~A~..,,,~.PROJECT NUMBER: '"'~"~' MATERIAL DESCRIPTION: DATE/ PANEL ROLL .PANEL PANEL ' COMMENT~r · n~,: ,UU~ER ,uu,~r~ team ..... PANL:_L LOO6TI.ON ..... ~-~'". / _ ~ ~,~'2~ / 72 ' .,~ ~ - ,. ~ - - ....................... ,, g.'.z,~' ) /2 _..,,: ,- · - : . . . ~-,H. ~- ?7,~xw /?.2.' ~'-.s-~ 3 ~'~'Z~;d' /P,~ ,23 ---- -- .----'. ''='" "-- -- -- .='-- ~ - .~ 318'~ 4~ / ?A .z 3 .............. --,- -- ,~' - 3'C_ 0-' ~. ~.~d~ o'-c9 ' ..~ 3 - -- -- -- -' --'-. .... /~. '~ ~ ' /Z '." ~9 , ' ........ ~ - ~ ? / ?~ 'x 3 ----"'-) ....... .--'.--')'--: ................... ~ / ,i ~' -~ ~ /?x /_~ ....................... ........ : -- . P.O. BOX 121~7-234 · BAKERSFIELD, CA 93389-2007 · (661) 587-7150 · FAX (661) 587-5337 DESTRUCTIVE TEST LOG JECT NAME: PROJEI~TNUMBER: '~. MATERIAL DESCRIPTION: ~'",~- -~' srd~u * d~ sf, u~N " ' ~,xs$ i " oxTE~ro LX8 ~o ;~s ~ 'E ~UPLE' I.D. ~o~ · .~o. m[~s PEEL VALU;~ ~SS. / i~CH ~x~[ ~KO. SU~ ~0. ;~C LO~TIO~ / COMMENT ~-I~ ~ ~ ._ ~ r~~ ~, ,.~ "I ~ ~'~ .~~ -~ ~r~'~ ~!i ,. ,, I ~ .... I ...... ..... '[' [ I ~ .... i" ~ -', I i' [ ~l I , I .... :[.. - -- ' i -I. '- . .......... ~, .... l' .. " 1 I '1 I I I I ' - . , ~ I I ! .. e 630' COLLECTIOI~I Id)O' -- T. O. %. = TOP OF Gl-AB --7=0.~5. = 'FOP OF GERI~ --HDP~ PAI~EL L~¥our ~ PLATE.3 _TREATMENT_ AFl PROPO5£D GR^B/N6 + Lltvtt.]G PLAN5 ,i) p 3' ICl 7 T z],OlVilL HDPE. PAIdEL LAYDUT FOR ,IvtlXlNg CF, J-L I~I"S - ~_.oNCR. P-'T'F- DU~PfNG SLAB PRI~qARy LIAIL~ SEr.-OUOAR¥ L 'PLATE 4 LINER DETAIL pROPOS£D GR^D//V& '+LINING ~T,: ~-3o- Winston H. Hickox Secretary for Environmental Protection California Regional Water Quality Control Board Central Valley Region Steven T. Butler, Chair Fresno Branch Office www.swrcb.ca.gov/-p.vqcb5 3614 East Ashlan Avenue, Fresno, California 93726 (559) 445-5116 · FAX (559) 445-5910 18 October 1999 Gray Davis Governor NOTICE OF VIOLATION Mr. John Arnold SoilRem Corporation P.O. Box 40764 South Station 524 Bakersfield, CA 93304-9998 Attached is a staff memorandum regarding violations at your soil recycling facility at 408 East Pacheco Road in Bakersfield. The memorandum indicates that contaminated soil was discharged at the facility in violation of the Water Quality Control Plan section of your Facility Compliance Plan. Until the items listed below are submitted and approved by Board Staff, acceptance and storage of waste at your facility is a violation of the Water Quality Control Plan section of the FCP. Provision 8 of the Water Quality Control Plan states that "SoilRem shah remove to an appropriate waste management unit or other appropriately permitted facility, any wastes that are discharged at this site in violation of this "section of the Facility Compliance Plan." Regional Board Special Order No. 99-059 orders compliance with the Water Quality Control Plan section of the FCP. 1. Install groundwater monitoring wells and submit a groundwater and unsaturated zone monitoring plan for review. Obtain approval of a proposed financial assurance mechanism for corrective action following a potential release, and for closure and post-closure maintenance. A copy of the proposed mechanism was submitted on 15 October 1999. 3. Submit a random load-checking program for review. 4. Complete construction of a marker layer of colored soil or other material on top of the waste pile liner to identify the top of the liner and distinguish it from the overlying contaminated soil. You are not permitted to accept any waste or contaminated soil until all requirements in the Water Quality Control Plan section of the Facility Compliance Plan have been complied with and approved. Provision 8 of the Water Quality Control Plan requires you to immediately remove all waste or contaminated soil accepted at the facility and dispose of it at an appropriately permitted facility. California Environmental Protection Agency 0 Recycled Paper Mr. John Arnold - 2 - 15 October 1999 By 29 October 1999, please provide this office with your plans and a time schedule to promptly attain compliance with the Water Quality Control Plan section of the FCP. Please call Doug Patteson at (559) 445-6191 if you have any questions. Senior Engineering Geologist WILLIAM PFISTER Supervising Engineering Geologist CEG No. 931 CC.' Ms. Chris Kinne, CalEPA, Sacramento Mr. Ralph Huey, City of Bakersfield, Bakersfield Mr. William O'Rullian, Kern County Environmental Health Services, Bakersfield Mr. Ray Rodriquez, San Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution Control District, Bakersfield Winston H. Hickox Secretary for Environmental Protection California egional Water Quality ontrol Board Central Valley Region Steven T. Butler, Chair Gray Davis Fresno Branch Office www.swrcb.ca.gov/-rwqcb5 3614 East Ashlan Avenue, Fresno, California 93726 (559) 445-5116 · FAX (559) 445-5910 TO: Shelton R. Gray FROM: Senior Engineering Geologist DATE: 18 October 1999 SIGNATURE: Doug Patteson Staff Engineer SUBJECT: NOTICE OF VIOLATION, SOILREM CORPORATION, BAKERSFIELD, KERN COUNTY On 4 October 1999, William O'Rullian of Kern County Environmental Health Services notified us that he had received a complaint that SoilRem Corporation accepted liquid waste at their soil recycling facility at 408 East Pacheco Road in Bakersfield. The SoilRem facility is regulated by a Facility Compliance Plan (FCP), under CaIEPA's Permit Consolidation Zone process. The City of Bakersfield is the Zone Administrator for the Permit Consolidation Zone. The FCP is for operation of a Class II waste pile for the discharge of petroleum contaminated soil and prohibits acceptance of liquid waste. The FCP also contains provisions that require SoilRem to address various regulatory requirements before accepting any contaminated soils at the facility. On 4 October 1999, I discussed the complaint regarding acceptance of liquids at the facility with Terry Gray of Kern County Environmental Health Services. At that time, he informed me that SoilRem had previously accepted contaminated soil at the facility. On 5 October 1999, I inspected the SoilRem facility accompanied by Terry Gray. Also present were, Howard W'mes of the City of Bakersfield and Ray Rodriquez of the San Joaquin Unified Air Pollution Control District. No liquids were found at the facility during the inspection. Two plastic tanks (each approximately 1000 gallons capacity) were observed and found to be empty. .During the inspection I observed a pile of soil, and several drums of soil on the facility's waste pile unit. There was also a significant amount of concrete rubble and several piles of soil stored on SoilRem's property, outside of the facility's fence. John Arnold of SoilRem stated that the soil on the waste pile unit was petroleum contaminated soil and that the soil outside the fence was soil from on-site excavation during construction of the waste pile unit. A sample from the soil pile stored on the waste pile, and from one of the soil piles outside the fence line were collected and submitted for chemical analysis. The analytical results are attached and indicate that the soil stored on the waste pile contains Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons consistent with petroleum contaminated soil. California Environmental Protection Agency ~ Recycled Paper SOILREM NOTICE OF V~ATION - 2 - 1 $ October 1999 Until the items listed below are received and approved by Board staff, acceptance and storage of waste at the SoilRem facility is a violation of the Water Quality Control Plan section of the FCP. Regional Board Special Order No. 99-059 orders compliance with the Water Quality Control Plan section of the FCP. 1. Install groundwater monitoring wells and submit a groundwater and unsaturated zone monitoring plan for review. Obtain approval of a proposed financial assurance mechanism for corrective action following a potential release, and for closure and post-closure maintenance. A copy of the proposed mechanism was submitted on 15 October 1999. 3. Submit a random load-checking program for review. 4. Complete construction of a marker layer of colored soil or other material on top of the waste pile liner to identify the top of the liner and distinguish it from the overlying contaminated soil. The City of Bakersfield issued a Correction Notice requiring SoiIRem to comply with all parts of the FCP that require approval before acceptance of waste. The City also issued a Correction Notice regarding the acceptance of concrete and asphalt rubble at the site. Both notices are attached. The Air Pollution Control District section of the FCP requires contaminated soil stored at the facility to be covered with either six inches of clean soil or impermeable plastic sheeting. The soil pile observed at the facility did not have any cover. Conclusion: SoilRem is in violation of their FCP by accepting/discharging waste before all requirements of the Water Quality Control Plan section of the FCP have been complied with and approved. SoilRem is also in violation of Regional Board Special Order No. 99-059, which orders compliance with the Water Quality Control Plan section of the FCP. Provision 8 of the Water Quality Control Plan states that "SoilRem shall remove to an appropriate waste management unit or other appropriately permitted facility, any wastes that are discharged at this site in violation of this section of the Facility Compliance Plan." The required groundwater detection monitoring system for SoilRem's waste pile has not been installed. Also, financial assurances and final construction requirements have not been completed. lO/07/gg oo 326 0576 BI~ HAZ'HAT eCORRECTION NOTICE o BAKERSFIELD FIRE DEPARTMENT N-° 0293 '..-.., ..%:.::? Sub Div. . Blk. . Lot You are hereby required to make the following corrections at the above location: Completion Date for Corrections / Inspector 326-3979 lO/07/gg 13:28 9661 326 0676 BFI) HAZ MAT DIV eCORRECTIOi NOTICE ~004 BAKERSFIELD FIRE DEPARTMENT No 0'232 Sub Div- Blk. . Lot You are hereby required to make the following corrections at the above location: Completion Date for Correctiorts_~:~79~- ~ I/-/'~/,~/~ 326-3979 0CT-15-1999 88:48 FROM:TWINING LGE~, INC. 559 E68 0748 T0:559 44S 5910 P. BSE~011 WIIIING E L.&_B,QRATORIE~. ANAI.YTICAL ~4KMISTI~Y · INVIAONidENTAJ. II.qvIC$1 GEOTECHNICAL ENQINEIRING ' $AJ, I~LiNG IIIIVICIS ~ONSTRuCTION INSI)ICTI0N & MATENIAt, S TESTING PROJECT COVER SHEET REPORT DATE : October 13, 1999 LABORATORY ID ·: 699-5946.1-2 INVOICE # 69905946 AMENDED REPORT: OCTOBER 15, 1999 ATTENTION CLIENT : BETTY YEE RWQCB 3614 E. ASHLAN AVE. FRESNO CA 93726 The Twining Laboratories is accredited by the State of California Department of Health Services for the analysis of Drinking Water, Wastewater and Hazardous Waste under Certificate No. 1371. In accordance with your instructions, the samples submitted were analyzed for the components specified. The analytical results are enclosed on the following pages. Please contact us if you have any questions concerning the analyses or results. Thank you for letting us serve you. rs FAX: BETTY YEE FAX#: 445-5910 Laborat6~ Director CORPORATE OFFICE ~ 2~8-/021 · F~x MODESTO 4230 IMmM Mi.. #10S ~ S4S-IM0. FIx S4S-II47 BAKERSFIELD ~?01 PeG,uul Chive. 11~4 ~.__~0~__. Fax 3~3.4643 SAUNAS (831) 44G-S284 · Fix MI-SC~ OCT~lS-1999 88:48 ~I~OM:TWININ~ U:~, INC. T0:55'9 445 591;) REPORT DATE LABORATORY ID : October 13, 1999 : 699,5946.1 THE TWINING LA;)ORATORIES, INC. PAGE I of 8 DATE SAMPI. ED DATE RECEIVED : 10/05/99 at 1400 by O, Pattea°n : 10/06/99 at 1700 from Client CLIENT : RWQCB ANALYZED BY REVIEWED BY : D. Radu, J. Creager - : J. Peralta. F. HOevertSZ DATE PREPARED DATE ANALYZED : 10/08199 through 10/11199 : 10/08/99 through 10111/99 SAMPLE TYPE: Solid/Soil CLIENT SAMPLE ID : S1 CONSTITUENT RESULTS DLR METHOD (mg/~gl {rog/kg) Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons- Gasoline Range' 1,9 1.0 GC/FID Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons- Diesel Range ' ° 400 100 GCIFID I"rc~ration IBTEX · TPH-GiNlineI: SO30 .NON-TYPSOAL (]AS PATTENd TPH: Total Petroleum H,Id~oc:aHxms "eCH~OMATOGRAPt4Y ~ NOT GONGI&'TENT WiTH THE DEE'EL GTANOA, RD. m~/Kg: Ml~gram~ I~ idled'am ~ 0CT-15-1999 88:48 FROM:TWINING LRBS, INC. 559 L:~08 074~ T0:559 445 5918 P.884/B11 REPORT DATE LABORATORY ID DATE SAMPLED DATE RECEIVED CLIENT ANALYZED BY REVIEWED BY DATE PREPARED DATE ANALYZED October 13, 1999 699-5946.2 : 10105/99 at 1400 by D. Patteson : 10/06199 et 1700 from Client : RWQCB : D. Radu, J. Creager : J, Peralta,. F, Hoavertsz . : 10/08/99 through 10111199 : 10108199 through 10111/99 THE TWINING LABORATORIES, INC, PAGE 2 of 8 SAMPLE TYPE: Solid/Soil CLIENT SAMPLE ID : S2 CONSTITUENT RESULTS DLR METHOD (mg/kg) (rog/kg) Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons- Gasoline Range ND 1.0 GCIFID Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons- Diesel Range *' 280 100 GC/FID h.~rm~an IBTEX & 'i]'H-GasoGmY. SO~0 TPH: Total Pmmleum Hydmc~,~,~-.G *eCI4ROMATOGRAPHY I~ NOT COILS~TE/fT WITH THE DESEL STANDARD. mE/Kg: MilGgr'dm$ ~ kJ~gt'om (gl)m) 0C7o15-1999 88:49 FROM:TWINING U~BS, INC. 559 E68 8748 T0:559 445 5918 P.885~011 REPORT DATE LABORATORY ID DATE SAMPLED DATE RECEIVED CLIENT ANALYZED BY REVIEWED BY DATE PREPARED DATE ANALYZED October 13, 1999 699-5946.1 10/05/99 at 1400 by D. Pa~teson 10/06/99 et 1700 from Client fWVOCB G. Barrett, E. Abalos F, Hoevertsz 10111/99 through 10112/99 10/11/99 through 10/12199 CLIENT SAMPLE ID : S1 CAM Metals- TOTAL Antimony ISb) Arsenic (As) Barium (Ba! Ba~yllium IBa) Cadmium lCd} Chromium {Ct! Cobalt ICo) Copper (Cu) Lead {lab) Mercury (Hg) Molybdenum{Mo) Nickel (!~ Selenium (Se) S~ver lag) Thallium ITl) Vanacr~um (V) Zinc (7.n) RESULT (mg/kgl ND 4,3 140 0.53 ND 45 6.7 13 17 .ND ND 48 NO ND ND 27 55 THE TWINING LABORATORIES, INC. PAGE 3 of 8 SAMPLE TYPE: Solid/Soil DLR [ METHOD (mg/kg) , 1.0 6010 0.8 6010 5.0 6010 0.1 6010 1.0 6010 5.0 6010 5.0 6010 6.0 6010 5.0 7420 0.1 7471 20 6010 5.0 6010 0.3 7740 1.0 6010 2.0 6010 $ 6010 5 6010 0CT-15-1999 88:49 FROM:TWINING LABS, INC. 559 E68 8748 T0:559 44S 5910 P.B86~011 REPORT DATE LABORATORY ID DATE SAMPLED DATE RECEIVED O. IENT ANALYZED BY REVIEWED BY DATE PREPARED DATE ANALYZED CLIENT SAMPLE ID CAM Metals- TOTAL Antimony [Sb) Arsenic (As) Barium (Ba) Berylrmm {Be) Cadmium lCd) Chromium (Ct} Cobalt (Co) Copper (Cu) Lead Il=b) Mercu~ (Hg) Molybdenum(Mo) N'~kel (Ni) Selenium (Se) S~er (Ag) Thallium ITl) Vanadium (V] Zinc (Zn! : October 13, 1999 : 699-5946.2 : 10105199 at 1400 by D. Pat~eson : 10106/99 at 1700 from Client : RWOCB : G. Barrett, E. Abalos : F, Hoavertsz : 10/11199 through 10112199 : 10/11199 through 10112199 : S2 RESULT ling/kg! ND 4.6 110 0.54 ND 11 4.3 13 48 0.100 ND 6.4 ND ND ND 35 62 THE TWlNINO LABORATORIES, INC. PAGE 4 of 8 SAMPLE TYPE: Solid/Soil DLR I METHOD (mg/kg) 1.0 6010 1.0 6010 5.0 6010 0.1 6010 1.0 6010 5.0 6010 5.0 6010 5.0 6010 5.0 7420 0.1 7471 20 6010 5.0 6010 0.3 7740 1.0 6010 2.0 6010 5 6010 $ 6010 THE REPORT DATE : October 13, 1999 CLIENT: RWOCB TWINING LABORATORIES, INC. I.ABO RATORY ID OATE SAMPLED DATE RECEIVED ANALYZED BY REVIEWED BY CLIENT SAMPLE ID : S1 : 699-5946.1 : 10105199 : 10/06199 : J. Peralta : D. Radu I ~ (l:;b) I CONS1)TUEN! NI) J.O 04~'~,ILOIMN) IIL~ 114AI41 lid S.O ISQ BIJ~'YL ALCC:I(OI,. ND ,.0 NO $.O 1%4ETHY~ IK~TIIACIWI.AT! NO S.O NO $.0 ILAJ~"IDIALIN~ ND S.O o.OI~ILOI4OB! m'l~NI 14) S.O NO I,.O T~I II, ACNL olm~f THYLIJhlE 14) 1.0 lid 1.0 IAICHLOIK) FLUQIK~I~! ~ I~l) ~.0 VINYl. C ItLOfllO( ~1) S.O )CYLIIi~ ND S.O ND ~.0 IlO S .0 PAGE 5 ol 8 EPA 8260 DATE ANALYZED: 10107/99 SAMPLE TYPE: Solid/Soil I ,,,--,-, ND LO ND' ND $.O ND LO NO LO lido NO LO I~) 1%O NO LO ND S.O NO NO ND IlO 41.O 140 !oO NO ~.O / NO NO S.O ND S.O ND $.O I~' 6.O ND LO ~ 8. O ND S.O HO S.O NO S.O ND M) THE TWINING LABORATORIES, INC. REPORT DATE LABORATORY ID DATE SAMPLED DATE RECEIVED ANALYZED 8Y REVIEWED BY CLIENT SAMPLE ID : October 13, 1999 : 699-5946.2 : 10/05/99 : 10/06/99 : J. Perelta : D. Radu : S2 JO I.O I~O I.O NO NO IoO NO 840 fid 6.O Ill) rE) 6.0 fid S.O ND S.O HO I.O HD S.O ~0 NO ~.O NO Id) $.0 NO NO !.0 ND NO S.O ill) · .0 HD ~S.0 HO 1.0 NC) S.0 fid $.0 ND S.0 fid ~.0 · ND ~.0 · l xa.ede OC inch. CLIENT: RWOCB ' ~ PAGE 6 of 8 ~- EPA 8260 DATE ANALYZEO: 10/07/99 SAMPLE TYPE: t~ S ,0 S.O 1.0 I.O S.O S,O I.O I.O I,O J.G 7HE TWINING LABORATORIES, INC. Aoef~pMhe~e ND 330 AoenepMhyfene ND 330 Aniline ND 330 ~e~ ND 330 ~ ND 330 ~nzMo A~ ND 330 ~nzo (~ ~th~ene ND 330 ~e (~ py~ ND 330 h~o ~) Ibor~thene ND 330 ~n~o (g,h~ p.~ene ND 330 hnto ~ fl~M~ ND' 330 hn~ A~ ND 3~ ~ 42~et~W) ~ ND 330 h 42~N~ ethff ND 330 ~ f2~N~ob~op~l ~t~ ND 330 ~ 42~0 pMhd~e ND 330 ~~ ~ et~r ND 330 ~ be~ p~hte ND 330 ~C~ ND 330 2-C~M~e ND 330 4~h~t~h.~ HO 330 ~-C~henol ~ 330 4-C~eayI ~ et~r fid 330 C~ NO 3~ ~benzo (a,~ Anth~ene ND 330 ~enzdur~ HO 330 ~~th~e HD 330 REPORT DATE LABOKATORY ID DATE SAMPLED DATE RECEIVED DATE PREPARED ANALYZED BY CLIENT SAMPLE ID : October 13, 1999 : 699-5948.1 : 10/05/99 at 1400 by D. Patteson : 10/06/99 at 1640 from Client : 10/08/99 : J. Peralta : S1 1,4-Dioldorobenzene 1,2-DioNoroboflzeno 3.3'-OIcldombenzldin. 2.4. DIr. Norophonol 2,6.Diddorophol~d Oioth~fphthsdMe Direct byIphth~lat® 2,4.DtmthYIphead 2,4.Dinitrophend 2,4-Dinltmtolu,n~ 2,6.Olnitroto~ue~ '1.2-Oiphenyfhydflzlne(Azobe nzene! Dl-a-octl~phthdate F]uor~mthene Fluomne Hex~=Norobenzene He](~hlorobutidle n~ Hoxmohl o roeydopo~t odieflo HexeatdoroethBne Indeno(1,2.3-od)l'wene bophofo~e · 2hth~4.&clinilfophenol 2.Methyfrxq)hthahme 2.Methy~phend (o.creK~l 4*ldethVfphe~ol NapMhdefle 2- Hitro~Mi~e DLR: Dsto~tioe Limit Io~ FIq)orting Rev. 2 O9196 (8270~ ND 330 ND 330 ND 330 ND 330 ND 3:30 ND 330 ND 330 ND 33O ND 330 NO 330 ND 330 Hi) 330 /41) 330 ND 330 ND 330 ND 330 ND 330 ND 330 ND 330 NO 330 ND 330 ND 330 ND 330 ND 33O ND 330 ND 330 ND 330 ND 330 4-Nit rowdline 2-1~tro~ 4.1~fophond N-~tro~thy~ N.~t;o~~ Pen~m~hond 1,2,~Ti~z~ ~4,S-Tr~~ 2,4,G-T~~. b-B~ g.~C~i~) DDT ~e~fln E~o~lf~ ~fote E~rin E~Hn A~ehyde HODI~NOF CLIENT: flWQCB PAGE 7 of 8 METHOD: EPA 8270 UNITS: ug/kg DATE ANALYZED: 10/12~99 REVIEWED BY: F. Hoevertsz SAMPLE TYPE: Solid/Soil ND 330 NO 330 ND 330 ND 330 ND 330 ND 330 NO 330 NO 330 NO 330 ND 330 ND 330 HO 330 ND 330 ND 330 ND 330 ND 33O ND 330 ND 330 ND 330 ND 330 ND 330 ND 330 ND 3:30 ND 330 ND 330 ND 330 ND 330 ND 33O ND 330 ND 330 0-4 THE ' REPORT DATE : October 13, 1999 TWINING DATE ~AMPLEO : 10105199 ~t 1400 by D. Patteson DATE RECEIVED : 10106199 at 1640 from Client t A B 0 R A T O R I E S I N C ~ DATE PREPARED : 10/08199 · ANALYZED BY : J. Peralta CLIENT SAMPLE ID : S4 CONSTITUENT RESULT CONSITrUENT RESULT CONST/TUENT Aee~e~Mhe~e ND 330 1.4,DboNo~obenzene ND 330 4.NH~o.~iline Acenq)Mhylene ND 330 1,2-DIoNon)benzene ND 330 Hltrd)enzsne Ar~ine FID 330 3,3'-~oh~oboflzM~no ND 330 2-~tlmpher~ Anthr. oen. ND 330 2,4-Dtchlorophenc4 ND 330 8en~idine ND 330 2,6-Diohloro~henol ND 330 N-Nitro ~)di methy~ .mine Benzoio Acid ND 330 Dieth~p~thsl'~t" .' ND 330 N-Nitrosocliphenytamine Benzo (.! amlv~oe~e ND 330 Dimethylpltthebte ND 330 N-Nitroso41-n-~)yl.mi~ Befl;o tel py~no ND 330 2,4.Dimethylphenc4 HO 330 Peflt~,tdorophenol' B4nzo Co) tluo~n~hene ND 330 2,4-Dinitml)he~ol NO 330 Ph.flunthr~ Beflzo 4g, h,t) pewte4~ ND 330 2,4.D~dt~o~okJeno ND 330 Phenol Be~o 4k~ fluo~mthe~e ND 330 2,6-[Xrdtrotoluine HI) 330 P~ene Beryl ~ ND 330 1,2.~pher~hydrn zlM(Azobenzene) HI) 330 1,2,4-TiroMorobenz .n* Bis 42-cldomethexy! methene ND 330 Di-n-~atylphthil~te ND 330 2,4,$-T~ahlorophonol Bis t2. sldoro~tllyI) ethe~ ND 330 Fluor4mthsas ND 330 2.4,6-Tdahlorophsnol Bie {2-oldordsol~ro~¥1) ether ND ' 330 FkJsrm~ ND 330 AId~rt Bie 12.sthythsxyt) phthalate ND 330 I.lexac~lm~benzene ND 330 e-BHC 4-BrQi~ophe~ phen¥1 sthet ND 330 Hex~c~dorob~tldlene ND 330 b-SHC Buty4 benzyl phthalats ND 330 Hex~hloroo¥olopentadisne ND 330 d-BHC 4-Chlo~o&niline ND 330 Hmcac:hlomethane ND 3:30 g-DHC(t, indans) 2.CNomn~phthdsne ND 330 Indsno(lo 203-od)Pyt~le ND 330 DI)D 4.Chroco- 3-me~hylphenol ND 330 Isopbotone ND 330 DDE 2-CN~rophenol ND 330 2.Meth~.4, 6-41nlt r ophend ND 330 DDT 4.CNocophenyf phenyl ether ND 330 2-Methyfnephtbalene ND 330 Ch~Nn. ND 330 24~4ethylphenol fo, aresol) ND :330 Endosulfirl I O~.nzo (~,h! Anth~aoe~e ND 330 4-Meth~4phenc~ Ip-orsso~ ND 330 Endosulfsrt l Oi~mzofu~fl ND 330 Hsphtl~dsno ND 330 EndoaKJif8u DF~b~Jty~)hthe~te · NO 3~O Z-~INI~M NC) 330 _l,3-[~c~orobo~9~e , ND ;130 3-~itroiniine , . ND 330 II End~n A~dehyde kiog~m DLR: Dstootlon Umi! for Reporting II rdarogmms per ND: Ho~e Detected Rev. 2 09~, ~e270) II. Heotaah]o! eDoXlde .. , CLIENT :RWQCB PAGE 8 o! 8 METHOO: EPA 8270 UNITS: ug/kg DATE ANALYZED: 10/12/99 REVIEWED BY: F. Hoevertsz SAMPLE TYPE: Solid/Soil RESULT DLR ND 330 ND 330 ND 330 NO 330 ND 330 ND 330 ND 330 ND 330 ND 330 ND 330 ND 330 ND 390 ND 330 ND 330 ND 330 ND 330 ND .330 ND 330 HO 33O HI) 330 HO 330 ND 330 HO 330 ND 330 HI) 330 ND 330 ND 330 ND 330 ND 330 NO 330 0CT-15.-1999 E~:5~ F'RC~:TI, IINIH6 I.I:~S, IHC. 559 E68 0740 T0:559 445 5910 P.011"011 SEMIVOLATILE ORGANICS METHOD - 8270 LABORATORY CONTROL SAMPLE QUALITY CONTROL REPORT Analyzed by:_~ Reviewed by: ~)~ Radu Twinin( Laboratories Inc. Examination Number: _6.9905.94_6.!_-2 Constituent Method LCS LCS LCS LCS LCS Range Blank Expected Result Duplicate % R Duplicate Result Conc. {ug/L) Result % R {uglL! (ug/L) (uglL) Phenol < 10 200 138 134 69 67 5-11 2-Chlorophenol < 10 200 140 ....127 70 64 23-134 1.4-Oichlorobenzene < 10 100 69 61 69 61 20-124 n-N'~'osodi-n-propylamine < 10 100, , 104 102 104 .102 10-230 1.2.4-Trlchlorobenzene < 10 100 67 ~ , .61, 67 61 44-142 4.Chloro-3-methylphenol < 10 . 200 . ,168 174 84 87 22-1.47 < 10 100 83 84 83 84 47-145 Acenapthene ..... 4-N~_r.oph. enol < 10 200 .., 75 78 38 39., 10-132 2,4-Dinitrotoluene .... I < 10 100 69 71 69 ? 1 39-138 Pentachl0rophenol < 10 · 2q0. . 54 63 27 32 1.4-!76 < 10 100 80 86 80 86 52-115 Pyfene ..... ; ..... . EXPLANATIONS: ug/L: micrograms per rger (parts per billion) ND : none detected % R: percent recovery Method Blank: The method blank is used to determine if method analytes or other interterences are present in the laboratory environment, the reagents or apparatus. Laboratory Control Sample: A laboratory control sample (LCS) is generated by spiking the analyte into a relatively Inert matrix (clean sand or blank water). The laboratory control sample is analyzed exactly like a sample, and its purpose is to determine whether the methodology is in control and whether the laboratory is capable of making accurate and precise measurements. .. . ....... . SoilRem Corporatic P.O. Box 40764 South Station 524 Bakersfield, Ca. 93304.9998 October 8, 1999 Jim Eggert Development Services Dept. Planning Division i7i5 Chester Ave. Bakersfield, Ca. 93301 Dear Mr. Eggert, This letter is to confirm our verbal agreement of 10-7-99. The concrete we have on site will be utilized to construct.a barrier around our property, which is not fenced. It will then be covered with dirt & sloped to ensure water run off remains on our property. Additionally, a small trench will be constructed inside the barrier to retain any run off water. This will prevent the unauthorized access and dumping we discussed. A small portion of the concrete will be retained, crushed and used for road base on site. Once again, thank you for your assistance. Sincerely, John E. Arnold President Cc: Howard Wines, City of Bakersfield, Haz Mat Division 1-661-397-9641 office # 1-661-397-4508 fax # SoilRem@aol.com SoilRem Corporatio P.O. Box 40764 South Station 524 Bakersfield, Ca. 93304-9998 October 7, 1999 Howard Wines Office of Environmental Services 1715 Chester Ave. Bakersfiem, Ca. ~,_~.~01 Reference: Bakersncm ~cvmopmcnt Services Department letter cmteu October i, 1999. Bakersfield Fire Department Correction Notice No. 0293 dated October 5, 1999. Soil Rem Corporation's letter dated October $, 1999. Dear Mr. Wines: Following the inspection of October 5, i999 and upon evaiuahng the requirements in reference 1 above, we have chosen not to pursue an amendment to our Conditional Use Permit. We met with Mr. Jim Eggert on October 6, 1999 and submitted the letter (Reference 3 Above). The issue of concrete operations has been resolved. We provided to Mr. Eggert a copy of our liner Installation design, insurance papers and a listing of our current permits. These were the major concerns of Mr. Eggerts office with the exception of an issue over Habitat conservation fees. We will continue to keep your office informed regarding the other correction notice issued by your office. Yours truly, President 1-661-397-9641 office # 1-661-397-4508 fax # SoilRem@aol.com CORRECTION NOTICE BAKERSFIELD FIRE DEPARTMENT No 0 2 3 2 Sub Div. Blk. Lot You are hereby required to make the following corrections at the above location: Cot. No J Completion Date fox' Corrections Inspector 326-3979 CORRECTIO'N NOTICE BAKERSFIELD FIRE DEPARTMENT Location ~(~)~ '~'' ~;Z)/~C/'~'~O Sub Div Blk . Lot, You are hereby required to make the following corrections at the above location: Co~, Ho Completion Date fo,' Corrections Inspector 326-3979 CORRECTION NOTICE BAKERSFIELD FIRE DEPARTMENT N° 0 2 9 3 Location Sub Div. Blk. Lot You are hereby required to make the following corrections at the above location: Cot. Ho Completion Date for Corrections Date fO /~-/7? ,~/~_(~.~../"~'~-'<~ Inspector 326-3979 CORRECTION NOTICE- BAKERSFIELD FIRE DEPARTMENT Location Sub Div. Blk. Lot You are hereby required to make the following corrections at the above location: Completion Date for Corrections Inspector 326-3979 SoilRem Corporation P.O. Box 40764 South Station 524 Bakersfield, Ca. 93304-9998 October 6, 1999 Jim Eggert Development-Services Dept. Planning Division 1715 Chester Ave. Bakersfield, Ca. 93301 Dear Mr. Eggert This letter is to confirm the agreement reached during our meeting of 10/6/99. We have evaluated the content- of your letter of I0/I/99 and' the additional information received during our meeting. We have chosen not to pursue an amendment to our Conditional Use Permit and will/cease to accept concrete material onto our site. The material currently stored on site will be removed. Your office will be informed as soon as we develop a projected completiOn date and when the material has in fact been completely removed from the premises. Thank you for your assistance. Sincerely, ' Arnold President Cc: Howard Wines, City of Bakersfield, Haz Mat Division 1-661-397-9641 office # 1-661~397-4508 fax fl SoilRem@aol.com SoilRem Corporatio P.O. Box 40764 South Station 524 Bakersfield, Ca. 93304.9998 October 5, 1999 Mr. Doug Patteson California Regional Water Quality Control Board 3614 East Ashlan Ave. Fresno, Ca. 93726 Re; Load - Checking Program, Soil Rem Corp. We received your letter-of 15 September-1999. The following-is submitted for.your review. Each load entering the facility will be tested forHydrogen Sulfide (H2S). The meter_is set to sound an audible alarm at_ 10 PPM. Results of the H2S test will be recorded on the daily.log along with the LEL and Hydrocarbondevel. As discussed in the telephone conversation of 9/27/99 between Mr. Patteson and Mr. Jones of this office, testing-for cyanide will not be required. Periodic sampling (per every 1000 yards accepted) will be conducted as agreed. We are working with Dr._Zaletel ofZalco Laboratories,_Inc. to set up our program, He has suggestedan alternate series of tests which would_accomplish the same results and be considerably less expensive to run. Volatile organic compounds could be tested using EPA methods 8020 (BTX&E) and 80~5- (TPH gas). Semi volatile compound testing would be by EPA method 8015 (TPH diesel). Testing for totalCadmium, chromium, lead, mercury, nickel and zinc will also be performed. If the proposed alternative test methodology meets with your approval, we will incorporate it into our Load-Checking program. Should you find theproposed tests do not meet your requirements, we wilI utilize the EPA methods, stated in.you letter of 15 September 1999. 1-661-397-9641 office Ct 1-66.1-397-4508 fax Ct SoilRem@aol.com Should you require additional information, please advise us at your earliest convenience. Thank you, President Ce: Mr. Ralph Huey, City of Bakersfield San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District September 15, 1999 Mr. Jay Gould J & J Crushing P.O. Box 40764 South Station 524 Bakersfield, CA 93304-9998 Project # 990802 Project Description: Concrete and Asphaltic Concrete Crushing and Screening Operation Dear Mr. Gould: The Air Pollution Control District is in receipt of the additional information requested regarding the above-referenced project, and has again reviewed the application for completeness. Based on this preliminary review, the applications appear to be complete. However, during processing of your applications, the District may request additional information to clarify, correct, or otherwise supplement, the information on file. In general, complete applications are processed on a first-come first-served basis. If you have any questions, please contact Mr. Thomas Goff at (661) 326-6900. Sincerely, Seyed Sadredin D_~~ices ~,'g-'7/3omas E. Goff, P.E. Permit Services Manager svt Northern Region C)ffice 4230 Kiernan Avenue, Suite ! 30 Modesto, CA 9S356-9321 (209) 557-6400 · FAX (209) 557-6475 Central Region C)ffice 199(3 last Gettysburg Avenue Fresno, CA 93726-0244 [559i 230-6000 · FAX (559) 230-0061 Southern Region Office 2700 M Street, Suite 275 Bakersfield, CA 93301.2370 ~,661) $26-6900 · FAX (661) 326-6985 San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District August 26, 1999 Mr. Jay Gould J & J Crushing P.O. Box 40764 South Station 524 Bakersfield, CA 93304-9998 Re,' Notice of Incomplete Application Project Number: 990802 Dear Mr. Gould: Your application for Authority to Construct a concrete and asphaltic concrete crushing and screening operation has been received by the Air Pollution Control District, and has been reviewed for completeness. Based on this preliminary review, the application has been determined to be incomplete. The following information is required pdor to further processing: The material to be processed by this operation will be required to maintain a certain degree of moisture in order to prevent excess visible emissions. Generally, the moisture content must be maintained around 4% to meet this requirement. Please descdbe how this will be accomplished. In addition, the District has determined that the application filing fee of $60.00 per emission unit has not been fully paid. Payment of the attached bill is required pdor to further processing. In response, please refer to the above project number, and send to the attention of Mr. Steve Tornlin. Please submit the requested information within 30 days. The District will not be able to process your application until this information is received. Thank you for your cooperation in this matter. Should you have any questions, please contact Mr. Steve Tomlin of Permit Services at (661) 326-6968. Sincerely, Seyed Sadredin Director of Permit Services Thomas'E. Goff, P.E. Permit Services Manager svt Enclosure Northern Region Office 4230 Kiernan Avenue, Suite '!30 Modest0, CA 95356-9321 (209) 5.57-6400 · FAX (209) 557-6475 Central Regiof~ Office t 990 East Geay~burg Avenue Fresno, CA 93726-0244 (559) 230-60~.X9 · FAX ($59i 230-6061 Sou[hem Region Office 27(X) M Street, Suite 275 Bakersfield, CA 93301-237{) (661J 326-6900 · FAX (661) 326-6985 San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District 2700 M Street, Suite~275 Bakersfield, Ca. 93301 Re; Project Number: 990802, Application for Authority to Construct a Concrete Crushing Operation. Dear Mr. Tomlin, Enclosed is our cheek for the balance of the required permitting fees. The dust control system we will be using consists ofa ~/i inch PVC pipe as the water source with a full radius mister system. Misters will be installed at the points indicated on the enclosed drawings. The system is operational all the time the plant is running. If additional information is required, please contact me at 1-(661) 397-9641. Sincerely, John E. Arnold President Enclosures 1 San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District _A_P_PLICATION FILING FEE STAT.E,,MENT August 26, 1999 Mr. Jay Gould J & J Crushing P,O. Bo,x 40764 South Station 524 Bakersfield, CA 93304-9998 Facility # S-3478 Project #990802 REQUEST FOR APPLICATION FILING FEE Payment required BEFORE processing of ATC applications can commence, TOTAL FEE FEE PAID FEE DUE, $120.00 $ 60.00 $60.00 DESCRIPTION: Application For Authority To Construct Concrete and Asphaltic Concrete Crushing and Screening Equipment DATE FEE DUE: IMMEDIATELY PLEASE SEND PAYMENT AND COPY OF THIS STATEMENT TO: SJVUAPCD - SOUTHERN REGION 2700 M ST., #;275 BAKERSFIELD, CA 93301 NONPAYMENT OF THE FEE 30 DAYS FROM BILLING DATE WiLL RESULT IN THE DENIAL OF YOUR APPLICATIONS. Pursuant to Rule 3010, Section 1.0 of the District's Rules and Regulations~ every applicant for Authority to Construct or a Permit to Operate any source operation for which an A~thodty to Construct or a Permit to Operate is required by California State Law or the Distdct Rules and Regulations shall pay a nonrefundable filing fee of $60 per permit unit, svt >,lonhem Region 42J0 Kiernan Avenue, Suile ! 30 ,\todesto, CA 9_5356-932t /209! 357-6400 · FAX (209) 557-6475 Central Region !990 ~-as! Getl?shufg Avenue Fresno, CA 93.726-0244 (559) 2 ~,0-6000 · FAX ($.:$9) So~the:rn Region Office 2700 M S~r~'et, Sdite 275 Bakersfield, CA 93301 .Z J70 !661} 326-h900 · FAX (6611 '~26.6985 California l gional Water Quality ontrol Board Central Valley Region Steven T. Butler, Chair Winston H. ltickox Secreta~'~or Fresno Branch Office Environme~l www.swrcb.ca.gov/-rwqcb5 Protection 3614 East Ashlan Avenue, Fresno, California 93726 (559) 445-5116 · FAX (559) 445-5910 15 September 1999 Gray Davis Governor Mr. John Arnold SoilRem Corporation P.O. Box 40764 South Station 524 Bakersfield, CA 93304-9998 LOAD-CHECKING PROGRAM, SOILREM CORPORATION, BAKERSFIELD, KERN COUNTY We have reviewed the proposed Load-Checking Program for your soil recycling facility, which was submitted on 30 July 1999. The purpose for the Load-Checking Program is to ensure that no hazardous waste is inadvertently accepted at your facility and to randomly confwrn the nonhazardous characterization analyses performed by generators. We have the following comments regarding your proposed Load-Checking Program: 1. The proposed plan calls for measuring hydrocarbon levels of each load with a meter. The pH and reactivity (presence of sulfide or cyanide) of each load should also be screened. This will help confLrm the generator's characterization of the waste and also provide some protection to personnel handling the waste, and equipment which comes in contact with the waste. Periodically, e.g. for every 1000 cubic yards accepted, a sample from an incoming waste load should be collected and analyzed for volatile organic compounds (EPA Method 8240 or 8260), semi-volatile organic compounds (EPA Method 8270), and total cadmium, chromium, lead, mercury, nickel, and zinc. Please submit for review and approval a revised Load-Checking Program that incorporates the above -comments. If you have any questions, please call Doug Patteson at rqqox 445-6191 Senior Engineering Geologist Supervising Engineering Geologist CEG No. 931 cc: Mr. Ralph Huey, City of Bakersfield, Bakersfield Mr. William O'Rullian, Kern County Environmental Health Services, Bakersfield California Environmental Protection Agency 0 Recycled Paper California l gi°nalCentralWater ValleyQUality~°ntr°l Region Board Steven T. Butler, Chair Winston H. Hickox Secretary for Environmental Protection 15 September 1999 Mr. John Arnold SoilRem Corporation P.O. Box 40764 South Station 524 Bakersfield, CA 93304-9998 Fresno Branch Office www.swrcb.ca.gov/~ rwqcb:~ 3614 East Ashlan Avenue, Fresno, California 93726 (559) 445-5116 · FAX (559) 445-5910 Gray Davis Governor -LINER INSTALLATION REPORT, SOILREM CORPORATION, BAKERSFiELD, KERN COUNTY We have reviewed the Liner Installation Report, dated 22 June 1999. The report documents construction of a 150 ft. x 150 ft. Class II waste management unit for storage of petroleum contaminated soil at your soil recycling facility. Based on information in the report, the liner beneath the waste management unit was constructed in accordance with the approved design plans and specifications. The report indicates that the uppermost asphalt working surface had not yet been constructed. The 'certification in the report states that the waste management unit was constructed in compliance with California Code of Regulations, Title 27. Your facility is regulated by a Facility Compliance Plan (FCP) which contains requirements that need to be implemented before waste is discharged. Following compliance with all other requirements in the FCP, and following construction of the asphalt working surface, we concur with discharge of waste to the Class II waste management unit in accordance with the FCP. If you have any questions, please call Doug Patteson at (559) 445-6191. Senior Engineering Geologist Supervising Engineering Geologist CEG No. 931 cc: Mr. Ralph Huey, City of Bakersfield, Bakersfield Mr. William O'Rullian, Kern County Environmental Health Services, Bakersfield California Environmental Protection Agency 0 Recycled Paper SoilRem Corporatio P.O. Box 40764 South Station 524 Bakersfield, Ca. 93304.9998 September 28, 1999 Mr. Howard Wines Bakersfield Fire Dept. Office of Environmental Services 1715 Chester Ave. ._ Bakersfield, Ca. 93301 Mr. Wines, We have requested a modification to our current Facility Compliance Plan (FCP) which would permit us to accept Hydrocarbon Contaminated Water (Rinsate) at our facility. To assist in that process, the following details are submitted. Rinsate products will be generated primarily from tank washout and removal activities, other vessels which store or process petroleum products such as gas, diesel, and oil. We plan to utilize two closed top poly tanks for rinsate storage. One tank has a 3500- gallon capacity; the other holds 3000 gallons. Both tanks have pressure relief valve systems (Sentinel UFG Co. 16oz pressure model S 22). The tanks will be located inside our approVed WMU as indicated on the attached drawing. A 250-gallon open top- receiving tank will also be utilized. When product is delivered, it is off-loaded into the 250 gallon receiving tank. This permits a brief period for solids to settle out before the liquid is pumped into the storage tanks. The receiving tank (Sx10x3) sits on a slight angle allowing the solids to settle at the "low end". The liquid is pumped out at the" high end" via a 3" fill line and a 3" centrifugal pump. The product enters the storage tank from the top. A 3" line interconnects the two storage tanks where another pump and feed line is utilized to move the rinsate fi-om storage to the closed loop processing plant. Flow rates from the receiving the outlet tank is 600 GPM maximum. While in the storage tanks, an enzyme product is introduced into the rinsate to expedite hydrocarbon consumption. This process is further enhanced by utilizing aerators located at the base of both storage tanks. 1-661-397-9641 office Ct 1-661-397-4508 fax Ct SoilRem@aol.com We propose a rinsate contaminant acceptance level be established at no more than 1.0% (10,000 PPM). Estimated daily maximum volume accepted on site is 6,500 gallons. Please advise Mr. Jones of this office if additional information is desired. Yours Truly, President i Fa cility DRAFT Checklist Compliance Plan Is this project consistent with the Local General Plan? [,,,'~'YES [ ] NO What is the current zoning for your Project site? i Is your Project consistent with Community Plans and design guidelines? [v,~'YES [ ] NO If yes please elaborate: Does your facility currently have any environmental permit s that are land use related? [ ] YES [~,,~O If yes please elaborate: 5. Will your permit require.,~se of Tanner sitting process for hazardous waste facilities? [ ] YES [/J NO o Will any State or Federal agency require mitigation measures related to the use of your property? [ ] YES If yes please elaborate: What will be the public review period for the land use part of your project? 0 Days If yes/no please elaborate: I cility Compliance Plan Chec ist o Is the community in support of this project? [~,,,'~'YES [ ] NO Please elaborate: California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) Does your project require you to evaluate the environmental impacts under CEQA? [ ] YEs If you answered yes to the question above, please complete the following questions. VVho is the Lead Agency for this project? Which CEQA document is likely to be required? [ ] EIR [~]"~D [ ] MND [ ] Exempt If known. Indicate the public comment period for your environmental review in days? 0 Days Explain what steps in the CEQA review process you, or the Lead Agency for your project, have completed: Please elaborate: Does your facility currently have any environmentai permits that are water-related? [~,~YES [ ] NO If yes please list below: Will the facility discharge storm water directly or indirectly to a surface water of the state? []YES [V'~ NO If yes please elaborate: 2 I cility Compliance Plan Checl st a) Name the receiving water (lake, ocean, river, stream, or wetland): b) Will the facility have any industrial activities that could affect storm water quality such as vehicle maintenance or outside storage of materials? []YES [ ] NO c) What percentage of the site is impervious including rooftops? ~% d) Will the construction of the'facility disturb more than five acres of land? [ ] YES [ ] NO Will the facility discharg~.wastewater onto land or to surface water? [ ] YES [v"J NO If yes please elaborate: a) What types of wastewater will be discharged? (i.e. domestic, cooling water, industrial, etc.) Wastewater Type Flow (Gallons/Day) What disposal method will be used? (i.e. irrigation, percolation, direct discharge, etc.) Will the facility have a waste management unit such as a landfill, waste pile or surface impoundment? [,/J'YES [ ] NO Ifyes please elaborate: C£~ 5,5 ~ V~'.,~L,' a) b) c) What types of waste or material will be stored? What is the depth to the ground water? ft What method of containment will be used? Will the facility discharge wastewater into a community sanitary sewer system? [ ] YES [~,,,3~NO If yes please elaborate: a) What types of wastewater will be discharged? (i.e. industrial, cooling water, domestic, etc.) Fa cility Compliance Plan Checklist Wastewater Type Flow (Gallons/Day) 6. Will there be discharges of dredge or fill material? (i.e. navigational dredging, flood control channelization, levee construction, channel clearing, or fill of wetlands) [ ] YES [ v/J NO 7. Will the facility have an/underground storage tank? [ ] YES [ v/] NO If yes; please elaborate: Number of tanks Tank Capacity Content of Tanks o Will the facility store petroleum in a single aboveground tank greater than 660 gallons or store petroleum in aboveground tanks or containers with a cumulative storage capacity of greater than 1,320 gallons? [ ] YES [~]~NO Does your facility currently have any environmental permits that are hazardous waste-related? [ ] YES [v~]'NO If yes please elaborate: o Will you generate hazardous waste on-site? [ ] YES Will your receive hazardous waste generated off-site? [ ] YES [v~'NO If you answer no to both of the above questions, stop. You do not need to.complete the following questions. Fa cility Compliance Plan Chec li st Will you generate a federally regulated hazardous waste (RCRA Hazardous Waste)? [ ] YES [ ] NO 5. Do you plan to treat any of the hazardous waste on-site? []YES [ ]NO 6. If you answered yes to question 5, identify thetype of permit needed to treat this waste. Refer to Zone Administrators library for assistance. a) Conditional Exemption (CE) CE Small Quantity Treatment (CESQT) CE Specified Waste Stream (CESW) CE Limited (CEL) CE Commercial Laundries (CECL) b) Conditional Authorization (CA) c) Permit - by- Rule d) Standardize Permit e) Full Permit If yes please list below: 7. Do you plan to store hazardous waste on-site? []YES [ ]NO 8. question 7, list the time waste is expected to be held? ] ] ] ] 9. Do you plan to recycle hazardous waste? []YES [ ]NO a) If yes, where will it be recycled [ ] on-site [ ] off-site 10. If you plan to accept hazardous waste generated off site, how do you plan to manage it? [ ] transfer off-site [ ] treat on-site 11. Do you plan to dispose of either hazardous waste or treat hazardous waste on site? If you answered yes to Less than 90 days [ Less than 180 days [ Less than 270 days [ Less than 1 year [ Fat lccility Compliance Plan Checklist Will you facility dispose of or process: Solid Waste [ ] YES [v,~NO Contaminated Soil [ v~'YES [ ] NO Ash [ ] YES [~NO Tires [ ] YES [v/J NO If yes estimate the volume and types of wastes/materials handled: 2. Do you compost at your facility? Green Waste [ ] YES [ v'~NO Agricultural Waste [ ] YES [ v~NO Animal Materials [ ] YES [ V'j' NO Sewage Sludge [ ] YES [ ~ NO Mixed Solid Waste [ ] YES [ v~'NO If yes estimate the volume and types of wastes/material handled: In the context of the questions in section E, any reference to "District" means the San Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution Control District. Will the project emit air contaminants from new stationary sources or from modifications to existing stationary sources? [~YES [ ] NO If you checked "No" to question 1, the project is not required to obtain any air District' permits. Therefore, you are not required to answer any of the air-related questions that follow. Will the project emit any affected pollutant(s)? [ ] YES [V'] NO a) What air contaminant-emitting equipment is expected to emit an affected pollutant(s)? Fa cility Compliance Plan Chec ?st b) What are the potential emission levels of each affected pollutant for each piece of air contaminant-emitting equipment (in pounds per day and tons per year)? Will the project emit any toxic air contaminants (TACs)? [ lYES [ ] NO a) What air contaminant-emitting equipment is expected to emit TACs? Does the project involve a major stationary source subject to federal Title V permitting requirements? To determine if the source is subject to Title V, read. below and check all that apply. The project is: [ ] A non-exempt major source under the general definitions in the federal Clean Air Act (CAA) [ ] An affected source under the acid rain requirements of Title IV of the CAA [ ] A non-excluded solid waste incinerator subject to Section 129(e) of the CAA [ ] A non-deferred or non-exempted source subject to a federal New Source Performance Standard (NSPS). [ ] A non-deferred or non-exempt source subjected to National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAPs) or Maximum Achievable Control Technology (MACT). If any of the above boxes are checked in question 4, your facility is a Title V major source and you may not substitute a Facility Compliance Plan for the required air District permits. Is the project site located within 1000' of a school? [ ] YES [v,~NO If you checked "Yes" to question 5, the project is subject to the public notification requirements of the California Health and Safety Code (H&S) section 42301.6. This requires distribution or mailing of a public notice to the parents or guardians of children enrolled in any school located within 34 mile of the source and to each address within a 1000' radius of the source, at least 30 days prior to the date final action on the application is to be taken. o Do any of the air contaminant-emitting equipment trigger application of best available control technology (BACT)? []YES a) What air contaminant-emitting equipment will trigger BACT? F ility Compliance Plan Chec llst b) For those air contaminant-emitting equipment that trigger BACT, what is proposed as BACT? 7. Are emission offsets required for the project? [,,/J"YES [ ] NO Is a New Source Review p~blic notification required? [ ] YES [,/'J NO If you checked "Yes" to question 8, the project is subject to the public notification requirements of District Rule 2201 section 5.1.3. This requires publication in at least one newspaper of general circulation in the District, a notice stating the preliminary decision of the Air Pollution Control Officer, noting how pertinent information can be obtained, and inviting written public comment for a 30-day period following the date of publication. The applicant is required to pay all fees associated with the public notification. BAKERSFIELD FIRE DEPARTMENT FAX Transmittal TO: COMPANY: FROM: FAX No: --~ ~ '7.. ~ Office of Environmental Services FAX No. (805) 326-0576 · Bus No. (805) 326-3979 1715 Chester Ave. · Bakersfield, CA 93301 COMMENTS: ........ : ...................... ~ ...................................................................................................................... ~. ............................................................... ............. ~ ....... ~~% ........... ~.~. ........ .~.~.....,. ...... L.~ .......... ~......~..~ ......... ~_~ ....... ~~.. ............ ~.~.~ ......... ~.~ .... ~~.~ ~.~..~_~.~ ~.~..~.... ~ .... ,~ ~ ~ .~..._.~.~. ....... ~...~.~'__~.....~5 ~ ............ ~..~ ........... ~.e.E ........ ~ ....... ~ ....... ~.~Y:.~ .......... ~Gz...'.~ ......... A~.~.....~ .......... ~..~..Z.....~... ........... .~.~. ...... .~. ....... ~.~ .......... ~.~.~..C ......... ~z~......~.~~ ............ ~..;~.~. ...... .~.e..~ ......... ........... ~.~..e.?.H.~. ........ .~. ........... ~~.~.~.~ .......... ~.~.~ ........... ~.~.~ .......... ~.~ ................ § 66261.21 BA ! AYS CALIFORNIA CODE OF REGUL^ NS Title 22 the EPA Hazardous Waste Number set forth in this article for each char- acteristic that is applicable to that waste. These numbers shall be used in complying with the notification requirements of Health and Safety Code section 25153.6 and, where applicable, in the recordkeeping and report- ing requirements under chapters 12 through 15, 18 and 20 of this division. (c) Sampling and sample management of wastes and other materials for analysis and testing pursuant to this article shall be in accord with the sampling planning, methodology and equipment, and the sample pro- cessing, documentation and custody procedures specified in chapter nine of '`Test Methods for Evaluating Solid Waste, Physical/Chemical Meth- ods,'' SW-846, 3rd edition, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 1986 (incorporated by reference, see section 66260.11 of this chapter). In addition to the sampling methods in chapter nine of SW-846, the De- partment will consider samples obtained using any of the other applicable sampling methods specified in Appendix I of this chapter to be represen- tative samples. No~: Authority cited: Sections 208, 25141 and 25159, Health and Safety Code. Reference: Sections 25141, 25159 and 25159.5, Health and Safety Code and 40 CFR Section 261.20. H~s'roa¥ 1. New section filed 5-24-91; effective 7-1-91 (Register 91, No. 22). § 66261.21. Characteristic of Ignitability. (a) A waste exhibits the characteristic of ignitability if representative samples of the waste have any of the following properties: (1) it is a liquid, other than an aqueous solution containing less than 24 percent alcohol by volume, and has a flash point less than 60°C (140°F), as determined by a Pensky-Martens Closed Cup Tester, using the test method specified in ASTM Standard D-93-79 or D-93-80 (incorpo- rated by reference, see section 66260.11), or a Setaflash Closed Cup Tes- ter, using the test method specified in ASTM Standard D-3278-78 (in- corporated by reference, see section 66260.11), or as determined by an equivalent test method approved by the Department pursuant to section 66260.21; (2) it is not a liquid and is capable, under standard temperature and pressure, of causing fire through friction, absorption of moisture or spon- taneous chemical changes and, when ignited, bums so vigorously and persistently that it creates a hazard; (3) it is an ignitable compressed gas as del'reed in 49 CFR section 173.300 (as amended September 30, 1982) and as determined by the test methods described in that regulation or equivalent test methods approved by the Department pursuant to section 66260.21; (4) it is an oxidizer as defined in 49 CFR section 173.151 (as amended May 31, 1979). (b) A waste that exhibits the characteristic of ignitability has the EPA Hazardous Waste Number of D001. Nffm: Authority cited: Sections 208, 25141 and 25159, Health and Safety Code. Reference: Sections 25117, 25120.2, 25141,25159 and 25159.5, Health and Safe- ty Code and 40 CFR Section 261.21. HISTORY 1. New section filed 5-24-91; effective 7-1-91 (Register 91, No. 22). § 66261.22. Characteristic of Corrosivity. (a) A waste exhibits the characteristic of corrosivity if representative (3) it is not aqueous and, when mixed with an equivalent weight of wa- ter, produces a solution having a pH less than or equal to 2 or greater than or equal to 12.5, as determined by a pH meter using either Method 9040 in 'West Methods for Evaluating Solid Waste, Physical/Chemical Meth- ods,'' SW-846, 3rd edition and updates (incorporated by reference, see section 66260.11) or an equivalent test method approved by the Depart- ment pursuant to 66260.2 I; (4) it is not a liquid and, when mixed with an equivalent weight of wa- ter, produces a liquid that corrodes steel (SAE 1020) at a rate greater than 6.35 mm (0.250 inch) per year at a test temperature of 55°C (130°F) as determined by the test method specified in NACE Standard TM--01-69 as standardized in "Test Methods for Evaluating Solid Waste, Physical/ Chemical Methods," SW-846, 3rd edition and updates (incorporated by reference, see section 66260.11) or an equivalent test method approved by the Department pursuant to 66260.21. (b) A waste that exhibits the characteristic of corrosivity specified in subsection (a)(1) or (a)(2) of this section has the EPA Hazardous Waste Number of D002. Ntrm: Authority cited: Sections 25141, 25159, 58004 and 58012, Health and Safety Code. Reference: Sections 25117, 25120.2, 25141, 25159 and 25159.5, Health and Safety Code and 40 CFR Section 261.22. HISTORY 1. New section tried 5-24-91; effective 7-1-91 (Register 91, No. 22). 2. Amendment of subsections (a)(1)-(4) and No'm filed 10-13-98; operative 11-12-98 (Register 98, No. 42). § 66261.23. Characteristic of Reactivity. (a) A waste exhibits the characteristic of reactivity if representative samples of the waste have any of the following properties: (1) it is normally unstable and readily undergoes violent change with- out detonating; (2) it reacts violently with water; (3) it forms potentially explosive mixtures with water;, (4) when mixed with water, it generates toxic gases, vapors or fumes in a quantity sufficient to present a danger to human health or the environ- ment; (5) it is a cyanide or sulfide bearing waste which, when exposed to pH conditions between 2 and 12.5, can generate toxic gases, vapors or fumes in a quantity sufficient to present a danger to human health or the environ- ment; (6) it is capable of detonation or explosive reaction if it is subjected to a strong initiating source or if heated under confinement; (7) it is readily capable of detonation or explosive decomposition or reaction at standard temperature and pressure; (8) it is a forbidden explosive as defined in 49 CFR section 173.51 (as amended April 20, 1987), or a Class A explosive as der'reed in 49 CFR section 173.53 (as amended April 5, 1967) or a Class B explosive as de- fined in 49 CFR section 173.88 (as amended May 19, 1980). (b) A waste that exhibits the characteristic of reactivity has the EPA Hazardous Waste Number of D003. NoTe: Authority cited: Sections 208, 25141 and 25159, Health and Safety Code. Reference: Sections 25117, 25120.2, 25141,25159 and 25159.5, Health and Safe- ty Code and 40 CFR Section 261.23. Hx~roav samples of the waste have any of the following properties: 1. New section filed 5-24-91; effective 7-1-91 (Register 91, No. 22). (1) it is aqueous and has a pH less than or equal to 2 or greater than or ~ ~ equal to 12.5, as determinedby apH meter using either the EPA test meth- I § 68261.24. Charactaristie of Toxicity. od for pH or an equivalent test method approved by the Department put- I (a) A waste exhibits the characteristic of toxicity if representative sam- suant to section 66260.21. The EPA test method for pH is specified as I ple, s,,of_~e waste have any of the following properties: Method 9040 in '`Test Methods for Evaluating Solid Waste, Physical/ (1) when using the To_x!city Characteristic Leaching Procedure Chemical Methods," SW-846, 3rd edition and updates (incorporated by.,,~ (TCLP), test Method 1311 in `Test Methods for Evaluating Solid Waste, reference, see section 66260.11); ~ Physical/Chemical Methods," EPA Publication SW-846, third edition (2) it is a liquid and corrodes steel (SAE 1020) at a rate greater than 6.35 mm (0.250 inch) per year at a test temperature of 55°C (130°F) as determined by the test method specified in NACE Standard TM-01-69 as standardized in '`Test Methods for Evaluating Solid Waste, Physical/ Chemical Methods," SW-846, 3rd edition and updates (incorporated by reference, see section 66260.1 l) or an equivalent test method approved by the Department pursuant to section 66260.21; and Updates (incorporated by reference in section 66260.11 of this divi- sion), the extracts from representative samples of the waste contain any of the contaminants listed in Table I of this section at a concentration equal to or greater than the respective value given in that table unless the waste is excluded from classification as a solid waste or hazardous waste or is exempted from regulation pursuant to 40 CFR section 261.4. Where the waste contains less than 0.5 percent filterable solids, the waste itself, Pag 66 Regisltr 98. No. 42; 10-16-98 Title 22 '-" nvironmental Health Stnndar ~Hn~ ~ Waste ~ . after filtering using the methodology outlined in Method 131 1, is consid- ered to be the extract for the purposes of this section; (A) a waste that exhibits the characteristic of toxicity pursuant to sub- section (a)(l) of this section has the EPA Hazardous Waste Number spe- cified in Table I of this section which corresponds to the toxic contami- nam causing it to be hazardous; (B) Table I - Maximum Concentration of Contaminants for the Toxic- ity CharacteriStic: EPA Chemical Hazardous Abstracts Regulatory Waste Service Level Number Contaminant Number Mg/l D004 Arsenic 7440-38-2 5.0 D005 Barium 7440-39-3 100.0 DO 18 Benzene 71 --43-2 0.5 D006 Cadmium 7440-43-9 1.0 D019 Carbon tetrachloride 56-23-5' 0.5 13020 Chlordane 57-74-9 0.03 D021 Chlorobenzene 108--90-7 100.0 D0'22 Chloroform 67-66-3 6.0 D007 Chromium 7440-47-3 5.0 13023 o-Cresol 95-48-7 200.01 D024 m-Cresol 108-39-4 200.0l D025 p-Cresol 106-44-5 200.01 D026 Cresol 200.01 DO 16 2,4-D 94-75-7 10.0 D027 1,4-Dichlombenzene 10646-7 7.5 D028 1,2-Dichloroethane 107-06-2 0.5 DO29 1,1 -Dichloroethylene 75-35-4 0.7 D030 2,4-Dinitrotoluene 121-14-2 0.13 D012 Endrin 72-20-8 0.02 D031 Heptachlor (and its epoxide) 76 44 ~ 0.008 DO32 Hexachlorobenzene 118-74-1 0.13 DO33 Hexachlombutadiene 87-68-3 0.5 13034 Hexachloroethane. 67-72-1 3.0 D008 Lead 7439-92-I 5.0 D013 Lindane 58-89-9 0.4 D009 Mercury 7439-97-6 0.2 13014 Methoxychlor 72-43-5 10.0 13035 Methyl ethyl ketone 78-93-3 200.0 13036 Nitrobenzene 98-95-3 2.0 13037 Pentachloropbenol 87-86-5 100.0 13038 Pyridine 110-86-1 5.02 130 10 Selenium 7782-49-2 1.0 130 11 Silver 7440-22--4 5.0 13039 Tetrachloroethylene 127-18-4 0.7 ~ 130 15 Toxaphene 8001-35-2 0.5 D040 Trichloroethylene 79-01--6 0.5 D041 2,4,5-Trichlorophenol 95-95-4 400.0 D042 2,4,6-Trichlorophenol 88-06--2 2.0 D017 2,4,5-TP (Silvex) 93-72-1 1.0 13043 Vinyl chloride 75-01-4 0.2 l Ifo-, m- and p--Cresol concentrations cannot be differentiated, the total cre- sol (D026) concentration is used. The regulatory level of total cresol is 200 mg/l. 2 Quantitation limit is greater than the calculated regulatory level. The quanti- ration limit therefore becomes the regulatory level. (2) it contains a substance listed in subsections (a)(2)(A) or (a)(2)(B) of this section at a concentration in milligrams per liter of waste extract, as determined using the Waste Extraction Test (WET) described in Ap- pendix II of this chapter, which equals or exceeds its listed soluble thresh- old limit concentration or at a concentration in milligrams per kilogram in the waste which equals or exceeds its listed total threshold limit con- centrafion; (A) Table II - List of Inorganic Persistent and Bioaccumulative Toxic Substances and Their Soluble Threshold Limit Concentration: (STLC) and Total Threshold Limit Concentration CrFLC) Values. STLC TTLC Wet-Weight Substance~b mg/! rog/kg Antimony and/or antimony compounds 15 500 Arsenic and/or arsenic compounds 5.0 500 Asbestos 1.0 (as percent) Barium and/or barium compounds (excluding barite) 100 10,000c Beryllium and/or beryllium compounds 0.75 75 Cadmium and/or cadmium compounds 1.0 100 Chromium (VI) compounds 5 500 Chromium and/or chromium (III) compounds 5d 2,500 Cobalt and/or cobalt compounds 80 8,000 Copper and/or copper compounds 25 2,500 Fluoride salts 180 18,000 Lead and/or lead compounds 5.0 1,000 Mercury and/or mercury compounds 0.2 20 Molybdenum and/or molybdenum compounds 350 3,500: Nickel and/or nickel compounds 20 2,000 Selenium and/or selenium compounds 1.0 100 Silver and/or silver compounds 5 500 Thallium and/or thallium compounds 7.0 700 Vanadium and/or vanadium compounds 24 2,400 Zinc and/or zinc compounds 250 5,000 aSTLC and TTLC values are calculated on the concentrations of the elements, not the compounds. bin the case of asbestos and elemental metals, the specified concentxation lim- its apply only if the substances are in a friable, powdered or £mely divided state. Asbestos includes chrysotile, umosite, crocidolite, tremolite, anthophyllite, and actinolite. CExcluding barium sulfate. dIf the soluble chromium, as determined by the TCLP set fo~da in Appendix I of chapter 18 of this division, is less than 5 mg/l, and the soluble chxomium, as determined by the procedures set forth in Appendix II of chapter 11, equals orex- ceeds 560 mg/l and the waste is not otherwise identified as a RCRA hazm'dous waste pursuant to section 66261.100, then the waste is a non-RCRA hazardous waste. eExcluding molybdenum disulfide. (B) Table Hi - List of Organic Persistent and Bioaccumulative Toxic Substances and Their Soluble Threshold Limit Concentration (STLC) and Total Threshold Limit Concentration (WI'LC) Values: - STLC TI'LC - Wet Weight Substance mg/l mg/kg Aldrin 0.14 1.4 Chlordane 0.25 2.5 DDT, DDE, DDD 0.1 1.0 2,4-Dichlorophenoxyacetic acid 10 100 Dieldrin 0.8 8.0 Dioxin (2,3,7,8-TCDD) 0.001 0.01 Endrin 0.02 0.2 Heptachlor 0.47 4.7 Kepone 2.1 21 Lead compounds, organic -- 13 Lindane 0.4 4.0 Methoxychlor 10 100 Mirex 2.1 21 Pentachlorophenol 1.7 17 Polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) 5.0 50 Toxaphene 0.5 5 Trichloroethylene 204 2,040 2,4,5-Tfichlorophenoxypropionic acid 1.0 10 (3) it has an acute oral LDs0 less than 5,000 milligrams per kilogram; (4) it has an acute dermal LDso less than 4,300 milligrams per kilo- gram; Page 667 Register 98, No. 42; 10-16-98 ~UG-05-99 ?HU 09:45 SJV~POD SO REGION NO, San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District 5 P. 02/02 August 3, 1999 Mr. Ralph Huey, Zone Administrator City of Bakersfield Permit Consolidation Zone Office of Environmental Services 1715 Chester Avenue Bakersfield, CA 93301 RE: Soil Rem Corporation's Facility Compliance Plan Dear Mr. Huey: We are in receipt of your July 28, 1999 letter including the entire Special Order No. 99-059 adopted by the California Regional Water Quality Control Board. This document has been placed in Attachment A of Soil Rem Corporation's Facility Compliance Plan (FCP) per your letter. Based on the receipt of this information, it appears that the revised FCP is now complete and adequate. As outlined in the Permit Consolidation Zone legislation, this FCP replaces the District's Authority to Construct and Permit to Operate for Soil Rem Corporation. In the future, we encourage elimination of inconsistencies and duplicate information. Thank you for your cooperation in this matter. Should you have any questions, please contact Mr. Steve Tomlin of Permit Services at (661) 326-6900. Sincerely, Seyed Sadredin Directc)r of .,Permit Services Thomas E./jGoff, P.E. ' t Permit Services Manager svt x.c. John Arnold, Soil Rem Corporation Peter Ruggerello, CAL EPA Permit Assistance Center Northern Region Office 4230 Kiernan Avenue, Suite 130 Modesto, CA 95356-032 ! Central Region Office 1990 East Gettysbur§ Avenue Fresno, CA 93726-0244 $,,ulhem Re~,i~m ()fi'ice 2700 M Street, Suite 275 B,.~kersfiek'J. CA 93.'~01 I) August 6, 1999 FlEE CHIEF EON FEAZE ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES 2101 "H' Street Bakersfield, CA 93301 VOICE (805) 326-3941 FAX (805) 395-1349 SUPPRESSION SERVICES 2101 "H" Street Bakersfield, CA 93301 VOICE (805) 326-3941 FAX (805) 395-1349 PREVENTION SERVICES 1715 Chester Ave. Bakersfield, CA 93301 VOICE (805) 326-3951 FAX (805) 326-0576 ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES 1715 Chester Ave. Bakersfield, CA 93301 VOICE (805) 326-3979 FAX (805) 326-0576 TRAINING DM$1ON 5642 Victor Ave. Bakersfield, CA 93308 VOICE (805) 399-4697 FAX (805) 399-5763 Mr. John Arnold, President Soilrem Corporation P.O. Box 40764, South Station 524 Bakersfield, CA 93304-9998 RE: Facility Compliance Plan Approved Dear Mr. Arnold: This is to notify you that your "Facility Compliance Plan" has been approved and therefore serves as authorization for the following individual state and local environmental permits: Permit Agency Permit Number Permit Title City of Bakersfield 15-021-001975 i Unified Permit Fire Department ~ Office of Environmental Services City of Bakersfield P99-0053 Conditional Use Permit Planning Department Kern County Environmental Health 15-AA-0356 Enforcement Agency Services Department Notification San Joaquin Valley Unified Air S-3496-1-0 Authority To Construct and Pollution Control District S-3496-2-0 Permit To Operate S-3496-3-0 Central Valley Regional Water Order No. 99-059 Water Quality Control Plan Quality Control Board This letter serves as documentation of those individual permit authorizations. The permit conditions as indicated in your Facility Compliance Plan apply to all operations authorized by those permits. Sincerely, al~glt~ E. Huey, l~ector Office of Environmental Services "Zone Administrator," Permit Consolidation Zone City of Bakersfield CC: Chris Kinne, CalEPA Pete Reggerello, CalEPA Thomas E. Golf, SJVAPCD Sheiton R. Gray, RWQCB Mike Chapman, KCEH FII E D July 2g, 1999 FIRE CHIEF RON FRAZE ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES 2101 'H' Strait Bakersfield, CA 93301 VOICE (805) 326-3941 FAX (805) 395-1349 SUPPRESSION SERVICES 2101 'H' Street Bakersfield, CA 93301 VOICE (805) 326-3941 FAX (805) 395-1349 PREVENTION SERVICES 1715 Chester Ave. Bakersfield, CA 93301 VOICE (805) 326-3951 FAX (805) 326--0576 ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES 1715 Chester Ave. Bakersfield, CA 93301 VOICE (805) 326-3979 FAX (805) 326-0576 TRAINING DMSION 5642 Victor Ave. Bakersfield, CA 93308 VOICE (805) 399-4697 FAX (805) 399-5763 Winston H. Hickox Secretary for Environmental Protection California Environmental Protection Agency 555 Capitol Mall, Suite 525 Sacramento, CA 95814 RE: SoilRem Corporation Facility Compliance Plan Dear Mr. Hickox: SoilRem Corporation, located at 408 East Pacheco Road in Bakersfield, California, has submitted a Facility Compliance Plan to the applicable permitting agencies through the SB 1299 Permit Consolidation Zone Pilot Project. The City of Bakersfield Permit Consolidation Zone is herein transmitting the consolidated determination of completeness and adequacy pursuant to Section 10410(d)(2), Title 27, Califomia Code of Regulations. If you have any questions, please call me at (661) 326-3979. Sincerely, Ralph E. Huey, Director Office of Environmental Services "Zone Administrator" Permit Consolidation Zone City of Bakersfield REH/dlm C. Kinne, Cai/EPA T. Goff, SJVUAPCD Wm. O'Rullian KCEHS Shelton Gray, CVRWQCB Lori Senitte, SWRCB Pete Ruggerello, Cai/EPA CITY OF BAKERSFIELD OFFICE OF ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES PERMIT CONSOLIDATION ZONE FACILITY COMPLIANCE PLAN · TRACKING FORM Project: Location: Facility Compliance Plan Notice of Intent Received by Zone Administrator: Initial Applicant / Permitting Agency Meeting: CEQA Compliance Determination: Participating Conditions FCP Guidance FCP Submitted FCP Approved Revised FCP Revised FCP Agencies provided to given to to PCZ & or Denied Re-Submitted Approval PCZ Applicant Agencies ~'~UPA [] Approved [] Approved I~Z/.I~"/~ ~ / I~"~ ~'~ ~' /~Z/`/~ []Denied 4~ / ~'/ ~'~ ~ ByDefault / / / /__ [] POTW [] Approved [] Approved / / / / _ /__/__ [] Denied __/__/__ [] By Default / / / /__ I~em Co. [] Approved ~ I tS"'l `~et J~pproved ~/~/~ ~ / i~'/~¢} ,2_ /~/~ •Denied [] By Default [] DTSC [] Approved [] Approved / / / / /__/__ [] Denied / /__ [] By Default / / / / ~CVRWQCB [] Approved J~pproved .[ / <~ /c~ 2 / l&-l~ ~ /2~-/ ~¢~ {;;it'~enied ~l. l t~'l~ ~ ByDefault ~.~^~,~v 2~ /26/'/? ~/ t~ /5'/ ~SJVUAPCD [] Approved ,¢~ / t~/~'~ [] Approved / / ,~ / I ~"'~ `/¢[ ~ / ~ 2./<~<~ [] Denied [] By Default / / / / [] CIWMB [] Approved [] Approved / / / / / /__ [] Denied / /-- [] By Default / / / / RUG-05-99 THU 09:45 SJVRI :D SO REGION FRX NO, 661.3266985 P, 02/02 San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District August 3, 1999 Mr. Ralph Huey, Zone Administrator City of Bakersfield Permit Consolidation Zone Office of Environmental Services 1715 Chester Avenue Bakersfield, CA 93301 RE: Soil Rem Corporation's Facility Compliance Plan Dear Mr. Huey: We are in receipt of your July 28, 1999 letter including the entire Specia[~Order No. 99-059 adopted by the California Regional Water Quality Control Board. This dO~:ument has been placed in Attachment A of Soil Rem Corporation's Facility Compliance Plan (FCP) per your letter. Based on the receipt of this information, it appears that the revised FCP is now complete and adequate. As outlined in the Permit Consolidation Zone legislation, this FCP replaces the District's Authority to Construct and Permit to Operate for Soil Rem Corporation. In the future, we encourage elimination of inconsistencies and duplicate information. Thank you for your cooperation in this matter. Should you have any que~ons, please contact Mr. Steve Tomlin of Permit Services at (661) 326-6900. Sincerely, Seyed Sadredin .D~,~r of !perr~it Services ~ nomas E..~ ~ off, P . E . Permit Services Manager svt x.c. John Arnold, Soil Rem Corporation Peter Ruggerello, CAL EPA Permit Assistance Center Norlhern Resion Office 42.10 Kiernan Avenue, Suite 130 f,a(xJe~h), C.A 9~'156-932 1 Central Re,lion Office 990 [afl Getty,burg ^venue Fre.~no, CA g.1726-02,14 l'l/l. Aft~4't · ;;AY f{~J 87/28/1999 21:13 6613979643 SOIL REM PAGE 01 San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District July 13, 1999 Mr. John Arnold, President Soil Rem Corporation P.O. Box 40764, South Station 524 Bakersfield, CA 93304-9998 Re: Facility Compliance Plan for Soil Washlng/Bloremediefion Operation Dear Mr. Arnold: We are in receipt of a fax from the City of Bakersfield that includes a July 9, 1999 letter and copy of Special Order # 99-059 from the Califomia Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB). It appears this order may be an update to the Facility Compliance Plan in response to item (l-a) listed on the District's May 8, 1999 letter to you. We are awaiting revised Facility Compliance Plan pages addressing item (l-a) in the District's leffer. Please submit revised pages addressing this item as soon as possible. Once this information is received, the District will make a final determination regarding your Facility Compliance Plan. Thank you for your cooperation in this matter. Should you have any questions, please contact me or Mr. Steve Tomlin of Permit Services at (681) 326-6900. Sincerely, Seyed Sadmdin Dim~or or,Permit Services Permit Services Manager svt Ralph Huey, Zone Administrator City of Bakersfield Permit Consolidation Zone Peter Ruggerello, CAL EPA Permit Assistance Center David L. (:row Executive Director/Air Pollution (:ontrol Officer Northern Region Office 4230 Kiernan Avenue, Suite 130 Modesto. CA 9.S_IS6-9321 (209) $57~6,~00 ~, FAX (209) .557-6475 Central Re[~ion Office 1990 last Gettysbur§ A,,enue Fresno, CA 9372b-0244 [559) 230-6000 ~ F.AX (559) 230-6061 Southern Region Office 2700 ~ Street, Suite 275 Bakersfield, CA 93301-2370 {6bl ) 326-6900 -' FAX ($61) 326-6985 07f20/1999 21:13 6613979643 SOIL REM PAGE 02 Soil Rem Corporation 408 E. Pachec, o P.O. Box 40764 Bakersfield Ca, 93304 1-661-397-9641 1-661-397-9643 fax FAX COVER SHEET SEND TO co~,~.~: '_,..'~,~..f. Ci ....... DATE: , "7-"~-! PHONE NUMBE~ 0 Urgent 0 Reply ASAP 0 Please Comment ~M:or y~xtr Information Total Pages Including Cover Sheet COUNTS: BAKERSFIELD FIRE DEPARTMENT To: From: Subject: MEM ORANDUM July 12, 1999 Ralph Huey, Director t~ Howard Wines, Hazardous Materials Specialist SoilRem's Facility Compliance Plan Status BACKGROUND You had asked me to review the status of SoilRem's Facility Compliance Plan (FCP) and also comment on the issue of SoilRem's compliance with the Water Quality Control Plan portion of the FCP as it relates to the design and construction of the site. ISSUE Whether the Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board's (RWQCB) letter of 13 May 1999, approving the Waste Management Unit liner plans (dated 30 April 1999 and signed by Tim W. Collins, RCE No. 40610) extended that same approval to Detail #5 "Typical - 100' x 100' Clean Soil Storage Cell" utilizing a 10 mil poly sheet liner. OPINION The RWQCB's May 13, 1999 approval of SoilRem's liner plan was expressly limited to approval of 40 mil liner materials for a Class II Waste Management Unit (WMU) at the site. Since the Water Quality Control Plan portion of SoilRem's FCP also considers the Clean Soil Storage Cell to be a Class II WMU, it would necessarily require a 40 mil liner as well, unless an engineered alternative is allowed by the RWQCB pursuant to Sections 20080 (b) and (c), supra. SoilRem's argument that they acted in good faith on the RWQCB's approval of a plan which did, in fact, include a design detail specifying the use of a 10 mil liner for the Clean Soil Storage Cells only, might become a contributing factor for the possible approval of an engineered alternative by the RWQCB in this case. A SWRCB legal counsel's opinion should be sought on this issue, as SoilRem and the Central Valley RWQCB are each apparently adamant in their opposing positions. FACTS On March 26, i999 the RWQCB issued SoilRem a Water Quality Control Plan as Attachment A to SoilRem's FCP. A discharge specification contained within the Water Quality Control Plan (page 2) required that, "4. Treated material shall be stored within a certified Class II waste management unit .... " On April 15, 1999, SoilRem resubmitted a revised FCP to the RWQCB which included the Water Quality Control Plan as Appendix A. The design and construction of Class II WMU's is regulated under Chapter 3 of Division 2 of Title 27, CCR. Section 20330(c) of Title 27, CCR requires that flexible membrane or synthetic liners have a minimum thickness of 40 mils (0.040"). SoilRem Memo July 12, 1999 Page 2 Section 20080 allows for engineered alternatives to SWQCB promulgated regulations to be considered under certain conditions enumerated under subparts (b) and (c) supra. SoilRem subsequently submitted liner plans (dated 30 April 1999 and signed by Tim W. Collins, RCE No. 40610) to the RWQCB for review. The plans contained details on the contaminated soil treatment area, indicating a 40 mil liner design, as well as detail #5 indicating a 10 mil liner under the Clean Soil Storage Cell where the treated material will be stored. On May 13, 1999, RWQCB issued a letter to SoilRem stating, "Our preliminary assessment indicates the design plans, specifications, and QA/QC plan appear to be in accordance with Title 27 of the California Code of Regulations. However, final approval requires an action by the Regional Board at a public meeting." This letter further specified liner materials as 40 mil, and included an admonition that "..if you decide to begin construction of the proposed liner prior to Board approval, it is at your own risk." The RWQCB's letter did not mention nor specifically deny the 10 mil reference to the Clean Soil Storage Cell liner detail. Between June 2 and June 5, 1999, Soils Engineering, Inc. certified that the installation of the 40 mil liner and leachate collection system for the contaminated soil treatment area was performed according to plans and in accordance with Title 27 CCR. On June 11, 1999, the RWQCB, at its stated public meeting, issued a Special Order approving the Water Quality Control Plan section of SoilRem's FCP. At some point subsequent to the liner plan and FCP approval by the RWQCB, SoilRem made a non- refundable purchase of 10 mil liner material, apparently acting in good faith that the Clean Soil Storage Cell liner design, as indicated in detail #5 of the approved drawing, was similarly approved by the RWQCB in their letter of May 13, 1999. Discussions have recently ensued between SOilRem and RWQCB staff on the acceptance of the liner design based on the plan as submitted and the apparent approval thereof. To date, there has not been a resolution to the issue of whether the 10 mil liner design was approved by the RWQCB as submitted. CONCLUSION The RWQCB's May 13, 1999 approval of the liner plan dated April 30, 1999 was expressly specific to the approval of utilizing 40 mil liner material. SoilRem contends that the approval was on the plan as a whole, whereby the plan severally referred to using 40 mil liner under the contaminated soil and 10 mil liner under the Clean Soil Storage Cells. The RWQCB has not heretofore made a distinction between the pre-treatment Contaminated Soil WMU and the post-treatment Clean Soil Storage Cell WMU, but consider both to be regulated as Class II WMU. As such, Title 27 would require a 40 mil liner, unless an engineered alternative (which in this case would utilize a 10 mil liner) can be shown to provide an equivalent amount of protection under the Clean Soil Storage Cell that a 40 mil liner would otherwise provide for the contaminated soil. A SWRCB legal counsel opnion should be sought to assist in the resolution of this issue. SoilRem Corporation P.O, Box 40764 South Station 524 Bakersfield, Ca. 93304-9998 July 27, 1999 Mr, Doug PaRe, son California Regional Water Quality Control Board 3614 E. Ashlan Ave. Fresno, Ca. 93726 Re: Telephone Conversations of July 22 and luly 23, 1999 between Mr. Pattcson and John Arnold. Mr. Patteson, As discussed in the referenced conversations, we herewith request authority to accept Hydrocarbon Contaminated Water {'Rinsate) at our facility, The water will be used as make up water in our closed loop processing system. The rinsate water will be stored in state approved "Baker Tanks", elevated off the ground with a soil containment berm around them. Your favorable consideration of this request at your earliest convenience is appreciated, fi additional information is required, please call me at (661) 39%9641. Sincerely, John E. Arnold President 1.661.397-9641 office # 1.661-397-4508 fax # SoilRem@aol.com RECORD OF TELEPHONE CONVERSATION Location: Business Name: Contact Name: Business Phone: .... Inspe;~tor's Name: , ~ Time of Call: Date': '7/'~O/~; ~ Time: , # Min:, Type of Call: Incoming Outgoing [ ] Retumed[ ] ,,ID# Time Required to Complete Activity # Min: San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District July 13, 1999 Mr. John Arnold, President Soil Rem Corporation P.O. Box 40764, South Station 524 Bakersfield, CA 93304-9998 Re: Facility Compliance Plan for Soil WashinglBioremediation Operation Dear Mr. Amold: We are in. receipt of a fax from the City of Bakersfield that includes a July 9, 1999 letter and copy of Special Order # 99-059 from the California Regional Water Quality Control Board (RVVQCB). It appears this order may be an update to the Facility Compliance Plan in response to item (l-a) listed on the District's May 6, 1999 letter to you. We are awaiting revised Facility Compliance Plan pages addressing item (l-a) in the District's letter. Please submit revised pages addressing this item as soon as possible. Once this information is received, the District. will make a final determination regarding your Facility Compliance Plan. Thank you for your cooperatior{ in this matter. Should you have any questions, please contact me or Mt. Steve Tomlin of Permit ServiCes at (661) 326-6900. SinCerely, Seyed Sadredin Director of Permit Services 'Thomas E"//(~off, P.E. Permit Services Manager svt X,Co Ralph Huey, Zone Administrator City of Bakersfield Permit Consolidation Zone Peter Ruggerello, CAL EPA Permit Assistance Center David L. Crow Executive Director/Air Pollution Control Officer Northern Re§ion Office 4230 Kiernan Avenue, Suite 130 Modesto, CA 95356-9321 (209) 557-6400 ,~ FAX (209) 557-6475 Central Region Office ! 990 East Gettysburg Avenue Fresno, CA 93726-0244 (559) 230-6000 ~. FAX (559) 230-h061 Southern Reg,on C",."'c,.- 2700 M Street. _;~te "-'~ 6akersiie[d. C.~ ~530 ~ :23 ~,2 ~661~32,5-6900~.F-~X 66] 326-~,985 Air July 13, 1999 San Joaquin Valley Pollution Control District Mr. John Arnold, President Soil Rem Corporation P.O. Box 40764, South Station 524 Bakersfield, CA 93304-9998 Re: Facility Compliance Plan for Soil Washing/Bioremediation Operation Dear Mr. Arnold: We are in receipt of a fax from the City of Bakersfield that includes a July 9, 1999 letter and copy of Special Order # 99-059 from the California Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB). It appears this order may be an update to the Facility Compliance Plan in response to item (l-a) listed on the District's May 6, 1999 letter to you. We are awaiting revised Facility Compliance Plan pages addressing item (l-a) in the District's letter. Please submit revised pages addressing this item as soon as possible. Once this information is received, the Districtwill make a final determination regarding your Facility Compliance Plan. Thank you for your cooperation in this matter. Should you have any questions, please contact me or ML Steve Tomlin of Permit Services at (661) 326-6900. Sincerely, Seyed Sadredin Director of permit Services , ...... ~h~r~'as I~,//(~off, P.E. Pe~it Se~i~s Manager svt X,C. Ralph Huey, Zone Administrator City of Bakersfield Permit Consolidation Zone Peter Ruggerello, CAL EPA Permit Assistance Center David L. Crow Executive Director/Air Pollution Control Officer Northern Region Office 4230 Kiernan Avenue, Suite 130 Modesto, CA 95356-9321 (209) 557-6400 ~' FAX (209) 557-6475 Central Region Office ~ 990 East Gettysburg Avenue Fresno, CA 93726-0244 (559) 230-6000 ',, FAX (559) 230-6061 Southern Reg~c.~ ©ffice 2700 M Street, Suite 275 Bakersfield. CA c.. ~ 301-2370 ~661) 326-6900 ~' F~,;,; 65]' 326-6985 California onal Water Quallty ontrol Board Central Valley Region. Gray Davis Governor Winston H. Hickox Secretary for Environmental Protection 9 July 1999 CERTIFIED MAIL P 846 403 993 Steven T. Butler, Chair Fresno Branch Office Interact Address: http://www.swrcb.ca.gov/~rwqcb5 3614 East Ashlan Avenue, Fresno, California 93726 Phone (559) 445-5116 · FAX (559) 445-5910 CE P 846 403 994 Mr. John Arnold" SoilRem Corporation P.O. Box 40764 Bakersfield, CA 93307 Mr. Wayne Massie South Enterprise Zone 6570 North Backer Fresno, CA 93710 TRANSMITTAL OF ADOPTED SPECIAL ORDER FOR SOILREM CORPORATION, INC., THE SOUTH ENTERPRISE ZONE, FACILITY COMPLIANCE PLAN, CLASS II WASTE MANAGEMENT UNITS, BAKERSFIELD, KERN COUNTY Enclosed is an official copy of Order No. 99-059 as adopted by the California Regional Water Quality Control Board, Central Valley Region, at its 11 June 1999 meeting. WILLIAM F. PFISTER Supervising Engineering Geologist CEG No. 931 DKP:rac Enclosure: Adopted Order cc: Mr. Ralph Huey, City of Bakersfield, Bakersfield California Environmental Protection Agency Recycled Paper From: Howard Wines To: inet:ckinne@calepa.ca.gov Date: 7/13/99 11:51AM Subject: FCP Approvals I take pleasure in being able to inform you, on Ralph Huey's behalf, that the City of Bakersfield is prepared to notify both the Bakersfield Heart Hospital and SoilRem Corporation of the various permitting agency approvals of their respective Facility Compliance Plans. SoilRem, in particular, is requesting some type of Unified Permit or certificate indicating the consolidated approvals of the various agencies and specific permit authorizations contained within the FCP to manifest compliance to their prospective customers. As the Unified Agency, we are already authorized to issue Unified Permits under CaI/EPA's Unified Program, and would like to employ the same type of instrument to further encompass references to FCP permit approvals as well. What's your opinion on this suggestion? BAKERSFIELD FIRE DEPARTMENT FAX Transmittal COMPANY: FROM: Office of Environmental Services FAX No. (805) 326-0576 · Bus No. (805) 326-3979 1715 Chester Ave. · Bakersfield, CA 93301 .... g.~.~.~ ......... ~..~.~.~.~...~ ................................................................................................................................................................... ..~.L~.~:~ ....... .~.~. ....... .~_d~..~ ........ ~.~.~.~.~. ........ .q~z.L.~ ......... ~.~.~.~z......~. ........... ....~.~~..~ .......... [,.~.~s. ....... ~g.~: ...~g.~.~e~ ~ ........ t.~ ........ o~......t~.~.~..g.,. .......... .. ~.~..ff~.~ ..... ~ ...L.~.~g..~ ......... ~.~ .......... ~fig~%u.~.~ ....... ~.~o~uc~ ~ ~ .-- ...., ... ~--~.-- -- ....... ....... ........ ~%z ....... ~:E. ...... ~..~. ....... ~..~S ........ ~ ...... .&....~.~.~.~t ........ ~......~.~.g~.....~ .......... ........ ~.~.g~g .......... ~ ....... <~.~. ....... ~.~.~..~ ......... ~.~.~(~ ......... ~.....~..~. ....... ~.~......~.~ ...... ~.(~,~) ....... ~.~. ........ &.(.~. ....... D_S.~.~.~ ........ ~ ......... .~.~.6.~..~ ......... ~.~ ........ ~.~.~9.~5. ...... ~....~.~E~e-~, ........ ~R~.~.5 ......... L3. ....... .;..~.~:g~.~. ........ ~.g.~.Y~ ......... g.~.......~.~ ...................................................... BAKERSFIELD FIRE DEPARTMENT To~ From: Subject: MEMORANDUM July 12, 1999 Ralph Huey, Director Howard Wines, Hazardous Materials Specialist SoiiRem's Facility Compliance Plan Status BACKGROUND You had asked me to review the status of SoilRem's Facility Compliance Plan (FCP) and also comment on the issue of SoilRem's compliance with the Water Quality Control Plan portion of the FCP as it relates to the design and construction of the site. ISSUE Whether the Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board's (RWQCB) letter of 13 May 1999, approving the Waste Management Unit liner plans (dated 30 April 1999 and signed by Tim W. Collins, RCE No. 40610) extended that same approval to Detail #5 "Typical - 100' x 10ft Clean Soil Storage Cell" utilizing a I0 mil poly sheet liner. OPINION The RWQCB's May 13, 1999 approval of SoilRem's liner plan was expressly limited to approval of 40 mil liner materials for a Class II Waste Management Unit (WMU) at the site. Since the Water Quality Control Plan portion of SoilRem's FCP also considers the Clean Soil Storage Cell to be a Class II WMU, it would necessarily require a 40 mil liner as well, unless an engineered alternative is allowed by the RWQCB pursuant to Sections 20080 (b) and (c), supra. SoilRem's argument that they acted in good faith on the RWQCB's approval ora plan which did, in fact, include a design detail specifying the use ora 10 mil liner for the Clean Soil Storage Cells only, might become a contributing factor for the possible approval of an engineered alternative by the RWQCB in this case. A SWRCB legal counsel's opinion should be sought on this issue, as SoilRem and the Central Valley RWQCB are each apparently adamant in their opposing positions. FACTS On March 26, i999 the RWQCB issued SoilRem a Water Quality Control Plan as Attachment A to SoilRem's FCP. A discharge specification contained within the Water Quality Control Plan (page 2) required that, "4. Treated material shall be stored within a certified Class II waste management unit " On April 15, 1999, SoilRem resubmitted a revised FCP to the RWQCB which included the Water Quality Control Plan as Appendix A. The design and construction of Class II WMU's is regulated under Chapter 3 of Division 2 of Title 27, CCR. Section 20330(c) of Title 27, CCR requires that flexible membrane or synthetic liners have a minimum thickness of 40 mils (0.040"). SoilRem Memo July 12, 1999 Page 2 Section 20080 allows for engineered alternatives to SWQCB promulgated regulations to be considered under certain conditions enumerated under subparts (b) and (c) supra. SoilRem subsequently submitted liner plans (dated 30 April 1999 and signed by Tim W. Collins, RCE No. 40610) to the RWQCB for review. The plans contained details on the contaminated soil treatment area, indicating a 40 mil liner design, as well as detail #5 indicating a 10 mil liner under the Clean Soil Storage Cell where the treated material will be stored. On May 13, 1999, RWQCB issued a letter to SoilRem stating, "Our preliminary assessment indicates the design plans, specifications, and QA/QC plan appear to be in accordance with Title 27 of the California Code of Regulations. However, final approval requires an action by the Regional Board at a public meeting." This letter further specified liner materials as 40 mil, and included an admonition that "..if you decide to begin construction of the proposed liner prior to Board approval, it is at your own risk." The RWQCB's letter did not mention nor specifically deny the 10 mil reference to the Clean Soil Storage Cell liner detail. Between June 2 and June 5, 1999, Soils Engineering, Inc. certified that the installation of the 40 mil liner and leachate collection system for the contaminated soil treatment area was performed according to plans and in accordance with Title 27 CCR. On June 11, 1999, the RWQCB, at its stated public meeting, issued a Special Order approving the Water Quality Control Plan section of SoilRem's FCP. At some point subsequent to the liner plan and FCP approval by the RWQCB, SoilRem made a non- refundable purchase of 10 mil liner material, apparently acting in good faith that the Clean Soil Storage Cell liner design, as indicated in detail//5 of the approved drawing, was similarly approved by the RWQCB in their letter of May 13, 1999. Discussions have recently ensued between SOilRem and RWQCB staff on the acceptance of the liner design based on the plan as submitted and the apparent approval thereof. To date, there has not been a resolution to the issue of whether the 10 mil liner design was approved by the RWQCB as submitted. CONCLUSION The RWQCB's May 13, 1999 approval of the liner plan dated April 30, 1999 was expressly specific to the approval of utilizing 40 mil liner material. SoilRem contends that the approval was on the plan as a whole, whereby the plan severally referred to using 40 mil liner under the contaminated soil and 10 mil liner under the Clean Soil Storage Cells. The RWQCB has not heretofore made a distinction between the pre-treatment Contaminated Soil WMU and the post-treatment Clean Soil Storage Cell WMU, but consider both to be regulated as Class II WMU. As such, Title 27 would require a 40 mil liner, unless an engineered alternative (which in this case would utilize a 10 mil liner) can be shown to provide an equivalent amount of protection under the Clean Soil Storage Cell that a 40 mil liner would otherwise provide for the contaminated soil. A SWRCB legal counsel opnion should be sought to assist in the resolution of this issue. ~UL-t3-99 TUE t3:04 SJV~POD SO REGIOH F~X NO, 6613266985 P, O1/02 San Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution Control District Southern Region - 2700 "M" Street, Suite 275, Bakersfield, California 93301 Phone: (661) 326-6900 FAX: (661) 326-6985 FAX TRANSMITTAL SHEET Company: Fax #: # Pages: Date/Time: From: Steve Tomlin, Air Quality Engineer Message: SOILREM CORPORATION "ANNOUNCES THE BAKERSFIELD SOLUTION TO YOUR SOIL REMEDIATION PROBLEMS" SOILREM CORP. SoilRem has just opened our Fully Permitted Bakersfield Soil Remediation Site at 408 East Pacheco Road SoilRem's experienced staff will provide cost effective solutions for: * :HYDROCARBON CONTAMINATION *Gasoline *Diesel *Crude Oil *Oil & Grease *Long Chain Hydrocarbons *Jet Fuel *RINSATE LIQUIDS *RANGE OF OTHER CONTAMINANTS *ACCEPT 55 GAI,LON DRUMS FOR SOIL REMEDIATION SOLUTIONS CALL 1 (661) 834-8471 1 (661) 397-9641 Conditional Use Permit #P99-0053 0 0 z '-r'] x z o B A K E R S p I E L D~ FIRE DEPARTMENT FAX Transmittal TO: COMPANY: FROM: FAX No: Office of Environmental Services FAX No. (805) 326°0576 · Bus No. (805) 326-3979 1715 Chester Ave. · Bakersfield, CA 93301 Sent By: CALIFORNIA RWQCB FRESNO; 559 445 5910; Ju1-13-99 11:17AM; O' California Regional Water Quality C ontrol B Central Valley Region Wlns~n H. Hlckox Steven T. Buffer, Chair £.vlronssental Fresno Brant& ~mc (559) 445-5116 - FAX {559) ~5-5910 9 July 1999 CERTIFIED MAIL P 846 403 993 CERTIFIED P 846 403 9[ Mr. John Arnold" SoilR~m Corporation P.O. Box 40764 Bakersfield, CA 93307 Mx. Wayne South Enter 6570 North Fresno, CA TRANSMI'UrAL OF ADOPTED SPECIAL ORDER FOR SOIl,REM CORPORa THE SOUTH ENTERPRISE ZONE, FACILITY COMPLIANCE PLA.N, CLASS MANAGEMENT UNITS, BAKERSFIELD, KERN COUNTY Enclosed is an official copy of Order No. 99-059 as adopted by the'California Regional Control Board. Ccntral Vall~ Region, at its 11 June 1999 racing. WILLIAM F. PFISTER Supervising Engineering Geologist CEG No. 931 Enclosure: Adopted Order Mr. Ralph Huey, City of Bakersfield, Bakersfield Page 1 Gray Davis MAlL 4 4assie rise Zone tack~r t3710 ,TION, INC., II WASTE Water Quality Post-It"' brand tax transmittal mem~ California Environmental Protection Agency~ ORecycled P~laer Sent By: CALIFORNIA RWQCB FRESNO; 559 445 5910; Jui-13-99 11:18AU cI:NTRAL VALLEY REGION SPECIAL ORDER NO. 99-059 FOR SOILREM CORPORATiON, INC. THE SOUTH ENTERPRISE ZONE FACILITY COMPLIANCE PLAN CLASS 1I WASTE MANAOEMF.2qT' UNITS BAKERSFIELD, KERN COUNTY The California Regional Water Quality Control Board, Central Valley Region, (hereat~ that: SoilRem Corporation, Inc. (Ol~rator) and the South Enterpfis~ Zone (Property herr.~r collectively referred to as 'Discharger'. The City of Bakersfield has been' designated a Permit Consolidation Zone un& Consolidation Zone Piloi Program (5B 1299). This process providos fOr a pert prepa~ a Facility Compliance Plan (FCP) in lieu of obtaining individual cnvir frm'a separate permitting authorities. An FCP is required to contain all regular tha~ would normally be rcquirexi in an individual permit. An FC'P is effective of r~ pilot program (1 January 2002) and until it is converted in individual e~ The Board adopted Resolution NO. 98-173 which authorizes thc Executive Of agr~ment with the City of Bakersfield to participate in the l~rmit Consolidat~ The Executive Officer signed a Permit Consolidation Zone Pilot Program Ag 14 August 1998. By the terms of that agn~ement, an FCPmay be substituted requirements on a cast:-by-ca.sc basis, conditione, d on approval by the Board. On 23 February 1999, a draft FCP was ~w. eived from the City of Bakersfield SoilRcm facility. The Dischargo' pmpo~ to accept nonhazardous, petroleax contaminated soils for treatment by soil washing and biomm~diation. T~atm sold as fill materials. Board staff commented on thc draft FCP and provided a section to b~. inser, m entitled "Water Quality Control Plan", which includes site sl:n~ific discharg~ spocifications and piovisions and hhc Standard Provisions and Reporting August 1997, Any references to "Waste Discharge Requirements" or "WDR Standard Provisions and Reporting Requirements, dal~d.'August 1997 apply Cort~oration FCP. Page 2/5 ;r Board) finds Owner) are r the Permit ~t applicant to )nrr~ntal permits hroughout u'~ u~rm vironmental ,~cer to enter into an on Zone Pilot ,eernent, dated Or opera~ou o~'d~ hydmcafoon soils will then b~ into thc final FCP xohibitions, ruirements, dalmi contained in th~ the $oilRem Sent By: CALIFORNIA RWQCB FRESNO; SPI~CIAL ORDER NO. SOR. REM CORPORATION, iNC. TH~ SOUTH ENTERPRISE ZONE BAKERSFIELD, KERN COUNTY 10. il. 12. 13. 14. 559 445 5910; Ju1-13-99 11:19AM Page 3/5 On 19 April 1999, the final $oilRem Corporation FCP, dated 15 April 1999 wi the City of Bakersfield. Thc final FCP contained the "Water Quality Control P atU~hmenc The "Water Quality Control Plaff' section of the $oilRem Corporation FCP appropriate requirements as would be contain~ in Waste Discharge Requirem, approval of the "Water'Quality Control Plan" section of the $oilR~rn Corporat~ equivalent to the issuance of Waste Discharg~ Requireraents. The "Water Qua sectiot~ of the .~oilRem Corporation FCP is 'complete and ~:lequate' as it -2- r~iv~d from ~n" section as an ~tains all ~ts. Therefor, ,n FCP is lity Control Pla~" tins ali ' ~.qui~ments applicable to this discharge as requited by Division 7 of the C. ali~mia Water Cede and Title 27 of the Cnlifomia Code of Regulations. Any references to "Waste ~)isclun~ Requirements" or "WI)Rs" contained in Division 7 of the California Water Cdde and Title 27 of the California Code of RegulatiOns apply to the $oilRem Corporation FCP. Th~ "Wat~ Quality Control Plan" section requites submittal of several items hat must be submitl~ to the Executive Offico- for review and approval prior to acceptanc of waste at thc The I;CP is an enfolv, e. abl© docurmnt intended to ensure compliance with all a ~plicabi~ environmental laws, regulations and ordinances, and with all environmental p ~rmits lhat would otherwise be required. Board staff will make pexiodic inspections and enforce the tequirement~ of the "Water Quality Control Plan" section of the $oiIfem Corporation FCP. '1 he SoilRem Corporation FCP is subject to ¢lfforc~ment by thc Board as if it wer~ an indi~ idual environmental p~rmit or set of Waste Discharge Requi~rnents. The SoilRem Corporation FCP is subject to any provision of law or regulatio, l adopted subsequent to ~ approval of ~e FCP. The Board may re. quest SoilRem Corporation to .~c~ language within the FCP to t~flect compliance with laws and t~gulations adopted subs, quent to the Board's adoption of the $oilRem Corporation FCP. If the~e is any conflicting or contradictory language between th~ "Water Qual ty Control Plan" and any other sections of the $oilRan Corl~orar~ FCP. the "Water Quality Con~ ~ol Plan" s~-tion shall govern over other sections for purposes of compliance with. and Board ~nforc~ment of water 'quality ~gulations and requirements. This O~ler is being issued in accoldanc~ with the Permit.Consolidation Zon, Pilot Program Agreemenl. The purpos~ of this Order is to approve and °rd~t compliance w~ th th~ "Water Quality Control Plan" r~ction of the SoiiRern Corpora~'on FCP. This Order,to~s not approve any r~tions of the $oilRem Corporation FCP other than the "Walcr Quality Co~,troi Plan" section. SITE LOCATION AND DESCRIFrlON The lO. acm site is at 408 East P~h~o Road n~ar Cottonwood Road. on a p ~r. ion of asses.~or pan:el number 172-O'/0-03 in the SE 1/4 of Section 17. T30S. R2gE, MDB& M 'in the City of Sent By: CALIFORNIA RWOCB FRESNO; SPECIAL OR~ER NO. 99~ SOILRI~ CORi~RATION, ~C. ~ SO~ ~~SE ZO~ 559 445 5910; Ju1-13-99 11:20AM 15. 16. 17. 18. 19. 21. Bakersfield, Kern County. Land willfin 1,000 feet of the facility is or has been agr/cu]tum. Soils in the area are classified as moderately permeable. Average annual Pmcipit~on is apln'oxin~tely 6.1 inches and annual pan evap~ approximately 63 inches. The 1000-year, 24-hour precipitation event is cstirnat 2.'79 inches. The site is not within a 100-year flood plain. Groundwater ne~ the prol~ed site is appwxim~ly 30 feet below thc ground (3t~andwater quality in the a,'v.a is generally good, with ~n average specific ele~ of npproximamly 1300 Imtho/cm. Beneficial u~,~ of ~roundwater near the site and domestic supply, agricultural sul~lY, and industrial process and service suf approximately 30 domestic wells, 10 i~gation wells, and 6 municipal wells wi si~. WASTES AND THEIR CLASSWiCATION Only nonhazardous, hydrocarbon-contaminated soil is proposed to be contaminated wi~h gasoline, diesel, crude oil, mineral oils,, lubricating oils and oils may ~ a_,'ee__pted. No liquid wastes will be Hydrocarbon contaminat~ soil contains ~ohble constituents that could und~ ambient conditions at this sit~. Therefore, the contaminated soil is waste, t~gulated by Title 27 of the California Code of Regulations. required to be stor~l on lined Class H Wmt~ M~nag~ment Units. CRQA 'CONSIDERATiONS The Board of Zoning Adjustment of the City of Bakersfield approved a mitigi D~laration on 9 March 1999~ in accordance with the California (CEQA) (Public Resources Coc~ §21000, et S~l.) and State CEQA considered the Ncgutive Declaration end incorporataJ measures Plan" section of tl~ $oiIRem Corporation FCP that am intended to mitigat~ significan! i~ts on wa~-r qualiv], OTlt~R LEGAL ~RENCES This Order imple~nents the Water Quality Comrol Plan.for the Tulare ~ F_~ff~, which designates beneficial uses and contains water quality objecti~ the Basin. This Chalet implements thc prescriptive standards and performance goals of Californin Cod~ of Regulations. Page 4/5 -3- reviously used for ation is :d robe ;urface. ~cai conductivity nclude municipal ply. There are ~hin one mile of the Soil and fuel to gwundwater 'designated' soil is Negative Qual~ act The. Board h~ ~tial for a/l water~ of 27ofthe Sent By: CALIFORNIA RWQCB FRESNO; S~ ORDER NO. ~9 559 445 5910; Ju1-13-99 11:22AM; 22. The Board has notified the Discharger and interested agencies and persons of; this order and ha~ provided them ~vith an opportunity for a public hcaring and submit their ~iuea views and recommendations. 23. The Board, in a public meeting, heard and considered all comments pcrtainin, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that $oilRcm Corporation, Inc., the South Enterprise Zo successors, and assigns, in order to meet the provisions contained': in'Division ? of the Cod~ and regulations adopted thereunder, shall comply with: the '.~atcr Quality Con' tbe.$oilRera Corporatioa gacilJt~ Compliance Plan including any attachments or tevi aaached and incorporaled heroin by reference; with Title 27 of the California Code o! with the Standard Provisions aad Reporting Requirements dated August 1997. I, GARY M. CARLTON, Executive Officer, do hereby certify thc foregoing is a full. copy of an Order adopted by the California Regional Water Quality Con~'ol Board, C Region, on 11 June 1999. Page 5/5 ts intent to adopt an opportunity to to this f~ility and c, and their agents, California Water roi Plan" section of sions, which is Regulations; and ti'tiC, and correct ;ntral Valley San J°aquin Valley Air Pollution Control District June 30,1999 Mr. John Arnold, President Soil Rem Corporation P.O. Box 40764, South Station 524 Bakersfield, CA 93304-9998 Re: Facility Compliance Plan for Soil Washing/Bioremediation Operation Dear Mr. Arnold: We are in receipt of a letter dated June 15, 1999 with revised pages for your Facility Compliance Plan (FCP) from Mr. Ralph Huey of the City of Bakersfield Office of Environmental Services. The revised pages were submitted in response to the District's May 6, 1999 letter (copy attached). The revised pages included with Mr. Huey's letter appear to address the District's concerns listed in items (l-b) through (2-b) in the District's May 6, 1999 letter. Based on telephone conversations with the City of Bakersfield, it appears that item (l-a) listed on the District's May 6, 1999 letter is being resolved by the California Regional Water Quality Control Board. However, as of the date of this letter, the Distdct has not received any information or revised FCP pages addressing item (l-a) in the Distficrs. Please submit revised pages addressing this item as soon as possible. Once this information is received, the District will make a final determination regarding your Facility Compliance Plan. Thank you for your coopei'ation in this matter..Should you have any questions, please contact me or Mr. Steve Tomlin of Permit Services at (661) 326-6900. Sincerely, Seyed Sadredin Director,of Permit Services /. :i , -.j Thoma~ E. Goff, P.E. Permit Services Manager svt X.C, .Ralph Huey, Zone Administrator City of Bakersfield Permit Consolidation Zone Peter Ruggerello, CAL EPA Permit Assistance Center David L. Crow Executive Director/Air Pollution Control Officer Northern Region Office 4230 Kiernan Avenue, Suite 130 Modesto, CA 95356-9321 (209) 557-6400 ,.. FAX (209) 557-6475 Central Region Office 1990 East Gettysburg Avenue Fresno, CA 93726-0244- (559) 230-6000 "' FAX (S59) 230-6061 Southern Region Office 2700 M Street, Suite 275 Bakersfield. CA 93301 -2370 (661t 326-6900 + FAX '661) 326-6985 RECORD OF TELEPHONE CONVER8ATION Location: /--~ E PPc_r(cc~ Business Name: , ~o~c_~-~ Contact Name: ...~c~,~ /~<~/~ ID# Business Phone: Inspector's Name: Time of Call: ~e~ FAX:. Type of Call: Incoming [ ] Outgoing [ ] # Min: _ Returned ~' Content of Call: ~ ~¢J ~ ~ ~- ~ ~'~ ~ ~ ~ Actions Required: Time Required to Complete Activity # Min: San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District June 3,1999 Mr. Ralph Huey, Zone Administrator City of Bakersfield Permit Consolidation Zone Office of Environmental Services 1715 Chester Avenue Bakersfield, CA 93301 RE: Soil Rem CorporatiOn's Facility Compliance Plan Dear Mr. Huey: We are in receipt of a letter dated May 17, 1999 from Soil Rem Corporation regarding the District's comments on the proposed Facility Compliance Plan (FCP). In a May 6, 1999 letter (copy attached), the District outlined several points which must be incorporated into the final FCP. These points reference several places in the proposed FCP that list different values for the same critical process parameters. This information was used by various agencies, including the District, to established compliance with applicable rules & regulations. When more than one value is listed in the proposed FCP as a specific process limitation, it makes it unclear what the enforceable limit is. It continues to be this office's opinion that the points outlined in the May 6, 1999 letter to Soil Rem must be incorporated into the FCP in order for the FCP to be enforceable as a practical · matter. We cannot approve a FCP that includes different values for process limitations. We are encouraged in learning, via our telephone conversations, that point (1-a.) listed on the District's May 6, 1999 letter to Soil Rem is being resolved by the California Regional Water Quality Control Board. It is imperative that the other points we've raised be resolved if the FCP concept has any hope of successfully completing its pilot phase. Thank you for your cooperation in this matter. Should you have any questions, please contact me or Mr. Steve Tomlin of Permit Services at (661) 326-6900. Sincerely, Seyed Sadredin Director of Permit Services Thomas E:,Goff, P.E. Permit Services Manager svt CC: Mr. John Arnold, Soil Rem Corp. w/o attac. Ms. Christine Kinne, Cai EPA w/att~q~id L. Crow Executive Director/Air Pollution Control Officer Northern Region Office 4230 Kiernan Avenue, Suite 130 Modesto, CA 95356-9321 (209) 557-6400 · FAX (209) 557-6475 Central Region Office 1990 East Gettysburg Avenue Fresno, CA 93726-0244 (559) 230-6000 · FAX (559) 230-6061 Southern Region Office 2700 M Street, Suite 275 Bakersfield, CA 93301-2370 (661) 326-6900 · FAX (661) 326-6985 California REgional Water Quality?',ontrol Board Winston H. Hickox Secretary for Environmental Protection 10 June 1999 Central Valley Region Steven T. Butler, Chair Fresno Branch Office www.swrcb.ca.gov/~rwqcb5 3614 East Ashlan Avenue, Fresno, California 93726 Phone (559) 445-5116 · FAX (559) 445-5910 Gray Davis Goven~or Mr. John Arnold SoilRem Corporation, Inc. P.O. Box 40764 Bakersfield, CA 93304 GROUNDWATER WELL INSTALLATION, SOILREM CORPORATION, INC., BAKERSFIELD, KERN COUNTY We have reviewed your proposed Groundwater Installation And Sampling Plan, dated 10 May 1999. You are proposing to install two groundwater monitoring wells at your soil. recycling facility at 408 East Pacheco Road in Bakersfield. The plan is based onthe existing wells at the former CleanSoils site on White Lane, adjacent to your facility. We have no objection to the installation of the proposed wells, assuming conditions beneath the facility are as described in the plan. If it is discovered during drilling that conditions differ significantly (e.g. there is no perched water, or depths to groundwater are not as expected) then the plan must be modified. Any significant deviation from the plan needs to be discussed with us before being implemented. Please notify us when you will be installing the wells and we will be available for discussion with your consultant if field conditions dictate a change in the plan. If you have any questions, please call Doug Patteson at (559) 445-6191. SHELTON R. GR ' Senior Engineering Geologist WILLIAM PFISTER Supervising Engineering Geologist CEG No. 931 cc: Ms. Diane Wilson, Kern County Environmental Health Department, Bakersfield Mr. Ralph Huey, City of Bakersfield, Bakersfield California Environmental Protection Agency Rec~cled Paper San Joaquin Valley Air Pollution Control District June 3,1999 Mr. Ralph Huey, Zone Administrator City of Bakersfield Permit Consolidation Zone Office of Environmental Services 1715 Chester Avenue Bakersfield, CA 93301 RE: Soil Rem CorporatiOn's Facility Compliance Plan Dear Mr..Huey: We are in receipt of a letter dated May 17, 1999 from Soil Rem Corporation regarding the District's comments on the proposed Facility Compliance Plan (FCP). In a May 6, 1999 letter (copy attached), the District outlined several points which must be incorporated into the final FCP. These points reference several places in the proposed FCP that list different values for the same critical process parameters. This information was used by various agencies, including the District, to established compliance with applicable rules & regulations. When more than one value is listed in the proposed FCP as a specific process limitation, it makes it unclear what the enforceable limit is. It continues to be this office's opinion that the points outlined in the May 6, 1999 letter to Soil Rem must be incorporated into the FCP in order for the FCP to be enforceable as a practical matter. We cannot approve a FCP that includes different values for process limitations. We are encouraged in learning, via our telephone conversations, that point (1-a.) listed on the District's May 6, 1999 letter to Soil Rem is being resolved by the California Regional Water Quality Control' Board. It is imperative that the other points we've raised be resolved if the FCP concept has any hope of successfully completing its pilot phase. Thank you for your cooperation in this matter. Should you have any questions, please contact me or Mr. Steve Tomlin of Permit Services at (661) 326-6900. Sincerely, Seyed Sadredin Director of Permit Services · Thomas E. Goff, P.E. Permit Services Manager ~vt CC: Mr. John Arnold, Soil Rem Corp. w/o attac. Ms. Christine Kinne, Cai EPA w/att~id L. Crow Executive Director/Air Pollution Control Officer Northern Region Office 4230 Kiernan Avenue, Suite 130 Modesto, CA 95356-9321 (209) 557-6400 · FAX (209) 557-6475 Central Region Office 1990 East Gettysburg Avenue Fresno, CA 93726-0244 (559) 230-6000 · FAX (559) 230-6061 Southern Region Office 2700 M Street, Suite 275 Bakersfield. CA 93301-2370 (661) 326-6900 · FAX (661) 326-6985 May 17, 1999 Mr. Raymond Rodriquez San Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution Control District 2700 M. Street, Suite 275 Bakersfield, Ca. 93301 Re: Project #990190 Project Description: Facility Compliance Plan for Soil Washing/Bioremediation operation. Dear Mr. Rodriquez, Pursuant to your telephone conversation with Mr. Howard Wines of the office of Environmental Services on May 13, 1999,to your letter of May 6, 1999, Subject; same as above: we herewith submit our comment to 1. A. The permit conditions in Annex 111.3.C., operations, A 1, water quality is not fully descriptive of the process. By reference to appendix 111.3.C. 1. (a) 1, it is clear that the process intended to include gasoline and diesel since the required treatment level is given in the same section. The Conditional Use Permit States" applicants are requesting ..... that treats/cleans soil contaminated with hydrocarbons (Gasoline, Oil, Diesel)". Environmental Health Services comments to the Negative Declaration requested specific language be placed in the permit. "The facility may receive only soil that contains designated or nonhazardous concentrations of petroleum hydrocarbons such as gasoline ..... ." Further in Annex section 111.3 (a) 2 Process Description, the fact that gasoline and diesel contaminated soil will be taken in as well as soil contaminated with other hydrocarbons, is set forth in detail by language of appendix 111.b.c and was not meant to subsume these other sections. B). The ,General Acceptance Procedures for soil and water", "and analytical requirements for soil and water" will be removed from the Facility Compliance Plan. No free liquids or liquid waste will be accepted, stored or processed. C). The reference listed under "Water Quality" refers to 20,000 yards of untreated material whereas the "air quality" section refers to total tons stored. We understand the 15,000-ton quantity as stated in the air quality section is the permit limit. D). The "Enforcement Agency Notification" 400 tons peak load refers to machinery capability to process at peak capacity. The 600 tons referred to in Annex 111.3.C, operations, and "Air Quality is the maximum, which can be received and stored in a day this gives us the flexibility to maintain stock material to ensure continued operations. Please note the 400 tons is not a permit limitation, it is the machinery limitation. Differing values for the distance to the nearest offsite residence appears in the FCP. However, please note that all the Districts health risk assessments were based on the 200-yard distance and is therefore the most stringent requirement and the enforcement level. Thank you for your comments and assistance in our FCP development. Should you have any questions or require additional information, please telephone Mr. Jack Jones at (661) 833-3540. Sincerely, John E. Arnold President San Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution Control District May 6,1999 Mr. John Arnold, President Soil Rem Corporation P.O. Box 40764, South Station 524 B~akersfield, CA 93304-9998 Re: Project #990190 Project Description: Facility Compliance Plan for Soil Washing/Bioremediation Operation Dear Mr. Arnold: The District has received your revised Facility Compliance Plan (FCP) for your soil washing/bioremediation operation. Based on this review, the following points must be incorporated into the final FacilitY Compliance Plan: Any less stringent limitations should be removed as they are subsumed by the more stringent limits. The following discrepancies among regulatory limits are noted: The permit conditions in Annex 111.3.c, Operations, listed under "Water Quality" indicate Soil Rem shall not accept gasoline contaminated soil. However, permit conditions in the "Air Quality" section allow Soil Rem to accept gasoline contaminated soil with concentrations of 40,000 ppmw or less. bo The information in Annex 111.4, Emissions Documentation, "General Acceptance Procedures for Soil and Water", and "Analytical Requirements for Soil & Water'', imply that free liquids or liquid waste will be received by Soil Rem. However, this is not allowed by District permit conditions as stated in Annex 111.3.c, Operations. The FCP must be revised to eliminate all references to the receiving of liquids. The permit conditions in Annex 111.3.c, Operations, listed under "Water Quality" indicate Soil Rem may store up to 20,000 tons of petroleum contaminated soil. However, permit conditions in the "Air Quality" section indicate that no more than 15,000 tons total shall be stored. David L. Crow EXecutive Director/Air Pollution Control Officer 1990 East.Gettysburg Avenue, Fresno, CA 93726 (559) 230-6000 FAX (559) 230-6061 Northern Region 4230 Kiernan Avenue, Suite 130, Modesto, CA 95356 (209) 557-6400 FAX (209) 557-6475 ~ Prlnto(3 on RecycleO P(313er, Central Region 1990 East Gettysburg Avenue, Fresno, CA 93726 (559) 230-6000 FAX (559) 230-6061 Southern Region 2700 M Street, Suite 275, Bakersfield, CA 93301 (661)326-6900 FAX (661) 326-6985 Mr. John Arnold May 6, 1999 Page 2 The data in Annex II1.1, Maps & Drawings, listed under "Enforcement Agency Notification" indicates Soil Rem may receive up to 400 tons per day of petroleum contaminated soil. However, permit conditions in Annex 111.3.c, Operations, "Air Quality" indicate that no more than 600 tons total shall be received and stored in any one day. Throughout the Facility Compliance Plan, there are differing values for the distance to the nearest offsite business or residence. The information in Section 11.2.c, Preliminary Assessment, indicates there are no residences within 1000 feet. The information in Section 111.3.d, Planning, "(3) Coordination with Natural Resources Trustees and NGO's, Notice of Public Hearing", "Environmental Discussion", indicates there are no residences within 0.5 mile. The District estimated a distance of 200 yards to the nearest receptor. In addition, the District believes a FCP with a condition such as "compliance with one condition does not authorize violation of another condition or any regulation" is a flawed FCP. Therefore, we do not recommend this as an alternative to eliminating subsumed requirements. Thank you for your cooperation in this matter. Should you have any questions, please telephone Mr. Steve Tomlin at (661) 326-6968, or Raymond Rodriguez at (661) 326-6957. Sincerely, Seyed Sadredin Director of Permit Services Th~)mas E.~ o~ff, P.E. Permit Services Manager svt X, Co Ralph Huey, Zone Administrator City of Bakersfield Permit Consolidation Zone Peter Ruggerello, CAL EPA Permit Assistance Center May 17, 1999 Mr. Raymond Rodriquez San Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution Control District 2700 M. Street, Suite 275 Bakersfield, Ca. 93301 Re: Project #990190 Project Description: Facility Compliance Plan for Soil Washing/Bioremediation operation. Dear Mr. Rodriquez, _Pursuant to your telephone conversation with Mr. Howard Wines of the office of Environmental Services on May 13, 1999,to your letter of May 6, 1999, Subject; same as above: we herewith submit our comment tol. A. The permit conditions in Annex 111.3.C., operations, A l, water quality is not fully descriptive of the process. By reference to appendix 111.3.C. 1. (a) 1, it is dear that the process intended to include gasoline and diesel since the required treatment level is given in the same section. The Conditional Use Permit States" applicants are requesting ..... that treats/deans soil contaminated with hydrocarbons (Gasoline, Oil, Diesel)". Environmental Health Services comments to the Negative Declaration requested specific language be placed in the permit. "The facility may receive only soil that contains designated or nonhazardous concentrations of petroleum hydrocarbons such as gasoline ..... ." Further in Annex section 111.3 (a) 2 Process Description, the fact that gasoline and diesel contaminated soil will be taken in as well as soil contaminated with other hydrocarbons, is set forth in · detail by language of appendix 111.b.c and was not meant to subsume these other sections. B). The "General Acceptance Procedures for soil and water", "and analytical requirements for soil and water" will be removed from the Facility Compliance Plan. No free liquids or liquid waste will be accepted, stored or processed. C). The reference listed under "Water Quality" refers to 20,000 yards of untreated material whereas the "air quality" section refers to total tons stored. We understand the 15,000-ton quantity as stated in the air quality section is the permit limit. D). The "Enforcement Agency Notification" 400 tons peak load refers to machinery capability to process at peak capacity. The 600 tons referred to in Annex 111.3.C, operations, and "Air Quality is the maximum, which can be received and stored in a day this gives us the flexibility to maintain stock material to ensure continued operations. Please note the 400 tons is not a permit limitation, it is the machinery limitation. Differing values for the distance to the nearest offsite residence appears in the FCP. However, please note that all the Districts health risk assessments were based on the 200-yard distance and is therefore the most stringent requirement and the enforcement level. Thank you for your comments and assistance in our FCP development. Should you have any questions or require additional information, please telephone Mr. Jack Jones at (661) 833-3540. Sincerely, John E. Arnold President May 17, 1999 Mr. Doug Patterson California Regional Water Quality Control Board 3614 East Ashlan Ave. Fresno, Ca. 93726 Re: Tentative Special Order of 12 May 1999. Dear Mr. Patterson, We have reviewed the tentative special order and submit the following reeomme, ndation; Item 17 should be revised to state. "--- Soil contaminated with gasoline, diesel, crude oil, mineral oils, lubricating oils and greases, and fuel oils may be accepted." Thank you for the opportunity to comment and for your assistance in the development of our FCP. Thank you, John E. Arnold President California l .gionalCentral Water ValleyQUality~'~°ntr°l Region . Board Steven T. Buffer, Chair Winston H. Hickox Secretary for Flr~$11o Branch Office Environmental www.swreb.ca.gov/-rwqcb5 Protection 3614 East Aahlan Avenue, Fresno, California 93726 Phone (559) 445.5116 · FAX (559) 445-5910 13 May 1999 Mr. John Arnold SoilRem Corporation P.O. Box 40764 Bakersfield, CA 93304 Gray Davis Governor WASTE MANAGEMENT UNIT DESIGN, SOILREM CORPORATION, BAKERSFIELD, KERN COUNTY We have reviewed the proposed liner design and quality assurance/quality control (QA/AC) plan for a Class Il waste management unit at your proposed soil recycling facility in Bakersfield. The QA/QC plan is contained in the SoilRem Facility Compliance Plan, dated 15 April 1999. The liner plans are dated 30 April 1999 and signed by Tim W. Collins (RCE No. 40610). The specified liner materials are: Geomembrane - National Seal Company, DuraSeal HD (40-mil) . Geonet - Evergretn TechnOlogies, NS 140551 Geotextile - Mirafi, 160N (6-ounce) . .. Our preliminary assessment indicates the design plans, specifications, and QA/QC plan appear to be in accordance with Title 27 of the California Code of Regulations. However, final approval requires an action by the Regional Board at a public meeting. Please be advised that if you decide to begin construction of the proposed liner prior to Board approval, it is at your own risk. Any construction needs to follow the QA/QC procedures contained in the Facility Compliance Plan. A certified construction report must be submitted to this office following construction. If you have any questions, please call Doug Patteson at (559) 445-6191. Senior Engineering Geologist cc: .' Ralph Huey, City of Bakersfield, Bakersfield WILLIAM PFISTER Supervising Engineering Geologist CEG No. 931 DKP: c:\~woro~nn~linapp.stm California Environmental Protection Agency oRecycled Paper California l gionalcentralWatervalleyQualit ontroll egion Board Steven T. Buffer, Chair Winston H. Hlckox Gray Davis Secretary for l~'e$lio Branch Office Governor Environmental http'J/www.swrcb.ca.govl-tnvqcb$ Protection 3614 East Ashlan Avenue, Fresno, California 93726 Phono (559) 445-5116 · FAX (559) 445-5910 12 May 1999 Mr. John Arnold SoilRem Corporation, Inc. · P.O. Box 40764 · .. Bakersfield, CA 93307 Mr. Wayne Massie South Enterprise Zone 6570 North Backer Fresno, CA 93710 . Enclosed is a copy of, a tentative Special Order for operation of your proposed soil {~cycling facility in Bakersfield, Kern Couiity. The purpose of the Special Order is to approve and-order complianCe with the "Water Quality Control Plan" section of the SoiIRem Corporation FCP. Any comments or recommendations you may have concerning this tentative Order should be submitted to this offiCe by 21 May 1999. If you have any questions, please call DoUg Patteson at (209) 445-6191. SHULTON R.. GRA_. Senior Engineering Geologist Supervising Engineering Geologist CEG No.. 931 cc: Mr. Ralph Huey, City of Bakersfield, Bakersfield DKP: c:\-word~rmXtentltr, arm California Environmental Protection Agency oRecycled Paper CALIFORI~, REGIONAL WATER QUALITY C(7~ZOL BOARD CENTRAL VALLEY REGION SPECIAL ORDER NO. 99- FOR SOILREM CORPORATION, INC. THE SOUTH ENTERPRISE ZONE FACILITY COMPLIANCE PLAN CLASS II WASTE MANAGEMENT UNITS BAKERSFIELD, KERN COUNTY The California Regional Water Quality Control Board, Central Valley Region, (hereinafter Board) finds that: SoilRem Corporation, Inc. (Operator) and the South Enterprise Zone (Property Owner) are hereinafter collectively referred to as 'Discharger'.., ' The City of Bakersfield has been designated a Permit Consolidation Zone under the Permit Consolidation Zone Pilot Program (SB 1299). This process provides for a permit applicant to prepare a Facility Compliance Plan (FCP) in lieu of obtaining individual environmental permits from separate permitting authorities. An FCP is required to contain all regulatory requirements that would normally be required in an individual permit. An FCP is effective throughout the term of the pilot program (1 January, 2002) and until it is converted into individual environmental o The Board adopted Resolution No. 98-173 which authorizes the Executive Officer to enter into an agreement with the City of Bakersfield to participate in the Permit Consolidation Zone Pilot Program. The Executive Officer signed a Permit Consolidation Zone Pilot Program Agreement, dated 14 August 1998. By the terms of that agreement, an FCP may be substituted for Waste Discharge Requirements on a case-by-case basis, conditioned on approval by the Board2' On 23 February 1999, a draft FCP was received from the City of Bakersfield for operation of the SoilRem facili .ty. The Discharger proposes to accept nonhazardous~ petroleum hydrocarbon...,,.' contaminated soils for treatment by soil washing and bioremediation..Treated soils will then be sold as fill materials. Board staff commented on the draft FCP and provided a section to be inserted into the final FCP entitled "Water Quality Control Plan", which includes site specific discharge prohibitions, specifications and provisions and the Standard Provisions and Reporting Requirements, dated August 1997. Any references to "Waste Discharge Requirements" or "WDRs" contained in the Standard Provisions and Reporting Requirements, dated August 1997 apply to the SoiIRem Corporation FCP. On 19 April 1999, the final SoilRem Corporation FCP, dated 15 April 1999 was received from the City of Bakersfield. The final FCP contained the "Water Quality Control Plan" section as an attachment. SPECIAL ORDER NO. 99- .'~' SOILREM CORPORATION, INC. THE SOUTH ENTERPRISE ZONE BAKERSFIELD, KERN COUNTY TENTATIVE -2- The "Water Quality Control Plan" section of the $oilRem Corporation FCP contains all the appropriate rtquirements as would be contained in Waste Discharge Requirements. Therefore, approval of the "Water Quality Control Plan" section of the SoilRem Corporation FCP is equivalent to the issuance of Waste Discharge Requirements. The "Water Quality Control Plan" section of the SoiIRem Corporation FCP is 'complete and adequate' as it contains all requirements applicable to this discharge as required by Division 7 of the California Water Code and Title 27 of the California Code of Regulations. Any references to "Waste Discharge Reqmrements or "WDRs" contained in Division 7 of the California Water Code and Title 27 of the California Code of Regulations apply to the $oilRem Corporation FCP. 10. 11. 12. 13. The "Water Quality Control Plan" section requires submittal of several items that must be submitted to the Executive Officer for review and approval prior to acceptance of waste at the facility. The FCP is an enforceable document intended to ensure compliance,with all applicable environmental laws, regulations and ordinances, and with all environmental permits that would otherwise be required. Board staff will make periodic inspections and enforce the requirements of the "Water Quality Control Plan" section of the SoilRem Corporation FCP. The SoilRem Corporation FCP is subject to enforcement by the Board as if it were an individual environmental . permit or Waste Discharge Requirement. The SoiIRem Corporation FCP is subject to any provision of law or regulation adopted subsequent to the approval of the FCP. The Board may request SoilRem Corporation to incorporate language within the FCP to reflect compliance with laws and regulations adopted subsequent to the Board's adoption of the SoilRem Corporation FCP. If there is any conflicting or contradictory language between the "Water Quality Control Plan" and any other sections of the SoiIRern Corporation FCP, the "Water Quality Control Plan" section shall govern over other sections for purposes of compliance with, and Board enforcement of water. quality regulations and requirements. This Order is being issued in accordance with the Permit conSolidation Zone Pilot Program · Agreement. The purpose of this Order is to approve and order compliance with the "Water Quality Control Plan" section of the SoiIRem Corporation FCP. This Order does not approve any sections of the SoiIRem Corporation FCP other than the "Water Quality Control Plan" section. SITE LOCATION AND DESCRIPTION 14. The 10-acre site is at 408 East Pacheco Road near Cottonwood Road, on a portion of assessor parcel number 172-070-03 in the SE 1/4 of Section 17, T30S, R28E, MDB&M in the City of Bakersfield, Kern County. Land within 1,000 feet of the facility is or has been previously used for agriculture. Soils in the area are classified as moderately permeable. SPECIAL ORDER NO. 99 ' SOILREM CORPORATION, INC. THE SOUTH ENTERPRISE ZONE BAKERSFIELD, KERN COUNTY TENT. IVE -3- 15. Average annual precipitation is approximately 6.1 inches and annual pan evaporation is approximately 63 inches. The 1000-year, 24-hour precipitation event is estimated to be 2.79 inches. The site is not within a 100-year flood plain. 16. Groundwater near the proposed site is approximately 30 feet below the ground surface. Groundwater'quality in the area is generally good, with an average specific electrical conductivity of approximately 1300 gmho/cm. Beneficial uses of groundwater near the site include municipal and domestic supply, agricultural supply, and industrial process and service supply. There are approximately 30 domestic wells, I0 irrigation wells, and 6 municipal wells within one mile of the site. WASTES AND THEIR CLASSIFICATION 17. Only nonhazardous, hydi'ocarbon-contaminated soil is proposed to be accepted. Soil contaminated with crude oil, mineral oils, lubricating oils and greases,, and fuel oils may be accepted. No liquid wastes will be accepted. 18. Hydrocarbon contaminated soil contains soluble constituents that could migrate to groundwater under ambient conditions at this site. Therefore, the contaminated soil is classified as 'designated' waste, regulated by 'Title 27 of the California Code of Regulations. The contaminated soil is required to be stored on lined Class II Waste Management Units. CEQA CONSIDERATIONS 19. The Board of Zoning Adjustment of the City of Bakersfield approved a mitigated Negative Declaration on 9 March 1999, in accordance with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) (Public Resources Code {}2.1000, et seq.) and State CEQA Guidelines. The Board has considered the Negative Declaration and incorporated measures into the "Water Quality Control Plan" section of the SoiIRem Corporation FCP that are intended to mitigate any potential significant impacts on water quality. OTHER LEGAL REFERENCES 20. This Order implements the Water Quality Control Plan for the Tulare Lake Basin, Second Edition, which designates beneficial uses and contains water quality objectives for all waters of the Basin. 21. This Order implements the prescriptive standards and performance goals of Title 27 of the California Code of Regulations. 22. The Board has notified the Discharger and interested agencies and persons of its intent to adopt this order and has provided them with an opportunity for a public hearing and an opportunity to submit their written views and recommendations. 9 i sPECIAL ORDER NO. - ' SOILREM CORPORATION, INC. THE SOUTH ENTERPRISE ZONE BAKERSFIELD, KERN COUNTY TEN TeA TIV. E 23. The Board, in a public meeting, heard and considered all comments pertaining to this facility and discharge. IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that SoilRem Corporation, Inc., the South Enterprise Zone, and their agents, successors, and assigns, in order to meet the provisions contained in Division 7 of the California Water Code and regulations adopted thereunder, shall comply with: the "Water Quality Control Plan" section of the SoiIRem Corporation Facility Compliance Plan including any attachments or revisions, which is attached and incorporated herein by reference; with Title 27 of the California Code of Regulations; and with the Standard Provisions and Reporting Requirements dated August 1997. I, GARY M. CARLTON, 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 1999. GARY M. CARLTON, ExeCutive Officer 15:48~ San Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution Control District P, 02/03 May 6, 1999 Mr. John Arnold, President Soil Rem Corporation P.O. Box 40764, South Station 524 Bakersfield, CA 93304-9998 Re: Project #990190 Project Description: Facility Compliance Plan for Soil Washing/Bioremediation Operation Dear Mr. Arnold: The District has received your revised Facility Compliance Plan (FCP) for your soil washing/bioremediation operation. Based on this review, the following points must be incorporated into the final Facility Compliance Plan: Any less stringent limitations should be removed as they are subsumed by the more stringent limits. The following discrepancies among regulatory limits are noted: The permit conditions in Annex 1tl.3.c, Operations, listed under "Water Quality" indicateSoil Rem shall not accept gasoline contaminated soil. However, permit conditions in the "Air Quality" section allow Soil Rem to accept gasoline · contaminated soil with concentrations of 40,000 ppmw or less. The information in Annex 111.4, Emissions Documentation, "General Acceptance Procedures for Soil and Water", and "Analytical Requirements for Soil & Water", imply that free liquids 'or liquid waste wile be received by Soil Rem. However, this is not allowed by Distdct permit conditions as stated in Annex 111.3.c, Operations. The FCP must be revised to eliminate all references to the receiving of liquids. The permit conditions in Annex 111.3.c, Operations,, listed under "Water Quality" indicate Soil Rem may store up to 20,000 tons of petroleum contaminated soil. However, permit' conditions in the "Air Quality" section indicate that no more than 15,000 tons total shall be stored. David L. Crow Executive Director/Air Pollution Control Officer 1990 East Gettysburg Avenue, Fresno, CA 93725 (559) 230-6000 FAX (55@) 230-~061 Northern Region 4230 Kiernan Avenue, Suite 130, Modesto, CA 95356 (209) 557-6400 FAX (209) 557-6475 Central Region 1990 East Gettysburg Avenue, Fresno, CA 93726 (559) 230-6000 FAX (559) 230-6061 Southern Region 2700 M Street, Suite 275, Bakersfield, CA 93301 (661)326-6900 FAX (661) 326-6985 ~"~13-99 ?HU 15:49 ¢ P, 03/03 Mr. John Arno/d May 6, ~/999 Page 2 The data in Annex II1.1, .Maps & Drawinqs, listed under "Enforcement Agency Notification" indicates Soil Rem may receive up to 400 tons per day of petroleum contaminated soil. However, permit conditions in Annex 111.3.c, Operations, "Air Quality" indicate that no more than 600 tons total shall be received and stored in any one day. Throughout the Facility Compliance Plan, there are differing values for the distance to the nearest offsite business or residence. ao The information in Section 11.2.c, Preliminary Assessment, indicates there are no residences within 1000 feet. The information in Section lll.3.d, Planninq, "(3) Coordination with Natural Resources Trustees and NGO's, Notice of Public Hearing", "Environmental Discussion", indicates there are no residences within 0.5 mile. The District estimated a distance of 200 yards to the nearest receptor. In addition, the District believes a FCP with a condition such as "compliance with one condition does not authorize violation of another condition or any regulation" is a flawed FCP. Therefore, we do not recommend this as an alternative to eliminating subsumed requirements. Thank you for your cooperation in this matter. Should you have any questions, please telephone Mr. Steve Tomlin at (661) 326-6968, or Raymond Rodriguez at (661) 326-6957. Sincerely, Seyed Sadredin Director of Permit Services Yh0ma>s E~~o~ff, P.E. Permit Services Manager svt X.C, Ralph Huey, Zone Administrator City of Bakersfield Permit Consolidation Zone Peter Ruggerello, CAL EPA Permit Assistance Center ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH SIE~CES DEPARTMENT STEVE McCALLEY, R.E.H.S., Director 2700 "M" STREET, SUITE 300 ERSFIELD, CA 93301-2370 (661) 862-8700 (661) 862-8701 TTY Relay: (800) 735-2929 e-mail: eh~_,co, kern. ca. us April 28, 1999 IESOURCE MANAGEMENTAGENCY DAVID PRICE III, RMA DIRECTOR Community Development Program Department Engineering & Survey Services Department Environmental Health Services Department Planning Department Roads Department Ralph Huey, Permit Consolidation Zone Coordinator City Of Bakersfield Environmental Health Services 1715 Chester Avenue, Suite 300 Bakersfie. ld, CA 93301 SUBJECT: Soilrem Corporation, Inc. - Review of Revised Facility Compliance Plan Dear Mr. Huey: Our Department, as the Local Enforcement Agency (LEA) for the California Integrated Waste Management Board, has reviewed the Revised Facility Compliance Plan for the SoilRem Corporation. We reviewed the information for consistency with the Enforcement Agency Notification requirements and the Contaminated Soil Operation State Minimum Standards as prescribed in Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations (CCR). The LEA is satisfied with the Revised Facility Compliance Plan and finds it complete and adequate. The California Integrated Waste Management Board (CIWMB) has assigned this facility a Solid Waste Information (SWI S) Number: 15-AA-0356. This number is used by the LEA and CIWMB for tracking and filing inspection forms and other correspondence. The facility information is included in the SWIS '- Database and is available on the CIWMB web site at www.ciwmb.ea, gov/. Our staffwill not begin routine inspections until the facility is constructed and operating; thereafter, the facility will be inspected once every three months. If we may be of any further assistance to you, please contact Diana Wilson at (661) 862-8734. Sincerely, Steve McCalley, Director By: William O'Rullian, R.E.H.S. Environmental Health Specialist IV Solid Waste Program TH:dt cc: Peter Ruggerello, Director, Kern County Permit Assistance Center Lew Elliott, California Integrated Waste Management Board Shelton Gray, Central Valley, Regional Water Quality Board Clif Calderwood, San Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution Control District Dave Price III, Resource Management Agency Guy Greenlee, Community Development Program Department Wiison~Solwas~soilream3.1tr May- 10-99 11:33A P.O1 ~ay-10-99 11:33A P.02 From: Lori SEN1TrE To: Gray, Shelton Date: 5/7/99 1 l:26am Subject: Soilrem Insurance Coverage Title 27 imposes various financial assurance requirements for waste management units. Dischargers must maintain assurances of financial responsibility for initiating and completing corrective action for all known or reasonably foreseeable releases (22222), for initiating and completing closure requirements (22207), and for initiating and completing post-closure maintenance requirements (22212). The discharger must establish an irrevocable closure fund or some other acceptable means in accordance with Title 27. The Regional Board must be named as beneficiary on each mechanism used to satisfy financial assurance requirements identified above. The regulations provide great detail about requirements for insurance policies intended to cover closure, post-closure maintenance and corrective action requirements. (See 22248). The amount of coverage for closure, post-closure maintenance and corrective action is provided in 22207(a), 22212(a) and 22222(a), respectively. Essentially, there must be enough coverage to comply with an approved closure and post closure maintenance plan and for addressing reasonably foreseeable releases. Soilrem provided a letter dated January 21, 1999 (from their insurance carriers) to show the type of insurance coverage they have (or will have) for their operations. From what I can tell, this deals with liability coverage only. While liability insurance is certainly a good idea, it does not appear that the coverage described in this letter covers closure, post-closure maintence and corrective action requirements. If Soilrem takes a different view, they need to show how these policies meet the requriements of section 22248. May 17, 1999 Mr. Raymond Rodriquez San Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution Control District 2700 M. Street, Suite 275 Bakersfield, Ca. 93301 Re: Project #990190 Project Description: Facility Compliance Plan for Soil WashingiBioremediation operation. Dear Mr. Rodriquez, Pursuant to your telephone conversation with Mr. Howard Wines of the office of ._ Environmental Services on May 13, 1999,to your letter of May 6, 1999, Subject; same as above: we herewith submit our comment tol. A. The permit conditions in Annex 111.3.C., operations, A 1, water quality is not fully descriptive of the process. By reference to appendix 111.3.C. 1. (a) 1, it is clear that the process intended to include · gasoline and diesel since the required treatment level is given in the same section. The Conditional Use Permit States" applicants are requesting ..... that treats/cleans soil contaminated with hydrocarbons (Gasoline, Oil, Diesel)". Environmental Health Services comments to the Negative Declaration requested specific language be placed in the permit. "The facility may receive only soil that contains designated or nonhazardous concentrations of petroleum hydrocarbons such as gasoline ..... ." Further in Annex section 1.11.3 (a) 2 Process Description, the fact that gasoline and diesel contaminated soil will be taken in as well as soil contaminated with other hydrocarbons, is set forth in detail by language of appendix 111.b.c and was not meant to subsume these other sections. B). The "General Acceptance Procedures for soil and water", "and analytical requirements for soil and water" will be removed from the Facility Compliance Plan. No free liquids or liquid waste will be accepted, stored or processed. _ C). The reference listed under "Water Quality" refers to 20,000 yards of untreated material whereas the "air quality" section refers to total tons stored. We understand the 15,000-ton quantity as stated in the air quality section is the permit limit. D). The "Enforcement Agency Notification" 400 tons peak load refers to machinery capability to process at peak capacity. The 600 tons referred to in Annex 111.3.C, operations, and "Air Quality is the maximum, which can be received and stored in a day this gives us the flexibility to maintain stock material to ensure continued operations. Please note the 400 tons is not a permit limitation, it is the machinery limitation.. Differing values for the distance to the nearest offsite residence appears in the FCP. However, please note that all the Districts health risk assessments were based on the 200-yard distance and is therefore the most stringent requirement and the enforcement level. Thank you for your comrfients and assistance in our FCP development. Should you have any questions or require additional information, please telephone Mr. Jack Jones at (661) 833-3540. Sincerely, John E. Arnold President May 17, 1999 Mr. Doug Patterson California Regional Water Quality Control Board 3614 East Ashlan Ave. Fresno, Ca. 93726 Re: Tentative Special Order of 12 May 1999. Dear Mr. patterson, We have reviewed the tentative special order and submit the following recommendation; Item 17 should be revised to state." .... Soil contaminated with gasoline, diesel, crude oil, mineral oils, lubricating oils and greases, and fuel oils may be accepted." Thank you for the opportunity to comment and for your assistance in the development of our FCP. Thank you, John E. Arnold President - ' egi Ol O California onal Water Qualit ontr Board -Central Valley Region Steven T. Buffer, Chair Winston II. l-Iickox Secretary for Fresno Branch Office - · Environmental www.swrcb.¢a.gov/~rwqeb5 Protection 3614 East Ashlan Avenue, Fresno, California 93726 Phone (559) 445-5116 · FAX (559) 445-5910 13 May 1999 Gray Davis Governor Mr. John Arnold SoilRem Corporation P.O. Box 40764 Bakersfield, CA 93304 WASTE MANAGEMENT UNIT DESIGN, SOILREM CORPORATION, BAKERSFIELD, KERN COUNTY 'We have reviewed the proposed liner design and quality assurance/quality control (QA/AC) plan for a Class II waste management unit at your proposed soil recycling facility in Bakersfield. The QAJQC plan is contained in the SoilRem Facility Compliance Plan, dated 15 April 1999. The liner plans are dated 30 April 1999 and signed by Tim W. Collins (RCE No. 40610). The specified liner materials are: Geomembrane - National Seal Company, DuraSeal HD (40-mil) Geonet - Evergreen Technologies, NS 140551 Geotextile - Mirafi, 160N (6-Ounce) Our preliminary assessment indicates the design plans, specifications, and QA/QC plan appear to be in accordance with Title 27 of the California Code of Regulations. However, final approval requires an action by the Regional Board at a public meeting. Please be advised that if you decide to begin construction of the proposed liner prior to Board approval, it is at your own risk. Any construction needs to follow the QA/QC procedures contained in the Facility Compliance Plan. A certified construction ' report must be submitted to this office following construction. If you have any questions, please call Doug Patteson at (559) 445-6191. SHELTON R. GRAY Senior Engineering Geologist cc: Mr. Ralph Huey, City of Bakersfield, Bakersfield Supervising Engineering Geologist CEG No. 931 DKP: c:\-word~srm~linapp.srm California Environmental Protection Agency Re~vcled Paper Sent By: CALIFORNIA RWQCB FRES~O; 559 445 5910; May-12-99 3:40PM; Page 1 california regional Water Quality Control Board g. nvironmtntai MIpJIvn~ Protection 3614 ~! ~ Av~. F~. C~ 9~726 ~ (5~9) ~5-$116 · F~ ($~9) ~5910 12May1999 Mr. John Arnold, $oilRem Corporation, Inc. P.O. BOA 40764 Bakersfield, CA 93307 Mr. Wayne Massi¢ South Enterprise Zone 6570 North Backer Fresno. CA 937 ! 0 Enclosed is a copy of. a tentative Special Order for ol~ration of your proposed soil recycling facilitylin Bakersfield, Kern County. The purpose of the Special Order is to approve and orde:r compliance widl the "Water Quality Control Plan" section of the $oilRem Corporation FCP. Any comments or recommendations you may have concerning this tentative Order should be submitted to this office by 21 May 1999. If you have any questions, please call Doug Patteson at (209) 445-6191. Supervis~g Engineering Geologist CEO No. 931 cc: Mr. Ral.i~h Huey, City of Bakersfield, Bakersfield I )k'~: cA~rd~lemllt.atm California Environmental Protection Agency ORa~cled Paper Sent By: CALIFORNIA RWQCB-FRESNO; 559 445 5910; May-12-99 3:40PM; REGIONAL WATER QUALITY COBOL BOARD CENTRAL VALLEY RF. GION Page SPECIAL ORDER NO. 99- FOR SOIl,REM CORPORATION, INC. TH~ SOUTH ENTERPRISE ZONE FACILITY COMPLIANCE PLAN CLASS II WASTE MANAGEMENT UNITS BAKERSFIELD, KERN COUNTY The California Regional Water Quality Control Board, Central Valley Region, (hereinafter Board) f'mds that: $oilRem Corporation, Inc. (Operator) and the South Enterprise Zone (Property Owner) ate hereinafter collectively referred to as 'Discharger'. The City of Bakersfield has been designated a Permit Consolidation Zone under the Permit Consolidation Zone Pilot Program (SB1299). This process provides for a permit applicant tO.' prepare a Facility Compliance Plan (PCP) in lieu of obtaining, individual environmental permits from separate permitting authorities. An PCP is required to contain all regulatory requirementq that would normally b~ required in an individual permit. An PCP is effective throughout thc :term of the pilot program (1 ;anuary, 2002) and until it is converted iht6 indivkfia_ al environmental permits. The Board adopted Resolution No. 98-173 which authorizes the Ex~utive Officer to enter into aa agreement with the City of Bakersfield to participate in the Permit Consolidation Zeno Pilot Program. The Executive Officer signed a Permit Consolidation Zone Pilot Program Agreement, dated 714 August 1998. By thc terms of that agreement, an PCP may be substituted for Wa.qte Discharge Requirements on a case-by-case basis, conditioncd on approval by the Roard~' On 23 February 1999, a draft FCP was rcc~ive, zt from the City of Bakersfield for operation oflth¢ SoilRcm facility. The Discharger proposes to accept nonhazardous, petroleum hydrocarbon ~ contaminated soils for treatment by soil washing and bioremediation. Treatt:d soils will then sold as fill materials. Board staff commented on the draft FCP and provided a section to be inserted into the final PCP entitled "Water Quality Control Plan", which includes site specific discharge prohibitions, speeitications and provisions and the Standard Provi. rior~ and Reporting Requirement.~', dated August 1997. ,amy references to "Waste Discharge Requironmnts" or "WDRs" contained in the Standard Provisions and Reponing Requirements, dated Augu.qt 1997 apply to the SoilRem . Corporation FCP. On 19 April 1999, thc final SoilRem Corporation PCP, dated 15 April 1999 w~.s received from the City of Bakersfield. The final FCP conta/ncd the "Water Quality Control Plan" section as an attachment. Sent By: CALIFORNIA ~WQCB FRESNO; SPECIAL ORDER NO. 99-_._ $OILREM CORPORATION, INC. THE. SOUTH ENTERPRISE ZONE BAKFA~I:IELD, KERN COUNTY 559 445 5910; Uay- 12-99 3:41PU; TENTATIVE - Page 3/5 The "Water Quality Control Plan" section of thc $oilRem Corporation FCP contains all the appropriate r~luirements a.x would be contained in Waste Discharge Requirements. Therefore, approval of the "Water Qu',dity Control Plan" section of the $oilRem Corporation FCP is equivalent to the issuance of Waste Discharge Requirements. The "Water Quality Control Plan" section of the SoilRem Corporation FCP is 'complete and adequate' as it contains all r~quir~ment$ applicable to this discharge as required by Division 7 of thc California Water Code and Title 27 of the California Code of Regulations. Any references to "Waste Discharge Requirements" or "WDRs" contained in Division 7 of the California Water Code and Title 27 of the California Code of Regulations apply to the SoilRem Corporation FCP. The "Water Quality Control Plan" section requires submittal of several items that must be submitted to the Executive Officer for review and approval prior to acceptance of waste at the facilitT. 10. Thc FCP is an enforceable document intended to ensure Compliance with all applicable enviromnenta! laws, regulations and ordillances, aitd with all environmental pem~it.~ that would otherwise be required. Board staff will malcc p~riodic inspections and enforce the requirements of the ''Water Quality Control Plan" section of the SoilRem Corporaffon FCP. The SoilRe. m Corporation FCP is subject to enforcement by the Board aa if it wcr~ an individual environmental permit or Waste Discharge Requirement. 11. Thc $oilRem Corporation FCP is subject to any provision of law or regulation adopted subs .eque. nt to the approval of the FCP. The Board may request $oilRem Corporation to jncorporaxe language within the FCP to z~'leet compliance with laws and regulations adopted subsequent to the Board's adoption of the SoilRem Corporation FCP. 12. It there is any conflicting or contradictory language between the "Water Quality Control Plan" and any other sections of the $oilRem Corporation FCP, the "Water Quality Control Plan" secti°n shall govern over other sections for purposes of compliance with, and Board cnforccmcnt of water quality regulations and requirements. 13- This Order is being issued in accordance with the Permit Comolidation Zone Pilot Program' Agreement. The purpo~ of this Order is to approve and order con~liance with the "Water Quality Control Plan" section of the SoilRem Corporation FCP..This Order do~s not approve any sections of the Soi2R~m Corporation FCP other than the "Water Quality Control Plan" s~efi0n. SITli; I.,OCATION AND DF.,SCRIPTION .14. Thc 10-acre site is at 408 East Pachec, o Road near Cottonwood Road, on a portion of assessor parcel number 172-070~03 in the SE 1/4 of Section 17, T305, R28E, lVlDB&M ia the City Of. Bakersfield. Kern County. Land within 1,000 feet of thc facility is or has been previously used for agriculture. Soils in the area are classified as moderately permeable. Sent By: CAL[FORN~A RWQC8 FRESNO; 559 445 5910; Uay-12-99 3:41P~; _ Page 4/5 SPECIAL ORDER NO. 99-... . SOILREM CORPORATION, INC, THE SOUTR ENTERPR'iSE ?.,ONE BAKERSFIELD, KERN COUNTY 15. TENT'ATIVB Average annual precipitation is approximately 6.1 inches and annual pan evaporation is approximately 63 inches. The 1000-year, 24-hour precipitation event is estimated to be 2.79 inches. The site is not with/n a 100-year flood pla/n. 16. Crrmmdwater near thc proposed site is approximately 30 feet below the ground surface. Groundwater'quality in thc area is generally good, with aa average Sl~cific clex:trical conductivity of approximately 1300 limbo/cm. Beneficial u,qes of groundwater near thc site include municipal and domestic supply, agricultural supply, and industrial process and service supply. There ar~ approximately 30 domestic wells, 10 irrigation wells, and 6 municipal wells within one mile Of the site. W&$TE8 AND TI:~ CLASSIFICATION 17. Only nonhazardous, hydrocarbon-contaminated soil is proposed to bc accepted. Soil contaminated with crude oil, mineral oil.~, lubricating oils and greases, aad fuel oils may be/' accepted. No liquid wastes will be accepted. 18. Hydrocaxbon contaminated soil contains soluble constituents that could migrate to groundw .ater tinder ambi0nl: oonditions at this site. Therefore, the contaminated soil is classified as 'designated' waste, regulated by Title 27 of the California Code of Regulations. The contaminated Soil is. required to be stored on lined Class I1 Waste Management Units. CEQA CONSIDERATIONS 19. The Board of Zoning Adjustment of the City of Bakersfield approved a mitigated Negative Declaration on 9 Mar~h 1999, in acc. ordanc¢ with the California Environmental Quality Act : (CEQA) (Public Resources Code §21000, et seq.) and State CEQA Guidelines. The Board has considered the Negative Declaration and incorporated measures into the "Water Quality Control Plan" scction of the $OilRevn Corporation FCP that arc intcaded to mitigate any potential significant impacts on wat~ quality. OTHER LEGAL REFERENCES This Order implements thc Water Quality Control Plan for the Tulare ~ Basin, Second Edition, which designates beneficial ~ses and contains water quality objectives for all waters of the Basin. 21. This Order implements the prescriptive standards and performance goals of Title 27 of the California Code of Regulations. 22. The Board has notified the Discharger and interested agencies and persons or' its intent to adopt this order and has provide, zl them with an opportunity for a public hearing and an opportunity, to submit their written views and recommendations. Sent. By: CAL~FORNTA RWQCB FRESNO; 559 445 5910; May-12-99 3:42P~; SPECIAL ORDER NO. 99-.. SOILREM CORPORATION, INC. THE SOUTH ENTERPRISE ZONE BAKERSI=IELD, KERN COUNTY 23. TENTATIVE Page 5/5 Thc Board, in a public meeting, hcard and comidcrcd all comments pertaining to this facility.and discharge. IT I$ HEREBY ORDERED that SoilRem Corporation, Inc., the South Enterprise Zone, and their agents, successors, and assigns, in order to meet the provisions contained in Division 7 of the California Watea' Code and regulations adopted thereunder, shall comply with: thc "Water Quality Control Plaa" se,~tioa of the $oilRem Corporation Facility Compliance Plan including any attachments or revisions, which is. attached and incorporated herein by reference; with Title 27 of the California Code of Regulations; and with the Standard Provisions and Reporting Requirements dated August 1997. I, GARY M. CARLTON, Executive Officer, do her~oy certify the foregoing is a full, true, and correct copy of an Order 'adopted by the California Re ~gional Water Quality Control Board, Central Valley Region, on 1999. GARY M. CARLTON, Executive Officer , May-13-99 05:39P P.01 San Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution Control District May 6, 1999 Mr. John Arnold, President Soil Rem Corporation P.O. Box 40764, South Station 524 Bakersfield, CA 93304-9998 Re: Project #990190 Project Description: Facility Compliance Plan for Soil WashinglBioremediation Operation Dear Mr. Arnold: The District has received your revised Facility Compliance Plan (FCP) for your soil washing/bioremediation operation. Based on this review, the following points must be incorporated into the final Facility Compliance Plan: Any less stringent limitations should be removed as they are subsumed by the more stringent limits. The following discrepancies among regulatory limits are noted: The permit conditions in Annex 111.3.c, Operations, listed under "Water Quality" indicate Soil Rem shall not accept gasoline contaminated soil. However, permit conditions in the "Air Quality" section allow Soil Rem to accept gasoline contaminated soil with concentrations of 40,000 ppmw or less. The information in Annex 111.4, Emissions Documentation, "General Acceptance Procedures for Soil and Wate(', and "Analytical Requirements for Soil & Water", imply that free liquids or liquid waste will be received by Soil Rem. However, this is not allowed by District permit conditions as stated in Annex 111.3.c, Operations. The FCP must be revised to eliminate all references to the receiving of liquids. The permit conditions in Annex 111.3.c, Operations, listed under "Water Quality" indicate Soil Rem may store up to 20,000 tons of petroleum contaminated soil. However, permit conditions in the "Air Quality" section indicate that no more than 15,000 tons total shall be stored. David L. Crow Executive Director/Air Pollution Control Officer 1990 East Gettysburg Avenue, Fresno, CA 93726 (559) 230-6000 FAX (559) 230-6061 Northern Region 4230 ~ernan Avenue, (209) 557-5400 FAX (z09) 557-64~5 Central Region F_a~t. Gettysburg Avenue, Fresno, CA 9372~ (559) 230-6000 FAX (559) 230-6061 Southern Region P.02 May-13-99 05:40P ~ M~John Arnold May ~ 1999 Page 2 do The data in Annex II1.1, Maps & Drawin.qs, listed under "Enforcement Agency Notification" indicates Soil Rem may receive up to 400 tons per day of petroleum contaminated soil. However, permit conditions in Annex 111.3.c, Operations, "Air Quality" indicate that no more than 600 tons total shall be received and stored in any one day. Throughout the Facility Compliance Plan, there are differing values for the distance to the nearest offsite business or residence. The information in Section 11.2.c, Preliminary Assessment, indicates there are no residences within 1000 feet. The information in Section 111.3.d, Plannin,q, "(3) Coordination with Natural Resources Trustees and NGO's, Notice of Public Hearing", "Environmental Discussion", indicates there are no residences within 0.5 mile. The District estimated a distance of 200 yards to the nearest receptor. In addition, the District believes a FCP with a condition such as "compliance with one condition does not authorize violation of another condition or any regulation" is a flawed FCP. Therefore, we do not recommend this as an alternative to eliminating subsumed requirements. Thank you for your cooperation in this matter. Should you have any questions, please telephone Mr. Steve Tomlin at (661) 326-6968, or Raymond Rodriguez at (661) 326-6957. Sincerely, Seyed Sadredin Director of Permit Services Th~)mas E.~' o~ff, P.E. Permit Services Manager svt X.C, Ralph Huey, Zone Administrator City of Bakersfield Permit Consolidation Zone Peter Ruggerello, CAL EPA Permit Assistance Center BAKERSFIELD FIRE DEPARTMENT FAX Transmittal COMPANY: FROM: FAX No: Office of Environmental Services FAX No. (805) 326-0576 · Bus No. (805) 326-3979 1715 Chester Ave. · Bakersfield, CA 93301 COMMENTS: ............. ~ ........... ~,,,~-~. ........... ~ ........~~...~t ........................................................................................................ .............................. = ............................... ~t: ................................................................................................................................................................................................ TABLE OF CONTENTS FOR COMBINED SWRCB/CIWM~ REGULATIONS DIAqSION 2, TITLE 2'7 Division 2. Solid Waste. Subdivision I/Consolidated Regulations for Treatment, Storage, Processing, or Disposal of Solid Waste Chapter 1. General Article 1. 12OOO5. 120012. §20014. 12OO30. §2OO50. §2OO6O. §20080. §20090. Purpose, Scope and AppUcability of this Subdivision CIWMB - Purpose Scope and Applicability of CIWMB Standard~. (Ti4:§17601) ............. SWRCB. Reliance Upon CIWMB Requirements. (new) ............................... :... ! "- CIWMB - Reliance Upon SWRCB Requirement. (new) ................................... I ClWMB .'Authori~. (T!4:117200) ............ ! CfW~B - Compliance with Laws and Regulations. (T14:§!7201) ............................. 2 ClWMB - Purpose, Intent. (TI4:117202-17203) . 2 CIWMB - Applicability of Federal Subtitle D Related Standards to Small Landfills. ('TI4: portions of !17255.1) ................................ 2 SW~CB - General Requirements. (C15: 12510) .. 2 SWRCB - Exemptions. (CIS: 12511) .......... Chapter 2. Definitions Article 1. Statutory Dermitions §20150. CIWMB-Genetal. CTi4:tl722S, 17258.2) ..... 4 §20163. SWRCB - Statutory Definitions. {CI$: §2600) ... 4 Article 2. §20164. Specific Definitions Combined CIWMB & SWRCB Technical Definitions. [ClWMB T14:t I ?225. I- 17225.74.117258.2. 17761.18200.1, 18251,18011,18231,18281//SWRCB CIS: t2601] Chapter 3.. Criteria for Ali Waste Management Units, Facilities, and Disposal Sites Subchapter 1. General Article 1. 120180. 120182. CIWM.B - General CIWMB - Ox~et and Operator. (TI4:§17602) .. 14 CIWMB - Change of Ownership. fT14:§17603) . 14 Subchapter 2. Siting and Design A~icle I. iRcserved by SWRCB] Article 2. SWRCB - Waste Classification and Management §20200. SWRCB - Applicability and Clmiflcatioo Criteria. (CI5: t2~20) ............................ 14 120210. SWRCB- DesignatedWute.(Cl$: 12S22) .... I$ TABLE 2.1 SUMMARY OF WASTE MANAGEMENT STRATEGIES FOR DISCHARGES OF WASTE TO LAND 120220. SWRCB - Nonha2~udous Solid Waste. (CI5: 12523) 120230. SWRCB - Inert Waste. (CI5:125241 ........ 17 Article 3. Waste Management Unit, FaciUty, or Disposal Site Classification and Siting §20240. SWRCB. clusi§cation and Sidng Criteria. (C15: 12530) ................................. I? §20250. SWRCB - Class !I: Waste Management Units for Designated Waste. (CI5: §2532} ............. 120260. SWRCB - Class I!1: Landfills fo~ Nonhaz~dous Solid Waste. (Ci5: 12533) .................. 18 §20270. CIWMB - Location Restrictions: Airport Safety. CTI4:ti7258.10} ...: ..................... 19 Article 4. SWRCB - Waste Management Unit Construction Standards 120310. SWRCB - Geaeral Construction Criteria. (C!5: t2540) ................................. 19 TABLE 3.1 SWRCB's GEOLOGIC AND StuNG CRITERIA FOR CLASSIFIED UNITS ....................... 20 TABLE 4.1. CONSTRUCTION STAN.DARDS FOR UNITS 21 120320. SWRCB - ~ Cntcna forConta~nment Structures. (Ci5: t2MI) ....... ;-. .......... 22. FIGURE 4.1: SLrMMARY OF LINER REQUIREMENTS FOR CLASSI]~ED UNITS ...................... 24 §20323. SWR_CB- CQA Plan. (new) ................ §20)24. SWRCB - CQA Requiremenls. ltl4: §i??Tal) .. 24 120330. SWRCB - Liners. (05: §2~2) .............. 26 120340. SWRCB - L,~achate Collection and Removal Systems (LCRS). [CIS: §2543//TI4: tl7781CoX2) & ................................ ~ ...... 26 §20360. SWRCB - Subsurface Bart§ea. (C!$: 12545) · .. 2'/ 120365. SWRCB - Precipitation and Drainage Conu'ols. [CIS: t2S46 ~ Tlal: t 17778(e), (~1). {~). & (j)] ..... 28 §20370. SWRC'B. Seismic Design. (CIS: 12547) ...... 28 t203'75. SWRCB - Special Requirements for Surface Impoundments. (CI5: §2548) ............... 28 §203TL SWRC'B - Special Requirements for L~d Trcatmem Units (LTUs). (C15: §2549) ................. 29 Subchapter 3. Water Monitoring Article 1. 120380. §20385. t203~0. 120395. 120400. SWRCB - Water Q~nlity Monitoring and Response Programs for SoUd Waste Management Units SWRCB - Applicability. (C!5:12550.01 ....... ~ SWRCB - Required Pro,'ams. (CIS: t2550.1 ) · · ~ SWRC~ - Wat~ Quality Protection Standard (Wa~' Standard}. (CIS: 12550.2) .................. 30 SWRCB - Constituents of Concern (C(X~sL (CI5: t2550.3) ................................ 30 SWRCB - Concentration Limits. (C I S: 12550.4) Appendix 3 Financial Assurances Forms Table of Contents' I0. II. 12. 13. 14. I.~. 16. CIWMB 100 CIWMB 101 CIWMB 102(a) CIWMB 102(b) CIWMB 102{c) CIWMB 103(a) CIWMB 103(b) CIWMB CIWMB 104 CIWMB 105 CIWMB 106 CIWMB 107 CIWMB CIWMB 109 CIWMB'110 CIWMB I i I Trust Agreement Irrevocable Letter of Credit Performance Bond for Closure Performance Bond for Postclosure Performance Bond for Corrective Action Financial Guarantee Bond for Closure Costs Financial Guarantee Bond for Postclosure Cost~ Financial Guarantee Bond for corrective Action Costs Letter from the Chief Financial Officer Financial Means Test for Postclosure Maintenance ancO, or Operatin-t Liability Guarantee Certificate of Insurance for Closure. Post¢losure Maintenance Reasonably Foreseeable Corrective Action Certificate of Liabili~' Insurance Liabili~ Insurance Endorsemem Certificate of Self-Insurance and Risk Management Operator Certification of Comprehensive General Liabili~' Insurance Coverage and Establishment and Funding of the Environmental Liabili~ Fund Environmental Liability. Fund Agreement Insurer Name Address L,cense Number Insured Name Address $ol,3 Waste Disposal Facilities Covered' (Enter closure, postcJosure maintenance ar~ reasonaoly foreseeable con'ect~e achon amounts seoarately /! coverage rs not offered, enter 'N/A' as tile amount All amounts must t~al face amount.) Name A~aress SoI<l Waste C;osure Postciosure Reasonaoly O~sposal Insurance Insurance Foreseeabl Faczlity Amount Amount e Co-active IDentification A~,on Numoer Amount Pohcy Numl~er E flec't.~ve Face Date Amount INSURER CERTIFICATION The ~nsurer ~erel~y certifies that ~t has ~ssuecl to the insure':. ;he ~entified policy of ,nSurance tO Orovide financial assurance for C;osure C3. Postc~osure Maintenance C3. Reasonably Fc~eseeaD|e Correct~ve AC:aDh ~ (Che~ afl that ap~ly), for the fac~hty(*s) identified above. ~e ~1~ Drov~es that monks Ment~o ~n the fa~ a~unt above wi~ ~ availab~, as a~h~D~, fo~ the facdi~t~esl when needed. T~ te~ face amount means ~ total amount the ~nsurer ,s oOi,gat~ to Day u~er the Amual payments oy ~ ~nsurer ~ ~t ~a~e the fa~ a~unt, a~hougn the ~nsurer'l ~lure iiao~h~ wdl ~ ~wer~ ~y the amounl of the ~y~ntl ' ~ insurer furor wa,anls ~at su~ ~1~ ~nfo~s :n all res~s w~h the reoutre~nts of D~is~n Pu~I< Resouf~s C~: ~t~ 27 ~ ~ C/l~orma C~e of R~ulat~ns Dw~n 2. Su~ts~n 1 Chaoter 6; l~ ~e r~ulat~S of the C/bforn~ ~pa~nt of Insufan~ a~ u~er ~ te~ a~ ~it~ons des~d ~ Diws~on 1 of ~e ~orn~ tnsuran~ C~e for the fa~l~t~sl CentK~ t~. iS ap~o~ a~ as S~ r~u~tionS were ~nst~ut~ on t~e date sh~ ~. It that any prows~n of t~ ~1~ ~nsistent w~th su~ regu~flons · here0y a~nd~ to elim(nate s~ m~nsistenw. The ,nsurer ~her ce~es ~at reimbursements for expOSures ~11 ~ granteO on~ :f t~ remaini~ value of the ~S 5uffi~ent to cover the ~ematmng a~Orove~ a~h~o~ costs, a~ ~ t~e ex~endffures have Dean rewew~ a~ a~prove~ ~y the Califorma Int~rat~ Waste Management Boaro (C~B} ot ~s oes~nee Th~s ~nSuran~ ~verage allows ass~gnmen~ of t~ ~1~ to e successor owner o~ o~e~ator Su~ assonant may con~l~onal u~n ~nsenl of the ~nsurer. prowoed that Su~ ~nsenl ~s not unreasonably re~use~ The ~nsurer fu~e~ ~s that ~ wdl not ~n~l. te~nate, or fail to renew th~s ~h~ ex,pt for failure to pay the o~em~um, and ~at t~ automat~ ~en~al of the ~li~ pr~es the insured w~t~ t~ option of ~enewal at ~e fa~ a~unt of exom~ ~oli~. If ~fe ~s a fadure to pay the ~rem~um a~ the insurer e~s to ~n~l. te~nate ~ ~l renew the ~1~. ~nsu~r wdl send n~ Oy e~her r~er~ or ~ir~ mail to t~ ~ratot a~ the C~B. C~n~t~. te~inat~, of failure to renew may nol ~cur. however, dung the one ~undred ~en~ (1201 cays ~g~nning w~th the date ~ re~iot of the not~ operator and ~e C~B. as ev~en~ by ~e return re~s. Cancellation. termination, o~ fadure to renew will not oc~r ~l<y wdl remain ~n ~11 for~ and effe~ in the event that on or ~fo~e the oate of expirat~n: · ~ ) Tl~e Cn,'VMB :- ~.cal entorc~mem agency (~el~S me fl~l~ ~Ol~O~l~ ~ ,2~ The ~rmll ,S ~e,~mlte~ o~ r~Ok~ O~ I n~ ~ ,~ ~en~ Oy ~l C~ o~ '~l enfo~M~nt igen~, ~ C~e' o~ :~e:~ o~) ~veraoe. ~efleve, 'e:~este~ by me Colifomia Inteorited Wfste ~ano~ement 8oar= o~ me S~te of Caf,fo(n,o. the The po~ ~tow ~,fies i~ s,gfls u~er peni~ of ~e~u~ t~at the mfo~ot~ofl ,fltnts Oo~flt ,s t~e Ifl~ corre~ to (~ :es~ 3f n~s Or ~er k~owledGe, i~o si::s~es i~e r~uire~nts of Tiile 27. Cilifom~ C~e of Re~ullt~:~s. D~ws~n 2 $u~ws~on 1. C~ote~ 6. Authorized Skjnature of Insurer 'rede Typeo or Pnnleo Name of Pers~.~ S~n,ng Nota~ S~nature anO Seal Date P~vacy Statement ?l~e Infonnahon Practices Ac: (California C~wl Co(~e Sechon 1798 17) a~ the FeStal Pnvaw AGENCY REOUES~ING INFCRMATION ~l~fomm Iflt~rate~ Waste Mana~menr ~IT RESPONSIBLE FOR MAINTENANCE OF FORM: Financial Assu~s S~t~n. ~lif~a iflteg~a~ Waste Mana~ment ~. 88~ Cai ~nter Dnve. Sac~amenro. ~ 95826 ~tact ~e Mana~r. Finan=al A~u~es Sec~. at ~916) 25~22~, AuTHORI~: Publ~ Resources ~e sect~n 436~ et PURPOSE. ~e ~nfo~at~n o~v~ed ~fl be use~ ~ ved~ a~e~uate fi~al a~u~e of ~ .vases ~1Ya~lit~s li=ted, RECUIREMENT. Comoletmn of :~s fo~ ~s masaru. ~ conseque~e ~ ~ OTHER INFCRMA TION: A~er ~vmw of th~s ~ument. ~u may be ~st~ ~ ~v~e a~al'~nl~at~ mga~i~ ~e ~ptabi~ty of th~ ACCESS, Inf~at~n pmv~e~ ~n t~s ~ may ~ ~ to ~ U.S. En~ent~ P~'A~, SMte A~y Genii. ~ Resoumes Boa~. Calif~a ~eoa~m ~ Tox~ Subst~ces ~t~. E~y Comm~ss~ Water Re~u~es Con~l ~. a~ Calif~a R~al Water Quality ~cess to your ~s, c~ :he CaJ~f~ta Integrated Waste Man~ement ~. 88~ ~ ~n~er 0~. ~ramento, CA CIVd~B ~06 t4~6) CERTIFICATE OF LIABILITY INSURANCE Name of Insurer Address L~conse Numl:~t Name of Insuro~ Acldress ;olicl Waste Ois0osa! Facilities Covered: {Enter Informataon ~or Eac~ Facility) LIMITS OF LIABILITY Name Address Facility Infom~ation Per Occu,ence° Annual Aggregate' Numl~J' TOTAL TOTAL Policy NumDerJ Effectrve Date 'Excluoang h..gal defense costs and aedu~bMs INSURER CERTIFICATION: 1. Th~ ,flsurer he~reb¥ canines ~at ~ ~s ~sued liaOil~ ~flsuran~ ~vefiflg ~i~ ~fllu~ a~ ~m~ damage to t~ (nsured listed a~ve m ~nne~on w~r, the insured's obl~at~on lo demonstrate finon~al tes~ns~bi~ u~er T~ 27. Ca,amid C~e of R~ulat~ns. DWis~n 2. Su~s~ 1. ChaDter 6. The ~erage apples to ~e aDove-list~ fa~l~(~s) fM a~ental ~curren~s arising from the ogerat,on of the 2. Indicia whether th~s ~verage is ~pnma~ or ~ex~ss ~. The Im~s of liaBih~ are the a~unts stated a~e for '~r ~rren~' and 'annual ~gr~ate'~ ex~u~e of legal ~efense ~s~. If an ez~ss coverage i~uran~ ~1~ ~s ~,~ ~rov~. ~te ~ foll~ sente~: IS _~r ~.en~ a~ S _annual agg~ate ~ ex.ss of ~ u~e~ F~ o~u-en~ a~ S . .annual ~gr~ato.] 4. The insufan~ ~verage is subje~ to all of the te~s a~ ~ions of the ~1~: ~. h~et. ~at any prows~ons of ~e ~o1~ tnconsastent w~h se~ns (a) ~roug~ (el of this gatagtaph shall ~ ame~ to ~o~ w~h ~fl$ (a) through (a) 8ank~ot~ or inso~en~ of the insured shall not relive the insurer of ~s obligattons under ~e (bi The insurer ts liable for t~ pay~nl of amounts w~hifl any d~ ap~li~le to ~ ~1~. w~h a ~ht of re,m~urSe~nt from t~ ,nsur~ for any su~ payment mo~e Dy ~e insurer. If another ~an~m. as s~fl~ ~ T~M 27. California C~e of Regulations. ONis~n 2. Su~Nis~n 1. Chapter 6. is us~ to demonstrate ~erage of the ~u~ib~. ~en th~ CflMA8107 (~) P~oe 1 M2 ~nl~ of Ihe :ce~itor of ~e ~ waste disposal fo~h~(~es), wdl ~e e~e~:ve ofl~ u~fl w~en ~t~ o~ ~ offer I~e expsrol,on of 60 ~oys a~e~ a copy of such ~flen not~ ~ ~nt by ~fl~e~ ma~l ir~ ~e~ by t~ C~8 as evcen~ Oy t~ return re~t. (See ex~ot~on, s~fl (e)) (e) C~fl~llatsofl G~ to ~fl.pay~flt of ~remsums ~s after,ye ofl~y da~ after the =ate on wh~ tho o~rator a~ the C~8 have re~,veo the not~ of te~mat~n as ev~enc~ ~y re~ts. T~ ~ ~1~ ~s and s~ns u~er ~fla~ of ~qu~ t~at the ,nfo~at~fl tfl th,s ~u~nt ts true an~ corre~ to the ~st of h~ ~ ~r k~e. a~ satisfies ~ ~quKemen~ of T~ 27 Califomoa C~e of R~u~t~ns. O~ts~on 2. Subdiwsson 1. Cho0ter 6. Signature of tnd~vk:lual Authorized to Sign on ~ehalf of Insurer Typecl or P~'~nted Name of Person S~nfng Titte of Author<ed Pe~ofl Date Address of Insurer PRIVACY STATEMENT The Infon~at~fl Practices Act (Cefif~n~e CMl CocM Section 1798.17) ~ the Federal P~a~ Act (5 U S C. 552a(e)(3)) meu,m AGENCY REQUESTI~ IN~R~ TION: ~lif~e Int~m~ed Wasm Mana~ment ~. UNIT RES~NSIB~ ~R ~INTENA~ OF FORM: Finan~al Assuro~es Secr~. Calif~fa Inl~fated Waste Mana~ment 8oa~. 88~ ~1 Center D~. So,manta. ~ 9~26. ~ntact the Manager. Fine,al Assuages ~c~. at (9 I6) 255.22~ AUTHORITY' Public Resoun=es Code section 43600 et PURPOSE. '/'he infonnatk~ p~.vided wig be used to redly a~equare finenc~a~ assurance of soi~l waue d, soosal facii/r~es I~srec REQUIREMENT Completion ol th,s fon'n ~s man~aIO~. The conseGuence o~' flor comp/er,fig Ih,s ;~ ,s c~en,al or revocar,ofl o: a ~erm, to o,oeram a soM waive d/s,oosel fecal/fy. OTHER INFORMATION: After review of this document, you may be m¢~uested to provue aO~ft~Onal ~formar~on regan~lng :he acceptaO;l(f), of th~s mecAonism. ACCESS:' ~fon~alx~ provfded in this form may be/xovideO to the U.S. Envkonmental Protection Agency. State Anomey Gene,a. A~r Resources Boa~. California Deportment of Toxic Substances Control. Ene~gy Resou~es Conservation an~l Development Camm;assail Water Resources Co/tirol Boa~. or~l California Regional Water Oual/Iy Co~ol Boan~. ~or more information or access to your mcorOs, cant&cf the C.a/~7orr~a Integrateo Waste Ma/~agemen! Boa~l. 8800 Cai Center Dnve. Sacramento CA 95826. (916} 255-2200. CN~dde =07 (~) Pi~e 2 ~ ~ LIABILITY INSURANCE ENDORSEMENT 'L' ;"V ......... , , Address I.~,en~4' Numl~w Name of Inlu~ Name of Insur~ ;olid Waste Disl:,o!_~,! FaCqities Covered: {Enter Information for Each Facd~ty) LIMITS OF LIABILITY Name Addre~ Facility Information Per Occurmnco' A~nual Aggregate' Numar TOTAL TOTAL I Policy Numller ,"' I Effec~ve Date I I I I I! I l il I 'ExcluDing legal Defense costs and INSURER CERTIFICATION: 1. By endomement, the insurer ce~ifieS that this policy prowdes liability insurance covering bodily injury and ~ope~ty damage in connection w~th 'the insured's obligation to demonstrate flnanc:al reslxms~dity under Title 27, Califom-~a Code of Reguiatmn$. Diva~on 2. Sulxliv~S~o~ 1, C~apter 6. The coverage al~phes to the above-;isled facility(ies) for accidental occurrences arising from the operatmn of the facdity(ies). 2. Ind~.ate w~ethe~:'the coverage is O primary or O excess coverage. 3. The lirn~ of liability are the amounts stated alcove for 'per occurrence' ann 'annual aggregate', excluswe of legal defense costs. If the endorsement 4 for an excess coverage insurance policy, coml~ele the following sentence: ' [S ,per Occurrence and S . annual aggregate m excess of the underlying limits of $ ~er occurrence aM S, ,annual aggregate.] 4 The ,nSurance coverage ,s su~ect to all of the terms a~l Condipons of the ~opcY; provided, however, tl~lt any prows,ohs of the pol~/inconsistent w~th sections (a) through lei of th,s paragraph snaa be amended to co~form with sections through (a) Bankruotcy ot insolvency of the insured shall not redeve '.~e ,nsurer of ~ coligation$ under the pohcy to whk:~ endorsement is attached. (bi The ~nsurer ~s liable for the peymenl Of amounts ~thm any deduchble N~pl~.at)le to the policy, w~th a right of re~ml~ursement from ~ insured for any suc~ payment mace I~¥ tl~ ,nsurer. If aoethet meonan~m, as specd'e<~ ~n Title 27. . Califofma Code of RegulaPonS. Division 2. Sulxliwson I. Chapter 6. i~ used to demonstrate coverage of the deductible, then section does not (¢1 Uoon reduel! 0y ll~e California Inlegrated (~1 Cance~t~n or any dior te~mal~n of ~*s e~orse~nt, whether ~y ~ovC~ng ~ns~rin~ ~verage for ,ts ~na~ of t~ :~rat~ of the sol~ waste =ays a~er a cody of suc~ ~Ren nottM :s sent 0y (e~ Cin~at~ ~ue to flofl-oay~flt of prems~ms ,s e~e~e ~ayt after ~e ~ate ~ wh,~ the oGerator The ~a~ ~w ce~fies ~s[ of ~s or ~r k~ge. an~ sat~s~s ~aoter 6 S~natum ~ I~ual Aut~ tO Insurer Ty~ or Pnnte~ Na~ of Pemon AoOress of Jnsurer PRIVACY STATEMENT The Infon'net~on Practices Act (California Civil Cocle Section 1798.17) a~ ~e Federal pn Vacy Act (S U S.C. 552a(e)(3)) ~equ ~at th~s notice be p~wg~ci when collec',~ng personal info,matron from ~n~iv~luals. AGENCY REQUESTING INFORMATION. California Integrated Waste Management UNIT RESPONSIBLE FOR MAINTE:~A;;CE OF FORM: F;nanc,'al Assurances Section. Califon~a Integrated Waste Manegeme~ Boarcl. 8800 Cai Center Onve. Sacramento. CA 95826~ Co~tact ~he Manager. Financial AssuranCes Secaon. at (g16) 255-2200. AUTHORITY: Public Resources Co~e section 43600 et seQ ..... .: .. ~'~' .. . '. P'JRPOSE: The mfonnat~on prov~ecl vail be use~ to vent), a~equate financial assurance of .sol~d waste ?sp~sal facilities listed. REOUIREMENT. Completion of th~s form is mandatory. The consequence of not completing ~is form is denm! or revocation of a permit tO operate a sold waste ~/sPosal facility. ' ' OTHER INFCRMA TION: After review of th~s document, you may ~e reque~e~ to prorate ao~dJonel info~nat~on regarc~ tt~e acceptability of thrs mechani.~n. ACCESS. In~ ~ ~ tJ~s form may be ~on~v~ded to the U S. En~mnmental l:~te~mn Agency, State Attorney General. A~r Resources Boan~. Ca~d'om/a Depaflment o~ Toxic Substances Contn~l. Ene~ Resourges Consenmtion and Oeve/opmant Commission. Waist Resources Controt Boan~. end California Regional Water Quality Contn~ accede ~ ~ou~ reco~s, contact the Califorma Integrated Waste Management Boar~l. 6600 Cai Center Onyx. ,~K:~'amento. CA 95826. (9~6) 255,2200. 05/10/99 07:53 8805 326 0576 BFD HAZ MAT DIV ~001 ACTIVITY REPORT TRANSMISSION OK TX/RX NO. CONNECTION TEL CONNECTION ID START TIME USAGE TIME PAGES RESULT 1437 05/10 07:49 04'19 9 OK 3974508 Anthony J. Klein Thomas V. DeNatale, Jr. Barry L. Goldner J. L. Rosenlieb David J. Cooper Claude P. Kimball William A. Bruce Leonard K. Welsh Christopher P. Burger Ned E. Dunphy Mel Ehrlich Kevin C. Findley Krystyna L. Jamieson Barry E. Rosenberg KLEIN, DENATALE, GOLDNER, COOPER, ROSENLIEB & KIMBALL, LLP LAWYERS 4550 CALIFORNIA AVENUE SECOND FLOOR BAKERSFIELD, CA 93309 MAILING ADDRESS: P.O. BOX 11172 BAKERSFIELD, CA 93389-1172 (661) 395-1000 FAX (661) 326-0418 E-MAIL kleinlaw@kleinlaw.com T. Scott Belden Catherine E. Bennett T David D. Blaine Nancy L. Oehler imothy G. Scanlon ~~, ~ ~~ndrea Selvidge / ~'"~ / BruceF. Bunker ~'~-tl~homas C. Fallgatter Craig D. Braun May 4, 1999 Lori Senitte, Staff Counsel State Water Resources Control Board Office of Chief Counsel Post Office Box 100 Sacramento, California 95812-0100 Re: SoilRem Corporation FCP Stipulated Time Frames Dear Ms. Senitte:-~ Pursuant to your voice mail message of today, I have revised the "Stipulation To Establish Mutually Agreed Upon Time Frames For Review Of Facility Compliance Plan." Mr. Arnold has executed the document on behalf of SoilRem. Please secure Gary Carlton's signature and return a fully executed copy of the Stipulation to me at your earliest opportunity. Should you become aware of facts or circumstances that may preclude compliance with this schedule, please notify me immediately. If you have questions or concerns regarding the above or any other aspect of this matter, please feel free to contact me. Very truly yours, CPB: j m Enc. as noted cc: Mr. John Arnold / Mr. Ralph Huey Christopher P. Burger STIPULATION TO ESTABLISH MUTUALLY AGREED UPON TIME FRAMES FOR REVIEW OF FACILITY COMPLIANCE PLAN The undersigned parties hereby stipulate to extend the statutory and regulatory time frames, as set forth in California Public Resources Code Section 71035.6 and Section 10410 of Title 27 of the California Code of Regulations ("CCR") for review by the Regional Water Quality Control Board, Central Valley Region, of SoilRem Corporation's Facility Compliance Plan ("FCP") submitted pursuant to Section 10410(f) of Title 27 of the CCR. A mutual agreement to establish mutually agreed upon substitute time frames is specifically authorized pursuant to Section 71035.6(e) (4) of the California Public Resources Code and Section 10410(j) of Title 27 of the CCR. The undersigned parties hereby agree to use their best efforts to: submit a complete and adequate FCP for SoilRem Corporation's Bakersfield facility; make all necessary determinations of completeness and adequacy of that FCP; place adoption of FCP on Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board's June 11, 1999 meeting agenda; and secure the Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board's consideration of the FCP on the following schedule: Make Determination of Completeness and Adequacy of Resubmitted FCP: Place Adoption of SoilRem's Final FCP on Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board Meeting Agenda of June 11, 1999: Not' later than May 28, 1999. Not later than May 28, 1999. Secure Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board consideration of SoilRem's FCP: June 11, 1999. Dated: , 1999. REGIONAL WATER QUALITY CONTROL BOARD, CENTRAL VALLEY REGION By. Gary Carlton Its Executive Officer , 1999. SOILREM CORPORATION Its President 2 ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH {ESOURCE MANAGEMENT AGENCY STEVE McCALLEY, R.E.H.S., Director 2700 "M" STREET, SUITE 300 BAKERSFIELD, CA 93301-2370 Voice: (661) 862-8700 Fax: (661) 862-8701 TTY Relay: (800) 735-2929 e-mail: eh~co, kern. ca. us SEi~CES DEPARTMENT April 28, 1999 DAVID PRICE III, RMA DIRECTOR Community Development Program Department Engineering & Survey Services Department Environmental Health Services Department Planning Department Roads Department Ralph Huey, Permit Consolidation Zone Coordinator City Of Bakersfield Environmental Health Services 1715 Chester Avenue, Suite 300 Bakersfield, CA 93301 SUBJECT: Soilrem Corporation, Inc. - Review of Revised Facility Compliance Plan Dear Mr. Huey: Our Department, as the Local Enforcement Agency (LEA) for the California Integrated Waste Management Board, has reviewed the Revised Facility Compliance Plan for the SoilRem Corporation. We reviewed the information for consistency with the Enforcement Agency Notification requirements and the Contaminated Soil Operation State Minimum Standards as prescribed in Title 14 of the California Code of Regulations (CCR). The LEA is satisfied with the Revised Facility Compliance Plan and finds it complete and adequate. The California Integrated Waste Management Board (CIWMB) has assigned this facility a Solid Waste Information (SWIS) Number: 15-AA-0356. This number is used by the LEA and CIWMB for tracking and filing inspection forms and other correspondence. The facility information is included in the SWIS Database and is available on the CIWMB web site at www.ciwmb.ca, gov/. Our staff will not begin routine inspections until the facility is constructed and operating; thereafter, the facility will be inspected once every three months. If we may be of any further assistance to you, please contact Diana Wilson at (661) 862-8734. Sincerely, Steve McCalley, Director By: William O'Rullian, R.E.H.S. Environmental Health Specialist IV Solid Waste Program TH:dt CC: Peter Ruggerello, Director, Kern County Permit Assistance Center Lew Elliott, California Integrated Waste Management Board Shelton Gray, Central Valley, Regional Water Quality Board Clif Calderwood, San Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution Control District Dave Price III, Resource Management Agency Guy Greenlee, Community Development Program Department Wilson\SolwasXsoilream3.1tr Winston H. Hickox Secretary for Environmental Protection April 16, 1999 Mr. John Arnold Soilrem Corporation, Inc. P.O. Box 40764 South Station 425 Bakersfield, CA 93304-9999 State l ater Resources Contr "iBoard Office of Chief Counsel 901 P Street · Sacramento, California 95814 · (916) 657-2154 Mailing Address: P.O. Box I00 · Sacramento, California 95812-0100 FAX (916) 653-0428 ·lntemet Address: http://www.swrcb.ca.gov Gray Davis Governor Dear Mr. Arnold: SOILREM CORPORATION, INC.: FACILITY COMPLIANCE PLAN On or about February 23, 1999, Soilrem Corporation, Inc. (Soilrem) submitted a draft Facility Compliance Plan (FCP) under SB 1299 (Environmental Permit Consolidation Zone Program). On March 26, 1999, the Regional WaterQuality Control Board, Central Valley Region (Board) provided you with detailed comments on the draft FCP. Once. the FCP is resubmitted. incorporating information and addressing comments raised, the Board has thirty days to' determine whether the resubmitted FCP is complete and adequate and provide a written response. The portion of the FCP relating to water quality needs to be the equivalent to Waste Discharge Requirements (WDRs) implementing requirements contained in Division 2 of Title 27 of the California Code of Regulations (CCR). Division 2 of Title 27 of the CCR govem the treatment, storage, processing or disposal of solid waste. Since the water quality portion of the FCP is equivalent to WDRs implementing the solid waste regulations, the Board must comply with certain procedural requirements before considering the FCP. The determination of whether the FCP is complete and adequate must be made by the Board in a public meeting. The Board meets approximately every six weeks. Further, the Board must notify the public at least 45 days in advance of the Board meeting at which the FCP will be considered (see 27 CCR, §21730). Therefore, the Board is requesting that Soilrem waive the 30-day time period as authorized by the regulations implementing SB 1299 (see 27 CCR § 10410(j)). As you probably know, the Permit Consolidation Zone Program is intended to streamline the environmental permitting process. Please be assured that the staff of the Board intend to process the resubmitted FCP and present it to the Board as quickly as reasonably possible. Also be reminded, however, that Title 27 of the CCR imposes certain requirements that must be met before the facility can begin accepting waste, e.g., design, construction, ground water monitoring, financial assurance. Therefore, the date that Soilrem can begin accepting waste will California Environmental Protection Agency Recycled Paper John Arnold 2 April 16, 1999 depend in large part upon compliance with certain Title 27 requirements, and not necessarily the Board's adoption of the FCP. Attached is a waiver of the regulatory timeframes as set forth in section 10410 of Title 27 of the CCR. If it is acceptable to you, please sign the waiver and return it at your earliest convenience. If you would like to discuss this matter further, please contact me at (916) 657-1472. Sincerely, Loft Senitte Staff Counsel Attachment CC; Gary Carlton, Executive Officer Central Valley RWQCB (Sacramento) 3443 Routier Road Sacramento, CA 95827-3098 Bill Pfister Central Valley RWQCB (Fresno) 3614 East Ashlan Avenue Fresno, CA 93726 Shelton Gray Central Valley RWQCB (Fresno) 3614 East Ashlan Avenue Fresno, CA 93726 Gordon Innes State Water Resources Control Board Division of Water Quality 901 P Street Sacramento, CA 95814 Chris Kinne California Environmental Protection Agency 555 Capitol Mall, Suite 525 Sacramento, CA 95814 Ralph Huey City of Bakersfield Fire Department Environmental Services 1715 Chester Avenue Bakersfield, CA 93301 California Environmental Protection Agency ORecycled Paper WAIVER OF TIMEFRAMES FOR REVIEW OF FACILITY COMPLIANCE PLAN The undersigned parties hereby agree to waive the statutory and regulatory timeframes, as set forth in California Public Resources Code section 71035.6 and section 10410 of Title 27 of the C~tlifomia Code of Regulations (CCR) for review by the Regional Water Quality Control Board, Central Valley Region of Soilrem Corporation, Inc.'s Facility ComplianCe Plan submitted pursuant to section 10410(f) of Title 27 of the Regulations. A waiver of the statutory timeframes is specifically authorized pursuant to section 71035.6(e)(4) of the California Public Resources Code and section 10410(j) of Title 27 of the CCR. GARY CARLTON EXECUTIVE OFFICER REGIONAL WATER QUALITY CONTROL BOARD, CENTRAL VALLEY REGION DATE JOHN ARNOLD SOILREM CORPORATION, INC. DATE PERMIT CONSOLIDATION ZONE PROCESS TIMELINE Submit NO! · End Period Subndt Dratt FC P · Agency Review ami Public Comment Period End Public COmment Period Applicant Responds t~ Comments Submit Revised FCP · Deemed Adequate & Complete · FCP Approved Review response to comments xstd hold Board baring (max. 45 days) File FCP ~dflt CalfEPA (mx. 5 days) r Deemed Inadequate Applicant Responds to Comments (uo timeframe) Subndt Deemed FCP Revised FCP Adequate Approved V' · Agency Review File FCP (max. 30 ~ay~) wi& Cal/EP~ Deemed luadequate Appeals (max. 60 days) NEXT-FUNC: KIPS #ROLLINQ ATN 17~ 070 File No APN 17~ 070 SITE 03 03 9 KEY: SECURED ROLL O0 4 Lgnd Lgl S 17 T30 Ouner SOUTH ENTERPRISE ZONE Bill 6570 NORTH BACKER FRESNO CA TRA-No CHG DT Chg Type Hineral Land/PI ~prv~ent Other Imp Pets Prop Ex~p Net qalue INQUIRY ACTIqE 9371 0 R.B.P. 99 98-11097~1-00-? 00! ;~64 001 ;~64 397,634 405,586 397,634 405,586 Acres Doc KEY Roll I Use AG Presv NO 71.3~ CPest BPS SD 5 UF DATA PROI~PT P~?~41 Code 3030 Y NT 97-11 09~97-00-9 001 ?64 389,838 389,838 PFI=HELP ?=I~ENU 3=RTRN 4:TOG 5:FUTR 9:BILL I O:UFL PF13=XEI4 14=APN HIST 15:014XERS 16:EXEHPT 17:SUPPL PF;~O:PREY YR ?I=XEXT YEAR ?;~:PflT ?3:XEXT ~4:PREY II:BUS I?=EVTSEL 18:ADDR 19:ROLL COflfl 04/!;¥99 !! :06 1) Property: , CA APN: 172-070-21,4)0 County: KERN, CA Census: 411.07 Map Pg: 232-B3 New Pg: Phone: Owner: REGENCY BK Mail: t~. BJECT PROPERTY INFORMATIO _1~ Tax Rate Area: 000-1264 Prop Tax: $2,493.57 Delinq Tax Yr: Exemptions: PO BOX 16279; FRESNO CA 93755-6279 Use: Total Value: Land Value: Imprv Value: Assd Yr: % Improved: INDUSTRIAL LOT $216,883 $216,883 1998 SALES INFORMATION Transfer Date: Sale Price/Type: Document Cf: Document Type: 1st TD/Type: Finance: Junior TD's: Lender: Seller: Title Company: Transfer Info: LAST SALE: 08~28~98 $10,000 117376 TRUSTEE'S DEED UNKNOWN CAPITAL FORECLOSURE SVCS PRIOR SALE: 08/10~92 $345,900 112947 TRUSTEE'S DEED SITE INFORMATION Improve Type: Zon!ng: County Use: Bldg Class: Flood Panel: Flood Zone: M-3 3030 Lot Size: Lot Area: Parking: Park Spaces: Site Influence: Ground Lease: A38.200 1,663,992 Phys Chars: UNKNOWN IMPROVEMENTS Bldg/Liv Area: Cf Units: Cf Bldgs: Cf Stories: $/SF: Yrblt/Eff: Total Rms: Bedrms: Baths(F/H): Fireplace: Pool: Bsmt Area: Construct: Flooring: Air Cond: Heat Type: Quality: Condition: Style:- Other Rooms: Legal: /PM ~.1 PL 3 Comments: Copyright (D 1996 TRW REDI Property Data Page: 1 of 1 EXPERIAlt 1-800-345-733~ ~ IN 1110 Of Mi INCH r"/z-07 PTN. WI/2 &,El/2 OF SEC.'I~7 T.3QSR28E. .@ HO~N£ · ! £ TRACT 4441 3&05~C /'~./4 ,4C. /0 R M. I-~5~ 2 ! 4 QMR ZO ~A¥ 0 1 !997 ( 2,'="~. ~ riot,; T~. mop ~. ~ e,.,..,.,,t pu*po., ] ASSESSORS MAP NO.].,.7..Z----,.QT- .... · COUNTY OF KERN . NEXT-FUNC: KIPS #ROLLTHQ ATN 17;i? 070 Fi le No gPN 177 070 ~! ! SITE Ouner nEGENCV Bill 7060 KEY: O0 6 Lgnd Lgl PH BANK FRESNO ST R,B,P, TRA-No00! ~64 CHG DT08/~8/98 Chg Type TnANSFER Hineral Land/PI~0,90! I~prv~ent Other I~p Pets Prop Ex~p A~t Net Value ~0,901 SECURED ROLL INQUIRY ACTIVE L 3 Acres H P 0 BOX 16779 FRESNO 99 98-1 ! 097317-00-4 001 ?64 ; !6,883 Doc Roll 1 AG Presv NO 38.~0 BPS 19811 937~0 KEY DATA PflOUPT P;~;~?41 Use Code 3030 CPest SD § UF Y NT 7376 08/~78/98 97-11 09308-00-8 001 ?64 ~16,883 ?18,63! Dt tax Defaulted: 06/30/98 PFI=HELP ?:I~ENU 3:RTRN 4:T06 5:FUTfl 6:RDUP 9:BILL PF 13 :NEI4 ! 4=APN H I ST 1 § :OI4NEflS 16 :EXEHPT ! 7 :SUPPL PF?O:PREq YR ?1:NEXT YEAR ??:PRT ;~3:NEXT ;~4:PflEV 717,631 IO:UFL 11 :BUS I~:EVTSEL 18:ADDfl 19:ROLL CORR 04/1;~/99 ! !: ! ~ ANNEX III.3.c OPERATIONS Objectives and targets A. Specify that only non-hazardous petroleum contaminated soil will be accepted? Hydrocarbon contaminated soils meet RCRA standards B. Specify concentration limits on constituents of concern for soil acceptance? 50,000 PPM Gasoline 50,000 Diesel 100,000 Oil 250,000 Crude Oil C. Describe how litter, nuisances, dust, noise, or other impacts will be minimized? Site is designated as 7.3 Heavy Industrial Zone. This area is located in a remote area of the city with no Residential housing within .5 miles. (see enclosed map for details) Discharge or release control A. Provide a liner and leachate collection and removal system: Soil Rem will install a 40 mil Liner 200X200 with monitoring leachate system. (see scale drawing for details) B. Alternate design, which provides an equivalent protection of water quality? N/A Assessment and monitoring A. Describe the monitoring and detection systems in use? Have permission fi-om property owner to use former tenants (clean soils) monitoring well system. Leachate monitoring and collection system will be monitored every 30 days and all regulators will be provided copies. B. Describe any other steps used or needed to detect or monitor releases? N/A Containment A. Describe the mitigation systems in use to control air emissions? Use of chemical depressant to knock down air emissions if necessary chemical name is Vapor Control B. Describe safeguards to prevent surface storm water run off7. Use of Burros in site area Recovery A. Upon completion of operation or termination of service, describe how: the operation grounds, excluding the disposal area, shall be cleaned of all contaminated soil, construction scraps, and other materials related to the operation, and these materials legally recycled, reused, or disposed of?. Dirt is cleaned Recycled and construction materials will be removed and properly disposed Decontamination A. All machinery shall be cleaned of contaminated soil? Company's SOP require equipment clean and maintenance to be performed daily B. All remaining structures shall be cleaned of contaminated soil? Structures adjacent to operations area would not be susceptual to contaminated soil RE: ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS FOR SOIL REM CORPORATION 1). Please specify for what emissions the knock down agent is used for (e.g. VOC or PM 10)? All Hydrocarbons, Gasoline, Jet Fuel, Diesel Fuels, Waste Oil and Grease. 2). Specify what emission concentration would determine the use of a knock down agent and how often are emissions levels taken? a). An Emission Concentration would be used if emissions were over 15 PPM on FID meter. b). Emissions levels are taken and recorded twice daily. See attached FID air monitoring record. 3). Please provide MSDS chemical make up for knock down agent? See MSDS sheets. 4). Specify maximum VOC concentration after treatment and immediately prior to release of material? a). At~er treatment VOC levels 0 to 15 on PPM on FID meter. b). Prior to release of Soil 0 to 20 PPM on FID meter. 5). Response to question #10 did not include units of measure and did not answer the volume? See attached flow chart. There is no oil./water separated not needed. 6). The active portion of the contaminated soil storage piles will assumed to be equal to the daily facility through put unless otherwise specified. (The active portion is the portion that is uncovered and is actively being handled for processing)? a). We will store about ten thousand tons of feed stock materials of different hydrocarbon contaminants. b). The active portion of soil uncovered will be on average of 4 to 600 tons daily. 7). Specify the average height of contaminated soil received and stored on site before processing? Height of contaminated soil may be ten to twenty five feet high. 8). Flow chart provided shows three "solids" drop out points, please indicate what these solids indicate and corresponding VOC concentration? a). Back sand screw two dewatering screens V.O.C. at this point ten to twelve on FID meter. b). Clay and sand defilter with twenty-four bank cones. V.O.C. at this point seven to ten on FID meter. e). Centrifuges for micron removal. V.O.C. at this point seven to ten on FID meter. 9). Specify what happens to oil product after initial oil/water separation indicated on flow chart (e.g. is oil stored on site?, is oil transferred off-site?, if so how?) a). If any oil is recovered it is broken down with surfactant. Then bacteria will ingest it. b). Oil is not stored on site. What small amounts of oil are ingested by the bacteria. c). No oil is transferred offsite. The surfactant emulsifies oils and bacteria ingest it. 10). Is flow chart incorrect? - There is no oil/water separation? There is no oil/water separator. 11). Specify what filters are used for in process (e.g. Are the filters used to filter oil or bio waste?, How and when are filters changed and disposed?, What are the associated emissions?) a). N/A on filters b). There is no bio waste bacteria, it tums to fatty acids which are non-hazardous. c). N/A d). No emissions 12). Because the flow chart provided does not indicate a bioreactor, please specify on the flow chart where the bioreaetor fits into process? See Flow Chart I have highlighted BioReactor. 13). Because you stipulate the system is closed loop, please indicate how oxygen for the bioreaction is provided and how off gassing is handled? a). Oxygen for bioreactor comes fi.om centrifugal pumps and agitator in tank. b). Spray bars and misters are in area's where gassing can occur to knock V.O.C. 14). Specify how treated soil/material is actively aerated (e.g. Are windows physically turned or mixed?, Is air induced through venting?...etc.) a). It is not necessary to move soil for aeration alter it is in curing beds. At~er leaving soil washing machine soil has enough oxygen and moisture to let set for approximately fourteen days until treatment is reached. b). Windows on stock piles of treated soil is not touched for seven to fourteen days or until lab samples indicate treated. 15). Response to question #19 did not include maximum area for windrow storage or windrow dimensions (height and width)? a). The maximum area for different treated soils is one hundred X one hundred areas each for the cells. b). Estimate size of clean soil rows is five foot high and about thirty feet wide. 16). Specify what waste stream is sampled every 100 tons (e.g. alter treatment or every 100 tons received)? a). Soils before treatment will have lab analysis before facility will accept and stipulate what hydrocarbons and range it is. b). Every hydrocarbon waste stram received at the facility will be sampled, such as gasoline, diesel, waste oil, and fuels. At, er treatment of soil, at~r seven to fourteen days treating period. ANNEX III.3.d PLANNING Hazard assessment A. Identification of all possible air emission points in the process? Stockpiles of untreated soil, feed hopper & conveyor belt system. B. Quantification of volatile organic compounds (VOC) and hazardous air pollutant and/or toxic air contaminant emissions (maximum hourly, daily, and annual) bom receiving, storage, processing, and loadout of soil, soil products, and any other materials handled? FID Air Monitoring Record is profiled and kept on record for every load delivered to Soil Rem's property C. Quantification of the acute and chronic health risk to the exposed population resulting from hazardous ak pollutant and/or toxic air contaminant emissions based on the maximum emission rates? Maximum rate set forth by state. (Get file from office) (See attachment of log) Protection A. A "top down" best available control technology (BACT) determination evaluating ail technically feasible air pollutant emission control options, including alternate basic equipment and processes. The most effective control technique that is both technologically feasible and cost effective, or achieved-in- practice, must be employed? Use of knock down agent if emissions require doing so Coordination with natural resources trustees & NGO's A. A determination that the Facility Compliance Plan is consistent with the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) document certified for the project? Site Plan Review (see map BZA) Waste management?. No chemical wastes generated during operation SOIL REM CORP. ADDITIONAL QUESTIONS FROM 2/5/99'S MEETING 1). Emission on Soil Rem Facility will be contained with Emissions Control agents and Clean Soil. a). Stockpiles on untreated soil will be tarped or 3" to 6" of clean soil will be added. b). On treated soil tarp or 3" to 6" of dean soil will be used to cover piles. 2). Contaminated soil will be kept segregated in feed stockpiles while waiting to be processed. 3). Emissions data will be done daily on each truck entering facility. a). Soil must have lab testing before acceptance b). Generator certification sheet properly filled out e). Amount of tonnage d). Type of contaminant e). Amount of VOC or PPM SUBJECT ON FEED STOCKPILES AND CLEAN SOIL STOCKPILES. VOC 1). Three times daily soil at Soil Rem Facility will be monitored for V.O.C. including the time, day, and weather will be recorded with V.O.C. readings. SUBJECT EMISSIONS OF SOIL WHEN SHIPPED 1). Emissions on Clean Soils should not exceed 8 to 20 PPM, when shipping. 2). No Free Liquids can be present when shipping. SUBJECT DUST CONTROL OF FACILITY 1). Spray equipment will be kept on site at all times in good maintenance condition. 2). Soil will be kept at a 20% moisture by weight. SUBJECT SCREENING 1). To screen soil we will be using a Grizzly screener. 2). Soil being screened will be at a 20% moisture by weight. SUBJECT GASOLINE RECEIVED AT FACILITY 1). Soil Rem would like to accept on site gasoline soil. No more than 100 tons per day. 2). Gasoline soil in feed stockpile not to exceed 1,200 tons at any time. 3). Gasoline soil not to exceed 2,000 tons in a calendar month at Soil Rem Facility. SUBJECT FEED STOCK PILE AT FACILITY 1). Gasoline soils not to exceed 2,000 tons per calendar month 2). Jet Fuels, Greases, Oils, and Diesel, Soil Rem would like to stockpile all of these contaminants to 9,000 to 13,000 ton's at any given time. Close loop system with regard to atmosphere. Bacteria ingest waste oils. Wastewater is separated with surfactants. See Flow Diagram. 13). Ifa bioreactor is to be used, describe where it would be placed within the process flow chart and the internal operation of the bioreactor (e.g. mass balance). See Flow Diagram. 14). Specify the chemical composition of surfactants and floculents used in the process? See MSDS's Sheets. FINISHED PRODUCT HANDLING 16). Specify maximum hourly, daily, and annual amounts of contaminated soil/material and liquid waste processed by the operation (these will become permit limits)? a). 8 to 12 hours daily. b). Process up to 400 tons daily. 17). Describe how treated soil/material is stored (e.g. it covered? What is the maximum VOC concentration of soil/material? Is it actively or passively aerated? How long is it stored on site? At what VOC concentration is it deemed remediated?) a). Stock Piled on day and lined (poly) bed, covered, in rainy weather. b). Due to temp and climatic conditions unable to furnish calculations. c). It is actively aerated. d). 14 to 30 days on site. -18). Specify maximum concentration of VOC's and moisture content of effluent soil/material or liquid waste before exposed to the atmosphere or placed in windows? Moisture content 12-15%, al~er treatment VOC's are below regulation standards. 19). Specify maximum area for windrow storage? 30 to 120 days. RECEIVING AND STORAGE 1). Identification of all possible emission points in the process including a description of all particulate PM10 and Voc emission control devices (e.g. enclosed conveyor, enclosed screening, venting to fabric baghouse or venting to thermal oxidizer, vehicular emissions from driving on unpaved areas/roadways.., etc.) PM10, Piles will be covered with a 10 mil poly vinyl voc will be monitored with a PID using a "knock down" agent. Once crust is formed on piles no dirt or particulates are dispersed. No bags house, or equipment emissions will be emitted. In addition all equipment is electrical. 2). Identify all types of generators/sources of contaminated soil/material or liquid waste to be received and processed (e.g. gasoline and diesel from tank pulls or spills, heavy or light crude oil storage tank bottoms, gasoline contaminated water, car wash waste water, fabric laundry waste water.., etc.) Soil contaminated with gasoline diesel from tank pulls or spills light to heavy crude. "NO FREE LIQUIDS". 3). Specify maximum hourly, daily, and annual amounts of contaminated soil/material and liquid waste received (these will become permit limitations) No liquids, up to 500 to 600 tons a day of contaminated soil. (New company no historical average to make calculations). 4). Specify maximum possible concentration of all 188 State Toxic Air Contaminants/EPA Hazardous Air Pollutants (see attached list) in soil/material or liquid waste as received (these will become permit limitations) Under Title 22 if over state limits "WILL NOT ACCEPT" 5). Describe how contaminated soil/material is received and stored (e.g. How high are drop points? Are delivery trucks covered? What are storage piles covered with? a). Brought in on dump tracks and stored in 40 mil liner receiving area. b). Per state regulations up to trucking company. c). Piles are then covered with 10-mil poly vinyl. 6). & 7). Specify maximum possible concentration of VOC's (see attached definition) in soil/material or liquid waste as received using EPA SW-846 test methods 7). Describe proposed sampling plan and procedures specifying sampling frequency and methods for all materials received (these will become permit limits) Six and Seven answered together. Soil Rem dose not accept any soil without a full lab analysis. Every 100 tons a full lab analysis is run. Aider treatment and prior to release a full lab analysis is done and has to meet requirements per state guidelines. 8). Describe how contaminated liquid waste is received and stored (e.g. How is it delivered? is it ever exposed to the open atmosphere>, How long is it stored on site? What type of containers is it stored in? What is the daily and annual volume received?) Soil Rem does not receive any liquid waste or free liquids. 9). Identify minimum soil/material moisture content as received and maintained in storage piles, as loaded into the inlet hopper to be screened Regular soil is 12-15%. 10). Identify the volume and area of contaminated soil/material that is open to the atmosphere in the "working" portion of the storage piles and the volume and area that is covered. Not open to atmosphere area. 200X200 area. PROCESSING 11). Describe what happens to solids removed from the process (e.g. Are the solids removed from site? How are the solids stored and transferred? What is the moisture content and VOC concentration of the solids? a). Hydrocarbon solids are ingested by microbes. b). No transfer of liquids or solids is applicable. 12). Description of how generated wastewater and separated waste oil is treated, recycled or removed, include a process flow chart that indicates any points in the process that are in communication with the atmosphere 20). Describe proposed sampling plan and procedures specifying sampling frequency and methods? 1 sample every 100 tons. MISCELLANEOUS 21). Identify any IC engine to be used at the facility'with a manufacturer's maximum continuous brake horsepower rating of greater than 50 hp (if any exist, see attached supplemental information sheet)? N/A 22). Identify any boiler to be used at the facility and if liquid fuel fired, natural gas fired or 75X 10 Btu/hr (if any exist, see attached supplemental information sheet)? N/A ENFORCEMENT AGENCY NOTIFICATION Operation Name: Address/Location: Soil Rem Corporation 408 East Pacheco Road Bakerpfield, CA 93307 Phone N~ber: (661) 834-8471 Operator: John E. Arnold Mailing Address: Soil Rem Corporation 408 East Pacheco Road Bakersfield~ CA 93307 Phone Numbem (661) 834-8471 Operation Information: Authoring EU~'oility (Section of 14 CCR, Dbision 7, Chap~r 3 or 3.1):. this tier is T14, CCR, 76362.2. Land Owne~r: Wayne Massie M~iJj~g Address: South Enterprise Zone 6570 North Becker Fresno, CA 93710 Phone Numbcm (209) 299-8959 The section authorizing eligibility for Volumeand Type ofWaae/Ma~dM(s)Han~ed: an additional 5,006 tons of Peak Loadl,g:.. 600 tons/day Annual Loadb~g:. 150,000 tons/yr Hours of Operation: 7 a.m. to (4-7 10,000 tons of this petroleum contaminated soil with treated soil undergoing bioremediation. Cubic Y~orTons Cubic Y~dsorTons p.m.) daylight hours only. hereby certify under penalty of penury that the information provhted ~s true and accurate to the'best of my knowledge and beli~. Signature of Land Owner:. Signature of Operator:. F_aforcement A~ency Name and Address: Kern County Environmental Health Services Department 2700 ~I' Street, Suite 300 Bakersfield, CA 93301 Date: Date: Completion of this form is not required by regulation; however, it will provide the enforcement ngcncy with the information required by 14 CCR 18103.1 S22 ENFORCEMENT AGENCY NOTIFICATION Operation Name: Address/Location: Phone Number: Operator: Mailing Address: Phone Number: Land Owner: Mailing Address: Phone Number: Operation Information: Authorizing Eligibility (Section of 14 CCR, Division 7, Chapter 3 or 3.1):. Volume and Type of Waste/Material(s) Handled: Peak Loading:. Annual Loading:. Hours of Operation: Cubic Yards or Tons Cubic Yards or Tons I hereby certify under penalty of perjury that the information provided is true and accurate to the best of my knowledge and belief. Signature of Land Owner: Signature of Operator: Date: Date: Enforcement Agency Name and Address: Kern County Environmental Health Services Department 2700 "M" Street, Suite 300 Bakersfield, CA 93301 Completion of this form is not required by regulation; however, it will provide the enforcement agency with the information required by 14 CCR 18103.1 S22 --- YOUR CALL ~_~ODE~ NUMBER EXTENSION ~ / FAX~ ,~ PLEASE CALL 10 S[~ YO~ ~ ~ [~ ~ WANTS TO SEE YOU BAKERSFIELD FIRE DEPARTMENT ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES 1715 Chester Ave. · Bakersfield, CA 93301 Business Phone (805) 326-3979 · FAX (805) 326-0576 FAX Transmittal TO: [ SHELTON GREY COMPANY:[[REGIONAL WATER QUALITY CONTROL BOARD ]FAX No. 559-445-5910 FROM: [ RALPH E. HUEY Attached, please find the response by Soil Rem intented to address the Regional Water Quality Control Boards comments on their Facility Compliance Plan. Per our teleconference today, April 7, 1999, we will incorporate this information into the revised Facility Compliance Plan in the addendum format suggested by the board. Feel free to comment directly to Soil Rem or through this office, which ever you prefer. If you comment directly to Soil Rem, please keep me informed of any changes required. Ralph Huey Zone Administrator REH/dm attachment cc: Peter Ruggerello Howard Wines 04/07/99 10:21 8805 326 0576 BFD HAZ NAT DIV ~001 *** ACTIVITY REPORT *** *************************** TRANSMISSION OK TX/RX NO. CONNECTION TEL CONNECTION ID START TIME USAGE TIME PAGES RESULT 1088 15594455910 04/07 10:08 12'57 20 OK BAKERSFIELD FIRE DEPARTMENT ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES 1715 Chester Ave. · Bakersfield, CA 93301 Business Phone (805) 326-3979 ° FAX (805) 326-0576 FAX Transmittal TO: I GINA KAPHURIA COMPANY:I STATE WATER BOARD FAX No.1916-657-2388 FROM: RALPH E. HUEY Attached, please find the response by Soil Rem intented to address the Regional Water Quality Control Boards comments on their Facility Compliance Plan. Per our teleconference today, April 7, 1999, we will incorporate this information into the revised Facility Compliance Plan in the addendum format suggested by the board. Feel free to comment directly to Soil Rem or through this office, which ever you prefer. If you comment directly to Soil Rem, please keep me informed of any changes required. Ralph Huey Zone Administrator REH/dm cc: Peter Ruggerello Howard Wines 04/07/99 09:58 '~805 326 0576 BFD HAZ MAT DIV ~001 *************************** ACTIVITY REPORT TRANSMISSION OK TX/RX NO. CONNECTION TEL CONNECTION ID START TIME USAGE TIME PAGES RESULT 1083 19166572388 04/07 09:45 12'43 20 OK ~s~R-30-g9 e4:~2 pr~ Iq&~- 30-9g 03 :Q3P P .01 SoilRem Corporation P,O. Box 40764 South Station 524 1-805.834.8471 1.805.828.8479 cell ph lqakersfielcl. Ca. 93304-9998 ! ,805.397.4508 fax# $oilRem~aol.ccm Date. March .10, To' Dell Harper From: John Arnold Subjecl Facility Compliance Plan ~FCP), SoilRem Corporation, [nc. The California Resional Water Q~lhy Control Boards commenfs to our FCP.sUbmi,ai requires a cerdficadon b)' the l~'oper~ ow~e~ as follows:. The undersisned ownen et'parcel number 172-070-03 (South Emerp~se Zone) herewith ~knowledse ukimate re~ponsibility for aa), condition orpollufion, nuisance or violations orthe FCP occurrtn$ on r~id propmy where $ollRem Coflx~mion. In,:. wiJl be oper~ins. SOILS ENGINEERING, INC. April 2, 1999 Mr. Howard Wines City of Bakersfield Fire Dept. Office of Environmental Services 1715 Chester Avenue Bakersfield, CA 93301 RE: Hydrogeologic Characterization Soil Rem Facility 408 Pacheco Rd. Bakersfield, California Mr. Wines: Soils Engineering, Inc. (SEI) has prepared this submittal for Soil Rem describing the hydrogeologic conditions in the area of the proposed facility (see Plate 1 for Location Map). SEI has reviewed previous groundwater monitorhig reports prepared by Advanced Environmental Concepts (AEC) for an adjacent facility CleanSoils and the latest Kern County Water Agency Reports on Water Conditions 1997 and Water Supply 1995. In addition the geologic map for Bakersfield was reviewed for general geologic conditions in the area. Based on this data the following can be stated at the site. GEOLOGIC SETTING The site lies in the southern portion of the San Joaquin Valley with a general topographic slope to the south. The project site rests on a considerable thickness of granitic alluvium, identified as "Older Alluvium" on geologic maps. Near surface soils within the zone of influence of future developments consist of interbedded sand, silt, and clay layers overlying bedrock, which is located several thousand feet below the surface. Subsurface layers of clay comprise partial aquiclude to the penetration of seepage from surface sources. These sediments were derived in the Sierra Nevada Mountains to the east and deposited by the meandering Kern River. No significant geologic differences are expected beneath the Soil Rem site and the former Clean Soils facility with wells approximately 700' apart. 4700 DISTRICT BLVD. · BAKERSFIELD, CALIFORNIA93313 · PHONE(805) 831-5100 ° FAX:(805) 831-2111 ~,-OILS ENGINEERING, INC. Proposed Well Locations Soil Rent Facility 408 Pacheco Rd. Bakersfieldt CA. File No. ENV99-06 April 2, 1999 Page 2 HYDROLOGY Unconfined Aquifer The depth to the unconfined aquifer as shown on maps prepared by the Kern Water Agency (KCWA), and dated September, 1997, is approximately 200 feet below the ground surface at both the Clean Soil and Soil Rem facility locations (see Plate 3). In 1995 Clean Soil facility had groundwater in it's deeper monitoring wells (MW-3, MW-5 and MW-6) at depths of 143 to over 150'. On February 12, 1999, SEI measured the depth to water in Clean Soils 3 deeper aquifer wells (MW-3, MW-5 and MW-6) with depths of 139.05' (MW-3) to 142.32' (MW-6) with an estimated groundwater gradient direction of S86W. Even though the groundwater levels are higher than reported by the KCWA Maps it appears to be the same unconfined aquifer. Perched Ground Water Shallow ground water beneath the proposed Soil Rem site and the former Clean Soil facility is shown on the Kern County Water Agency Depth to Shallow Groundwater Map dated July 1995, as being just outside of the 20' below ground surface contour (See Plate 4). This corresponds with what has been measured at the former Clean Soils facility which ranged from 25' to 29' in 1995 and 29.5' in well MW-1 in February, 19~9 with a g~-oundwater gradient direction of N42E. Groundwater Quality Maps prepared by the Kern County Water Agency, dated July, 1991 indicate total dissolved solids in the unconfined aquifer beneath both the former Clean Soils and the proposed Soil Rem site to be less than 500 ppm for specific well sites. This corresponds to the TDS concentrations reported at the former Clean Soils facility in October 12, 1995 which were 280 ppm (MW-5) and 440 (MW-3) ppm. CONCLUSIONS Based on the data stated above it appears that the shallow and deeper groundwater intervals at both the former Clean Soils facility and the proposed Soil Rem site are interconnected and groundwater data from both sites can be used for the required monitoring of the Soil Rem site. This will be confirmed when the 2 proposed monitoring wells are installed and sampled at the Soil Rem site. If it is determined that this is not the case, then additional monitoring wells will be installed on the Soil Rem site to determine groundwater quality and the direction of flow. RECOMMENDATIONS SEI recommends that a down-gradient deep aquifer well be installed west-southwest (S87W) of the soil treatment area with a depth of at least 155' bgs. (with 20 feet of screen interval). In addition a shallow perched groundwater well will be installed down-gradient LS ENGINEERING, INC. Proposed Well Locations File No. ENV99-06 Soil Rem Facility April 2, 1999 408 Pacheco Rd. Bakersfield, CA. Page 3 of the treatment system near the northeast corner of the property with a depth of at least 40' bgs. (with 15to 20 feet of screen interval). See Plate 2 for proposed down-gradient well locations and Plates 5 and 6 for proposed monitoring well construction diagrams. These proposed groundwater monitoring wells will be monitored quarterly for depth to groundwater and groundwater quality. Water samples collected from the 2 on-site monitoring wells will be analyzed for Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons as gasoline (TPHg) and diesel (TPHd) by EPA method 8015m and for volatile organics and MTBE by EPA method 8260, for general minerals, and for Title 26 metals. Depth to water of the six (6) neighboring CleanSoils monitoring wells will be measured during the monitoring events to calculate an accurate groundwater gradient beneath the Soil Rem site. If the groundwater quality of the 2 proposed on-site down-gradient monitoring wells are similar to the previous groundwater monitoring results of the adjacent Clean Soils wells, then 1 year of monitoring the on-site down-gradient wells should not be necessary to establish a baseline for groundwater quality beneath the site. If you have any questions concerning this letter Sincerely, ~obert J. Beaker, R.G. 5076 o Environmental Division Manager Enclosure: Location Map tact SEI at (805) 831-5100. Wel~t~'ons Plot Plan with Proposed Plate 3, Depth to Unconfined Groundwater Map, KCWA, ID4 1997 Plate 4, Depth to Shallow Groundwater, KCWA, Water Supply Report, 1995 Plate 5, Typical Groundwater Monitoring Well - Shallow Aquifer Plate 6, Typical Groundwater Monitoring Well - Deeper Aquifer { m rl~T ) "TENTATIVE" BFJNO ADI~S~N OF LOT 20 OF' ~E KERN COUN~ S~ES M · B. HA~N DASD M~CH 16, 1~9. R~O IN ~E OFR~ OF ~[ KERN C~N~ ~. IN SEC~ .17, T.' ~ S.. · 28 E., M.D.M. IN ~E CI~ ~ BAKERIES. C~N~ ~ KERN, STA~ ~ C~F~NIA. 2 PARCELS 27.68 ACRES ' ' ' ' ""';",..~r---- "'1~-...:-.: · .. "... :...-j..": .'...'.. . .- . .. Plate I SURVEYOR ~$ ~ STAIiSllC~_ NOT PLOTIABI F_ · BASIS 0~' BEARING: SHEET i OF' I SHEET ~'-"-"' ~ ~' ' M '": .'/: ..... Former I~. PM 4441 f .1 ' /' · I~Jd..4441 fi I~ II _VACAN ]' ' II II II I1~ LI-,- R 28E 29 27 ! 26 , 25 `30 I I I `3~ .32 `33 34 I 4 17 ~'/ 3_' 29 , 7 PLATE 5 Kern County Woter Agency IMPROVEMENT DISTRICT NO.4 Bokersfield, Colifornic DEPTH TO WATER IN WELLS SEPTEMBER 1997 LEGEND ID4 BOUNOARY CONTOUR INTERVAL' 20 or I00 F~'.£T 21 28 18 i3~ 32 L~ ~, NT 17 DEPTH TO UNCONFINED AQUIFE 0 1 <.(;ALE IN MILES PLATE 3 : :,. : PLATE 4 DEPTH TO SHALLOW WATER July : u : : T i . i · -il! Typical Shallow Monitoring Wei~iagram Well Box Locking Cap 18-i 2 feet 13-18' feet 3 feet 2 feet Concrete Neat CementJ5% Slurry Blank Casing 2" PVC Bentonite Seal 40 feet 15-20 8 inches Perforated Casing. 2" 020" slots Plug Estimated Groundwater Depth = 27'bgs. Sand pack, #2/12 or #3 NOT TO $CRLE Plate 5 Typical Deeper Monitoring Well Diagram Well Box Locking Cap 38' 133' 135' 2 feet 128 feet 3 feet 2 feet Concrete Neat Cement/5% tonite Slurry Blank Casing 2' PVC Bentonite Seal 20 feet Perforated Casing, 2" 020" slots Estimated Groundwater Depth = 145' bgs. Sand pack, #2/12 or #3 NOT TO SCALE Plug Plate 6 CONSTRUCTION QUALITY CONTROL MANUAL Construction QC Manual TABLE OF CONTENT e e INTRODUCTION 1.1 Purpose ...................................................................................................................................... I 1.2 Scope .......................................................................................................................................... 1 MATERIAL DELIVERY 2.1 Documentation of Material Delivery ........................................................................................ 1 GEOMEMBRANE INSTALLATION 3.1 Earth Work ............................................................................................................................... 1 3.1.1 Standard Responsibilities ................................................................................................ ! 3.1.2 Minimum QC Guidelines ................................................................................................. ! 3.2 Crest Anchorage System ........................................................................................................... 2 3.3 Preparation for Geomembrane Deployment ......................................................................... ;..2 3.3.1 Panel Layout ................................................................................................................... 2 3.3.2 Identification ................................................................................................................... 3 3.4 Field Panel Placement ............................................................................................................... 3 3.4.1 Weather Conditions ......................................................................................................... 3 3.4.2 Location .......................................................................................................................... 3 3.4.3 Documentation of Panel Placement ................................................................................. 3 3.4.4 Method of Deployment .................................................................................................... 3 3.4.5 Damage Repairs .............................................................................................................. 3 3.5 Geomembrane Field Seaming ................................................................................................... 4 3.5. I General Requirements ..................................................................................................... 4 3.5.2 Seam Preparation ............................................................................................................ 5 3.5.3 Trial Welds ...................................................................................................................... 6 3.5.4 General Seaming Procedures .... : ...................................................................................... 7 3.5.5 Seaming Documentation .................................................................................................. 8 SEAM TESTING - GEOMEMBRANES 4.1 Concept ...................................................................................................................................... 8 4.2 Air Pressure Testing .................................................................................................................. 4. 2.1 Equipment for Air Testing ............................................................................................... 8 4.2.2 Procedure for Air Testing ................................................................................................ 8 4. 2. 3Procedure Fo Non-Complying Test. ............................................................................... !0 4. 2. 4General Air Testing Procedures ..................................................................................... 10 4. 2.5 Air Pressure Testing Documentation ............................................................................. 10 4.3 Vacuum Testing ...................................................................................................................... 4.3.1 4.3.2 4.3.3 4.3.4 Equipment for Vacuum Testing ...................................................................................... 11 Procedure.for Vacuum Testing ...................................................................................... 11 Procedure for Non-Complying Test ............................................................................... 11 General Vacuum Testing Procedures ............................................................................. 12 Construction QC Manual TABLE OF CONTENT e ® 4. 3.5 I/acuum Testing Documentation .................................................................................... !2 4.4 Destructive Testing .................................................................................................................. 12 4. 4.1 Concept 12 4. 4. 2Procedure for Destructive Testing ................................................................................. !2 4. 4. 3Procedure for Non-Complying Destructive Test ............................................................. !3 4.5 Laboratory Testing of Destructive Seam Samples ................................................................. 13 4.$. I Destructive Seam Testing Laboratory ........................................................................... 13 4.5.2 Acceptance Criteria ....................................................................................................... 14 . DEFECTS AND REPAIRS 5.1 Superintendent'$ Review ......................................................................................................... 14 5.2 Technician's Responsibility ..................................................................................................... 14 5.3 Repair Procedures ................................................................................................................... 14 5.3.1 Patching ........................................................................................................................ 14 5. 3.2 Grinding a~117~elding ................................................................................................... !4 5. 3. 3'~pot Ftrelding or Seaming ............................................................................................... 14 $. 3. 4Capping ......................................................................................................................... 15 $. 3.5 Extrude Overlap ...................................................... ;: ................................................... 15 5. 3. 6Removal of Suspect Seams ............................................................................................. 15 5.4 Verification of Repairs., ......................................................................................................... 15 GEOTEXTILES 6.1 Handling and Placement ......................................................................................................... 15 6.2 Seams and Overlaps ................................................................................................................ 15 6.3 Repairs ..................................................................................................................................... 16 GEONETS 7.1 ltandling and Placement ......................................................................................................... 16 7.2 Layering and Tying of Geonet ............................................................................................... 16 7.3 Repairs ..................................................................................................................................... 17 GEOSYNTHETIC CLAY LINERS 8.1 Storage ..................................................................................................................................... 17 8.2 ltandling & Placement ............................................................................................................ 17 8.3 Repairs ..................................................................................................................................... 17 GEOCOMPOSITE 9.1 ltandling and Placement ......................................................................................................... 17 9.2 Seams and Overlaps ................................................................................................................ 18 9.3 Repairs ..................................................................................................................................... t8 Construction QC Manual TABLE OF CONTENT APPENDICES Appendix A Material Delivery Inventory Checklist ............................................................................................. Al Subgrade Surface Acceptance .......................................................................................................... A2 Panel Placement Fo.rm ...................................................................................................................... A3 Trial Weld Information Form ........................................................................................................... A4 Panel Seaming Form ......................................................................................................................... A5 Non-Destructive Testing Form ......................................................................................................... A6 Destructive Te~t Log ............................................................................................... ~ ......................... A7 Repair Report ................................................................................................ :o .................................. AS CQC Daily Field Report ................................................................................................................... Appendix B Sample Installation Warranty ........................................................................................................... BI NSc Page e INTRODUCTION 1.1 Purpose This manual addresses the Quality Control Program developed and utilized by National Seal Company Installation Personnel to assure the quality of workmanship and the installation integrity of geomembranes and other geosynthetic products. 1.2 Scope AH geosynthetic components of lining systems will be addressed in this manual, including geomembranes, geotextiles, geonets, geocomposites, and geosynthetic clay liners. MATERIAL DELIVERY 2.1 Documentation of Material Delivery A Third Party QA Representative should be present, whenever possible, to observe and assist in material delivery and unloading on site. The Third Party QA Representativ~ is to note any material received in damaged state and to remove any necessary conformance samples. Upon mobilization to site, a NSC Representative shall: - Verify the equipment used on site is adequate and does not risk damage to thc geomembrane or other materials. - Mark rolls or portions of rolls which appear damaged. - Verify that storage of materials ensure adequate protection against dirt, theft, vandalism, and passage of vehicles. - Ensure that rolls are properly labeled and that labeling corresponds with Quality Control documentation.. - Complete roll numbers, date, roll size and any damage will be logged on the NSC Material Delivery Checklist (See Appendix A). GEOMEMBRANE INSTALLATION 3. l Earth Work 3.1.1 Standard Responsibilities The General and/or Earthwork Contractor shall be responsible for preparing and maintaining the subgrade in a condition suitable for installation of the liner unless specifically agreed otherwise. 3.1.2 Minimum QC Guidelines In cases where no site specific earthwork quality control guidelines exist, the following general guidelines shall be followed. 3.1.2.1 Surfaces to be lined shall be smooth and free of debris, roots, and angular or sharp rocks. All fill shall consist of well-graded material, free of organics, trash, clayballs, or other deleterious material that may cause damage to the geomembrane. Unless otherwise required by design specifications, the upper six inches (6") of the finished subgrade shall not contain stones or debris larger than one-half inch (1/2"). The subgrade shall be compacted in accordance with design NSc Construction QC Manual Page 2 3.2 3.3 3.4 specifications, but in no event less than is required to provide a firm unyielding foundation sufficient to permit the movement of vehicles and welding equipment over the subgrade without causing rutting or other deleterious effects. The subgrade shall have no sudden sharp or abrupt changes in grade. 3.1.2.2 The Earthwork Contractor shall protect the subgrade from desiccation, flooding, and freezing. Protection, if required, may consist of a thin plastic protective cover (or other material as approved by the engineer) installed over the completed subgrade until such time as the placement ofgeomembrane liner begins. Subgrades found to have desiccation cracks greater than one-half inch (I/2") in width or depth, or which exhibit swelling, heaving, or other similar conditions shall be replaced or reworked by the General and/or Earthwork Contractor to remove these defects. 3.1.2.3 Surface Acceptance. Upon request, National Seal Company's Site Supervisor will provide the Owner's and/or Contractor's Representatives with a written acceptance of the surface to be lined. This acceptance will be limited to an amount of area that National Seal Company is capable of lining during a particular work shill Subsequent repairs to the subgrade and the surface shall remain the responsibility of the Earthwork Contractor. An example of NationaJ Seal Company's Subgrade Surface Acceptance form is included in Appendix A. Crest Anchorage System 3.2.1 The anchor trench shall be excavated by the General and/or the Earthwork Contractor to lines and widths shown on the design drawings prior to geomembrane placement. 3.2.2 Anchor trenches excavated in clay soils susceptible to desiccation cracks should be excavated only the distance required for that days liner placement to minimize the potential of desiccation cracking of the clay soils. 3.2.3 Coruers in the anchor trench shall be slightly rounded where the geomembrane adjoins the trench to minimize sharp bends in the geomembrane. Preparation for Geomcmbrane Deployment 3.3.1 Panel Layout Prior to commencement of liner deployment, layout drawings shall be produced to indicate the panel configuration and general location of field seams for the project. 3.3.2 Identification Each panel used for the installation will be given a number which will be correlated with a batch or roll number. This panel identification number shall be related on the NSC Panel Placement Form, which will be used when required. Field Panel Placement 3.4.1 Weather Conditions Geomembrane deployment will generally not be done during any precipitation, in the presence of excessive moisture, in an area of standing water, or during high winds. NSc Construction QC Manual Page 3 3.5 3.4.2 3.4.3 3.4.4 3.4.5 Location National Seal Company will attempt to install field panels as indicated on the layout drawing. If the panels are deployed in a location other than that indicated on the layout drawings, the revised location will be noted in the field. These notations will be maintained and submitted by NSC and/or third party QA Consultants as determined on a site specific basis. Documentation of Panel Placement Information relating to geomembrane panel placement including date, time, panel number, and panel dimensions may be maintained on a site specific bases, on the Panel Placement Form as presented in Appendix A. 3.4.3.1 Ifa portion ora roll is set aside to be used at another time, the roll number will be written on the remainder of the roll in several places. Method of Deployment 3.4.4.1 The method and equipment used to deploy the panels must not damage the geomembrane or the supporting subgrade surface. 3.4.4.2 No personnel working.on the geomembrane will wear shoes that can damage the geomembrane or engage in actions which could result in damage to the geomem- bi'aBe. 3.4.4.3 Adequate temporary loading and/or anchoring, (i.e. sandbags, tires), which will not damage the geomembrane, will be placed to prevent uplift of the geomembrane by wind. 3.4.4.4 The geomembrane will be deployed with slack to allow for typical thermal expansion. Damage Repairs Any area of a panel seriously damaged (torn, twisted, or crimped) will be marked and repaired in accordance with Paragraph 5.3 of this document. Geomembrane Field Seaming 3.5.1 General Requirements 3.5.1.1 Layout ' In general, seams shall be oriented parallel to the slope, i.e., oriented along, not across the slope. Whenever possible, horizontal seams should be located on the base of the cell, not less than five (5') feet from the toe of the slope. Each seam made in the field shall be numbered. Seaming information to include seam number, welder iD, machine number, temperature setting, and weather conditions may be maintained on NSC Panel Seaming Form as presented in Appendix A. 3.5.1.2 Personnel NSc Construction QC Manual Page 4 3.5.2 3.5.1.3 3.5.1.4 All personnel performing seaming operations shall be trained in the operation of the specific seaming equipment being used and will qualify by successfully welding a test seam as described in Paragraph 3.5.3. Equipment 3.5.1.3.1 3.5.1.3.2 Fusion Welding Fusion Welding consists of placing a heated wedge, mounted on a self propelled vehicular unit, between two (2) over-lapped sheets such that the surface of both sheets are heated above the polyet- hylene's melting point. After being heated by the wedge, the overlapped panels pass through a set of pre-set pressure wheels which compress the two (2) panels together to form the weld. The fusion welder is equipped with a device which continuously monitors the temperature of the wedge. Extrusion Fillet Welding Extrusion fillet welding consists of introducing a ribbon of molten resin along the edge of the overlap of the two (2) geomembrane sheets to be welded. A hot-air preheat and the addition of molten polymer causes some of the material of each sheet to be liquifled resulting in a homogeneous bond between the molten weld bead and the surfaces of the overlapped sheets. The extrusion welder is equipped with gauges giving the temperature in the apparatus and a numerical setting for the pre-heating unit. Weather Conditions National Seal Company relies on the experience of the Project Superintendent and the results of test seams to determine whether seaming is restricted by weather. Many factors, such as the geomembrane temperature, humidity, wind, precipitation, etc., can effect the integrity of field seams and must be taken into account when deciding whether or not seaming should proceed. Test seams, as described in Paragraph 3.5.3, are required prior to daily production seaming to determine if the weather conditions will effect National Seal Company's ability to produce quality seams. Additional non-destructive and destructive testing of · production seams substantiate the decision made by the Project Superintendent to seam on any given day. Seam Preparation 3.5.2.1 Fusion Welding 3.5.2.1.1 Overlap the panels of'Geomembrane approximately four (4") to six (6") inches prior to welding. 3.5.2.1.2 Clean the seam area prior to seaming to assure the area is clean and free of'moisture, dust, dirt, debris of any kind. No grinding is required for fusion welding. NSc Construction QC Manual Page $ 3.5.2.1.3 Adjust the panels so that seams are aligned with the fewest possible number ofwrinides and "fishmouths". 3.5.3 3.5.2.2 3.5.2.2.5 3.5.2.1.4 A movable protective layer may be used, at the discretion of the National Seal Company Project Superintendent, directly below the overlap ofgeomembrane that is to be seamed to prevent build-up of dirt or moisture between the panels. Extrusion Fillet Welding 3.5.2.2.1 Whenever possible, the sheet will be pre-beveled prior to heat-tacking into place.. 3.5.2.2.2 Overlap the panels ofgeomembrane a minimum ofthree inches (3"). 3.5.2.2.3 Using a hot-air device, temporarily tack the panels ofgeomembranq to be welded, taking care not to damage the geomembrane. 3.5.2.2.4 Clean the seam area prior to seaming to assure the area is clean and free of moisture, dust, dirt, and debris of any kind. Grind seam overlap prior to welding within one (I) hour of the welding operation in a manner that does not damage the geomembrane. Grind marks should be covered with extrudate whenever possible. In ail cases grinding should not ex~end more than one-quarter inch (I/4") past the edge of the area covered by the extrudate during welding. Purge the extruder prior to beginning the seam to remove all heat-degraded extrudate from the barrel. 3.5.2.2.6 3.5.2.2.7 THai Welds Keep welding rod clean and dry. Trial welds shall be conducted by Welding Technicians prior to each seaming period, every five (5) hours, as weather conditions dictate or as requested by NSC CQC personnel if welding problems are suspected. All trial welds will be conducted under the same conditions as will be encountered during actual seaming. Once qualified by a passing trial - weld, Welding Technicians will not change parameters without performing another trial weld. 3.5.3.1 3.5.3.2 Trial Weld Length The trial weld shall be made by joining two (2) pieces ofgeomembrane at least six inches (6") in width. Trail welds for fusion welds will be 15 feet long and extrusion trial welds will be a minimum of four feet (4') long. Sample Procedure 3.5.3.2.1 Visually inspect the seam for squeeze out, footprint, pressure, and general appearance. 3.5.3.2.2 Cut three (3) one inch (1") wide specimens, one (1) from the middle of the seam and one foot (1') from each end of the test seam using a NSc Construction QC Manual Page 6 3.5.3.3 3.5.4 General 3.5.4.1 3.5.4.2 3.5.4.3 3.5.4.4 3.5.4.5 3.5.4.6 one inch (1") die cutter, The specimens shall then be tested in peel using a field tensiometer. 3.5.3.2.3 In order for a trial weld to be considered acceptable, all three specimens must meet the following criteria: 3.5.3.2.3. I Exhibit Film Tearing Bond (F'rB). 3.5.3.2.3.2Meet or exceed the minimum peel strength values listed in NSC's Material Specification Sheet. If any specimen is nonconforming the entire procedure shall be repeated. In the case of double track fusion welded seams, both welds must pass in order to be considered acceptable. 3.5.3.2.4 Ifrepeat tests utilizing reasonable sets of welding parameters also fail, the seaming apparatus shall not be accepted and shall not be used for seaming until the deficiencies are corrected and a passing test seam is achieved. Trial Weld Documentation 3.5.3.3.1 CQC Coordinator and/or Assistant will be present during peel testing and will record date, time, operator, machine number, ambient and operating temperatures, speed setting, peel values, and pass/fail designation. 3.5.3.3.2 All trail weld records shall be maintained on Nation. al Seal Company's Trial Weld Form as exhibited in Appendix A. 3.5.3.3.3 The National Seal Company CQC Coor-dinator and/or Superintendent will give final approval to proceed with welding. Seaming Procedures Seaming shall extend into the anchor trench. While welding a seam, monitor and maintain the proper overlap. Inspect seam area to assure it is clean and free of moisture, dust, dirt, debris of any kind. Welding Technicians will periodically check machine operating temperature and speed, and mark this information on the geomcmbranc. Align wrinkles at thc seam overlap to allow welding through the wrinkle. "Fishmouths" or wdnldes at seam overlaps that cannot be welded through shall be cut along the ridge in order to achieve a flat overlap. Thc cut "fishmouth" or wrinkle shall be heat-tacked flat and extruded or patched with an oval or round patch'of thc same geomembrane extending a minimum of three inches (3") beyond the cut in all directions. NSC Construction QC Manual Page 7 3.5.4.7 Ali cross/butt seams between two (2) rows of seamed panels shall be welded during the coolest time of thc day when practical, to allow for typical thermal expansion ofthe geomembrane. 3.5.4.8 Prior to welding cross/butt seams, the top and bottom overlap of intersecting fusion....W.,.e, lded seams will be trimmed six inches (6"). Intersecting extrusion fillet welded seams will be ground to flatten the extrusion bead prior to welding butt seams. 3.5.4.9 All "T" joints produced as a result of cross/butt seams shall be extrusion fillet welded. Overlap on each "leg" of the "T" joint will be trimmed back six inches (6"). Then grind three inches (3") minimum on each of the three (3) legs of the "T~ and extrusion weld all of the area prepared by grinding. 3.5.4.10 Whenever possible, Welding Technicians will cut a one inch (1 ") peel specimen, at the end of every seam. Prior to welding the next seam, the specimen will be tested for peel. 3.5.4.11 In the event non-complying seam test strips are encountered, the welding machine will be taken out of service until a passing trial weld is obtained, and additional peel specimens will be taken to localize the flaw. 3.5.4.12 Th,'. CQC Coordinator may, after consulting with NSC's Site Superintendent, take destructive samples from any seam, if'defects are suspected. 3.5.5 Seaming Documentation 3.5.5.1 Welding Technicians will mark on the liner with Mean Streak permanent mark:ers at the start of all seams information regarding, date, time, Welding Technician ID, machine number, and set temperature. CQC Coordinator or Assistant will record date, time, seam number, Technician ID, machine ID, set temperature, speed, and weather conditions on the NSC Panel Seaming Form (See Appendix A). 3.5.5.2 Welding Technicians will periodically check operating temperature and speed and mark the information along the seam. 3.5.5.3 CQC Coordinator will make periodic checks on welding operations to verify overlap, cleanliness, etc. SEAM TESTING - GEOMEMBRANES Concept 4.1. I The welded seam created by National Seal Company's fusion welding process is composed ora primary seam and a secondary track that creates an unwelded channel. The presence of'an unweided channel permits National Seal Company's fusion seams to be tested by inflating the sealed channel with air to a predetermined pressure and observing the stability of the pressurized channel over time. 4.1.2 National Seal Company performs non-destructive air-pressure testing in accordance with the following procedures, developed by NSC and adopted by the Geosynthetic Research Institutes Test Method GM-6. 4.1 NSc Construction QC Manual Page 4.2 Air Pressure Testing 4.2.1 Equipment for Air Testing 4.2. I. I An air pump (manual or motor driven) capable of generating and sustaining a pressure between 20 to 60 psi. 4.2.1.2 A rubber hose with fittings and connections. 4.2.1.3 A sharp hollow needle, or other approved pressure feed device with a pressure gauge capable of' reading and sustaining a pressure between 0 to 60 psi. Procedure for Air Testing 4.2.2.1 4.2.2.2 4.2.2 4.2.2.3 Seal both ends of the seam to be tested. Insert needle or other approved pressure feed device into the sealed channel .. created by the fusion weld. Inflate the test channel to a pressure of approximately 30 psi, and maintain the pressure within the range listed in Initial Pressure Schedule. Close valve, observe and record initial pressure. 12qlTIAL PRESSURE SCHEDULE * MATERIAL (M~.) MIN. PS! MAX. PSI 40 24 30 60 27 35 80 30 35 I00 30 35 4.2.2.4 *Initial pressure settings are recorded after an optional two (2) minute stabi- lization period. The purpose of this "relaxing period" is to permit the air temperature and pressure to stabilize. The initial pressure reading may be recorded once stabilization has taken place. Observe and record the air pressure five (5) minutes after the initial pressure setting is recorded. If loss of pressure exceeds the following or if the pressure does not stabilize, locate the suspect area and repair in accordance with Section 4.2.3. MAXIM-OM PERMISSIBLE PRESSURE DlYl~RENTIAL AFTER 5 MINUTES - HDPE/VLDEP/COEX SEAL* MATERIAL (MIL) pRESSURE DIFF, 40 4 psi NSc Construction QC Manual Page 9 60 3 psi 80 2 psi 100 2 psi 4.2.3 4.2.4 4.2.2.5 At the conclusion of all pressure tests, the end of the air-channel opposite the pressure gauge is cut. A decrease in gauge pressure must be observed or the air channel will be considered "blocked" and the test will have to be repeated from the point of blockage. If the point of blockage cannot be found, cut the ak channel in the middle of the seam and treat each half as a separate test. 4.2.2.6 Remove the pressure feed needle and seal resulting hole by extrusion welding. Procedure For Non-Complying Test In the event of a Non-Complying Air Pressure Test, the following procedure shall be followed: 4.2.3.1 Check seam end seals and retest seams. 4.2.3.2 Ifa seam will not maintain the specified pressure, the seam should be visually inspected to localize the flaw. If this method is unsuccessful, cut one inch (1") samples from each end of the seam. 4.2.3.3 Perform destructive peel tests on the samples using the field tensiometer. 4.2.3.4 If all samples pass destructive testing remove the overlap left by the wedge welder and vacuum test the entire length of seam in accordance with Paragraph 4.3. 4.2.3.4.1 Ifa leak is located by the vacuum test, repair by extrusion fillet welding. Test the repair by vacuum testing. 4.2.3.4.2 If no leak is discovered by vacuum testing, the seam will be considered to have passed non-destructive testing. 4.2.3.5 If one or more peel specimens are in non-compliance, additional samples will be taken in accordance with Paragraph 4.4.3. 4.2.3.5.1 When two (2) passing samples are located, the length of seam bounded by the two (2) passing test locations will be considered non- complying. The overlap left by the wedge welder will be heat tacked in place along the entire length of seam and the non-complying portion of seam will be extrusion fillet welded. 4.2.3.5.2 Test the entire length of the repaired seam by vacuum testing in accordance with Paragraph 4.3. General Air Testing Procedures 4.2.4.1 The opposite end of the air channel will in all cases be pierced to assure that no blockages of the air channel have occurred. NSc ¢ons~c~on ~¢ Mnnu~[ Page 4.3 4.2.4.2 Whenever possible, seams should be air- tested prior to completing butt seams to avoid having to cut into liner. All cuts through the liner as a result of testing will be repaired by extrusion welding. 4.2.4.3 All needle holes in air channels, within the boundaries of the active cell, will be repaired with an extrusion bead. 4.2.5 Air Pressure Testing Documentation All information regarding air-pressure testing, (date, initial time and pressure, final time and pressure, pass/fail designation, and Technicians number) will be written on one end of the seam, or portion of seam tested. All of the above information will also be logged on the NSC Non-Destructive Testing Form as exhibited in Appendix A. Vacuum Testing This test is used on extrusion welds, or when the geometry of a fusion weld makes air pressure" testing impossible or impractical, or when attempting to locate the precise location ora defect believed to exist after air pressure testing. 4.3.1 Equipment for Vacuum Testing 4.3.1.1Vacuum box assembly consisting ora rigid housing with a soI~ neoprene gasket attached to the open bottom, a transparent viewing window, port hole or valve assembly, and a vacuum gauge. 4.3.1.2 Vacuum pump or Vcnturi assembly equipped with a pressure controller and pipe connection. 4.3.1.3A rubber pressure/vacuum hose with fittings and connections. 4.3.1.4A bucket and means to apply a soapy solution. 4.3.1.5Asoapy solution. Procedure for Vacuum Testing 4.3.2.1Trim excess overlap from the seam, if any. 4.3.2.2Turn on the vacuum pump/compressor to reduce thc vacuum box to approximately 10 inches of mercury, i.e., 5 psi gauge. 4.3.2.3Apply a generous amount ora strong solution of liquid detergent and water to the area to be tested. 4.3.2.4Place the vacuum box over the area to be tested and apply sufficient downward pressure to "seat" the seal strip against the liner. 4.3.2.5Close the bleed valve and open the vacuum valve. 4.3.2.6Apply a minimum of 5 psi vacuum to the area as indicated by the gauge on the vacuum box. 4.3.2.7 Ensure that a leak tight seal is created. 4.3.2.8 For a period of'approximately 10 seconds, examine the geomembrane through the viewing window for the presence of soap bubbles. 4.3.2 NSc Construction QC Manual Page 11 4.4 4.3.3 4.3.4 4.3.2.9 At~er this period close thc vacuum valve and open the bleed valve, move the box over the ncx~ adjoining area with a minimum three inch (3") overlap, and repeat the process. Procedure for Non-Complying Test 4.3.3.1 4.3.3.2 Gene~ 4.3.4.1 4.3.4.2 4.3.4.3 Mark all areas where soap bubbles appear and repair the marked areas in accordance with Paragraph 5.3. Retest repaired areas. Vacuum Testing Procedures Vacuum box testing will be performed by qualified construction personnel. Overlap must be trimmed prior to vacuum boxing all seams. Special attention shall be exercised when vacuum testing "T" seams or patch intersections with seams. 4.3.5 Vacuum 4.3.5.1 4.3.5.2 Testing Documentation Vacuum testing crew will use Mean Streak permanent markers to write on liner indicating testers ID number, date, and pass/fail designation on all areas tested. Records of vacuum testing will be maintained by the CQC Coordinator or testing crew on NSC Non-Destructive Testing Form or NSC Repair Report Form as exhibited in Appendix A. Destructive Testing 4.4. I Concept The purpose of destructive testing is to determine and evaluate seam strength. These tests require direct sampling and thus subsequent patching. Therefore, destructive testing should be held to a minimum to reduce the amount of repairs to the geomembrane. 4.4.2 Procedure for Destructive Testing 4.4.2.1 Destructive test samples shall be marked and cut out randomly at a minimum average frequency of one (1) test location every 500 feet of seam length, unless otherwise specified or agreed. 4.4.2.2 Location of destructive samples will be selected by CQC Coordinator (or the third party QA Representative), with samples cut by NSC Construction Personnel. 4.4.2.3 Destructive samples should be taken and tested as soon as possible alter the seams are welded (the same day), in order to receive test results in a timely manner. 4.4.2.4 Qualified NSC personnel will observe all field destructive testing and record date, time, seam number, location, and test results on NSC Destructive Testing Form as contained in Appendix A. 4.4.2.5 All destructive test locations with pass/tail designation will be marked on liner with permanent Mean Streak markers. NSc Construction QC Manual Page 12 4.5 4.4.2.6 Sample Size 4.4.2.6. I The sample should be twelve inches (12") wide with a seam sixteen inches (16") long centered length-wise in the sample. The sample may be increased in size to accommodate independent laboratory testing by the Owner at the Owner's request or by specific project specifications. 4.4.2.6.2 A one inch (1") specimen shall be cut from each end of the test seam for field testing. 4.4.2.6.3 The two (2) one inch (I") wide specimens shall be tested on a field tensiometer for peel strength. If either field specimen does not pass, it will be assumed the sample would also not pass laboratory destructive testing. The procedure outlined in Paragraph 4.4.3 shall be followed to locate passing samples to send to the laboratory. 4.4.3 Procedure for Non-Complying Destructive Test 4.4.3.1 Cut additional field samples for peel testing. In the case ora field production seam, the samples must lie a minimum often (I0') feet in each direction from the location of the initial non-complying sample. Perform a field test for peel strength. If these field samples pass, then laboratory samples can be cut and forwarded to the laboratory for full testing. 4.4.3.1.1 If the laboratory samples pass, then repair the seam between the two (2) passing sample locations according to procedures detailed in Section 5.3. 4.4.3.1.2 If'either of the samples are still in non-compliance, then additional samples are taken in accordance with the above procedure until two (2) passing samples are found to establish the zone in which the seam should be reconstructed. 4.4.3.2 All passing seams must be bounded by two (2) locations from which samples passing laboratory destructive tests have been taken. 4.4.3.3 In cases of repaired seams exceeding 150 consecutive feet, a sample must be taken and pass destructive testing from within the zone in which the seam has been reconstructed. Each destructive must be considered a seam. 4.4.3.4 All destructive seam samples shall be numbered and recorded on National Seal Company's Destructive Test Form as exhibited in Appendix A. Laboratory Testing of Destructive Seam Samples 4.5.1 Destructive Seam Testing Laboratory Seam destructive samples may be sent to National Seal Company's laboratory or tested on site when permitted by a site specific quality control plan or in the event that third party laboratory destructive testing is not being performed. NSc Construction QC Ma~ual Page 13 4.5.2 Acceptance Criteria Destructive samples will be tested for "shear strength" and Peel Adhesion" (ASTM D4437 as modified by NSF). Five (5) specimens shall be tested for each test method. Four (4) out of the five (5) specimens must exhibit FTB (as defined by NSF Standard Number 54- 1993) for each round of peel and shear testing. In addition, four (4) of the five (5) individual specimens and the average of the five (5) peel and shear tests must meet or exceed the strength requirements as listed in NSC's Material specification sheet in order for the seam to pass the destructive test. DEFECTS AND REPAIRS 5. I Superintendent's Review National Seal Company's CQC Coordinator and/or Project Superintendent shall conduct a detailed walk through and visually check all seams and non-seam areas of the geomembrane for. defects, holes, blisters, and signs of damage during installation. 5.2 Technician's Responsibility AH other National Seal Company installation personnel shall, at all times, be on the lookout for any damaged areas. Damaged areas shall be marked and repaired. 5.3 Repair Procedures Any portion of the geomembrane or geomembrane seam showing a flaw, or having a destructive or non- destructive test in non-compliance shall be repaired. Several procedures exist for repair and the decision as to the appropriate repair procedure shall be made by National Seal Company's Project Superintendent. Procedures available for repair include the following: 5.3.1 Patching Used to repair large holes, tears, and destructive sample locations. All patches shall extend at least three inches (3") beyond the edges of the defect and all comers of patches shall be rounded. 5.3.2 Grinding and Welding Used to repair sections of extruded fillet seams. 5.3.3 Spot Welding or Seaming Used to repair small tears, pinholes, or other minor localized flaws. 5.3.4 Capping Used to repair lengths of extrusion or fusion welded seams. 5.3.5 Extrude Overlap Runs along the length of fusion welded seams. 5.3.6 Removal of Suspect Seams Remove the suspect seam and replace with a strip of new material seamed into place. NSc ¢o~ruc~on Q¢ ~m~uM Page 14 o 5.4 Verification of Repairs Every repair shall be non-destructively tested. Repairs which pass the non-destructive test shall be deemed acceptable. Repairs in excess of I $0 consecutive feet require a destructive test. Non- destructive testing of repair shall be logged on a National Seal Company Repair Report Form when specified as exhibited in Appendix A. GEOTEXTILES 6.1 6.2 6.3 Handling and Placement All geotextiles shall be handled in a manner to ensure they are not damaged. The following special handling requirements shall be adhered to: 6. I. 1 On slopes, the geotextiles shall' be secured in the anchor trench and then rolled down the slope when practical. In any event it should be deployed in such a manner as to continually keep the geotexxile sheet in sufficient tension to reduce folds and wrinkles. 6.1.2 In presence of wind, all geotextiles shall be weighted with sandbags or the equivalent. 6.1.3 Geotextiles shall be cut using an approved cutter. If the material is being cut in place, special care must be taken to protect other geosynthetic materials fi.om damage. 6.1.4 Care shall be taken not to entrap stones or excessive dust that could damage the geomembrane, or generate clogging of drains or filters. Seams and Overlaps Geotextiles may be seamed by thermal bonding or by sewing. No horizontal seams shall be allowed on side slopes. 6.2.1 On slopes steeper than ten (10) horizontal to one (1) vertical, it is recommended that geotextiles be continuously sewn along the entire length of the seam. Geotex~iles shall be overlapped a minimum of four (4") inches prior to sewing. 6.2.2 On bottoms and slopes shallower than ten (10) horizontal to one (1) vertical, geotextiles can be either sewn as indicated above or thermally bonded. If thermally bonded the geotextile shall be overlapped a minimum of four inches (4") prior to seaming. Repairs Any holes or tears in the geotextile shall be repaired as follows: 6.3.1 On Slopes - A patch made fi.om the same geotex'tile shall be seamed into place. Should any tear exceed 10% of the width of'the roll, that roll shall be removed from the slope and replaced. 6.3.2 Horizontal Areas - A patch made from the same geotextile shall be spot-seamed in place with a minimum oftwelve inches (12") overlap in all directions. GEONETS 7.1 Handling and Placement The geonets shall be handled in such a manner as to ensure the geonets are not damaged in any way. NSc QC ~anual Page 15 e 7.1.1 On slopes, the geonets shall be secured in the anchor trench and then rolled down the. slope in such a manner as to continually keep the geonet sheet in tension. Ir'necessary, the geonet shall be positioned by hand al~er being unrolled to minimize wrinkles. Geonets can be placed in the horizontal direction (i.e., across the slope) in some special locations (e.g., across slopes and special locations where extra layers are required or where slope is less than 10:1). Such locations shall be identified by the Design Engineer in the project drawings. 7.1.2 Geonets shall not be welded to geomembranes. Geonets shall be cut using approved cutters, i.e., hook blade, scissors, etc. Care should be taken to prevent damage to underlying layers. 7.1.3 Care must be taken not to entrap dirt in the geonet that could cause clogging ofthe drainage system, and/or stones that could damage the adjacent geomembrane. 7.2 Layering and Tying of Geonet When several layers ofgeonets are installed, care should be taken to prevent the strands of one layer from penetrating the channels of the next layer. Adjacent geonets shall be joined according to the following requirements. 7.2.1 Adjacent rolls shall be overlapped by at least four inches (4") and securely tied. 7.2.2 Tying can be achieved by plastic fasteners. Tying devices shall be white or yellow for easy inspection. Metallic devices are not allowed. 7.2.3 Tying shall be five (5') to ten (10') along the bottom, every five (5') along the slope every two feet (2') across the slope and at top of'berm and into anchor trench at least with one (1') foot intervals. 7.2.4 In the corners of the side slopes where overlaps between perpendicular geonet strips are required, an extra layer ofgeonet shall be unrolled along the slope, on top of the previously installed geonets, from top to bottom of the slope. 7.2.5 When more than one layer ofgeonet is installed, overlaps must be staggered and layers tied together. 7.3 Repairs Any holes or tears in the geonet shall be repaired by placing a patch extending two feet (2') beyond edges of the hole or tear. The patch shall be secured to the original geonet by tying every twelve inches (12"). Ifthe hole or tear width across the roll is more than 50% the width of the roll, the damaged area shall be cut out and the two (2) portions of the geonet shall be joined. GEOSYNTIt'ETIC CLAY LINERS 8.1 Storage 8.1.1 Geosynthetic clay liner rolls must always be stored in a location where they will not be exposed to excessive moisture. 8.2 Handling & Placement 8.2.1 On slopes, geosynthetic clay liners should be placed with overlap oriented parallel to the maximum slope (i.e. down the slope, not across the slope). NSc Co~truction QC Manual Page 16 8.2.2 Adjoining panels ofgeosynthetic clay liners should be overlapped a minimum ofsix inches (6"). 8.2.3 Geosynthetic clay liners should never be installed in standing water or while rain is falling. 8.2.4 Geosynthetic clay liners should always be instailed with appropriate side up. 8.2.5 Rolls should be pulled tight to smooth out any creases or irregularities. 8.2.6 Precautions should be taken to avoid damage to any underlying geosynthetic materials while placing the geosynthetic clay liners. 8.2.7 Cover geosynthetic clay liners with geomembrane or other cover materials after placement to avoid damage from precipitation. 8.3 Repairs 8.3.1 Repairs to cuts or tears in installed rolls should extend a minimum of six inches (6") beyond the area in need of' repair. Repair pieces should be held in place until cover material has been placed. GEOCOMPOSITE 9.1 Handling and Placement All Geocomposites shall be handled in a manner to ensure the. y are not damaged. The following special handling requirements shall be adhered to: 9.1.1 On slopes, the geoeomposites shall be secured in the anchor trench and then rolled down the slope when practical. In any event it should be deplc~yed in such a manner as to continually keep the geocomposite sheet in sufficient tension to reduce folds and wrinkles. 9.1.2 In the presence of high wind, all geocomposites shall be weighted with sandbags or the equivalent. 9.1.3 Geocomposite shall be cut using an approved cutter, i.e. hook blade. Ir'the material is being cut in place, special care must be taken to protect other geosynthetic materials from damage. 9.1.4 Care shall be taken not to entrap stones or excessive dust that could damage the geomembrane, or generate clogging of drains or filters. 9.2 Seams and Overlaps Geocomposites may be seamed by thermal bonding or by sewing. No horizontal seams shall be allowed on side slopes greater than 4:1. 9.2.1 On slopes steeper than then (10) horizontal to one (1) vertical, it is recommended that geocomposites be continuously sewn. The geotextile must be overlapped by at least three (3) inches, the geonet overlap by at least four (4) inches. 9.2.2 On bottoms and slopes shallower than ten (t0) horizontal to one (1) vertical, geocomposites can be either sewn as indicated above or thermally bonded. 9.2.3 Tying of the geonet will be with plastic fasteners. Tying devices shall be white or yellow for easy inspection. Metallic devices are not allowed. NSc Construction QC Manual . Page 17 9.3 9.2.4 Tying shall be every five (5') to ten (10') feet across thc bottom, every five (5') feet along thc slope, at the top of thc berm and into anchor trench at least with one (1') intervals. End to end joints on the bottom will be overlapped two (2') with no tying. Repairs The repair will be observed and if smaller than three (3') by three (3') the geocomposite will be repaired. Ifthe tear or hole is larger, then the roll will be cut and a butt joint placed. 9.3.1 If the geonet is undamaged, and the geotextile is damaged, a patch ofgeotextile shall be placed. The geotex~ile patch shall be thermally bonded in place with a minimum of twelve (12') inches overlap in all directions. 9.3°2 If the geonet is damaged, the damaged geonet shall be removed. A section ofgeonet shall be cut to replace the removed section. The geonet shall betied to the existing geonet using plastic fasteners placed at least every six (6') overlap. A geotextile patch shall be placed .. over the repaired geonet section. The geotexfile patch shall be thermally bonded in place with a minimum of twelve (12') inch overlap in all directions. The procedures described herein are those in effect as oflune 1, 1994. National Seal Company reserves the dght to deviate from these procedures in order to keep abreast of changes in technology. DuRA SEAL® HD GEOMEMBRANE PHYSICAL PROPERTIES 40 mil (1.0 mm) PROPERTIES METHOD UNITS Multi-Axial Tensile Elongation Critical Cone Height Wide Width Tensile Stress at Yield Strain at Yield Brittleness Temp. by Impact2 Coef. of Linear Thermal Exp.2 ESCR, Bent Strip Hydrostatic Resistance Modulus of Elasticity Ozone Resistance Permeability2 Puncture Resistance ASTM D 5617 percent ASTM D 5514 cm ASTM D 4885 ASTM D 746 ASTM E 831 ASTM D 1693 ASTM D 751 ASTM D 638 ASTM D 1149, 168 hrs ASTM E 96 FTMS 101, method 2065 Soil Burial Resistance2 * ASTM D 3083, NSF mod. Tensile Impa~ct ASTM D 1822 Volatile Loss= ASTM D 1203, ^ Water ^bsorption2 ASTM D 570, 23°C Water Vapor Transmission2 ASTM E 96 MINIMUM~ TYPICAL SEAM PROPERTIES 20.0 26.0 1.0 1.5 psi 2000 2110 % 15.0 20.0 °C -75 <-90 °C'1 1.5 x 10.4 1.2 x 10.4 hours 1500 >10,000 psi 300 360 psi 80,000 131,000 P/F P P cm/sec ' Pa 3.5x10'~4 1.4xl 0'14 ppi 1300 1639 lbs 52 68 % change 10 0 ff lbs/in' 250 390 percent 0.10 0.08 percent 0.10 0.04 g/day' m2 0.036 0.014 METHOD UNITS MINIMUM~ TYPICAL Shear Strength ^STM D 4437, NSF mod. psi 2000 2630 ppi 80 109 ' Peel Strength ASTM D 4437, NSF mod. psi 1500 1880 (hot wedge fusion) ppi 60 78 Peel Strength ASTM D 4437, NSF mod. psi 1300 1590 (fillet extrusion) ppi 52 66 Seam testing is the responsibility of the installer and/or CQA personnel. STANDARD ROLL WIDTHS 15 FT. - 23 FT. - 30.5 FT. The information contained herein has been compiled by National Seal Company and is, to the best of our knowledge, true and accurate. All suggestions and recommendations are offered without guarantee. Final determination of suitability for use based on any information provided, is the sole responsibility of the user. There is no Implied or expressed warranty of merchantability of fitness of the product for the contemplated use. NSC reserves the right to update the information contained herein in accordance with technological advances In the material properties. 4H-0895 DURA SEAL® HD GEOMEMBRANE SPECIFICATIONS 40 mil (1.0 mm) National Seal Company's DURA SEAL HD high density polyethylene (HDPE) geomembranes are produced from virgin, first quality, high molecular weight resins and are manufactured specifically for containment in hydraulic structures. DURA SEAL HD geomembranes have been formulated to be resistant to chemicals, ultraviolet degradation, as well as leaching additives. Refer to NSC's Manufacturing Quality Control Manual to determine test methods and frequencies used as a part of NSC's quality control program. All properties meet or exceed NSF Standard Number 54. RESIN PROPERTIES Melt Flow Index2 Oxidative Induction Time METHOD UNITS MINIMUM~ TYPICAL ASTM D 1238 g/10 min 0.50 0.25 ASTM D 3895, minutes 100 120 Al pan, 200°C, I atm 02 SHEET PROPERTIES Thickness Average Individual (15' & 30.5') Individual (23') Density Carbon Black Content Carbon Black Dispersion Tensile Properties Stress at Yield Stress at Break Strain at Yield Strain at Break Dimensional Stability2 Tear Resistance Puncture Resistance Constant Load ESCR METHOD UNITS MINIMUM~ TYPICAL ASTM D 5199 ASTM D 1505 ASTM D 4218 ASTM D 5596 ASTM D 638 1.3" gage length (NSF) 2.0" gage or extensometer 2.5" gage length (NSF) ASTM D 1204, NSF mod. ASTM D 1004 ASTM D 4833 ASTM D 5397 (Single Point) mils 40.0 41.5 mils 38.0 40.3 mils 36.0 40.0 g/cm3 0.940 0.947 percent 2.0 2.49 rating Al, A2, B1 A1 psi 2200 2442 ppi 88 101 psi 3800 5012 ppi 152. 2O8 percent 13.0 16.4 percent 700 826 percent 560 661 percent 2.0 0.6 ppi 750 870 lbs 30 36 ppi 1800 3084 lbs 72 128 hours 200 >400 This value represents the minimum acceptable test value for a roll as tested according to NSC's Manufacturing Quality Control Manual. IndMdual test specimen values are not addressed in this specification, except thickness. Indicates Maximum Average Roll Value Manufacturing Reliabt'liO , Quality Control ... and Quality Assurance Policies and Procedures May 1996 N TABLE OF CONTENTS Page I 1.0 2.0 3.0 4.0 5.0 6.0 7.0 Description Page No. NSC MANUFACTURING QUALITY ASSURANCE POLICY ................................. 1 INTRODUCTION ........................................................................................................ MANUFACTURING RELIABILITY .......................................................................... 1.1 MANAGEMENT'S RESPONSIBILITIES ............................................................. 2 1.2 FOREMAN'S RESPONSIBILITIES ...................................................................... 2 1.3 OPERATOR'S RESPONSIBILITIES ..................................................................... 3 1.4 LABELING/HANDLING PROCEDURES ............................................................ 3 NSC QUALITY CONTROL STAFF ............................................................................ 4 NSC QUALIFY CONTROL LABORATORY ............................................................ 4 QUALITY ASSURANCE ........................................................ ' ...................................... 5 4.1 PREPARING SPECIMENS ................................................................................... 5 4.2 CALCULATIONS ................................................................................................. 5 4.3 DATA ENTRY ....................................................................................................... 5 4.4 TRAINING 5 4.5 EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE AND CALIBRATION ....................................... 5 TEST PROGRAM SUMMARY ................................................................................. 6 5.1 RESIN ......... ~ .............................................................................................. 6 5.2 DURA SEAL' ........................................................................................................ 6 5.3 FRICTION SEAL' ................................................................................................ 6 5.4 POLY-NET* ........................................................................................................ 6 5.5 TEX-NET' ........................................................................................................ 6 5:6 EXTRUSION ROD ................................................................................................ 7 MANUFACTURING QUALITY CONTROL .............................................................. 7 6.1 RESIN TESTING .................................................................................................. 7 6.2 DURA SEAL* TESTING ....................................................................................... 7 6.3 FRICTION SEAL' TESTING ................................................................................ 6.4 POLY-NET* TESTING ......................................................................................... 8 6.5 TEX-NET' TESTING ............................................................................................ 8 6.6 EXTRUSION ROD TESTING ............................................................................... 9 6.7 OPTIONAL TESTING .......................................................................................... 9 MANUFACTURING TEST PROCEDURES ............................................................. 10 7.1 RESINTEST PROCEDUKES ............................................................................. 10 Rev. 11/96 mmm TABLE OF CONTENTS Page 2 7.2 7.1.1 7.1.2 7.1.3 7.1.4 7.1.5 7.1.6 Description Page No. CARBON BLACK CONTENT ................................................................. 10 DENSITY ................................................................................................ 11 MELT FLOW INDEX .............................................................................. 11 MELT FLOW RATE ................................................................................ 11 MELT FLOW RATIO .............................................................................. 12 OXIDATIVE INDUCTION TIME ........................................................... 12 DURA 7.2.1 7.2.2 7.2.3 7.2.4 7.2.5 7.2.6 7.2.7 SEAL® TEST PROCEDURES ............ ~ .................................................... 12 CARBON BLACK CONTENT .................... ' ............................................. 13 CARBON BLACK DISPERSION ............................................................ 13 DIMENSIONAL STABILITY .................................................................. 13 TENSILE PROPERTIES .......................................................................... 14 TI-tIC--SS ............................................................................................ 14 NOTCHED CONSTANT TENSILE LOAD ............................................. 14 DENSITY ................................................................................................. 15 7.3 FRICTION SEAL® TEST PROCEDURES ..................................................: ....... 15 7.3.1 TENSILE PROPERTIES .......................................................................... 15 7.3.2 FRICTION COATING ADHESION STRENGTH ................................... 16 7.3.3 FRICTION COATING MASS PER UNIT AREA .................................... 16 7.4 POLY-NET® TEST PROCEDURES .................................................................... 17 7.4.1 CARBON'BLACK CONTENT ................................................................. 17 7.4.2 TENSILE PROPERTIES .......................................................................... 17 7.4.3 THICKNESS ............................................................................................ 18 7.4.4 MASS PEP, UNIT AREA ......................................................................... 18 7.4.5 HYDRAULIC TRANSMISSIVITY .......................................................... 18 7.5 TEX-NET® TEST PROCEDURES ...................................................................... 19 7.5.1 PLY ADHESION ..................................................................................... 19 7.5.2 THICKNESS ............................................................................................ 19 7.5.3 PERCENT ADHESION ........................................................................... 19 7.5.4 MASS PER UNIT AREA ......................................................................... 20 7.6 EXTRUSION ROD TEST PROCEDURES ......................................................... 20 7.6.1 CARBON BLACK DISPERSION ............................................................ 20 7.6.2 THICKNESS ............................................................................................. 20 7.6.3 MASS PER UNIT LENGTH .................................................................... 21 Rev. I I/9~5 mmm TABLE OF CONTENTS Page 3 8.0 Description Paee No. 7.7 OPTIONAL TEST PROCEDURES ..................................................................... 21 7.7.1 CHEMICAL COMPATIBILITY .............................................................. 21 7.7.2 DIRECT SHEAR FRICTION ANGLE ..................................................... 22 7.7.3 EXTRACTABLES CONTENT ................................................................ 22 7.7.4 FTIR ...................................................................................................... 22 7.7.5 HARDNESS ............................................................................................. 23 7.7.6 HYDROSTATIC POINT STRESS ........................................................... 23 7.7.7 MELTING POINT CLrRVE .................................. i .................................. 23 7.7.8 MODULUS OF ELASTICITY (YOUNG'S) .............................................24 7.7.9 MULTI-AXIAL TENSILE .............................................................. 2 ....... 24 7.7.10 PERMEABILITY ..................................................................................... 25 7.7.11 PUNCTURE RESISTANCE (POINTED TIP) .......................................... 25 7.7.12 PUNCTURE RESISTANCE (FLAT TIP) ................................................. 26 7.7.13 PUNCTURE RESISTANCE, CBR. ........................................................... 26 7.7.14 SECANT MODULUS .............................................................................. 26 7.7.15 SOIL BURIAL RESISTANCE ................................................................. 27 7.7.16 TEAR RESISTANCE ............................................................................... 27 7.7.17 TENSILE IMPACT .................................................................................. 28 7.7.18 TENSILE PROPERTIES, GRAB ............................................................. 28 7.7.19 TENSILE PROPERTIES, STRIP ............................................................. 28 7.7.20 TENSILE PROPERTIES, WIDE WIDTH ................................................ 29 7.7.21 TEXTURED COATING ADHESION STRENGTH ................................. 29 7.7.22 VOLATILE LOSS .................................................................................... 30 7.7.23 WATER ABSORPTION ................. ~ ......................................................... 30 7.7.24 WATER VAPOR TRANSMISSION ........................................................ 30 TERMINOLOGY ...................................................................................................... 31 R~'~. 11/~15 rnmm NSc Manufacturing QA/QC Manual Page I MANUFACTURING QUALITY ASSURANCE POLICY National Seal Company's policy is to adhere to the highest standard of quality when manufacturing all of its products. In furtherance of National Seal Company policy, all employees are required to strictly adhere to all published quality control standards at all times. National Seal Company resli~.es that quality assurance is an attitude that must prevail among all employees and that attitude, coupled with a definitive and strong quality control program, will ensure the highest quality product possible. National Seal Company maintains Quality Control and Research laboratories capable of performing concurrent testing-iff.assure control over all products. These laboratories are also capable of supporting manufacturing, product development and research needs. National Seal Company's commitment to quality is evident in its specialized training of plant personnel. All levels of management remain sensitive to quality assurance suggestions offered by plant and field personnel. As always, National Seal Company welcomes the suggestions of its customers. ,Rev. 11;96 mmm II II NSc Manufacturing QA/QC Manual - Policies & Procedures Page 2 INTRODUCTION Quality Control is an ongoing system of monitoring and testing materials as they are delivered and manufactured. The Quality Control program is essential to manufacturing and must be strictly adhered to by all individuals involved. The Quality Control Department reserves the right to reject all raw materials or manufactured materials not meeting National Seal Company specifications. Quality Assurance is the process of verifying compliance with accepted procedures for training, manufacturing processes, Quality Cont~'ol testing, material handling and data review and distribution. For the Quality Control Department, this includes verifying the validity of test results, the correctness of test procedures, the proper operation of test equipment and the ongoing training of all personnel in Quality Control and Quality Assurance procedures. 1. MANUFACTURING RELIABILITY loL MANAGEMENT'S RESPONSIBILITIES: It is National Seal Company's policy to produce thc highest quality products for maximum customer satisfaction. To achieve this goal, we purchase only state-of-thc-axt machinery with built-in inspection and compensation features. In addition, all operating personnel are thoroughly trained in their machine's capabilities. Managcment's primary responsibility is to establish leadership and furnish a means to assure that acceptable quality, standards are constantly met. Obtaining and maintaining our high standards of quality is the goal of every individual and is the cornerstone of National Seal Company. 1.2. FOREMAN'S RESPONSIBILITIES: Foremen are responsible for ensuring that all products are being produced to the applicable Quality Control standards. Foremen must monitor production at random times to ensure that proper procedures are being followed. Foremen serve as communicators of information between Quality. Control and the Operators. Foremen instruct and train employees in the proper operation of their machine. 1.3. OPERATOR'S RESPONSIBILITIES: Thc primary responsibility of visual product inspection lies ~ith the operators of the production equipment. National Seal Company requires that either the operator of any given machine or thc apprentice be present at thc machine at all times. Operators are required to take Quality Control test samples into the lab and to check on the results of the previous test. By use of this interactive relationship bet~'een machine operators and laboratory technicians, product irregularities can be discovered before they become problems. Operators are required to make adjustments to their machine when physical or visual properties of the product fall below acceptable levels. Rev. 11,96 mrnrn NSc Manufacturing QA/QC Manual - Policies & Procedures Page $ 1.4. LABELING/tLa. NDLING PROCEDURES: Sheet mils ate labeled with a bar code on the outside layer, under the first layer, on each end cap and inside each end of the core. The material is then stored by thickness and resin type. When the material is shipped, the bar code is read with a scanner or by shipping personnel and recorded for Quality. Control certification. Sheet is loaded by either crane or foddiR depending on the location of the sheet and the type of transportation required by the customer. POLY-I~TI~ is labeled with a bar code inside the core, under the first layer and an all-weather label wired to each end of the roll. The material is stored by type. When the POLY-NET is shipped, shipping personnel record the roll number, date of production, shiR of produaion and resin batch used. This information is given to Quality Control for certification purposes. POLY-NET is loaded with a forklii~ using a carpet-ram attachment. TEX-NET~ is labeled with a bar code wired to each end of the mil, under the first layer, an adhesive label on the protective cover and written by hand with permanent marker on the protective cover. When TEX-NET is shipped, shipping personnel record the roll number, date of production, shiR of production, type of POLY-NET and type of geotextile used. This information is given to Quality. Control for eerti~cation purposes. TEX-NET is loaded onto either vans or tarped flatbed~ with a forklL~ using a carpet-ram attachment. Extrusion rod is labeled by hand with a permanent marker on the end of the reel. When extrusion rod is shipped, shipping personnel record the roll number, shii~ of production and roll weight. This information is given to Quality Control for certification purposes. The extrusion rod is bagged for shipment. 2. QUALITY CONTROL STAFF 2.1. The Vice-President of Manufacturing Responsible for laboratory operation policies. These responsibilities include review and approval of changes to the Quality Contwl program and testing procedures; as well as the resolution of all discrepancies and quality assurance problems. The Vice-President of Manufaauring reports directly to the Executive Vice President of NSC. 2.2. The Quality Assurance Manager Responsible for managing, directing, and coordinating quality planning liaison effort~, quality. programs, and quali~' problem solving. Additional responsibilities include maintenance of NSC product certificatiOns, NSC manufacturing quality control and test procedures manual, and overseeing the Quality Control Laboratory including supervising training of Laboratory Technicians. The Quality. Assurance Manager reports directly to theVice-President of Manufacturing. 2.3° The Quality Control Manager Responsible for the daily operation of the Quality Control Laboratory and assuring stria compliance with appropriate sampling, handling, testing and reporting procedures. Other responsibilities include resolving quality, discrepancies; test data review and certification of mw material and finished produa; and ensuring the proper functioning and calibration of laboratory equipment. The Quality Control Manager reports directly to the Quality. Assurance Manager. t~,. 11/96 mmm NSc Manufacturing QA/QC Manual - Policies & Procedures Page 4 2.4. The Laboratory Technicians Responsible for all sample handling, testing, and documentation as well as visual inspection of production. Other responsibilities include continuous communication with production depamnent personnel regarding quality testing. Quality discrepancies and equipment problems are reported to the Quality Control Manager. Quality and laboratory procedu~s problems are reported to thc Quality Assurance Manager. 3. NSC QUALITY CONTROL LABORATORY National Seal Company's Quality Control Laboratory is fully equipped to perform a v,~de range of conformance testing on geomembrane, geonet, geonetdgeotextile composites and extrusion rod. All samples an: die cut with a hydraulic press to ensure uniformity. Equipment used for physical testing includes: Differential. scanning calorimetry, Instron® tension/compression machines, density gradient columns, melt ilow index testers, mierotome, stereo microscope, index friction, notched constant tensile load environmental stress crack resistance, hydraulic transmissivity and various ovens, furnaces, balances and micrometers. The Quality Control Laboratory is complemented by National Seal Company's Technical Center. The Technical Center is responsible for Research and Development activities. Equipment used by the Tedmical Center includes all equipment used by the Quality Control Laboratory plus: Microscopic infrared spectroscopy, multi axial tensile, point stress, tensile impact, permeability, hardness, direct she, ar, specialtransmissivity and chemical resistance facilities. All Quality Control test results are stored in a computer database for ease of retrieval. Hard copies of ail worksheets, strip chart recordings and samples of liner and resin are archived off-site for future reference. The Quality Control laboratory is staffed twenty-four hours a day, seven days a ~s~ek in order to provide the most current data possible. 4. QUALITY ASSURANCE 4.1. PREPARING SPECIMENS: AU specimens are cut from clean samples using dies and a hydraulic press. Dies and specimens are inspected daily for imperfections. Specimens not meeting ASTM standards are rejected. 4.2. CALCULATIONS: All manual calculations are performed twice, once by the technician performing the test and once by another lab employee. The data sheets are initialed by persons performing the calculations. Discrepancies are discussed and resolved. The arithmetic mean and standard deviation are reported for all testing. 4.3. DATA ENTRY: All data manually entered into a computer for reports or a data base is verified by an individual other than the one who performed the original data entry.. Rev. ! 1/96 mmm NSc Manufacturing QA/QC Manual - Policies & Procedures Page .5 4.4. 4.5. All newly hired employees in thc Quality Control Laboratory are trained in test machine operation and proper test procedu~s. The trainees' progress is monitored by the Quality Assurance Manager and Lead Laboratory Technicians. Any variation from established procedures is discussed and corrected. EQUIPMENT MAINTENANCE AND CALIBRATION: All laboratory equipment is periodically checked for proper calibration.. Ail laboratory tensile testing machines and balances are calibrated annually, within ASTM E-4 specifications, by an independent agency. The calibration equipment used by the independent agency, and by NSC for internal calibration is traceable to the National Institute of Standards and Technology. The equipment is routinely checked to ensure proper operating condition. A supply of commonly needed spare parts is kept on-hand to facilitate the repair process. 5. TEST PROGRAM SUMMARY 5.1. RESIN Every rail car of resin is sampled upon delivery. Precompounded resin is tested for density, melt flow index and oxidative induction time once per resin batch. High load melt index (HLMI) and carbon black content is tested twice per railcar. When natural resin (without cafoon black) is used, carbon black content is monitored on the finished product. The amount of resin delivered and used by manufacturing is continually monitored by the Quality Control department. DURA SEAL® The sheet line is monitored on a continual basis. At the start up of the sheet line, thickness is checked at the beginning and end of the first production roll. Standard testing is done at the end of the first production roll. Thickness is verified on the first 2 production rolls. Standard testing is conduced at least every 50,000 square feet (4650 square meters) of sheet production. Standa~ testing is as follows: tensile properties, thickness, carbon black content, carbon black dispersion, density, and visual inspection. Notched constant tensile load environmental stress crack resistance (NCTL) is verified once per blend of resin for each thickness produced from that blend. Dimensional stability, is verified once per shiR. All test results are appropriately documented and the documentation and sample retains are maintained off-site in NSC's archives. Any roll not meeting National Seal Company specifications and the following roll are rejected. Rolls produced prior to or following the rejected rolls are tested until passing rolls are found. 5.3. FRICTION SEAL® The FRICTION SEAL line is monitored on a continual basis. FRICTION SEAL is tested not less than once every 50,000 square feet (4650 square meters) of finished sheet for tensile properties, friction coating adhesion and friction coating mass per unit area. Base sheet used in the FRICTION SEAL process is high quality, polyethylene geomembrane that meets thickness, carbon black content, carbon black dispersion, density., stress crack resistance and dimensional stability requirements. All test results are documented with documentation and sample retains maintained off-site in NSC's archives. Any roll not meeting National Seal Company specifications and the following roll are rejected. Rolls produced prior to or following the rejected rolls are tested until passing rolls are found. Re~. l l,'96 mmm NSc Manufacturing QAJQC Manual - Policies & Procedures Page 6 5.4. POLY-NET® The POLY-NET line is monitored on a continual basis. Thickness and mass per unit area are checked prior to making the first production mil at each start-up. POLY-NET is tested not less thaa once every 40,000 square feet (3720 square meters) for carbon black content, density, tensile properties, thickness, and mass per unit area. All test results are appropriately documented and maintained in NSC's archives. Hydraulic transmissivity is tested once per shiK. Any roll not meeting National Seal Company specifications and the following roll are rej~ed. Rolls produced prior to and following the rejected roll are tested until passing rolls are found. T X- T The TEX-NEr line is monitored on a continual basis. TEX-NET is tested no less than once every 40,000 square feet (3720 square meters) for thickness (geotextile and geonet combined), mass per unit area, ply adhesion and percent adhesion. All test results are appropriately documented and maintained in NSC's archives. Any roll not meeting National Seal Company specifications and the following roll are rejected. Rolls produced prior to and following the rejected roll are tested until passing rolls are found. 0 5.6. EXTRUSION ROD - The eXtrusion rod line is monitored on a continual basis. Extrusion rod is tested every fifty pounds for mass per unit length and thickness. Carbon black dispersion is tested once per shi_~. All test results are doemnented and rolls not meeting National Seal Company specifications are rejected. -. MANUFACTURING QUALITY CONTROL 6.1. Resin Testing The following tests are performed on each railcar of resin received (approximately 180,000 lbs or 82,000 kg): TEST FREQUENCY 6.1.1 Carbon Black Content~ Twice PerRailcar 6.1.2 Density Each Batch 6.1.3 Melt Flow Index Each Batch 6.1.4 High Load Melt Index Twice Per Railcar 6.1.5 Oxidative Induction Time Each Batch For resinprecompounded with carbon black by resin supplier. 6.2. DURA SEAL® Testing The following tests are performed at least once every 50,000 R' (4650 m~) of liner. A mil is considered to be 15 ft wide, 5000 lbs (2270 kg) or 30 ft wide 7500 lbs (3410 kg) roil. Roll frequencies listed below areapproximations based on current roll lengths. TEST FREQUENCY- 15' FREQUENCY-30' mil = 40 / 60 / 80 / 100 mil = 40 / 60 / 80 / 100 6.2.1 Carbon Dispersion every 2~ / 3~ / 4~' / 5~ roll each roll / 2"a / 2~/3"~ roll 6.2.2 :Dimensional once per shi~ per line i once per shift per line Stability Ro. 11/96 mmm NSc Manufacturing QA/QC Manual - Policies & Procedures Page 7 I TEsT FREQUEN~YiI 5' " FREQUENCY.30, mil = 40 / 60 / 80 / 100 mil = 40 / 60 / 80 / I00 6.2.3 Tensile Properties every 2~ / 3'a / 4'/5' roll each roll / 2~ / 2~/3~ roll 6.2.4 Thickness every 2'~ / 3'a / 4' / 5' roll each roll / 2~ / 2°a/3~ roll 6.2.5 NCTL' once per batch once per batch 6.2.6 Carbon cont~t every 2~ / 3~i / 4m / 5' roll each roll 1 2nd / 2°al 3'~ r°ll 6.2.7 Densi .ty every 2~ / 3~ / 4~ / 5~ roll each roll / 2'~ / 2~/34 r0~l 6.3. 6.4. 6.5. 6.6. '- HDPE on.A, FRICTION SEAL® Testing The following tests are performed at least once every 50,000 ifa (4650 ma) of liner. Roll frequencies listed below are approximations based on current roll lengths. TEST FREQuENCy. mil = 40 / 60 / $0 / I00 6.3.1 ~'rtsile Properties :every 2"a / 2 ,a / 3',Y'/3 ,a 6.3.2 Coadng Mass Per UrtitArea eve,ry,2~a (2~a / 3~ / 3'a 6.3.3. Coating Adhesion .. every 2. ~ / 2 nd / 3 ,a / 3 ~a POLY-NET~ Testing Thc following tests are performed at least once every 40,000 fta (3720 mz) of net. Roll frequencies listed below areapproximati0ns based on current roll lengths. TEST ' ,, FREQUENCY FREQUENCY 7.5 1t wide 14 fl wide '6.41'I Carbon Content every 17a roll every 9~ roll " 6.4.2 Tensile'Properties ' ' every 17a' roll every 9~ roll 6.4.3 Thickness every 17'a roll every 9~ roll 6.4.4 Mass per Unit Area every 17~ roll every 9~ roll 6.4.5 T~ansmissivity once per shift per line once per shif~ per line 6.4.6 Densi .ty every 17a r01i every 9~ roll TEX-NET~ Testing Thc following tests are performed at least once every 40,000 fta of TEX-NET. Roll frequencies listed below are approximations based on current roll lengths. TEST FREQUENCY 615.1 Ply Adhesion ev,ery,8~a roll 6..5.:2 Thickness (geocomposite and ge0n~t)" every 8* roll 6.5.3 Percent Adhesion every ga roll 6.5.4 Mass Per Unit Area [every ga roll Extrusion Rod Testing The following tests are performed at least with the frequency listed below. 6.6.1 Thickness every fifty pounds (23 kg) 6.6.2 Mass per Unh L. ength ,. every filly po,unds (23 kg) 6.6.3 Carbon Black DispersiOn once per shift Ray. 11,96 mmm II I I NSc Manufacturing QA/QC Manual - Policies & Procedures Page 8 6.7. Optional Testing The following tests can be performed by National Seal Company's laboratories: 6.7.1. 6.7.2. 6.7.3. 6.7.4. 6.7.5. 6.7.6. 6.7.7. 6.7.8. 6.7.9. 6.7.10. 6.7.11. 6.7.12. 6.7.13. 6.7.14. 6.7.15. 6.7.16. 6.7.17. 6.7.18. 6.7.19. 6.7.20. 6.7.21. 6.7.22. 6.7.23. 6.7.24. 6.7.25. Chemical Compatibility* Direct Shear Friction Angle* Extractables Content* FTIR (Infrared Spectroscopy)* Hardness* Hydrostatic Point Stre~s* Index Friction Angle Melting Point Curve ModulUs of Elasticity (Young*s Modulus) Multi-Axial Tensile* Permeability* Puncture Resistance (Rounded tip) Puncture Resistance (Flat tip) Puncture, CBR* Secant Modulus Soil Burial Resistance Tear Resistance Tensile Impact* Tensile Properties, Grab ~ Tensile Properties, Strip Tensile Properties, Wide Width* Textured Coating Adhesion Strength Volatile Loss Water Absorption Water Vapor Transmission* * Test conducted at NSC's research laboratory Rev. 11/96 mmm NSc Manufacturing QA/QC Manual - Policies & Procedures ,Page 9 7. MANUFACTURING TEST PROCEDURES Resin Test Procedures The following tests arc performed by National Seal Company's laboratory personnel in accordance with thc standard test methods detailed in the indicated ASTM section unless othetxvisc noted. Thc information contained herein is for explanatory purposes only. No attempt has been made to set forth thc full test procedure in detail. A full, detailed procedure for each test method is maintained in thc laboratory and is available upon request. 7.1.1. 7.1.2. 7.1.3. Carbon Black Content Carbon Black Content is determined in accordance with ASTM D 4218. 7.1.1.1. Place a weighed quantity of polyethylene in a 600°C muffle furnace. 7.1.1.2. Allow the sample to remain in the furnace for 5 minutes. During this time all of the polyethylene should boil off leaving only the carbon black. Cool the caffoon black for 15 minutes in desiccator. Weigh. Calculate the amount of ca.,'bon black remaining as a percentage of sample weight. 7.1.1.3. 7.1.1.4. 7.1.1.5. Density 7.1. 7.1.4. Report the results in units of percent. Density is determined in accordance with ASTM D 1505. 7.1.2.1. Prepare a cons'tam tcmperattu~ density column by filling a grad,~t~ cylinder with fluids of continuously varying density such that a density/p-adier~ is achieved throughout the height of the cylinder. 7.1.2.2. Prepare thrcc spccitmns of material to be checked for density. Thc specimens can be of any shape and should bc approximately 0.2 in (0.5 cra) across. 7.1.2.3. Lower the specimens and glass standards into the density column. 7.1.2.4. Observe the location of the specimens with respect to the standards using the graduations etched in the cylinder. 7.1.2.5. Calculate density and report the results in units of grams per cubic centimeter. Melt Flow Index Melt Flow Index is determined in accordance with ASTM D 1238, Condition E. 7.1.3.1. Heat aplastometer to 190°C. 7.1.3.2. Add 3.7 grams of resin to the cylinder of the plastometer, compact the resin, add piston and place 2.06 kilogram weight onto the piston. 7.1.3.3. Allow the plastometer to rest. At the conclusion of 8 minutes remove and discard all plastic which has been extruded through the 0.0825 inch diameter hole at the end of the cylinder opposite the piston. 7.1.3.4. Allow plastometer to rest for an additional 10 minutes. At the conclusion of this test period, remove ex'truded plastic and allow it to cool at laboratory conditions. 7.1.3.5. Weigh theexxrudate and report the results in units of grams per 10 minutes. Melt Flow Rate Melt Flow Rate is determined in accordance with ASTM D 1238Cond P or F. 7.1.4.1. Heat aplastometcr to 190°C. Rev. J 1/96 mmm NSc Manufacturing QA/QC Manual - Policies & Procedures Page lO 7,2. 7.1.4.2. 7.1.4.3. 7.1.4.4. 7.1.4.5. Add 3.7 grams of resin to the cylinder of the plasmmeter, compact the resin, add the piston and place a 2.06 kilogram weight onto the piston. Allow the plastometer to rest At the completion of 8 minutes, replace the 2.06 kg weight with the weight appmprlate for lhe test.* Remove and discard all plastic which has been extruded flu~ugh the 0.0825 inch diameter hole at the end of the cylinder opposite the piston. 7.1.4.3.1. * Replace the 2.06 kg weight with either a 4.9 kg (Condition P) or a 21.5 kg (Condition F) weight. 7.1.4.3.2. Allow plasWmeter to rest for an additional 5 minutes if testing per Condition P or 30 seconds if testing per Condition F. At the conclusion of th/s period, remove the exmided plastic and allow it to cool at laboraWxy conditions. 7.1.4.3.3. Weigh theextrudate and report the results in units of grams per l0 minutes. Melt Fl0w Ratio Melt Flow Ratio is determine in accordance with ASTM D1238. 7.1.4.4.1. Divide any two melt flows and report as a ratio. Oxidative Induction Time, Low Pressure Oxidative Induction Time is determined in accordance with ASTM D 3895. 7.1.4.5.1. Prepm'e shavings from five pellets. 7.1.4.5.2. Remove a S-10 mg test sp~cin~n from interior shavings and place in an open aluminum sample lid. Place lid on the sample theraxx~uple of the differential scanning calorimeter. Place an empty lid on the reference thermocouple. 7.1.4.5.3. Heat the cell in a pure oxygen atmosphere from ambient to 200°C at a rate of 20°C/minute. 7.1.4.5.4. Terminate test a minimum of two minutes aftcxotherm is observed. 7.1.4.5.5. Determine the amount of elapsed t/me between the beginning of heating and ~e onset of the oxiclat/ve exotherm Report the results in units of minutes. DURA SEAL® TEST PROCEDURES Thc following tests are performed by National Seal Company's laboratory personnel in accordance with thc standard test methods detailed in the indicated ASTM section unless otherwise noted. The infommfion contained herein is for explanatory purposes only. No attempt has been made to set forth thc full test procedure in detail. A full, detailed procedure for each test method is maintained in the laboratory and is available upon request. 7.2.1. Carbon Black Content Carbon Black Content is determined in accordance with ASTM D 4218. 7.2.1.1. 7.2.1.2. 7.2.1.3. 7.2.1.4. Place a weighed quantity of polyethylene in a 600°C muffle furnace. Allow the sample to remain in the furnace for 5 minutes. During this time all of the polyethylene should boil off leaving only the carbon black. Cool the carbon black for 15 minutes in desiccator. Weigh. Calculate the amount of carbon black remaining as a percentage of sample weight. 7.2.1.5. Report the results in units of percent. Rev. 1 !/96 mmm NSc Manufacturing QA/QC Manual - Policies & Procedures Page ] ] 7.2.2. 7.~.3. 7.2.4. 7.2.5. Carbon Black Dispersion Carbon Black Dispersion slides are prepared in accordance with ASTM D 5596 by cutting thin sections from the sample by use of amicrotome. 7.2.2.1. Slice five specimens approximately 10 microns (0.0004 in) thick. 7.2.2.2. Place the specimens between two microscope slides. 7.2.2.3. View the specimens under 100X magnification. 7.2.2.4. Compare the image to the D 5596 Carbon Dispersion Classification Chart for C-eomembranes. 7.2.2.5. Report thc results as a carbon black dispersion rating. Dimensional Stability Dimensional Stability is determined in accordance with ASTM D 1204. 7.2.3.1. Die cut two liner specimens 10 inches (25.4 em) on a side. 7.2.3.2. Mark the machine and transverse directions of the specimens. 7.2.3.3. Measure the width in each direction at the center point. 7.2.3.4. Place the specimens in an air circulating oven set at 100°C for 60 minutes. 7.2.3.5. Remove the specimens and cool at laboratory conditions. Re-measure. 7.2.3.6. Calculate the dimensional change and report the results in units of percenC Tensile Properties Tensile properties are determined in accordance with ASTM D 638. 7.2.4.1. Die cut five dumbbell shaped specimens with the length ..tmmllel to the machine direction and five with the length perpendicular to the machine direction using an ASTM D 638 Type IV die. 7.2.4.2.' Determine the minimum cross-sectional area for each specimen. 7.2.4.3. Insert tbe ends of the specimen into the jaws of the testing machine. Tbe jaws should have an initial separation of 2.5 inches (6.4 em). 7.2.4.4. Start the machine so that the jaws separate at a rate of 2 in/min (5 cra/rain).* 7.2.4.5. Continue separating the jaws until the specimen breaks. 7.2.4.6. Calculate stress at yield** and break. Report the results in units of pounds per square inch or MPa as specified by the project. 7.2.4.7. Calculate the strain at yield** and break. Report the results in units of percent. A 1.3 inch (3.3 em) gage length is used for yield calculations and a 2 inch (5 cra) gage length is used for break calculations. *.4 20 inch per minute rate is used for T.T. I3PE ** L£DPE does not exhibit a definitive yield point and is not reported. Thickness Thickness is determined in accordance xx~th ASTM D 5199. 7.2.5. I. Measure the thickness at one (30 cra) foot imervals across the width of the sheet using a dead weight micrometer exerting a pressure of 29 psi (200 KPa). 7.2.5.2. Report the results in thousands of an inch (mils) or tenths of a centin~ter as specified by the project. R~'. 11/96 mmm NSc Manufacturing QA/QC Manual - Policies & Procedures Page 12 7.3. 7.2.6. Notched Constant Tensile Load (NCTL) Stress Crack Resistance Notched Constant Tensile Load Environmental Stress Crack Resistance is determined in accordance with ASTM D 5397 (single point). 7.2.6.1. Die cut five AS'I'M D 1822 Type 'I," specimens with the length parallel to the transverse direction. 7.2.6.2. Condition specimens in ice water for 30 minutes. 7.2.6.3. Notch each specimen with a single razor cut in the middle of and perpendicular to the length of the specimen. Notch depth should leave a residual thickness equal to 80% of the nominal thickness of the material being tested. 7.2.6.4. Place specimens in water bath containing a 10% Igepal CO630 solution (or other suitable surface active agent) at 50 C. One end of specimen should be anchored to the bottom of the water bath with the other end affixed to a cantilever. 7.2.6.5. Hang a sufficient quantity of lead shot from the camilever such that a consta~ sUess equivalent to 30% (or other agreed upon loading) of the geomembrane room temperature yield strength is applied to the specimen. 7.2.6.6. Report failures occurring before 200 hours or as otherwise directed. 7.2.7. Density Density is determined in the same manner as resin (see section 7.1.2). FRICTION SEAL® TEST PROCEDURES The following tests arc performed by National Seal Company's laboratory personnel in accordance with the standard test methods detailed in thc indicated ASTM section unless otherwisc noted. Thc information contained herein is for explanatory purposes only. Bio attempt has been made to set forth thc full test procedure in detail. A full, detailed procedure for each test method is maintained in the laboratory and is available upon request. 7.3.1. Tensile Properties Tensile properties are determined in accordancc with ASTM D 638. 7.3.1.1. Die cut five dumbbeU shaped specimens with thc length parallel to the machine direction and five with the length perpendicular to the machine direction using an ASTM D 638 Type IV die. 7.3.1.2. Insert the ends of the specimen imo the jaws of the testing machine. The jaws should have an initial separation of 2.5 inches (6.4 em). 7.3.1.3. Start the machine so that thc jaws separate at a rate of 2 in/min (5 cm/min).* 7.3.1.4. Continue separating the jaws until the specimen breaks. 7.3.1.5. Calculate stress at yield** and break. Use nominal sheet thickness in all stress calodations. Report the results in units of pounds per square inch or MPa as specified by the project. 7.3.1.6. Calculate the strain at yield** and break. Report the results in units of percent. A 1.3 inch (3.3 cra) gage length is used for yield calculations and a 2 inch (5 cra) gage length is used for break calculations. * ,,1 20 inch per minute rate is used for IJF)PE ** [_LI~PE does not exhibit a definitive yield point and is not reported. R~v. ! J/96 mmm II NSc ir Manufacturing QA/QC Manual - Policie~ & Procedures Page 13 7.4. 7.3.2. Friction Coating Adhesion Friction Coating Adhesion strength is determined in accordance with ASTM D 413. 7.3.2.1. Cut six 1 in x 13 in (2.5 cm x 33 em) specimens in the machine direction. 7.3.2.2. Score each specimen with a utility knife approximately one inch (2.5 em) from the end. 7.3.2.3. Attempt m start a peel with your fingernail allowing not more than ore minute per specimen. If unable to start a peel, label the specimen FTB (film tearing bond): 7.3.2.4. If a peel can be started, separate by hand enough to place specimen in grips. If unable to separate enough material to fit specimen in grips, label the specimen ITLS. 7.3.2.5. Separate jaws at a rate of 2 in/min (5 cnVmin) until the friction material completely separates from the base liner. 7.3.2.6. Use Instron Series IX test procedure 05 to calculate the average. ' 7.3.2.7. Report the re. suits in units of pounds per inoh width, N/cra or F'rB as specified by the project. 7.3.3. Friction Coating Mass Per Unit Area Friction Coating Mass per Unit Are~ is determined in accordance with ASTM D 5261 as modified by NSC. 7.3.3.1. Cut from the same roll width sample, ten 4 in x 8 in specimens from the textured portioD of the sample and ten 4 in x $ in specimens from the non-textured portion of the sample. 7.3.3.2. weigh each stack of specimens individually on a triple beam balance. 7.3.3.3. Calculate the mass per unit area by dividing the difference between the textured and non- textured samples by the total area represented by a single stack of specimens. 7.3.3.4. Report the results in units of pounds per square foot or grar~ per square meter as specified by the project. POLY-NET~ TEST PROCEDURES The following tests are performed by National Seal Compan?s laboratory personnel in acxordance with the standard test methods detailed in the indi~ ASTM section unless otherwise noted. The information contained herein is for explanatory purposes only. No attempt has been made to set forth the full test procedure in detail. A full, detailed procedure for each test is maintained in the laboratory and is available upon request. 7.4.1. Carbon Black Content (when required) Carbon Black Content is determined in accordance with ASTM D 4218. 7.4.1.1. 7.4.1.2. 7.4.1.3. 7.4.1.4. Place a weighed quandty of polyethylene in a 600°C muffle furnace. Allow the sample to remain in the furnace for 5 minutes. During this time all of the polyethylene should boil off leaving only the carbon black. Cool the cagoon black for 15 minutes in desiccator. Weigh. Calculate the amount of carbon black remaining as a percentage of sample weight. 7.4.1.5. Report the results in units of percent. Rev. i 1/96 mmm NSc Manufacturing QA/QC Manual - Policies & Procedures Page 14 7.4.2. Tensile Properties Tensile Properties are determined in accordance with ASTM D 5035, NSC modified. 7.4.2.1. Die cut three 4 in x 8 in (10 cm x 20 cra) test specimens with the length parallel to the machine direction. Cut the specimens such that each one contains the same raunber of junctions across the shorter section of the specimen. 7.4.2.2. insert the ends of the test specitmn into the jaws of the testing machine. The jaws should have an initial separation of 4 inches (10 cra). 7.4.2.3. Start the machine so that the jaws separate at 8 in/min (20 cm/min). 7.4.2.4. Continue separating the jaws until the first strand breaks. 7.4.2.5. Record the peak load required for first suand break. C. a1~dnt~ tensile strength and report the results in units of pounds force per inch of width or N/cm as specified by the project 7.43. Thickness Thickness is determined in accordance with ASTM D 5199. 7.4.3.1. Measure the thickness at ten strand jun~ons re:ross the width of tl~ net using a dead weight micrometer exerting a pressure of at least 3.4 psi (23 KPa). 7.4.3.2. Report the results in thousands of an inch (mils) or hundredths of-a centimeter, as specified by the project. 7.4.4. 7.42. Mass Per Unit Area Mass per Unit Area is determined in accordance with ASTM D 5261~ 7.4.4.1. Weigh accurately a stack often 4 in x 8 in (10 cm x 20 em) specimens. 7.4.4.2. Calculate the mass per unit area by dividing the weight of the stack by the total area represented by the ten specimens. 7.4.4.3. Report results in pounds per square foot or g/ma as specified by the project. Hydraulic Transmissivity Hydraulic Transmissivity is determined in accordance with ASTM D 4716. 7.4.5.1. Cut three 12 in x 14 in (30 em x 36 cra) specimem ~ross the width ofthe sample with the length of the specimens parallel to the machine direction. 7.4.5.2. I. ay the specimen or profile in the base of the transmissivity tester making sure that it is free of wrinldes and folds. Place the platen on the specimen. 7.4.5.3. Condition the specimen or profile by running water through the apparatus under a hydraulic head of approximately 1.0 for 5 minutes. 7.4.5.4. Apply compressive stress to be tested. Allow specimen to seat for one hour while water continues to flow at a gradient of 0. I. 7.4.5.5. Adjust gradient to lowest test level (1.0 for st~ testing). Record flow quantity for an appropriate time period once uniform flow is achieved. 7.4.5.6. Repeat test three times for each gradient. Calculate the average hydraulic transmissivio'. Report the results in units of square meters per second. 7.5, TEX-NET~ TEST PROCEDURES The following test are performed by National Seal Company's laboratory personnel in accordance ~th the standard test methods detailed in the indicated ASTM section unless otherwise noted. The information contained herein is for explanatory purposes only. No attempt has been made to set forth Rtv. !1/96 mmm NSc Manufacturing QA/QC Manual - Policies & Procedures Page 15 7.6. the full test procedure in detail. A full, detailed procedure for each test method is maintained in the laboratory and is available upon request. 7.5.1. Ply Adhesion Ply Adhesion is determined in accordance with ASTM D 413 (same as ASTM F904). 7.5.1.1. Die cut three 2 in x 7 in (5 cmx 18 cra) specimens from across the mil width with the long dimension in the machine direction. 7.5.1.2. Separate by hand enough material to permit the grips to be attached. Initial distance between the grips should be 2 inches (5 em). 7.5.1.3. Start the machine so that the jaws sepamm at a speed of 2 in/rain (5 cra/rain). Cominue testing until the geotextile separates completely from the geonet. 7.5.1.4. Draw the best average line between minimum and maximum values. This line r~pt~sems the average ply adhesion strength. 7.5.1.5. Report results in units of pounds force per inch of specimen width or N/em as specified by the project. 7.5.2. Thickness Thickness is determined in accordance with ASTM D 5199. 7.5.2.1. Cut five 2 inch (5 cm) diameter circular specimens fi'om across the roll width of the sample. 7.5.2.2. Measure the thickness of each specimen using a dead weight micrometer exerting a pressure of 0.29 psi (2 K.Pa). 7.5.2.3. Report the results in units of tho,~ncls of an inch (mils) or humlmdths of a centimeter as · specified by the project. 7.5.3. Percent Adhesion Percent adhesion is a measurement of the degree of bonding for a given sample. 7.5.3.1. Measure the total width of the sample. 7.5.3.2. Measure the total number of inches (cm) of unlaminated material, excluding any edges intentionally leflmbonded. 7.5.3.3. Divide the totalunlaminated material by the nominal laminated width. 7.5.3.4. Report the results in units of percent. 7.5.4. Mass Per Unit Area Mass per Unit Area is determined in accordance with ASTM D 5261. 7.5.4.1. Weigh accurately a stack often 4 in x 8 in (10 cm x 20 cm) specimens. 7.5.4.2. Calculate the mass per unit area by dividing the weight of the stack by the total area represented by the ten specimens. 7.5.4.3. Report the results in units of pounds per square foot or g/ma as specified by the project. EXTRUSION ROD TEST PROCEDURES The following tests are performed by National Seal Company's laboratory personnel in accordance with the standard test methods detailed in the indicated ASTM section unless otherwise noted. The information contained herein is for explanatory purposes only. No attempt has been made to set forth the full test procedure in detail. A full, detailed procedure for each test is maintained in the laboratory and is available upon request. Rev. 11/96 mmm NSc Manufacturing QA/QC Mnnunl - Policies & Procedures Page/6 7.7. 7.6.1. Carbon Black Dispersion Carbon Black Dispersion slides arc prepared in accordance with ASTM D 5596 by cutting thin sections from thc sample by usc ofamicrotomc. 7.6.1.1. Slice five specimens approximately 10 microns (0.0004 in) thick. 7.6.1.2. Place thc specimens between two microscope slides. 7.6.1.3. View the specimens under 100X magnification. 7.6.1.4. Compare the image to the D 5596 Carbon Black Dispersion Classification Chart for G-eomembrancs. 7.6.1.5. Report the results as a carbon black dispersion rating. 7.6.2. Thickness Thickness is determined with hand calipers. 7.6.2.1. Cut a section of rod one foot (30 cra) in length. 7.6.2.2. Measure thc di:~w, ctcr of thc rod around thc circumference in three places equally spaced along thc length of thc one foot (30 cm) specimen. 7.6.2.3. Determine thc highest and lowest meastLrcrrents and report thc results in units of thoo~ncls of an inch (mils) or hundredths ora ~'~ntimctcr as spccificd by thc project 7.6.3. Mass Per Unit Length Mass. pcr unit length is determined by usc ofa mcchaxfic~l scale. 7.6.3.1. Accurately weigh a one foot (30 cra) length of rod. 7.6.3.2. Report thc results inlbs per foot length or g/m as specified by thc projccL OPTIONAL TEST PROCEDURES Thc following tests arc pcrforrncd by National Seal Company's laboratory personnel in accordance with thc standard test methods detailed in thc indicated ASTM section unless otherwise noted. Thc information contained hcrcin is for explanatory purposes only. No attcrnpt has bccn made to set forth the full test procedure in dctail. A full, detailed procedure for each test is maintained in thc laboratory and is available upon request. 7.7.1. Chemical Compatibility Chemical Compatibility can be determined in accordance vdth procedures such as EPA Method 9090 or ASTM D 5322. Exact procedures arc determined on a case by ca.sc basis. Chemical compatibility can bc determined on any gcosynthctic. Thc procedure outlined below is an example of a smooth polyethylene gcomcmbranc Method 9090 test. 7.7.1.1. Die cut 48 - 81/z in x 11 in (21 cmx 28 cm) coupons with the maclfine direction parallel to thc long end. Stamp each coupon with a uniqdcD, number. 7.7.1.2. Record thc mass, width/length, and thickness of each coupon. 7.7.1.3. Suspend 24 coupons from stainless steel or glass frames in each of two glass lanks making sure that there is sufficient room between thc coupons for liquid circulation. Place ore magnetic stir bar in each tank. 7.7.1.4. Fill tanks with liquid (landfill lcachatc or chemical solution). Set ore tank on a stirring plate in 23°Croom and onc lank on stimng plate in 50°Croom. Rev. 1 !/96 mmm NSc Manufacturing QA/QC Manual - Polici~ & Procedures Page 17 7.7.2. 7.7.3~ 7.7.4. 7.7.5. 7.7.6. 7.7.1.5. l~move two coupons from each tank a~r 30 days. Rinse in diz'tilled wamr, pat dry and determine weight, thickness and dimension changes. Store coupons in sealed plastic bags when not being handled. 7.7.1.6. Test coupons for tensile properties, tear resistance, puncture ~istance, modulus of elasticity, hardness, volatiles content, Exiractables content and hydros~tic resistance. Compm~ results to baseline testing conducted on unexposed material to determine if a change has taken place. 7.7.1.7. Repeat testing at 60, 90, and 120 days. Verify any anomalous results by removing and testing samples at 150 and 180 days. 7.7.1.8. Replace solution as required to ensure consistent solution composition. Direct Shear Friction Angle Direct Shear Friction. Angle is determined in accordance with ASTM D 5321. The test procedure varies on a case by case basis. Extractables Content Extractables Content is determined in accordance with EPA publication 600/2-88/052, Appendix E. 7.7.3.1. Cut polyethylene liner sample into cubes no larger than 0.25 in on a side. 7.7.3.2. Place material in an air ciro_dnti,g oven set at 105°Cfor either 24 hours (exposed per EPA 9090) or 2 hours (unexposed material). 7.7.3.3. Weigh accurately 5 grams of dried material intotared extraction thimble. 7.7.3.4. Place approximately 150 mi of reagent grade Methyl Ethyl Ketone (MEK) into the distillation flask with several boiling chips. Set flask on heating mantle. 7.7.3.5. Place the thimble in the ex'tractor barrel, put the condenser in place, and nm the exuaction for a minimum of 24 hours. 7.7.3.6. DO', in thimble, to a constant weight in an air circulating oven set at 70 C. 7.7.3.7. Calculate extracutble content as a percentage of sample weight. Report the results in units of percent. Fourier Transform Infrared Spectroscopy (FTIR) There is no standard practic~ for FTIR analysis. The actual test procedure varies on a case by case basis. Hardness Hardness is determined in accordance with ASTM D 2240. 7.7.5.i. Prepare specimens large enough to assure that the test is unaffected by the proximity of an edge. Sufficient specimens must be made so that when they are stacked, the stack height is at least 1/4 inch (0.5 em). 7.7.5.2. Apply a firm, even pressure to the loading lever of a Shore T.~e D durometer, being careful not to shock the system. Hold the load for 5 seconds then release the load lever. Record the maximum hardness values from the dial. 7.7.5.3. Report the results in units of Shore D hardness. Hydrostatic Point Stress Hydrostatic point stress resistance is determined in accordance with ASTM D 5514. 7.7.6.1. Cut sample 33 inches (84 em) in diameter and condition as needed. R~v. 11/96 mmm I NSc Manufacturing QA/QC Manual - Policie~ & Procedures Page/8 7.7.7. 7.7.8. 7.7.9. 7.7.6.2. Place three mmcated cones. Use fine r~nd around the poims to regulate the amount of protxusion. 7.7.6.3. Place the specimen over the cones and the test chamber flanges, lower the upper cha~er into position and clamp securely. 7.7.6.4. Half-fill upper chamber with water. Close all vents and valves. 7.7.6.5. Pressurize upper chamber with air at a rote of I psi (7 KPa) every minute. 7.7.6.6. Terminate test when specimen is punctured or 70 psi (483 KPa) is reached. Repeat the test using amounts of cone protrusion. 7.7.6.7. Determine the ~ amount of cone protrusion not resul~ng in punotured specimen. Report the results in units of inches or centimeters as specified by the project. Index Friction Angle · FdCt/on angle is determined in accordance w/th the procedure established/n the C-cosynthet/c Research Inst/tute's test method GS-7. 7.7.7.1. Die cut ten 4 inch x 8 inch (10 cm x 20 em) specimens in the machine directio~t IVark the specimens in the direction that the friction material was applied. 7.7.7.2. Test the specimens in the opposite direction of the mark. 7.7.7.3. Place a specimen on the tilt table at an angle less than 30 degrees. 7.7.7.4. Place the weight gently against the specimen and raise the table. 7.7.7.5. Record the angle at which the weight begins to slide. Report the results in units ofdegrces. Melting Point Curve Melting Po/nt Curves and Percent Ctystallinity are determined by a Different/al Scanning Calorimeter (DSC) in accordance with ASTM D 3418. 7.7.8.1. Place 3 - 10 milligrams of sample in an aluminum sample pan with lid. 7.7.8.2. Place the sample and reference pans in the DSC cell. 7.7.8.3. Purge the cell for five mimaes with nitwgen gas prior to start of test. Oxygen free nitrogen gas only is to be used in determination of the melting point. 7.7.8.4. Heat sample to 160°C at 10°C per minute. Observe thermal curve. 7.7.8.5. Analyze the curve between 50°C and 135°C using the DSC data analysis program. 7.7.8.6. Report peak melting point, onset melting point, and heat of fusion in units of degrees Celsius. Reportcrystallinity in units of percent. Modulus of Elasticity (Young's Modulus) Modulus of' Elasticity is determined in accordance with the procedure established in ASTM D 638. 7.7.9.1. Die cut five dumbbell shaped specimens with thc length parallel to the machine direction and five with the length peri)end/agar to the machine direction using an ASTM D 638 Type IV die. 7.7.9.2. Determine the minimum cross-sect/on,al area for each specimen. 7.7.9.3. Insert the ends of the specimen/mo the jaws of the testing machine. The jaws should have an initial separation of 2.5 inches (6.4 em). 7.7.9.4. Attach a strain gagcxtensometer. 7.7.9.5. Start the machine so that jaws separate at 2 inches per minute (5 em/rain). !/96 mmm NSc Manufacturing QA/QC Manual - Policies & Procedures /)age J9 7.7.9.6. 7.7.9.7. Continue scparatin~ ~ jaws until thc specimen elongates approximately 15 percent. Determine the maximum slope from the stress/strain curve. Calodnte modulus of elasticity and rePOrt the results in units of pounds per square inch or MPa as specified by the project. 7.7.10. Multi-Axial Tensile Multi-Axial Tensile properties arc determined in accordance with ASTM D 5617. 7.7.10.1. Cut sample 33 inches (84 cm) in diameter and condition as needed. 7.7.10.2. Place the specimen over the flanges of the lower chamber, lower the upper chamber into POsition and clamp securely. 7.7.10.3. pressurize upper chamber with air at a rate of 1 psi (7 KPa) per minute. Continue until test specimen raptures. 7.7.10.4. Calculate tensile slxess and strain using the forn~,ln-~ in ASTM D 5617. Rgpon stress results in units of POunds per square inch or MPA as specified by the project. RePOrt strain results in units of percent. - 7.7.11. Permeability Permeability is determined in accordance with ASTM E 96. 7.7.11.1. Die cut tluee circular specimens 4 inches (10 cra) in diameter. 7.7. I 1.2. P~ace test specimen on dish comaining approximately 50 mil of liquid. Bolt in place with ahu-ninum ring. Weigh dish to thc nearest 0.1 mg and store uptight (liquid not touching liner) at laboratory conditions of 2~- 2°Canal 50 ± 5% relative humidity. 7.7.11.3. Weigh dishes at least three times per week. Record ambient temperature and relative hm_nidity at each weighing. 7.7.11.4. Generate a scatter graph of weight (grams) versus time (days). Plot a linear regression line through data points. 7.7.11.5. Calculate vapor transmission by dividing the slope of the regression line by the exposed area of the specimen. RePOrt the results in units of grams per square meter per day (g/m~- day). Calculate permea~bility by dividing the vapor transmission value by 3600 seconds per hour and the difference in water vapor pressure (Pa) as determined by 1) the mean ambient temperature and humidity and 2) the difference in humidity between the test dish and ambient conditions. 7.7.11.7. Report the results in units of centimeters per second per Pascal. '7.7.11.6. 7.7.12. Puncture Resistance (pointed tip probe) Puncture Resistance is determined in accordance with lei'MS 10lC, Method 2065. 7.7.12.1. Die cut five circular specimens two inches (5 cra) in diameter. 7.7.12.2. Measure the thickness of each specimen. 7.7.12.3. Clamp the specimen securely over a 1 inch (2.5 cra) diameter opening. 7.7.12.4. Puncture the specimen with a polished steel probe having a tip with a 1/8 inch (0.3 cm) radius. Usc a deflection rate of 20 in/min (50 cm/min). 7.7.12.5. Report the peak load in units of POunds force per inch thickness or N/em, as specified by thc project. Rev. 11/96 mrnm .Sc Manufacturing QA/QC Manual - Policies & Procedures Page 20 7.7.13. 7.7.14. 7.7.15. 7.7.16. Puncture Resistance (fiat tip probe) Puncture Resistance is determined in accordance with ASTM D 4833. 7.7.13.1. Die cut five circular specimens four inches (10 cra) in diameter. 7.7.13.2. Measure the thickness of each specimen. 7.7.13.3. Clamp the specimen securely over a 1.77 inch (4.50 em) diameter opening. 7.7.13.4. Pum'Uu~ the specin~n with a polished 5/16 inch (0.8 cra) steel probe having a fiat tip with a chamfered edge. Use a deflection rate of 12 inches per minute (30 cm/min). 7.7.13.5. Report the peak load in units of pounds force per inch thickness or N/cm, as specified by the project. Puncture Resistance, CBR California Beating Ratio Puncture Resistance is determined in accordance with the procedure established in the Geosynthetic Research Institute's test method GS-I. 7.7.14.1. Die cut six specimens 10 inches ( 25 em) in diameter. 7.7.14.2. Clamp the specimen securely over a 5.9 inch (15 em) diameter opening. 7.7.14.3. Pure-rare the specinzm with a polished solid steel probe having a 1.97 inch (50 cra) diameter and a 45 chamfered edge. Use a deflection rate of 2 inches per minute (5 cm/min). Continue the test until the specimen completely ruptures. 7.7.14.4. Record the peak s~ngth and elo,~tion. When testing composite geotextiles and geomembranes, there may be a double peak. If this occurs, record the initial peak. 7.7.14.5. Report the re. suits in units of pounds force or lqewWns, as specified by the project, and percent elongation. Secant Modulus Sex, ant Modulus is determined in accordance with ASTM D 5323. 7.7.15.1. Follow the test procedure outlined in section 7.7.8 Do not use mxxensometer. 7.7.15.2. Determine the load at 2% swain and report the results in units of pounds per square inch or MPa, as specified by the project. Soil Burial Resistance SOil Burial Resistance is determined in accordance with ASTM D 3083 as modified by National Sanitation Foundation, Standard $4. 7.7.16.1. Prepare a compost soil for the specLmen burial such that the soil pH is between 6.5 and 7.5. Moisture content should be maintained between 25 and 30 percent. 7.7.16.2. Bray the test specimens with the width in a vertical plan~ with th: long dimension parallel to the horizon at a depth of approximately 5 inches (12 em). 7.7.16.3. Place the soil container in an oven maintained between 90° and 100°F (32 and 38°C) 7.7.16.4. Verify microbiological activity by burying unueated 10-oz cotton duck for 1 and 2 week periods. Satisfacto~ activity is indicated by a loss in tensile st~ng~ of greater than 70% after one week and greater than 90% after two weeks. 7.7.16.5. Remove the test specimens at the end of 30 days and test according to the pwper procedure. Compare thc physical properties of th~ specin~ns after burial with those of specimens tested without burial. 7.7.16.6. Report the results as percent change from original unexposed values. Rev. i 1/96 mmm .Sc Manufacturing QA/QC Manual - Policies & Procedures Page 21 7.7.17. 7.7.18. 7.7.19. 7.7.20. Specific Gravity Specific Gravity. is determined by first determining the density of the material using ASTM D 1505 and then reporting the ratio of that value to the density of water at 20°C. Tear Resistance Tear Resistance is determined in accordance with ASTM D 1004. 7.7.18.1. Die cut five specimem with the length parallel to the machine direction and five with the length perpendicular to the machine direction. 7.7.18.2. Measure thickness near the 45 angle of each specimen. 7.7.18.3. inert the eads ofthe specitr, en imo the jaws of th~ testing machine. The jaws should have an initial separation of one inch (2.5 ~n). 7.7.18.4. Start the machine so that the jaws sepaxato at a rate of 2 inches per minute (5 ~n/min). 7.7.18.5. Determine the peak force requix~ to initiate a tear. 7.7.18.6. Report the results in traits of pouads force per inch thickness or N/cra, as specified bY the proj t. Tensile Impact Tensile Impact is determined in accordance with ASTM D 1822. 7.7.19.1. Cut ten machine and transverse direction specimens using a Type "L" die. 7.7.19.2. Determine the minimum cross-sectional area of each specimen. 7.7.19.3. prepare the insmm~ent by allowiag the pendulum to hang f~eely at the bottom of its swing with n~ movement. Zero the pointer arm on the scale and set the forward follower pin against the pendulum pin. Raise and latch the pendulum. 7.7.19.4. Bolt the specimen securely into position so as to not place the test region under stress. 7.7.19.5. Release the pendulum. Record the impact energy for each specimen. 7.7.19.6. Report the results in umts of flbshn or kJ/m, as specified by the project. Tensile Properties, Grab Method Geotextile tensile properties by the Grab method are determined ia accordance with ASTM D 4632 (or ASTM D 5034). 7.7.20.1. Cut ten 4 in x 8 in (10 em x 20 cm) specimens with the machine direction parallel to the longer dimension and ten with the transverse direction parallel to the longer dimension. 7.7.20.2. Set initial distance between the grips of the constant-rate-of-tension mach~ to 3 inches (8 em). Place 1 in x 1 in (2.5 em x 2.5 cm) faces in grips. Set test speed to 12 inches per minute (30 cm/min). 7.7.20.3. Center test specimen in the grips. S~rt the tensile testing machine and continue running the test to rupture. 7.7.20.4. Record peak load and elongation to mptu~. Report the results in units of pounds force or Newtons, as specified by the project~ and percent elongation. 7.7.21. Tensile Properties, Strip Method Geote~ile tensile properties by the Strip method are determined in accordance with ASTM D 5035. 7.7.21.1. Cut five 2 in x 7 in (5 cm x 18 cm) specimens with the machine dixection parallel to the longer dimension and five with the transverse direction parallel to the longer dimension. 1/96 mmm NSc Manufacturing QA/QC Manual - Policies & Procedures Page 22 7.7.21.2. Set initial distance between the grips of the constant-rate-of-tension machine to 3 inches (8 em). Place 4 in x I in (10 cm x 2.5 em) faces in grips with the longer end perper~cular to the direction of pull. Set test speed to 12 inches per minute (30 cm/min). 7.7.21.3. Center test specimen in the grips. Start the tensile testing machine and condnue running the test to rupture. 7.7.21.4. Record peak load a~l elongation m rupture. Report the results in units of pounds force per inch width or N/cra, as specified by the project, and percent elongation. 7.7.22. Tensile Properties, Wide Width Method Goo~le wide width tensile properties are determined in accordance with ASTM D 4595. C-ooruembrane wide width tensile properties are determined in accordance with ASTM D 4885. 7.7.22.1. Cut twelve 8 in x 8 in (20 cm x 20 cm) specimens. Mark machine direction on six specimens and transverse direction on six. 7.7.22.2. Set initial distance between the 8 inch (20 cra) wide grips of the constant-rote-of-tension machine to 4 inches (10 cm). Set test speed to 0.4 in/min (1 cra/rain) for geotextile and 0.04 in/rain (0.1 cra/rain) for geomembtanc. 7.7.22.3. Center test specimen in the grips. Start the tensile testing machine and comin~ running the test until the peak stress (geotextile) or yield point (geomembrane) has clea~ly been pass . 7.7.22.4. Record peak and/or yield load and elongation as appropriate, l~port the results in units of pounds per square inch or MPA, as specified by the project, and percent elongation. 7.7.23. Textured Coating Adhesion Strength (under developruent) There is no standard test method for determining the strength of the bond between the friction coating and sruooth base sheet. The test ruethod developed by National Seal Company is considered to be the most appropriate for FRICTION SEA~ 7.7.23.1. Prepare ten l in x 13 in (2.5 cm x 33 cm) textured specimens from across the sample roll width with the machine direction parallel to the long dimension. 7.7.23.2. Place the specimen in the test device, between the low fxiction movable slide and fixed block, oriented such that the direction of pull is in the "upstream" direction. 7.7.23.3. Pull the specimen at a rate of 20 in/min (50 cm/min) such that the edge of the f~xed block strips the coating from the base sheet for a distance of at least t/tree inches (8 cm). 7.7.23.4. Use dam acquisition software to determined the average strength of the bond over a two inch distance (5 em). 7.7.23.5. Report the results in pounds force oNewtons, as specified by the project. 7.7.24. Volatile Loss Volatile Loss is determined in accordaace with ASTM D 1203, Method A. 7.7.24. I. Weigh accurately three liner specimens after conditioning in a desiccator for 40 hours at 21 = 2°C. 7.7.24.2. Bur)' specimens in activated c. atbon and hold for 24 hours at 70°C. 7.7.24.3. Remove specimens from activated carbon and cool in a desiccator. Weigh and calculate the voladle loss asa percen~ge of the sample weight. 7.7.24.4. Report the results in units of percent. 1/96 mmm NSc Manufacturing QA/QC Manual - Policies & Procedures ,Page 23 7.7.25. Water Absorption Water Absorption is determined in accordance with ASTM D 570. 7.7.25.1. Dry thre~ specimens of liner in a 100°Coven for 24 hours. 7.7.:25.2. Cool in adesiccator and weigh. 7.7.25.3. Immerse in distilled water at laboratory temperature for 24 hours. 7.7.25.4. Wipe off all external water, weigh and calodat~ tha water absorption as a percentage of sample weight. 7.7.25.5. Report thc results in units of percent. 7.7.26. Water Vapor Transmission Water vapor transmission is determined using thc same procedure as Permeability (sec section 7.8.11) and using water as thc liquid. TERMINOLOGY. The definitions included in this section are to explain words or terms that have a unique meaning in this manual. 8.1. BATCH: A volume of plastic resin used to produce the finished product. Typically a batch is 180,000 pounds. A resin batch is also referred to as "Blend" or "l,ot". 8.2. RESIN: Pellets of polyethylene used in production. 8.3. ROLl,: This term refers to a full size roll of finished product. 8.4. TEX-NET~: A heat bonded laminate consisting ofgeonet and geotextile. The procedures described herein are those in effect as of 25 April 1996. National Seal Company reserves the right to modify these procedures in order to keep abreast of changes in technology and standard industry practices. Rtv. i 1,'96 rnmm UNSATURATED ZONE MONITORING SYSTEM The system will consist of a four inch PVC casing which shall be installed approximately one foot below the 40-mil HDPE liner at the lowest point of the containment sump. A neutron moisture detection probe will be utilized for testing. The system will be installed under the supervision of Soils Engineering, Inc.. Prior to acceptance of waste, an initial test will be conducted to establish "baseline data" to be compared to subsequent results to determine whether moisture has infiltrated the unsaturated zone beneath the unit. Testing, data preparation, and reporting will be performed by Welenco, Inc.. ,FOCUS Vadose Zone Monitoring with the Neutron Moisture Probe by John H. Kramer, Stephen J. Cullen, and Lorne G. Everett Abstract The neutron moisture probe is widely applicable to vadose zone monitoring problems which require measuring variable moisture contents. Neutron data are proportional to hydrogen density (modified by local chemistry) '.and sensitive to wetting fronts as well as changing volumes of hydrocarbon liquids. They cannot, however, be used to corff'a'm contaminant chemistry, nor to detect steady-state flow. Neutron data are amenable to statistical analysis, providing a measure of the significance of data variations. Detection of incipient moisture changes at numerous monitoring locations is more practical using raw neutron data than data calibrated for moisture content because calibrations suffer from uncertainties associated with soil heterogeneities. When properly applied, the neutron probe is an effective monitoring tool as illustrated by three example applications described in this paper:. (1) neutron moisture logs are used to detect subtle lithologic changes and identify monitoring horizons; (2) sequential neutron data are used to track induced saturation at a soil flushing pilot study; and (3) neutron logs from a horizontal access tube beneath a waste facility are used to pinpoint moisture anomalies. Introduction The neutron moisture probe is increasingly being applied to vadose zone hydrogeologic problems such as site characterization, contaminant leak detection and monitoring, remediation, infiltration, and recharge. Ground water scientists and engineers should be acquainted with the principles of operation, limitations, an.r:' advantages of neutron measurements. This paper reviews the theory and application of neutron moisture probes and presents results from its use. The first part provides background necessary to understand the tech- nique. The second part describes three monitoring proj- ects which successfully employed the method. The intent of the authors is to provide a useful guide to the advan- tages of this monitoring approach. Part I: 'Background of Neutron Moisture Measurement Neutron soil moisture measurement was established in agriculture (van Bavel 1963; Gardner 1965) before environmental monitoring needs were identified. In 1972, the first major ground water study funded by EPA (Everett 1980) recognized that neutron moderation was a cost-effective technology. Everett et al. (.1984) defined the application of vadose zone monitoring at solid and h~':ardous waste landfills and gave examples at hazard- ous waste impoundments. Six landfills in Los Angeles County were characterized with neutron measurements (Everett 1985) to comply with California's Calderon Bill. The first horizontal tube application of neutron mea- surements was reported by Brose and Shatz (1986). Unruh et al. (1990) report precise, accurate, reliable, and cost-effective monitoring by non-destructive means at a landfill using neutron data. Neutron monitoring was used beneath a solid-waste landfill in conjunction with deep (greater than 250 feet) installation of high- pressure/vacuum lysimeters hung from a neutron access casing by Cullen et al. (1991). The concept of using neutron probes in perforated casing as part of a monitor- ing and passive remediation strategy was presented at the U.S.Af~I.S.S.R. hydrology conference by Everett et al. (1990). The use of neutron monitoring to support passive remediation Or hydrocarbon stability is receiving increased attention. In response to regulatory interpre- tations concerning waste facility siting, neutron data are now being used to estimate the effective height of the capillary fringe above the water table. Neutron Moderation Theory Neutron probes take advantage of the neutron mod- eration process in which fast neutrons emitted from a radioactive source are moderated, or slowed, by colli- sions with surrounding atoms. Slowed neutrons, also called thermalized neutrons, diffuse through interato- mic space like gas particles until they are absorbed or captured by receptive atoms. Thermalized neutron cap- ture emits a pulse of detectable energy, which is counted in a neutron probe detector. The neutron moderation process is dominated by neutron-hydrogen collisions. Fast neutron collisions with relatively heavy soil atoms result in little loss of neutron velocity, whereas collisions with hydrogen atoms (of equal mass), result in appreciable neutron slowing. Thus. relatively high hydrogen density (moles/ cc of soil) results in rapid (near source) neutron mod- Summer 1992 GWMR 177 eration. Hydrogen in geologic material occurs as water, min- eralogically bound H", organic soil components, and organic liquids (e.g., petroleum contaminants). Water is nearly always the greatest source of hydrogen in the subsurface. Therefore, as a dry soil is wetted, the ther- malized neutron density near a neutron source will increase. Elements vary in their capture cross sections, or the propensity to absorb thermalized neutrons. Of the elements present in soils and monitoring well sys- tems, chlorine and boron are particularly high. Neutron capture by these elements may significantly lower neu- tron probe counts and should be considered in arid regions where salt buildup occurs in soils. The effects of chlorine in polyvinylchloride (PVC) casing on neu- tron moisture probe data do not significantly interfere with wetting front detection (Keller et al. 1990; Kramer et al. 1990a). Schneider and Greenhouse (1992) report significant count decreases resulting from chlorine present in liquid perchlorethylene (PCE). Additional discussion of theoretical concepts .is presented in Greacen (1981), Keys and MacCary (1983), and Welex Neutron Probe: Instrument Design The term neutron probe describes two.basic types of instruments: neutron-porosity loggers (type 1), used primarily in liquid-filled boreholes, and neutron mois- ture probes. (type 2), used in dry access tubes. Eoth types use a fast neutron source and thermal neutron detector(s) bat differ in source strength and detector geometry. The result is that neutron counts in type 1 instruments are in~'ersely proportional to hydrogen den- sity, whereas they ~roportional in type 2 instruments. Ground water investigators should be aware of the type of instrument being employed before interpreting results. Type 1 neutron-porosity probes are well established in the oil industry where they are used to infer porosity in saturated sediments. Type 1 probes employ strong sources (250 mCi to $ Cf) to enhance sampling volume and dual detectors to isolate borehole effects. These probes, which are subject to stringent regulatory over- sight, utilize long tool lengths (4 to 21 feet) and sophisti- cated, expensive logging vehicles. They have been suc- cessfully used to' monitor the vadose zone (Hargis and Montgomery 1983), and are available by subcontracting borehole logging specialists. Type 2 neutron moisture probes are designed for precise measurement of soil moisture in small-diameter (2-inch) access tubes, but have also been employed in larger access tubes (Tyler 1985; Tyler 1988; Hammer- meister et al. 1985; Keller et al. 1990; Kramer et al. 1990a). These probes employ a low-strength source (10 to 50'mCi) and a single, near-source detector. Similar to density gauges used by many geotechnieal firms, they require minimal operator training (an eight-hour radia- tion safety course) and are subject to less regulatory oversight than the type 1 probes described. The moder- ate one-time acquisition cost ($4300 to $6900), low main- tenance, one-person operation, light weight (less than 30 pounds), and small tool length (1 .foot) keep the cost per sampling event low and make it the method of choice for diverse vadose zone monitoring tasks, especially in situations in which frequent sequential data are required. Hereafter, all referendes in this paper to neu- Neutron Data for Five Elevations in Test Chamber Gasoline Leak of .04 gal/hr 1.8 0.8 Leak Stopped 0.6 [ I ~ [ ~ -10 40 90 140 190 240 Time in Minutes from Start of Leak +20 cm +10 cm 'leak ' -10 cm ' -20 cm F~gure L Neutron data from slow g~oline leak detection experiment showing count increase in response to leak. 178 Summer 1992 GWMR tron probes refer to this type 'ument. Instrument Capabilities Neuu:on probes can be calibrated to measure soil moisture changes on the order of 1 to 5 volume percent. Although designed for measuring pore water, neutron probes are also sensitive to hydrocarbon liquids as dem- onstrated by Kramer et al. (1990b). Figure 1 shows data from five different positions in a test chamber which were obtained before, during, and after the initiation of a slow gasoline leak halfway up the chamber. ARer initiating the leak, count increases were observed at elevations below the leak, but no count increases were observed at or above the leak elevation. The counts below the leak elevation decrease after the leak is cut off. The data indicate that the neutron moisture gage is sensitive to slow liquid gasoline leaks, but not to increasing gasoline vapors which, though present, did not cause count increases at levels above the leak. The radius of influence for neutron moisture probes varies with source strength, hydrogen density, solids density, and chemistry. Practical limits are from 6 to 24 inches from the point between the source and detector (Kramer et al. 1990a; Silvestri et al. 1991). The cloud of thermalized neutrons is compact in wet and/ or dense soils, and expanded in dry and/or loose soils. Strong neutron absorbers, including boron and chlorine, will diminish the radius of influence. Sensitivity of the neutron probe to wetting fronts depends on' the magnitude of the possible moisture change and the masking effects of grout and casing. The neutron probe is most sensitive in ungrouted access tubes with minimal distance between the tube and soils (Teasdale and .lohnson 1970). Small-diameter (2-inch) driven metal casings are best. Steel, aluminum, stainless steel, and P~asings at diameters up to 4 inches, installed in borzngs"'" and backfilled with native material, have also been successfully used. The neutron moisture probe can be applied in grouted wells. Well grout must cure to maturity before grout water will stabilize. For neat cement grout mixed at 5 gallons of water per 94-pound sack of cement, the stabilization period is on the order of seven days. Wetter grout will require much longer stabilization periods. In laboratory tests at very low background moisture contents, grout thickness up to 3 radial inches did not obscure the detection of wetting fronts with increase of volumetric water content of 9 percent (Kramer et al. 1990a). Neutron data from a follow-up field test at more realistic background moisture levels are presented in Figure 3. A mock well (consisting of a grouted 10-inch diameter borehole with 4-inch PVC casing) from the aforementioned study was buried in loamy soils, allowed to stabilize for three months, and tested for wetting front detection. Figure 2 shows that under these field conditions, a wetting front could be detected in a 4-inch PVC casing through 3 radial inches of grout. Under wetter field conditions in clay-rich soils, however, a 3-inch grout thickness may fully mask neutron response to wetting. As a general rule, grout thickness greater than 3 radial inches is inappropriate for neutron mois- ture probes, although limited success has been achieved through thicker grout in arid settings. Instntment Shortcomings The neutron moisture probe cannot distinguish chemical species (e.g., leachate from ground water) and is sensitive ordy to changes in hydrogen density or neu- tron-absorbing solutes and Liquids. Neutron data cannot be used to distinguish between gasoline and water, which Control Chart of Wetting Front Detection in 10X4 Well Configuration 5300 out of Control 5200 i5100 5000 4900 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 1011121314151617181920 Successive Measurements Figure ~ Control chart of wetting front detection by neutron probe through 3 inches of grout and 4-inch diameter PVC easing in loamy soils. Summer 1992 GWMR Raw Counts ......... Background +2* S.D. m ..-. -- Mean Background ......... Background -2* S.D. ' Mean of Five Successive Counts 179 Standa~ CI3e Count~ (On Bench or Tailgate) S1andlrd ~ Coun~ (On Ground) ~, ;. . . · . . . 870O [ .............. * ...... · .................. / 8600 L : : : : : : t 2 3 4 S I 7 I I 10 t~ 12 ......... *1% M ueaA ......... -I% o4 blM~ StJnd~d Counts In 55 Gallon Drum o! Witer . , . . . : : : . . . . .... :..:...:...~..~ ............. .*. ........... ,~...* .............. I 2 3 4 S 6 7 I I 10 11 12 1,3 14 15 18 1'7 11 Humb~r of Standard-, Run Figure 3. Three neutron stnndard~ Case shield on a bench or tailgate, case shield on ground surface, und drum of water- have similar hydrogen densities (Kramer et al. 1990b), nor to detect a steady-state flow situation that has no changing hydrogen content. In high background mois~ ture environments, such as heavy clay-rich soils, under conditions of fully masking grout, or in the presence of migrating boron or chlorine, detection of wetting fronts with a neutron probe would be uncertain or impossible. Counting Statistics Neutron moisture probe data are amenable to statis- tical analysis. A statistical model, the continuous normal approximation of a Poisson distribution, can be used to approximate the population from which monitoring data are taken, and the significance of changes in moni- toring data can be inferred. The Poisson distribution, a special case of the bino- mial distribution appropriate to radioactive decay processes, offers a convenient estimate of the sample standard deviation as the square root of the mean: ~r = x(ta) (Equation 1) where ~ = standard deviation and x = sample mean. An estimate of the standard deviation is useful because it forms the basis for a variety of popular statis- tical testing techniques for continuous normal distribu- tions. The continuous normal distribution is applicable to the Poisson distribution for sample sizes greater than 15. This is the reason that one probe manufacturer uses 16-second counts as a standard. The electronics of the probe actually count 16 one-second periods and report the mean of this subsample. Equation I can then be applied to obtain an estimate of the population standard 180 Summer 1992 GWMR deviation from an, )-second count. To compare neutron probe counting statistics with the Poisson distribution model, 900 separate counts were collected at five different counting times in two materials, a clay and a dry sand, in barrels in the labora- tory (100 counts for each material and time). The statis- tics are presented in Table 1. In all cases, Poisson-based calculations of the standard deviation (S.D.2) were in close agreement with the standard deviations calculated for the whole data set (S.D.0. Table 1 demonstrates the validity of using the square root of the mean as an estimate of the standard deviation. L~stx~ment Precision Precision, or the reproducibility of successive mea- surements, depends on instrument reliability, back- ground stability, and counting time. The electronics in commercially available neutron probes are stable enough that, given an invariant background, I percent precision 68 percent of the time is routinely attained by adjusting counting times (CPN 1978). The precision improves with longer counting time as shown by the decreasing coefficient of variation (C.V.: the ratio of one standard deviation to the mean) in Table 1. Assum- ing the normal approximation of the Poisson distribu- tion model, neutron probe precision at the 68 percent confidence level can be expressed as: P = i00 * xOr2)/x (Equation 2) where P = pr6cision in percent and .x = sample mean. count. A useful rule of thumb is that a precision of _ 1 per-. cent in 68 out of 100 sa.mples can be expected by count- hag long enough to record 10,000 counts. For example,' if a 16-second measurement recorded 5000 counts, then a 32-second reading would be required to attain 1 per- cent precision. If a four-second measurement of 2500 counts is obtained, the precision would be 2 percent (100'2500or~)/2500). Note that on instruments that report counts normalized to a specific time equivalent (e.g., 16-second), the actual number of counts at the selected measurement time must be used (in the 32- second example, the reported measurement would be 5000 even though 10,000 counts were measured). Higher confidence in the precision is obtained by using multi- ples of the standard deviation in Equation 2. For the 32-second example, the precision is expected to be +_2 percent in 95 out of 100 samples (2'100'10,000(~r2)/ 10,000 = 2 percent). An Example Validation of Short Counting Time Methodology For a practical monitoring scheme, short counting times are economically advantageous in terms of field personnel time and safety. In a landfill monitoring study (Cullen et al. 1991) 16-second counting periods were undesirable. To support the use of shorter count times. an experiment was conducted to determine if significant differences existed between four. second counts and 16-second counts (both normalized to 16-second counts). In the two-treatment experiment, the first treatment TABLE 1 'Effect 'of Counting Time on Statistical Parameters Used to Interpret Neutron Probe Data Parameter Wet Clay Neutron Probe Counts Counting Time tsec) Minimum Maximum Range Mean Median Variance S.D.~ C.V.1 S.D.2 Dry Sand Neutron Probe Counts 4 16 32 64 I 4 16 32 64 256 2958 12405 24678 50028 3312 12879 25374 51212 354 474 696 1184 3143 12667 25045 50650 3149 12669 25042 50646 3472 10698 25058 50547 58.9 103.4 158.3 224.8 .019 .008 .006 .004 56.1 112.5 158.3 225.1 141 612 1282 2560 10816 200 726 1430 2840 11264 59 114 148 280 448 171 677 1362 2649 11032 169 680 1362 2686 11024 171 637 1034 2682 11380 13.1 25.2 32.2 51.8 106.7 .077 .037 .024 .019 .010 13.1 26.0 36.9 51.9 105.0 n - I00 me~uremcn~ at each counting time S.D.t ' standard deviation calculation based on assumption of a normal distribution C.¥.~ ' coefficient of variation calculation based on assumption of a normal distr~ution S.D.2 - standard deviation _~lt..Intlofl based on the assumption of the Poisson distr~ution (i.e., square root of the mean) consisted of two sets of readings made in a borehole using 16-second counting periods. The second treatment was made separately and identical to the first except that the readings were made using four-second count times. The means of the four-second readings from each depth were paired with the means of the 16-second ' readings from the same depths to minimize variability which could be attributed to stratigraphic differences. Based on a paired t-test of the data as shown in Table 2, no difference was detected between the results of the four-second readings and those of the 16-second readings. This conclusion only applies to the site where these data were collected. The use of short counting- time intervals should be validated on a site-by-site basis. Count Ratios Neutron probe data are often reported as count ratios, which are ratios of counts at sampling locations to counts on the same instrument in a stable standard material. Count ratios are defined as follows: R = C~S (Equation 3) where R = Count Ratio, C = Measured counts, and S = Counts in standard material. The ratio is used to offset instrument drift between sampling events due to component degradation or other factors. A disadvantage to reporting probe data as ratios is that random error in both the standard (ratio denomi- nator) and the measurement (ratio numerator) can com- pound. To minimize error, the mean of two or more standard counts taken before and after the measure- ments should be used in ratios. Sinclair and Williams (1979) show that averaging several count ratios will reduce precision error to a very small amount of total variance. Averaging standard counts or count ratios over a large number of sampling events may obscure real moisture changes. In monitoring applications of long TABLE 2 Paired Samples T-Test on 4-Second vs. '16-Second Counts of Neutron Probe at Background Monitoring Access Tube of a California Solid Waste Landfill Depth (feet below ground d-Second 16-Second surface) Counts Counts 3 4094.0 4207.0 8 6142.0 6297.5 13 7660.0 7647.5 18 8878.0 8865.0 23 2578.0 2450.5 28 2598.0 2527.0 33 3860.0 3758.0 38 5032.0 4914.0 ne8 mcan difference -21.94 sd difference ,, 106.27 sample t - 384 tabulated t = 3.499 alpha ,..01 duration (i.e., years), ratios will eventually become desirable and standard counts before and after each monitoring event should be recorded and averaged. The standard material may be any stable volume of neutron moderators. Manufacturers provide a shielded case which can be used as a standard but which may be subject to external influences. Greacen (1981) recom- mends a large drum of water fitted with a centered access tube as a standard if portability is not a problem. Such standards will produce repeatable measurements to within 1 percent of the mean approximately 68 per- cent of the time. Figure 3 compares three types of standard measure- Summer 1992 GWMR 181 ments for the same probe: an inst~ent case shield on a bench (or truck tailgate), a case'TR~e[d on the ground (pavement, cement, or compacted earth), and an access tube in a 55-gallon drum of water. The case standards run on the bench include three extreme outliers that may have been caused by some external source of neu- tron moderators and absorbers near the case shield. It is easier to control external conditions for case standards run on the ground. Figure 3 shows that, for the instru- ment used, the precision in the water standard is no better than the precision of the case standard on a dense surface. As a general rule it is best to use a standard that approximates the count rate obtained in the target soils; this practice removes any effect of variance at dLfferent count rates. Greacen ct al. (1981) state that count ratios simplify comparisons of measurements from different experi- mental conditions, access tube geometries, or instru- ments. It should be cautioned, however, that ratios are not direct conversions between instruments. Each instrument has a unique combination of source strength and detector sensitivity which affect ratios. Figure 4 shows neutron ratios collected during an induced recharge event in an affected well and a control well. A change of instruments occurred between the sixth and seventh measuring events. Ratios in the control well show a downward bias associated with the instrument change which, if uncorrected, would mask the magni- tude of moisture change in the affected well. Bias correc- tions will vary with the moisture contents measured because each-instrument has a unique calibration coeffi- cient (see next section). Comparisons between two instruments over a range of meast~ed moisture levels require at least a two-point (wet and dry) calibration standard with e~ instrument. Count ratios are also used to standardize measure. ments taken at different counting time intervals to develop a single soil calibration curve that will work for all counting time intervals. Calibration Neutron probe data can be reported as calibrated units of volumetric soil moisture content. This form of reporting is desirable if data are to be used to estimav.. soil water and soluble contaminant mobility in conjunc. tion with a known soil water characteristic curve and associated knowledge of unsaturated hydraulic con- ductivity as a function of partial saturation. By measur- ing soil water content, one can assess the likelihood of liquid movement. If the soil water content is below a critical value (unique to each soil), then the likelihood of contaminant mobility is negligible. Calibration curves traditionally are made in the labo- ratory (drums) or in the field by measuring the neutron counts from a given probe in a target soil at two or more known moisture contents and regressing these to a linear model. At least two of the soil moisture contents used in the calibration should span the moisture contents of interest in the natural system. Such a regression takes the form: O -- So + ~ n (Equation 4) where O -- Volumetric moisture co~tent, Bo = ¥ axis intercept, ~ - Calibration coefficient, and n -- neutron counts or count ratio. Holland (1969) recommends regressing n on B, where n is dependent for drum calibrations, and where error in O is small In field calibrations, most workers chose O as the dependent variable, as'in Equation 4, Downward Data Bias From Instrument Change During Induced Recharge Study 0.9 Instrument #1 Instrument #2 0.8 = Control. Well I ~ = ----O ,.. Monitor Well 0.75 0.7 0.65 0.6 i I I t I ,, ! 5/09 5/09 5/10 5/10 5/10 5/11 5/16 5/20 Date of Measurement Figure 4. Neutron count ratios from two instruments in two wells documenting bias due to instrumenl change during recharge event. 182 Summer 1992 GWMR because it is desirable to know moisture content corresponds to a given neutron count. Laboratory drum calibrations can be performed in 55-gallon drums fitted with centered access tubes (iden- tical to the field access tubes) and packed with target soils at different known water contents and densities (Silvestri et al. 1991). Water contents can be adjusted by mixing measured amounts of water with soils before ?acking the drums. Densities can be measured by weigh- ing the tared drums or volumetrically sampling the packed material. Although this method results in even moisture distribution within the drum, it is difficult to accurately reproduce the density and pore-size distribu- tion of the field soils. Another technique is to pack the drum with dry soil and saturate it from the bottom up (to exclude air entrapment). This technique is only good for two-point calibrations because moisture stratifica- tion can occur within the drum at less than saturation. To avoid this problem, drums may be fitted with candle extractors, tensiometers, TDR (time domain reflec- tometry), or capacitance probes to control tension and measure moisture content during calibrations. Field calibrations can be performed by destructively volume sampling soils near an access tube (five samples are desirable) and measuring water contents gravimet- rically before, during, and after saturation events, or by implanting a TE)R or capacitance probe to measure changing soil moisture. These measurements can .be correlated to peutron measurements taken during a wet- ting event. In most hydrogeologic applications, it is impractical to obtain multiple gravimetric samples at a given posi- tion .for calibration regressions (e.g., in deep borings in thin-bedded strata), or to monitor induced saturation events in situ (e.g., if contaminant mobilization is possi- ble). It may also be impossible to obtain adequate representative .pies for drum calibrations. In these cases, approximate calibrations can be generated using limited gravimetric data or by applying calibration curves from similar soils. Silvestri et al. (1991) showed that a factory calibration is generally applicable to sandy soils, but that probes should be calibrated to the soils in which they are to be used. They provide a calibration curve for a particular probe in wet clay soils and note that the calibration appears non-linear at greater than 40 percent moisture content. This is most likely due to instrument design; loss of detector efficiency occurs as the cloud of thermalized neutrons collapses to within the geometry of the detector. Calibrations are prone to error from uncertainty in the quality and representativeness of samples upon which they are based. In many geologic settings each monitoring position deserves a specific calibration curve based on a unique combination of field density and bound hydrogen. The number of calibrations can be impractically large, necessitating the grouping of dif- ferent soils that actually have clearly distinct moisture retention properties. The resulting approximate calibra- tion curve is an information filter, reducing sensitivity to changes at any single position. Consider data in Fig- ure 5 from neutron moisture logs in a 2000-foot horizon- tal access tube. The variations in counts between posi- tions are numerous, yet the pattern of peaks is distinct and repeatable from one log to the next (excluding obvi- ous anomalous peaks to be discussed later). These varia- tions indicate the presence of numerous distinct soil- pore distributions, each with a unique soil water charac- teristic curve and associated neutron calibration. Vario- grams calculated for these moisture data indicate that at distances greater than 6 feet the data are uncorrelated, which means that at least 330 distinct calibrations would be required to provide quantitative moisture contents Landfill Neutron Moisture Logs at two times 9/13/9 0 20O00 190OO 18O00 17000 160O0 154XX) 1400(3 130O0 120(X) 11000 [ Surface wa?__[r .urce~ Figure 5. Neutron logs from a horizontal access tube beneath a landfill showing distinctly repeatable patterns, spatial variability, and pinpointed moisture anomalies. Summer 1992 GW.~YR 183 along this transect. Because it is impc~e to properly collect enough samples to perform thee calibrations, s~,me grouping and averaging schemes must be used if calibrated moisture contents are required. If quantita- tive moisture contents are not needed, background com- parison of raw data should be used. B'ackground Comparison Techniques When monitoring for changes in moisture content, the question of what represents a meaningful change has traditionally been addressed by attempting to cali- brate neutron counts to site soils and to monitor for an arbitrarily chosen level of significant change (e.g., 5 per- cent volumetric moisture change [Unruh et al. 1990]). Neutron data are better used by comparing neutron counts at each position through time to an established background. Analysis of raw data is more sensitive to subtle changes in hydrogen density than data processed through a calibration filter. Only after trends are noted in sequential count data are estimates of volumetric moisture content changes needed for risk assessment or predictive modeling efforts. In control charting, one useful statistical approach to anomaly definition (U.S. EPA 1989), a level of signi- ficance is assigned within which sequential samples may vary above or below established background. When a sample exceeds the significance level, the process is con- sidereal out of cont~ =nd anomalies are investigate .. In the example illust: d by Figure 2. a moving window of five sequential count measurements at a single moni. toring position advances stepwise through the data set. The mean or' each window is plotted at the central time position. If no trend exists in the data, the sequence of window means should be distributed normally about the background mean. If trends do exist, as is the case in Figure 2, deviation will be apparent. The plot of window means identifies when the increasing trend began. In the case of contaminant leaks, estimates of leak duration are useful to assessing contaminant vol- ume. This approach is very appropriate to neutron data, which are real time, inexpensive, and repeatable. Out- of-control conditions can be verified by repeat sampling. Part ri: Examples of Neutron Moisture Monitoring Applications This part includes descriptions of three field applica- tions of neutron probe monitoring: a logging effort to identify potential monitoring horizons, evaluation of saturation fronts at a soil flushing project, and long- term monitoring beneath a waste facility. Case 1.. Detailed Neutron Logging to Identify Monitoring Horizons _ Neutron moisture logs can be useful stratigraphic 32.75 34.75 36.75 38.75 40.75 42.75 44.75 46.75 FEET 48.75 BGS 50.75 52.75 54.75 56.75 58.75 60.75 62.75 64.75 66.75 NEUTRON COUNTS WELL A Clayey Silt ~ Silty ~ands NEUTRON COUNTS WELL B 32.75 36.75 ~o.Ts 4~75 ~.75 ~.75 FE~ ~.75 BGS ~.75 0 ~.7~ 56.75 ~.75 ~.75 62.75 ~.75 66.75 NEUTRON COUNTS WELL C :t2.75 36.75 a0.75 a~7~ FE~ ~.75 BGS ~.75 ~.75 ~.75 ~.75 ~.75 ~.75 62.75 ~.75 ~.75 Potential saturated flow, pathways Figure 6. Descriptive and neutron logs of three monitor wells. Potential saturated flow pathways are identified based on neutron data. Summer 1992 GWMR i~dicators as shown by the exa~ of reconnaissance neutron data from three grouted wells shown in Fig- ure 6. Data were collected by one person in less than two hours on-zite. Grout thickness was less than 2 radial inches and casing was aluminum. Potential flow path- ways are indicated by arrows. These positions were cho- sen because they represent sandy material, which would be a rapid lateral transport pathway in the event of .,'..~turated infiltration events, over finer grained material (ML). Much slower unsaturated flow may occur in the NIL (clay-rich) horizons. Descriptive logs are shown in Figure 6 alongside neutron logs. Theory predicts that the sandy material would generate relatively low neutron counts and the clay-rich material would generate higher counts. The two logging techniques are in rough agreement; however, the descriptive log does not match the neutron log in detailed variations. For example, high neutron c.¢unts do not correlate well to sand-rich horizons in the physical logs at several positions (e.g., Well B, 53.75 feet). High neutron counts indicate that a clay layer was not detected in the lithologic logs. In fact, the hidden clay layer at 53.75 feet in Well B correlates well with the thin clay at 53 feet in Well A (also detected in the neutron log from Well A at 52.75 feet). A similar clay occurs in Well C at 53.'/5 feet. The combination of neutron and lithologic logs permits a case to be made f,.:r the existence of a continuous clay across the site, a potentially important control to subsurface flow. Neutron logging is repeatable, whereas one-time boring logs are inherently less accurate unless the bore- holes are continuously cored and logged at considerable expense· Therefore, neutron logging can be a cost-effec- tive reconnaissance tool to locate specific, potential, or suspected flow pathways in existing wells o.r borings that cannot be continuously cored. Case 2: Soil Flushing Project A site underlain by fine-grained alluvial material, including interbedded silty sands, clayey silts, and gravels, contains chromium-contaminated soil from the surface to the ~r table at 80 feet. A ground water contamination plume in excess of 1 mile long is being captured and treated on site. The top 20 feet of soil is to be excavated and removed at a later date and will pose no long-term threat to ground water; however, the deeper non-excavated soils between 20 to 80 feet could be a continuing future source of contamination. A pilot project to evaluate the potential for flushing the soils between 20 and 80 feet with treated ground water was initiated. Flushing is intended to transport contaminants adsorbed on soil particles to the ground water pumping and treatment system. The objective of neutron monitoring was to observe progressive saturation of strata near an injection well and measure arrival of wetting fronts. A vertical injec- tion well screened between 20 and 80 feet was pressur- ized with a 3-foot head of potable water while monitor- ing tubes, installed 5, 15, and 30 feet from the injection well, were periodically logged with a neutron probe. Figure 7 shows example neutron data from two tubes (5 and 30 feet from the injection well) at six depths plotted with time of injection. Strata with high ratios are clay-rich horizons which show few, if any, meaningful changes, whereas sandy horizons (Iow ratios) show dis- tinct wetting front arrivals. Strata at the 60.3-foot depth change in character from sandy at Tube A to clay-rich . at Tube C. -' Wetting front arrival times interpreted from these data are shown on a cross section of the site in Figure 8. Neutron monitoring positions are depicted as spheres'.' to 'schematically represent the sampling volume of the neutron moisture probe, and patterned to indicate approximate wetting front arrival times. Contours of wetting front arrival times graphically illustrate vadose zone transport pathways at the site. The monitoring revealed complex vadose zone transport processes including the presence of sharp fronts, gradual fronts, and hydrodynamic waves in which saturation builds up at the wetting front and dissipates after it passes. It is concluded that vadose zone flow at the site is complex, characterized by rapid lateral trans- Probe Access LowerTube A Probe Access 'Lower Tube C 0.80 0.8o 0.70 .. 0.70 0.80 } / ~ ~ 0.~0 ~- 0.ss, g , , , 0.55 , , -: -, Period of Injection (Hours) Period o! Injection (Hours) · 54.3 ~ 55.8 ~ 58.3 o 60.3 .~ 61.8 -~ 67.8 Figure 7. Count ratios vs. time at six depths in two ~'ells during soil flushing pilot study. Summer 1992 GWMR 185 C,'oll S,l~lon ol · PofllQ~ ol ~QII pllOI St~lCly --~ Wenlng Front Arrlvsl Times (Hours) 0 ~ rear. cS ~ng cour~ N s~'y Figure 8. Cross section showing contoured wetting front arrival times interpreted from neutron data. port in saturated pulses through discontinuous sandy horizons. Specific transport pathways have been identi- fied using the neutron moisture probe data. Case 3: Long-Term Landfill Monitoring Strategies One of the most promising applications for neutron moisture monitoring is at waste facilities where monitor- ing of horizontal access tubes beneath the facilities can ¢:.etect incip!ent liner failure before ground water is impacted. Advantages pointed out by Kramer et al. (1990c and 1991) are the low cost per sampling event, high precision, and kigh sampling density. Automation poss!bilities can systemize the monitoring task, eliminat- ing human error and providing consistently high-quality data through post-closure phases. Figure 5 shows four neutron logs from a 2000-foot long access tube beneath the leachate collection system of a municipal landfill. Several anomalous neutron data peaks indicate moisture anomalies developed between the second and third logs. The anomaly at 988 feet is a very sharp spike representing a moisture increase over less than 9 feet of the tube. An associated smaller ano- maly occurs at 1083 feet. A second major moisture ano- maly at approximately 70 feet is also apparent. Both major anomalies are related to surface water drainage and operational practices at the landfill and probably do not represent leachate leaks. However, they serve to demonstrate the sensitivity of the system to possible leachate leaks, particularly the ability of moisture logs to pinpoint a potential problem area. An interesting aspect of this set of data is the extraor- dinarily high count numbers which exceed the standard counts for the same probe access tube configuration in a 55-gallon drum of water. These high counts can only be recreated by partially submerging the neutron probe in a puddle of water, therefore this discrepancy is tenta- tively explained by the presence of water in the pipe itself, which was perforated in order to collect gas sam- ples. Proof will come with confirmatory liquid sampling by remote suction lysimeter. The lysimeter will only be able to collect a liquid sample if there is a puddle in the 186 Summer 1992 GWMR pipe which contacd~the ceramic cup in the lysimete: The sample will a~serve to confirm the presence ~ r absence of leachate at this location. Conclusions Innovative applications of the neutron moisture probe to vadose zone monitoring problems are on the rise. It is fast becoming an important component of the geoscientist's toolbox because it can provide high-qual- ity data at relatively low cost. We have provided information on the theory of neutron moderation, and on issues of data collection that will aid potential users. We have demonstrated its application to characterize stratigraphic variability, to identify induced vadose zone flow at a soil flushing pilot project, and as a long-term monitoring strategy at waste facilities. Acknowledgements This work was supported by EPA Cooperative Agreement CR 816969-01-0 between the Environ- mental Systems Monitoring Laboratory-Las Vegas, Project Officer Lawrence Eccles, and the Institute for Crustal Studies at the University of California Santa Barbara, contribution # 0090-23I-IW. References Brose, R..f. and R.W. Shatz. 1986. Neutron monitoring in the unsaturated zone. First National Outdoor Action Conference on Aquifer' Restoration, Ground Water Monitoring and Geophysical Methods. NWWA, Dublin, Ohio, pp. 455-467. CPN Corporation. 1978. Operator's Manual, 503 Hydroprobe Moisture Depth Gauge, Martinez, Cali- fornia. Cullen, S_I., W.E Allmon, and B.K.'Keller. '1991. China Grade Sanitary Landfill: Vadose Zone Monitoring Program. Report to County of Kern, Department of Public Works. Metcalf and Eddy, Inc., Santa Barbara, California. Everett, L.G., 1980. Groundwater Monitoring. General Electric Company Publishing Corp., New York, New York. Everett, L.G., 1985. Vadose Zone Monitoring Designs for Six Landfills in Los Angeles County, Los Angeles County Sanitation Districts, Kaman Tempo. Everett, L.G., L.A. Eccles, and D.A. Blakely. 1990. Neu- tron moderation applications to hydrocarbon site risk assessment, monitoring and remediation. First USA/ USSR Joint Conference On Environmental Hydrol- ogy and Hydrogeology, Leningrad, U.S.S.R. Everett, L.G., E.W. Hoylman, and L.G. Wilson. 1984. Vadose Zone Monitoring for Hazardous Waste Sites. Noyes Data Corp., Park Ridge, New Jersey. 358 pp. Gardner, W.H. 1965. Water contents. In: Methods of Soil Analysis, Part I, C.A. Black (ed.), Agronomy Monograph No. 9, Am. Soc. Agron., Madison, Wi~., pp. 82-127. Greacen, E.L. (ed). 1981. Soil Water Assessment by the Neutron Method. Division of Soils CSIRO, Adelaide, Australia. 140 pp. Hammermeister, D.E, C.R. Kneiblher, and J.Klenke. 1985. Borehole-calibration methods used in cased and uncased test holes to determine moisture profiles in the unsaturated zone. Yu~¥1ountain. NV. In Proceedings of the NWWA Conf~-rence on Character. ization and Monitoring of the Vadose (Ur~aturated) ~.orte. Denver, Colorado. Hargis and Montgomery, 1983. Results of Construction and Testing of Neutron Logging System Hughes Air- craft Co. Manufacturing Facility, Tucson, Arizona. Rep6rt to Hughes Aircraft Corp.. Tucson, Arizona. I-!olland, D.A. 1969. The construction of calibration curves for determining' soil moisture content from radiation counts. J. Soil ScL 20, pp. 132-140. Keller, B.R., L.G. Everett, and R.J. Marks. 1990. Effects of access tube material and grout on neutron probe measurements in the vadose zone. Groundwater Monitoring Review, v. 10, no. 1, pp. 96-100. Keys, W.S. and L.M. MacCary. 1983. Application of borehole geophysics to water-resources investiga- tions, Book 2 Chapter E1 in: Techniques of Water Resources Investigations, U. S. Geological Survey.' Kramer, J.H., L.G. Everett, and L.A. Eccles. 1990a. Effects of well construction materials on neutron probe readings with implications for vadose zone monitoring strategies. In: Ground Water Manage- ment, Number 2, NWWA, Dublin, Ohio, pp.1303- 1317. Kramer, J.H., L.G. Everett, L.A. Eccles, and D.A. Blakely. 1990b. Contamination investigations using neutron moderation in grouted holes: A cost-effec- tive technique. In: Minimizing Risk to the Hydrologic Environmerit. Alexander Zporozee, Ed., Kendall/ Hunt Publishing Co., Dubuque, Iowa, pp. 234-242. Kramer, J.H., L.G. Everett. 1990c. Proactive Post-Clo- sure Vadose Zone Monitoring Strategy Using Neu- trofi Logs, in Project Earth -- Meeting the Demands GRCDA, Silver Spring, Maryland. Schneider, G.W. and J.P. Greenhouse. 1992. Geophysical detection of perchlorethylene in a sandy aquifer using resistivity and nuclear logging techniques. In: Pro- ceedings SAGEEP, Chicago, April 26-28. Silvestri, V., G. Sarkis, N. Bekkouche, M. Soulie, and C. Tabib. 1991. Laboratory and field calibration of a neutron depth moisture gauge for use in high water content soils. Geotechnical Testing Journal, ASTM, pp. 64-70. Sinclair, D.F. and J. Williams. 1979. Components of vari- ance involved in estimating soil water content and water content change using a neutron moisture meter. Au. st. J. Soil Res. 17, pp. 237-70. Tyler, S. 1985. Moisture monitoring in large diameter boreholes. In Proceedings of Conference on Charac- terization and Monitoring of the (Unsaturated) Vadose Zone, NWWA, Dublin, Ohio. Tyler, S. 1988. Neutron moisture meter calibration in large diameter boreholes. Soil ScL Soc. Am., v. 52, p. 890. Tcasdale, W.E. and A.I. Johnson. 1970. Evaluation of Installation Methods for Neutron-Meter Access Tubes. U.S. Geol. Survey Prof. Paper 700-C C237- Unruh, M.E., C. Corey, and J.M. Robertson. 1990. Vadose zone monitoring by fast neutron thermaliza- tion (neutron probe): A 2-year case study. In: Ground Water Manag~nt. Number 2, NWWA, Dublin, Ohio. pp. 431-444, 1303-1317. U.S. EPA. 1989. Statistical Analysis of Ground Water Monitoring Data at RCRA (Resource Conservation and Recovery Act) Facilities: Interim Final Guidance Document. U.S. Dept. of Commerce, NTIS# PB89- 151047. van Bevel. C.H.M. 1963. Neutron scattering measure- ments of soil moisture: Development and current status. Proc. Int. Syrup. Humidity and Moisture, Washington, D.C., pp. 171-184. Welex. 1978. Neutron Logging. A Haliburton Co., Hous- ton, Texas. Biographical Sketches John H. Kramer is a California Registered Geolo- gist andstaff researcher at the Vadose Zone Monitoring Laboratory at the University of California at Santa Barbara where he is an interdisciplinary Ph.D. candi- date in the Departments of Geology, Geography, and Mechanical and Environmental Engineering (Vadose Zone Monitoring Laboratory, Institute for Crustal Studies, UCSB, CA 93106-1100). His thesis is titled 'tA Vadose Zone Monitoring Strategy Using Neutron Logging." Kramer has been invited to present talks on hydrogeologic parameters and instrumentation per- tinent to vadose zone monitoring by the California State Water Resources Control Board, The Department of Energy Rocky Flats Clean-up Project, The Bureau of Reclamation Vandenberg AFB UST Project, and Innovations '91 Series. He has recently published mate- rial on the effects of well grout on neutron probe meas- urements and innovative vadose zone. monitoring strategies at landfills. Stephen (Steve) J. Cullen is research soil hydrologist and manager of the Vadose Zone Monitoring Labora- tory at the University of California at Santa Barbara (Vadose Zone Monitoring Laboratory, Institute for Crustal Studies, UCSB, CA 93106-1100). He is also a Certified Professional Soil Scientisa Cullen has presented and authored papers on techniques and instrumentation used for vadose zone monitoring and modeling and holds several patents on devices of his own invention. His current interests include develop- ment of a systematic approach to designing comprehen- sive vadose zone monitoring networks, writing national guidelines for vadose zone monitoring at hazardous waste sites, and Geographic Information Systems (GIS) applications at large UST investigations. Dr. Lorne G. Everett is director of the Vadose Zone Monitoring Laboratory at UCSB and chief scientist for Metcalf and Eddy Int' in Santa Barbara (816 State St., Ste. 500, Santa Barbara, CA 93101). In addition to authoring more than 80 professional papers, Everett is the author of the handbooks "Groundwater Monitor- ing'' and "Vadose Zone Monitoring at Hazardous Waste Sites. "Everett is the principal author of the book Establishment of Water Quality Monitoring Programs and the national guideline document "Unsaturated Zone Monitoring at Hazardous Waste Land Treatment Units." His recent book, published in I990, is titled Subsurface Migration of Hazardous Wastes. Summer 1992 GWMR 187 Attachment A WATER QUALITY CONTROL PLAN SOILREM CORPORATION, INC. WATER QUALITY ISSUES Groundwater near the proposed site is approximately 30 feet below the ground surface. Groundwater quality in the area is generally good, with an average specific electrical conductivity of approximately 1300 gmho/cm. Soils in the area are classified as moderately permeable. Beneficial uses of groundwater near the proposed site include municipal and domestic supply, agricultural supply, and industrial process and service supply. Average annual precipitation in the area of the proposed site is approximately 6.1 inches and annual pan evaporation is approximately 63 inches. The 1000-year, 24-hour precipitation event is estimated to be 2.79 inches. The site is not within the 100-year flood plain. Prior to treatment, hydrocarbon contaminated soil contains soluble constituents which could migrate to groundwater under ambient conditions at this site. Therefore, the contaminated soil is classified as 'designated' waste, regulated by the California Code of Regulations (CCR), Title 27, Section 20080, et seq. (Title 27). Following treatment, the soil may still be classified as a designated waste if it retains any soluble constituents which could migrate to groundwater. Any material, treated or not, which has mobile constituents that may threaten water quality must be stored on a lined waste management unit that meets Title 27 requirements. Title 27 contains siting and construction standards, and performance goals to protect water quality and prevent public nuisances. Therefore, this section of the Facility Compliance Plan implements Title 27. A special order adopted by the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) at a public meeting, orders compliance with this section entitled "Water Quality Control Plan" of the Facility Compliance Plan; witl~ the California Code of Regulations, Title 27, Section 20050 et. seq. (hereafter Title 27); and with the Standard Provisions and Reporting Requirements dated August 1997. Failure to comply with this section of the Facility Compliance Plan, with Title 27, or with the "Standard Provisions and Reporting Requirements" (Attachment B), constitutes noncompliance with the RWQCB special order and the California Water Code, which can result in the imposition of civil monetary liability. 'Discharge' is defined as the intentional or accidental spilling, leaking, pumping, pouring, emitting, emptying, dumping or storing of any waste material at the Soilrem facility. DISCHARGE PROHIBITIONS The following discharges are prohibited: The acceptance, treatment, or discharge of 'hazardous waste'. For the purposes of this Facility Compliance Plan, the term 'hazardous waste' is as defined in CCR, Title 22. The acceptance, treatment, or discharge of liquid waste; or the recycling of liquid waste at the facility for any purpose. The discharge of semi-solid waste (i.e., waste containing less than 50 percent solids) or solid waste containing free liquid or moisture in excess of the waste's moisture holding capacity. Attachment A The discharge of waste containing halogenated organic compounds or hazardous concentrations of any constituents. The discharge of liquid to any waste management unit, other than the minimum amount of clean water necessary for dust control. The discharge of solid waste, liquid waste, or leachate to surface waters, surface water drainage courses, or ground water. The discharge of waste or waste constituents to natural geologic materials, ground water, or surface water. 7. The discharge of treated or untreated soil within 100 feet of surface waters. o The accumulation of wastes or materials which have the potential to reduce or impair the integrity of containment structures or which, if commingled with other wastes in the unit, could produce violent reaction, heat or pressure, fire or explosion, toxic by-products, or reaction products, which, in turn: a) b) require a higher level of containment than provided by the unit; or impair the integrity of containment structures. o The discharge shall not cause any increase in the concentration of waste constituents in soil or other geologic materials outside of the waste management unit if such constituents could migrate to waters of the State and cause a condition of pollution or nuisance. DISCHARGE SPECIFICATIONS Only soil contaminated with crude oil, mineral oils, lubricating oils and greases, and fuel oils shall be accepted. Tank bottoms, generated exclusively from the storage of crude oil may be accepted. No waste containing halogenated organic compounds or hazardous concentrations of any constituents shall be accepted at the site. Incoming material shall only be discharged into, and shall be confined to a certified Class II waste management unit, which includes a liner, leachate collection and removal system (LCRS), and appropriate monitoring in accordance with CCR, Title 27. 3. Not more than 20,000 cubic yards of untreated material shall be present at the facility at any time. Treated material shall be stored within a certified Class II waste management unit until analysis of representative samples by a certified laboratory demonstrates that concentrations are below the following: Required Soil Treatment Levels 10 mg/kg TPH as Gasoline 100 mgJkg TPH as Diesel 0.1 mg/kg Benzene 0.1 mg/kg Toluene ,,Attachment A 3 0.5 mg/kg 0.5 mg/kg 0.5 mg/kg Ethylbenzene Xylenes Methyl tert-butyl ether (MTBE) A representative sample shall consist of one composite (four independent samples) sample per 500 cubic yards of material. o Any on-site or off-site storage, disposal, or reuse of material incorporating either contaminated or treated soils and any discharge of residual wastes from the recycling of contaminated soils shall be according to the requirements of CCR, Title 27, in a manner which is consistent with the waste's classification. 10. 11. Neither the treatment, storage, nor discharge of wastes shall cause a pollution or nuisance as defined by the California Water Code, § 13050. Soilrem shall control access to the facility at all times by a permanent fence and locking access gate(s). Waste Management Unit Construction Soilrem shall comply with the applicable provisions of CCR, Title 27 regarding all aspects of construction. Containment structures shall be designed by, and construction supervised by a registered civil engineer or certified engineering geologist. a) b) Prior to construction of any waste management unit, Soilrem shall submit the final design plans and specifications, and a Quality Assurance/Quality Control plan for RWQCB Executive Officer approval. Following construction, and prior to acceptance of waste, Soilrem shall submit a construction Quality Assurance/Quality Control documentation report for review and approval by the RWQCB Executive Officer. The construction specifications, the Quality Assurance/Quality Control plan, and the Quality Assurance/Quality Control documentation report shall include a certification signed by a registered civil engineer and/or certified engineering geologist stating that they are familiar with the requirements of Title 27 and that the design or construction is in compliance with those requirements and the approved design plans and specifications. Liner design is subject to change so long as the liner system provides equal or greater protection of water quality and if the design is approved by the RWQCB Executive Officer. Precipitation And Drainage Controls Facility precipitation and drainage control systems shall be designed and constructed to accommodate the anticipated volume of precipitation and peak flows from surface runoff under 1000-year, 24-hour precipitation conditions. Surface drainage from tributary areas and internal site drainage from surface or subsurface sources shall not contact or percolate through wastes. Attachment A 4 12. 13. 14. 15. 16. Monitoring Prior to acceptance of waste, Soilrem shall submit a proposed Unsaturated Zone Monitoring Plan for review and approval by the RWQCB Executive Officer. The proposed monitoring plan shall include a proposed method for determining whether moisture from the waste management unit has infiltrated the unsaturated zone beneath the unit. Prior to acceptance of waste, Soilrem shall submit a proposed Groundwater Monitoring Plan for review and approval by the RWQCB Executive Officer. The proposed monitoring plan shall include sampling and analysis procedures, and well construction details in accordance with CCR, Title 27. The proposed plan shall include hydrogeologic characterization of the subsurface beneath the facility. If appropriate, the proposed monitoring plan shall include a demonstration that the groundwater aquifer(s) beneath the Soilrem site and the adjacent former CleanSoils site are interconnected and that groundwater quality data from the CleanSoils site is suitable as background data for the Soilrem site. The proposed monitoring plan shall include a proposed statistical method for calculating concentrations limits for naturallyoccurring constituents of concern. Soilrem shall comply with the applicable provisions of CCR, Title 27 regarding all aspects of monitoring. Monitoring systems shall be designed by a registered civil engineer or registered geologist. The proposed unsaturated zone and groundwater monitoring plans shall include certifications signed by a registered civil engineer and/or registered geologist stating that they are familiar with the requirements of Title 27 and that the monitoring plans are in compliance with those requirements. Prior to acceptance of waste, Soilrem shall submit to the RWQCB Executive Officer for review and approval a report describing a periodic load-checking program to be implemented. The load- checking program shall be adequately designed to ensure that 'hazardous wastes' are not accepted or discharged to the waste management unit. This program shall include but not be limited to: a) b) c) d) e) g) Number of random loads to be checked per month. Chemical/physical testing methods for screening waste. Training program for on-site personnel. Record keeping and reporting program. Program implementation schedule. Posting of signs at facility. Disposal alternatives for waste found to be in noncompliance with this Facility Compliance Plan. Soilrem shall maintain legible records of the volume and type of each waste accepted by the facility. The records shall be available for review by representatives of the RWQCB and of the State Water Resources Control Board at any time during normal business hours. These records shall contain analytical data necessary to characterize the waste as nonhazardous and allow an independent auditor to determine whether the accepted waste is nonhazardous in accordance with both state and federal criteria. Records shall be maintained at the facility until the beginning of the post-closure maintenance period. At closure, copies of these records shall be sent to the RWQCB. Attachment A 5 17. Soilrem shall comply with the MONITORING AND REPORTING REQUIREMENTS section, beginning on page 7 of this section of the Facility Compliance Plan. Closure 18. At closure, all residual wastes, liner materials and adjacent natural geologic materials contaminated by wastes, shall be completely removed and discharged to an appropriate waste management unit at a permitted .waste disposal facility. Financial Assurance 19. Pursuant to Title 27, Soilrem shall obtain and maintain assurances of financial responsibility for initiating and completing corrective action for all known or reasonably foreseeable releases from the contaminated soil storage and/or treatment units. Prior to acceptance of waste, Soilrem shall submit a proposed financial assurance mechanism in accordance with CCR, Title 27, for RWQCB Executive Officer review and approval. The approved financial document shall be reviewed annually and revised as necessary. A report demonstrating the adequacy of the financial assurance mechanism shall be submitted to the RWQCB by 31 January of each year. 20. Pursuant to Title 27, Soilrem shall obtain and maintain assurances of financial responsibility for initiating and completing closure and post-closure maintenance of the contaminated soil storage and/or treatment units. Prior to acceptance of waste, Soilrem shall submit a proposed plan and proposed financial assurance mechanism in accordance with CCR, Title 27 for RWQCB Executive Officer review and approval. The plan must include: a) b) c) an estimate of closure and post-closure maintenance costs, a proposal for a trust fund or equivalent financial arrangement to provide sufficient funding for closure and post-closure maintenance, and the amount to be deposited in the trust fund or equivalent financial arrangement each year. This plan shall be prepared by a registered civil engineer or a certified engineering geologist. A report demonstrating the adequacy of the financial assurance mechanism shall be submitted to the RWQCB by 31 January of each year. DISCHARGE PROVISIONS 1. Soilrem may be required to submit technical reports as directed by the RWQCB Executive Officer. Soilrem shall comply with those applicable sections of the "Standard Provisions and Reporting Requirements for Waste Discharge Requirements" dated August 1997 (Attachment B), which are attached to, and by reference a part of this Facility Compliance Plan. This section of the Facility Compliance Plan does not authorize violation of any federal, state, or local laws or regulations. Attachment A 4. 6 Soilrem shall noti e RWQCB Executive Officer in writing of any proposed change in ownership or responsibility for construction or operation of the facility. This notification shall be given 90 days prior to the effective date of the change. In the event of any change in ownership, Soilrem shall notify the succeeding owner or operator in writing of the existence of this Facility Compliance Plan. A copy of that notification shall simultaneously be sent to the RWQCB. The post-closure maintenance period of the site shall continue until the RWQCB determines that the closed waste management unit(s) will not threaten water quality. Soilrem shall maintain a complete copy of this section of the final Facility Compliance Plan at the facility and make it available at all times to facility operating personnel, who shall be familiar with its contents, and to regulatory agency personnel upon request. o Soilrem shall immediately notify the RWQCB Executive Officer of any flooding, equipment failure, slope failure, or other change in site conditions which could impair the integrity of waste containment facilities or precipitation and drainage control structures. o Soilrem shall remove to an appropriate waste management unit or other appropriately permitted facility, any wastes that are discharged at this site in violation of this section of the Facility Compliance Plan. The owner of the waste management facility shall have the continuing responsibility to assure protection of waters from discharged wastes and from gases and leachate generated by discharged waste during the active life, closure, and post-closure maintenance period of the waste management unit and during subsequent use of the property for other purposes. 10. Soilrem shall comply with all applicable provisions of CCR, Title 27 that are not specifically referred to in this Facility Compliance Plan. 11. Soilrem shall review this Facility Compliance Plan periodically and revise it when necessary to insure compliance with current State laws, regulations, and statutes. Attachment A - MONITORING AND REPORTING REQUIREMENTS The following reports are to be submitted to the RWQCB at the frequencies listed below: Report Due 1. Incoming Waste Monitoring Quarterly 2. Post-treatment Monitoring Quarterly 3. Leachate Collection and Removal System Quarterly 4. Unsaturated Zone Monitoring Quarterly 5. Groundwater Monitoring Quarterly 6. Facility Monitoring a.) Facility Inspection Certification b.) Storm Event Inspection Annually When required 7. Annual Monitoring Summary Report (Standard Provisions and Reporting Requirements) Annually REPORTING Soilrem shall report monitoring data and information as required in this Monitoring and Reporting Requirements section and as required by appropriate sections of the Standard Provisions and Reporting Requirements. Reports that do not comply with the required format will be REJECTED and Soilrem shall be deemed to be in noncompliance. In reporting the monitoring data required by this section, Soilrem shall arrange the data in tabular form so that the date, the constituents, the concentrations, and the units are readily discernible. MONITORING 1. Incoming Waste Monitoring The generator shall submit, or Soilrem shall provide, documentation that demonstrates that the waste is not a hazardous waste, pursuant to 22 CCR, Section 66262.11. Any chemical analyses used in the determination shall be performed as required by Water Code Section 13176 and Health and Safety Code Section 100825. Records shall be maintained on site and be detailed such that an independent auditor can verify that the waste is not hazardous. Soilrem shall report on a quarterly basis, the waste type(s), quantity of waste, source, major pollutants, and range of concentrations for each lot of waste accepted at the facility. Attachment A Analytical methods for waste accepted at the facility are as follows: Parameter/Constituent Amount of incoming soil Generator Name, Address, Phone Numbers, Contact Person For known gasoline contaminated soil: TPH-Gasoline BTEX and MTBE Total lead ** For known diesel, virgin oil or crude oil contaminated soil: TPH-Diesel/Oil BTEX For all other contaminated soil: TPH-Gasoline TPH-Diesel/Oil Volatile Organic Compounds, incl. MTBE Semi-volatile Organic Compounds Total cadmium, chromium, lead, mercury, nickel, and zinc ** Aquatic 96-hour Static Bioassay required for all soil if: TPH-Gasoline is greater than 5900 mg/kg, or TPH-Diesel is greater than 20,000 rog/kg, or TPH-Oil is greater than 10,000 mg/kg Analytical Method * Reporting Units Cubic Yards or Tons EPA 5030/8015M mg/kg EPA 8020 mg/kg EPA 7421 mg/kg EPA 3550/8015M mg/kg EPA 8020 mg/kg EPA 5030/8015M mg/kg EPA 3550/8015M mg/kg EPA 8240 or 8260 mg/kg EPA 8270 mg/kg EPA 6010, 7421, mg/kg 7470 EPA 5030/8015M LC50 EPA 3550/8015M LC50 EPA3550/8015M LC50 * Other approved analytical methods may be proposed if they provide equal or greater accuracy or precision. ** If the total concentration for any constituent exceeds ten times the STLC, then the extractable concentration shall be determined using the WET procedure, as per Title 22, CCR, Appendix II of Chapter 18, Division 4.5. Based on the source or type of waste, analysis for additional parameters or constituents may be needed to fully characterize the waste and to demonstrate whether it is nonhazardous. Soilrem is responsible for ensuring that such analyses are performed when necessary prior to acceptance of the material at this facility. Attachment A 2. Post Treatment Monitoring Soilrem shall monitor the treated soil and/or recycled soil material prior to storage on-site or reuse off-site and shall report the location and volume of the recycled material quarterly. Treated soil and/or recycled material shall be analyzed at the minimum frequency of one composite (four independent samples) sample per 500 cubic yards. Minimum analytical and reporting requirements for confirming the residual levels of constituents remaining subsequent to treatment shall be as follows: Parameter/Constituent Amount of treated soil Recipient's Name, Address, Phone Numbers, Contact Person TPH-Gasoline TPH-Diesel BTEX, MTBE Analytical Method * Reporting Units Cubic Yards or Tons EPA 5030/8015M mg/kg EPA 3550/8015M mg/kg EPA 8020 mg/kg * Other approved analytical methods may be proposed if they provide equal or greater accuracy or precision. Based on the proposed final location,' treated soil and/or recycled soil material which is determined by analyses to be at or below the treatment standards specified in Discharge Specification 4 may NOT be appropriate for some uses. Soilrem shall inform anyone receiving treated soil and/or recycled soil material of the concentrations (or possible maximum concentrations) of all contaminants potentially remaining in the material, and that the material must be reused in compliance with all applicable regulations and in a manner protective of human health and the environment at the location of its reuse. 3. Leachate Collection and Removal System The leachate collection and removal system (LCRS) shall be monitored as described below. The depth of liquid in the LCRS shall be determined at least monthly. Liquid shall be removed from the LCRS monthly, or whenever the depth of liquid exceeds 12 inches. The average daily quantity of liquid removed shall be calculated and reported in gallons per acre per day. The first time liquid is removed from the LCRS, and annually thereafter, a sample of the liquid shall be analyzed for the constituents listed below. The results of LCRS monitoring shall be reported quarterly. Parameter/Constituent Liquid Level Total Quantity of Liquid Removed TPH-Gasoline TPH-Diesel/Oil Analytical Method * EPA 5030/8015M EPA 3550/8015M Reporting Units Inches gal/acre/day ~g/l (or mgfl) I~g/1 (or mg/l) Attachment A Parameter/Constituent Volatile Organic Compounds, incl. MTBE Semi-volatile Organic Compounds Soluble cadmium, chromium, lead, mercury, nickel, and zinc Analytical Method * EPA 8240 or 8260 EPA 8270 EPA 6010, 7421, 7470 Reporting Units gg/l (or rog/l) p.g/I (or mg/l) I~g/l (or mg/l) 10 * Other approved analytical methods may be proposed if they provide equal or greater accuracy or precision. 4. Unsaturated Zone Monitoring Soilrem shall monitor the unsaturated zone beneath all waste management units containing material having constituents which may pose a threat to water quality. Unsaturated zone monitoring shall be conducted in accordance with the approved monitoring plan required by Discharge Specification I I. 5. Groundwater Monitoring Soilrem shall monitor groundwater beneath all waste management units containing material having soluble constituents which may pose a threat to water quality. Groundwater monitoring shall be in accordance with the approved monitoring plan required by Specification 12. For each waste management unit, the water quality protection standard consists of a list of constituents of concern and monitoring parameters, concentration limits for each constituent of concern, the point of compliance, and all monitoring points. The compliance period is the minimum period during which Soilrem shall conduct water quality monitoring subsequent to a release. Constituents of Concern Constituents of concern are the waste constituents and reaction by-products of waste disposal that are reasonably expected to be in or derived from waste contained in the waste management unit. The constituents of concern for all waste management units at the facility are those listed in Table I. Monitoring Parameters Monitoring parameters are the waste constituents, reaction by-products of waste disposal, and physical parameters that provide a reliable indication of a release from a waste management unit. The monitoring parameters for all waste management units at the facility are those listed in Table 2. Concentration Limits The concentration limits for each constituent of concern are as follows: ao for naturally occurring constituents of concern, the concentration limits shall be the calculated statistical concentration limits based on samples from approved background monitoring points; Attachment A 1 ! b. for anthropogenic (not naturally occurring) constituents, the concentration limits shall be the Estimated Quantitation Limits shown in Table 1. Point of Compliance The point of compliance for each waste management unit is the vertical surface located at the hydraulically downgradient limit of the waste management unit that extends through the uppermost aquifer underlying the unit. Groundwater Detection Monitoring Points The Points of Compliance for groundwater detection monitoring are the approved monitoring wells, based on the approved monitoring plan required by Discharge Specification 12. Compliance Period The compliance period for each waste management unit shall be the number of years equal to the active life of the waste management unit plus the closure period. The compliance period is the minimum period during which Soilrem shall conduct a water quality monitoring program subsequent to a release from the unit. The compliance period shall begin anew each time Soilrem initiates an evaluation monitoring program. Monitoring Soilrem shall collect, preserve, and transport groundwater samples according to the procedures and quality assurance/quality control standards contained in the approved monitoring plan required by Discharge Specification 12. Soilrem shall determine groundwater flow rate and direction, including the times of highest and lowest elevations of the water levels in the wells. All groundwater analytical results and groundwater flow rate calculations and direction determinations shall be reported to the RWQCB. Groundwater samples shall be collected from the point of compliance and any additional piezometers or wells added as part of the approved groundwater monitoring system. Samples shall be collected at the frequencies and analyzed for the constituents listed below. Constituent Constituents of Concern (Table l) Monitoring Parameters (Table 2) Monitoring Frequency Every 5 Years' Quarterly * Sampling shall alternate between the Summer and Winter sampling events. 6. Facility Monitoring a). Facility Inspection Annually, Soilrem shall submit written certification that the drainage control system, unsaturated zone monitoring equipment, groundwater monitoring equipment, fencing, and waste management unit liners have been inspected and any necessary repairs have been initiated. Attachment A b). Storm Events 12 Soilrem shall inspect all precipitation, diversion, and drainage facilities for damage periodically or following a precipitation event of 0.5 inches or more in a 24-hour period measured at the facility. Necessary repairs shall be implemented as soon as practicable. Soilrem shall report any damage and subsequent repairs within 30 days of completion of the repairs. Attachment A CONSTITUENTS OF CONCERN TABLE 1 13 Concentration Constituent Analytical Method * Limit Total dissolved solids (TDS) EPA 160. l TBD ** Chloride EPA 9250 TBD Sulfate EPA 9035 TBD Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons (TPH) as Gasoline EPA 5030/8015M 50 pg/l as Diesel/Oil EPA 3550/8015M 50 lug/1 Benzene EPA 8020 5 pg/l Toluene EPA 8020 5 pg/l Ethylbenzene EPA 8020 5 pg/l Xylenes (Total) EPA 8020 5 pg/l Methyl ten-butyl ether (MTBE) EPA 8020 5 lag/l Cadmium EPA 6010 TBD Chromium EPA 6010 TBD Lead EPA 7421 TBD Mercury EPA 7470 TBD Nickel EPA 6010 TBD Zinc EPA 6010 TBD * Other approved analytical methods may be proposed if they provide equal or greater accuracy or precision. ** TBD = To be determined, based on samples from background groundwater monitoring wells B A K E RSF'I E L D FIRE DEPARTMENT FAX Transmittal COMPANY: Office of Environmental Services FAX No. (805) 326-0576 · Bus No. (805) 326-3979 1715 Chester Ave. · Bakersfield, CA 93301 ....T...~_~_ .... ...R,._~ D.a.. A ~ ._ .~..q.. ~.?..s_,,.'_'...~ :~.o....~ _v....c..:........g...~.~ .;..~ ~.~. ~._..~.~...-c_ ~ ..... ~.s_ ~.__-p~_.-_ ....~.~.~ ....... ~..i.....~.~.t~.4~.~......~s~.~.~./ ........ ~.~ ........ ~.~.~.~c~......~.~.....~.. ~..v...,.~.~ ............... ................................... · .... g~ ..... ~.~?..,~:~., .................................................................................................................................................................................. Ch. 872 4 of an amendmer. Dr termination of a permit conso idation zone designation, shall be specified in the applications submitted pursuant to Section 71035.3. 71035.5. The facility compliance plan substituted pursuant to subdivision (b) of Section 71035.1 shall provide for all of the following: (a) Substitution of the plan for all individual state agency and local environmental permits that would otherwise be required for the proposed project, unless otherwise specified in the designation application submitted by the applicant city or county. (b) Measures to be taken by the project applicant to ensure compliance with all applicable rules, regulations, ordinances, and statutes and to ensure that the facility compliance plan is as enforceable as individual permits. (c) The equivalent opportunity for public notice, hearing, comment, participation, administrative appeal, and judicial review as provided in the environmental permit process that would otherwise be applicable. (d) All applicable individual environmental permits for the project to be deemed to have been issued upon receipt of a complete and adequate facility compliance plan by the secretary. (e) A filing fee to reflect the reasonable costs of all agencies that would otherwise issue individual permits for the project covered by the facility compliance plan, and that also reflects the reduced costs of the applicable agencies through reduced staff review of individual permits. Any fee shall be subject to Section 57001 of the Health and Safety Code. [The project applicant shall not be liable for any application fees for any individual permit that is otherwise addressed in the facility compliance plan. Local agencies shall identify and quantify any local fees in the application submitted pursuant to Section 71035.3. 71035.6. (a) Environmental agencies with jurisdiction over portions of the compliance plan shall determine if a compliance plan is complete and adequate, in accordance with this section, as it relates to their particular area of jurisdiction. (b) A determination of completeness and adequacy shall be based solely upon whether there is compliance with the rules, regulations, ordinances, and statutes governing the environmental agency. As part of the determination of adequacy, an environmental agency may require additional conditions necessary, in its judgment, to make the facility compliance plan consistent with its rules, regulations, ordinances, and statutes. (c) If an environmental agency possessed discretionary authority over a facility prior to the enactment of this .chapter, then the determination of completeness and adequacy shall be a discretionary action for purposes of the California Environmental Quality Act (Division 13 (commencing with Section 21000)). If, subsequent to the enactment of this chapter, an environmental agency, by Attachment A MONITORING PARAMETERS TABLE 2 14 Constituent Total dissolved solids (TDS) Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons (TPH) as Gasoline Benzene Toluene Ethylbenzene Xylenes (Total) Methyl tea-butyl ether (MTBE) Analytical Method * EPA 160. I Concentration Limit TBD ** EPA 5030/8015M 50 pg/l EPA 8020 5 lag/1 EPA 8020 5 gg/l EPA 8020 5 jig/1 EPA 8020 5 gg/l EPA 8020 5 lag/1 · * Other approved analytical methods may be proposed if they provide equal or greater accuracy or Precision. ** TBD = To be determined, based on samples from background groundwater monitoring wells. ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH SERVICES DEPARTMENT STEVE McCALLEY, R.E.H.S, Director 2700'M' STREET, SUITE 300 BAKERSFIELD. CA g330! Phone: (805) 862-8700 FAX:(805) 862-8701 MARCH 15, 1999 RESOURCE MANAGEMENT AGENCY DA VID PRICE III, RMA DIRECTOR Engineering & Survey ~e~l~m Department Envdrenmenlal HealthServlces Department Planning Department fload~ D®partmenl Dear Sir/Madam: This billing has been initiated for services rendered by our Solid Waste Program. As prescribed by County Ordinance, a fee of $75.00 per hour for extended services has been billed. Also, per Kern County Ordinance Code, Section 8.04.190, if this fee is not paid within 30 days after the billing date, a penalty equal to 50 percent of the fee will be assessed. Please see the enclosed invoice for specific activities performed and total charges accrued. If there are any questions, contact the Solid Waste Program. at (805) 862-8700. To assist us in responding to questions, refer to the Work Order Number in the description portion of the invoice. Thank you for your cooperation. Sincerely, Steve McCalley, Director BY: William' O'Rullian, R.E.H.S. Environmental Health Specialist IV Solid Waste Program Supervisor WO:jg Enclosure COUNTY OF KERN ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH SERVICES 2700 "M" STREET, SUITE 300 BAKERSFIELD, CALIFORNIA 93301 J805) 862-8700 INVOICE NUIVlBER: CUSTONER NO: 0148712-IN 01-ARNOLD6 COUNTY'S COPY PAGE: 1 ~ INVOICE DATE ~ 03/15/99 DUE DATE 4,~-_ 04/14/99 j--. ~--j . ['- AMOUNT DUE ARNOLD, JOHN 300.00 4404~ AXNZN ISTER . ":" ' "' .....'" " I LQSE · ' . · ~ ., - - :'"".AMOUNT ENC BAKERSFIELD CA 9330? .. ~. . L_ --} ' DESCRIPTION: E..q~50 =' 02/01/09-02/28/09 ':: PLEASE MAKE CHECK PAYABLE TO THE COUNTY OF KERN AND NOTE ANY CHANGES ON ORIGINAL INVOICE PLEASE RETURN ORIGINAL INVOICE WITH YOUR PAYMENT ' ' ...... ': :' I~ORK ORDER ~.q~50 SERVICE: '.02/01/99-. 02/28/99 .. SEE ATTACHED FOR DETAIL. !LINQUENT CHARGES ARE SuBjECT i:~) $0~TY PER KERN COUNTY ORDINANCE CODE 8.04.190. TOTAL AMOUNT DUE 300.00 ',COUNTS THAT ARE 120 DAYS PAST DUE MAY BE SENT TO COLLECTIONS. 03/25/99 11:59 ~805 326 0576 BFD HAZ MAT DIV ~001 *** ACTIVITY REPORT *** *************************** TRANSMISSION OK TX/RX NO. CONNECTION TEL CONNECTION ID START TIME USAGE TIME PAGES RESULT O956 19164456401 03/25 11:56 02'58 4 OK ENFORCEMENT AGENCY NOTIFICATION Operation Name: Address/Location: Phone Number:. Operator: Mailing Address: Phone Numben Land Owner: Mailing Address: Phone Numbcc Operation Information: Authorizing Eligibility (Section of 14 CCR, Division 7, Chaptcr 3 or 3.1):. Volume and Type of Wage/Material(s) Handled: Peak Loading: Annual Loading: Hours of Operation: Cubic Yards or Tons Cubic Yards or Tons I hereby certify under penalty of perjury that the information provided is true and accurate to the best of my knowledge and belief. Signature of Land Owner: Signature of Operator: Date: Date: Enforcement Agency Name and Address: Kern County Environmental Health Services Department 2700 "M" Street, Suite 300 Bakersfield, CA 93301 Completion of this form is not required by regulation; however, it will provide thc enforcement agency with thc information required by 14 CCR 18103.1 S22 COUNTY OF KERN ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH SERVICES 2700 "M" STREET, SUITE 300 BAKERSFIELD, CALIFORNIA 93301 (805) 862-8700 TNVO:[CE NUNI~ER: 0148712-]~N CUSTONER NO: CUSTOMERS COPY PAGE: 1 :f,~;!,.:INVOICEDATE>:'">: 03/15/99 PLEASE ~KE CHECK' PAYABLE T0 THE COUN~ O~ ~RN ~N.D~TE AN~..~H~N~$ 0~.~R!~.NAL.~N~I~E:-'. .;:.~: ~.:: .:.. ~.~ ..." :...:., ,.:- · . FEE I : ... .- ,..:.~"' -... .... '..:, - ...... .....' ..... .. ; ',::?..-.: .... . '.:'::.'-.. _ "'-, ...._ ..,-.,: ..,: :":"."-:".":' . ' "' . : ',~"..... ..:~'.' . DELINQUENT CHARGES ARE SUBJECT TO 50%,PENALTY PER KERN , :? '>: -, ~- COUNTY ORDINANCE'CODE 8.04.190. "' '"' "' . ' ' "". ~,CCOUNTS THAT ARE' 1'20 DAYS PAST DUE MAY BE SENT TO COLLECTIONS~ ., ..- . TOTAL .AMOUNT DUE 300.00 ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH SERVICES DEPARTMENT STEVE McCALLEY, 2700'M' STREET, SUITE 300 BAKERSFIELD, CA 93301 Phone: (COS) 8G2-8700 FAX: (805) 862.8701 R.E.H.S., Director MARCH 15, 1999 RESOURCE MANAGEMENT AGENCY. DA VID PRICE#I, RMA DIRECTOR Engineering & Survey Service. Department En~mnmentel HMIIh Sendce. Department Planning Department Road~ Department Dear Sir/Madam: This billing has been initiated for services rendered by our Solid Waste Program. As prescribed by County Ordinance, a fee of $75.00 per hour for extended services has been billed. Also, per Kern County Ordinance Code, Section 8.04.190, if this fee is not paid within 30 days after the billing date, a penalty equal to 50 percent of the fee will be assessed. Please see the enclosed invoice for specific activities performed and total charges accrued. If there are any questions, contact the Solid Waste Program. at (805) 862-8700. To assist us in responding to questions, refer to the Work Order Number in the description portion of ~he invoice. Thank you for your cooperation. Sincerely, Steve McCalley, Director BY: William O'Rullian, R.E,.H.S. Environmental Health Specialist IV Solid Waste Program Supervisor WO:jg Enclosure COUNTY OF KERN ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH SERVICES 2700 "M" STREET, SUITE 300 BAKERSFIELD, CALIFORNIA 9330! (805) 862-8700 INVOICE NUMBER CUSTOMER NO: 0148712-IN 01-ARNOLD6 COUNTY'S COPY PAGE: I .~ INVOICE DATE 03/15/99 DUE DATE ~ 04/14/99 AMOUNT DUE 300.00 ARNOLD, JOHN 4404 AXMINISTER ** ., '' BAKERSFIELD CA 93307 ~ L -J * DESCRIPTION: ES450 :' PLEASE MAKE CHECK PAYABLE TO THE COUNTY OF KERN AND NOTE ANY CHANGES ON ORIGINAL INVOICE· PLEASE RETURN ORIGINAL INVOICE WITH YOUR PAYMENT ...... ' ' , SWO01A 4?50 WORK ORD-SLD WST-C~R YR , WORK ORDER ES450 SERV[cE:".02/01/99'~ 02/28/99 SEE ATTACHED FOR DETAIL. ,ELINQUENT CHARGES ARE SUBJE~C"~ TO 50%/P.,ENALTY PER KERN COUNTY ORDINANCE CODE 8.04.190. ~ [ ~' ',AMOUNT ENCLQSED: 02/01/99-02228/99 300.~0- 300.00 TOTAL AMOUNT DUE CCOUNTS THAT ARE 120 DAYS PAST DUE MAY BE SENT TO COLLECTIONS. MAR 16 '99 12:26 FR CAL EPA TO 918058628801 P.01/02 l.~iceDixon, Smdcnt ~$ist~ for Chda~ ' C~om~ En~ronmcn~ ~ . ~55 C~i~l M~I ~c, S~ 525 : ~ Sa~cn~, CA ~5814 · 916-32~25 To: All Participants in thc Fax: Conference Call: rrmn: Aneice Dixon- On BehalfofCKDa~: Re: [] Urgent X For Review X Pluase Comment [] Hease Recycl Participants in the Conference Call are listed below: Guy Greenly Ralph Huey Suzanne Hambleton Betty Sanchez Gordon Inne$ Gary Murchinson Stephanie Nakao Pete RuggereIlo This is the revised copy of the MEMORANDUM- Agenda Conference Call for Permit Consolidation Zones seat on March 15, 1998. MEMORANDUM To: From: 5ubjecCc: All participants in the Conference Call Draft Agenda for 8am Conference Call on March 17, 1999 Please review the draft agenda below for Wednesday's Conference Call and send me your comments by FAX. My Fax number is (916) 445-6401. If you have any problems retrieving this fax or sending me a fax please call (916) 324-8425. 6ge. uda_C.o, ufe. r.e.n.c.e..Cal.l.t~or.. Permit Consolidation Zones on March 17,1999 · Con~munications: role of Permit Assistance Centers (PACe), Zone Administrators, Team, and the role of Cai/EPA in regards ~ general assistance (re: Agreements) Lead for notification/distribution of notices (re: Agreement) NOI Meetings/CEi2A Timeframes related to approvals (single FCP, but various requirements) · ?roblems/lesues that have arisen a~ Zone Administrator · Future Needs · 5oilRem Project · Questions/Answers from or to the Zone Administra~rs 8A K E RS FI E L D FIRE DEPARTMENT ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES 1715 Chester Ave. · Bakersfield, CA 9330 Business Phone (805) 326-3979 · FAX (805) 326-0576 FAX Transmittal COMPANY': FROM:I ,==~,/~.~.,.~'~ FAX No. i I COMMENTS: RECORD OF TELEPHONE CONVERSATION Location: ID# Business Name: Contact Name: Business Phone: Inspector's Name: Time of Call: Date: Time: ~ # Min: Type of Call: Incoming Outgoing [ ] Returned [ ] Actions Required: Time Required to Complete Activity # Min: ~S?70 PA~E: 1/i San Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution Control District Southern Region - 2700 "M" Street, Suite 275, Bakersfield, California 93301 Phone: (805) 862-5200 FAX: (805) 862-5201 FAX TRANSMITTAL SHEET To: Company: Fax #: # Pages: Date/Time: Howard Wines City of Bakersfield 326-0576 Friday, February 05, 1999 From: Steve Tomlin, Air Quality Engineer Message: Regarding Soil Rem Corporation: Title 27, Division 1, Chapter 4, Section 10412, part (a) (1) states that permit application fees (for the Facility Compliance Plan) shall be determined by each permitting authority and conveyed to the applicant in a single consolidated statement prepared by the Zone Adminstrator. SJVUAPCD permit application fees for Soil Rem Corporation will be $180 ($60 per permit unit x 3 permit units). This fee does not include annual operating permit fees. BAKERSFIELD FIRE DEPARTMENT FAX Transmittal to: ~ ~2~-~?~ COMPANY: ~'--)(~) ~-~"'~ FROM: FAX No: Office of Environmental Services FAX No. (805) 326-0576 · Bus No. (805) 326-3979 1715 Chester Ave. · Bakersfield, CA 93301 02/01/99 MON 08:29 FAX 7603798722 Walter Mortensen Ins. ~001 Walter Mortensen Insurance KERN RIVER VALLEY BRANCH PO Box2663, Lake Isabella, CA 93240 PHONE:(760) 379-4651 FAX: 379-8722 License # 0090267 FAX Pages: 3 TO: COMPANY: FAX #: DATE: 2/111999 Howard Wines Bakersfield Fire Department 805_326 0576 Number of FROM: Judy Dempsey PHONE: (760) 379-4651 FAX: (760) 379-8722 REGARDING: SoilRem Corporation Please see copy of quote from Swett & Crawford Brokers through United Capitol Insurance Co. Please note Mr. Arnold can have coverage bound upon payment of the required 25% deposit. Be advised I am still waitin~ for another quote which might be better than this. ..~jzaJ~offer t~ble to Mr. Arnold right now. /. ." R egar~s~. ~ ~...~y De~l~sey · ,~"Account Executive/Branch Manager However, this is Please note: The informafon contalned in this fax message is Intended on~ for the personal end conltdanEal use of the recipient(s) named above. If the reader of this message is not the Intended recipient or an agent responsible for deffve~tng It to the Intended recipient, you are hereby advised that you have received this document in error and that any review, ~ssemina#on. dlstlfbu#on or copying of this message is strictly prohibited. 02/01/99 MON 08:29 FA~ 7603798722 Wa~ter ~orCensen Ins. SENT 7UUUT~I~7ZZ;~ SWETT & CRAWFORD 515 $. Figueroa St.. Ste. 600 Los Angeles, CA 90071 Telephone: 213.439.3400 Facsimile: 213.439.3449 Calif. License #0532269 January 21, 1999 Ms. Judy Dempsey Waller Mortensen Insurance 5520 Lake Isabella Blvd. Lake Isabella, CA 9-3240 Fax#: 760.379.8722 RE: $ollRem corporation. We are pleased to provide you with our quotation in response to your submission. As the representative of the insured it is Incumbent upon you to review the terms of this quote carefully as the coverage, terms and conditions will often be different than those requested. Swett & Crowford Group and Its affiliated companies disclaim responsibility for your failure to reconcile the original submission with coverages quoted herein. CARRIER: United Capitol Insurance Company A-VI This company is a non-admitted carrier in California. In compliance with SB 1145, any policy bound e~fectlve January 1, 1993 or later will require the attached disclosure be signed/doled and returned pflor to binding COVERAGE: Commercial General Liabllily - Occurrence Form Contractors Pollution Liability - Claims Made Form Professlodal Uability - Claims Made Form Retroactive Date: Professional LiabliNy [Inception} LIMITS: $1,000,000 $2,000,000 $1,000,000 $1,000,000 $ so,aaa S 5,000 $~,0o0.00o $ ,o0o.ooo Each Occurrence General Aggregate Products/Completed Operations Per~ol"tol/Advertlslr~g Injury Fire Damage Medical Payments Professional Lloblll~ Each Occurrence Contractors Pollution Liability Each Occurrence 02/01/99 MON 06:30 F&~ 7603798722 -21-S8 wa~ter Morcen%" ins. 2:34FM ; $ & C - LA B~ICH~ .~ ~oo3 7608788722;# 2/ 8 DEDUCTIBLE: $2,500 per claim - Contractors Pollution Lial~liity $2,500 per claim - Professional Liability $2,500 per occurrence - All. Other Coverage Parts POLICY PERIOD: Annual RATE: Flat TERMS & CONDITIONS: Premium due within 30 days o1' binding. Attach Deductible Endf,, Nuclear Energy Liability Exclusion, Service of Suit, Earned Premium & Composite Rate Endt., Millennium Endt,, Aclditionai Insured-Owners, Lessees or Contractor~-Form B, Employment Relaled Practices, Testing or Consulting Errors & O_missions Exclusion. PREMIUM: SURPLUS LINES TAX: STAMPING FEE: $12,000.00 360.00 42.00 TOTAL: $12,402.00 Upon binding, 25% of the premium plus applicable taxes are fully retained, All other fees are 100% retained. This quote i~ valid l'or a period of 30 days. We look forward to receiving your written instructions and appreciate your Interest in our facility. Regards, Catrina Williams for Lori M. Hunter, Sr. Vice-Pres. ANNEX III.3.c OPERATIONS Objectives and targets A~ Specify that only non-hazardous petroleum contaminated soil will be accepted? Hydrocarbon contaminated soils meet RCRA standards B. Specify concentration limits on constituents of concern for soil acceptance? 10,000 PPM Gasoline 50,000 Diesel 100,000 Oil 250,000 Crude Oil C. Describe how litter, nuisances, dust, noise, or other impacts will be minimized? Site is designated as 7.3 Heavy Industrial Zone. This area is located in a remote area of the city with no-Residential housing within .5 miles. (see enclosed map for details) Discharge or release control A. Provide a liner and leachate collection and removal system: Soil Rem will install a 40 mil Liner 200X200 with monitoring leachate system. (see scale drawing for details) B. Alternate design, which provides an equivalent protection of water quality? N/A Assessment and monitoring A. Describe the monitoring and detection systems in use? Have permission from property owner to use former tenants (clean soils) monitoring well system. Leachate monitoring and collection system will be monitored every 30 days and all regulators will be provided copies. B. Describe any other steps used or needed to detect or monitor releases? N/A Containment A. Describe the mitigation systems in use to control air emissions? Use of chemical depri~ssant to knock down air emissions if necessary chemical name is Vapor Control B. Describe safeguards to prevent surface storm water run oft? Use of Burms in site area Recovery A. Upon completion of operation or termination of service, describe how: the operation grounds, excluding the disposal area, shall be cleaned of all contaminated soil, construction scraps, and other materials related to the operation, and these materials legally recycled, reused, or disposed oP. Dirt is cleaned Recycled and construction materials will be removed and properly disposed Decontamination A. All machinery shall be cleaned of contaminated soil? Company's SOP require equipment clean and maintenance to be performed daily B. All remaining structures shall be cleaned of contaminated soil? Structures adjacent to operations area would not be suscepmal to contaminated soil GARCIA TRUCKING, INC. Date: January i 7, 1999 To: Whom it may concern: P. oference: Monitoring w~lls on old cie. an soils site at: 905 E. White Lane. ! Tony Garcia $ivg Soil Rzm Corp the right, to monitor Clean Soils m°nitorir, g wells every 3 to 6 months at 905 E. White Lane this property is adjacent to 5oil Rem's Thank you. .i T FOR HyDROCAI~OH 1"0 ~ -' VIE. V,/ Clean,_' Als Pro PG%E Pole· i...' '.. i:. Yard./.-.'(: Fi}e Hydrant 02/04/99 11:49 '~805 326 0576 BFD HAZ MAT DIV *** ACTIVITY REPORT TRANSMISSION OK TX/RX NO. CONNECTION TEL CONNECTION ID START TIME USAGE TIME PAGES RESULT 0302 1559445591O 02/04 11:42 06'03 10 OK ~ 001 02/03/99 08:21 8805 326 0576 BFD HAZ MAT DIV ~001 *** ACTIVITY REPORT TRANSMISSION OK TX/RX NO. CONNECTION TEL CONNECTION ID START TIME USAGE TIME PAGES RESULT O277 02/03 08:18 02'24 4 OK 3974508 BAKERSFIELD FIRE DEPARTMENT FAX Transmittal TO: COMPANY: FROM: FAX No: ~c:/'7 - ,4._~<D :~ Office of Environmental Services FAX No. (805) 326-0576 · Bus No. (805) 326-3979 1715 Chester Ave. · Bakersfield, CA 93301 FEB-02-99 TUE 13:41 SJVUAPOD SO REGION FAX NO, 8058625201 P, 02/04 San Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution Control District February 2, 1999 Mr. Ralph Huey, Zone Administrator City of Bakersfield Permit Consolidation Zone Office of Environmental Services 1715 Chester Avenue Bakersfield, CA 93301 RE: Additional Questions for Soil Rem Corporation Dear Mr. Huey: The District is in receipt of the January 29, 1999 fax from Mr. Howard Wines regarding Soil Rem Corporation. Based on the fax, additional information is required in order to determine the applicability of various District rules and regulations to the Soil Rem proposal: 3 4 5 6 7 8 Please specify for what emissions the knock down agent is used for (e.g. VOC or PM 10) Specify what emission concentration would determine the use of a knock down agent and how often are emissions levels taken? Please provide MSDS chemical make up for knock down agent Specify maximum VOC concentration after treatment and immediately prior to release of material Response to question #10 did not include units of measure and did not answer the volume The active portion of the contaminated soil storage piles will assumed to be equal to the daily facility throughput unless otherwise specified. (The active portion is the portion that is uncovered and is actively being handled for processing.) Specify the average height of contaminated soil received and stored on site before processing Flow chart provided shows three "solids" drop out points, please indicate what these solids indicate and corresponding VOC concentration David I~ Crow Execul~ve Director/Air Pollution Control Od~cer l ~'9 TUolumne ,51reef. Sutle ;,ou. - ~-resno, CA 93721 * (209) 497- TO00 · FAX (209) 233-2057 Northern Region 4230 Kiernml Avenue. Suite 130 · Modesto, CA ~356 (209} 545-7000 · Fax {209) 545-8652 Central Region 1999 Tuotum~ Street, Suite L~30, Fresno, CA 93721 (209} 497.1000 · Fe~ (20~) 233.2057 Southern Region 2700 M Street, Suite 275. Bakersfield, CA 93301 {805) 862-5200. Fax (8~5} 862.5201 FEB-02-99 ?UE 13:42 SJVURPCD SO REGION FRX NO, 8058625201 P. 03/04 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 Specify what happens to oil product after initial oil/water separation indicated on flow chad (e.g. is oil stored on site?, is oil transferred off-site?, if so how?) Is flow chad incorrect? - there is no oil/water separation Specify what filters are used for in process (e.g. Are the filters used to filter oil or bio waste?, How and when are filters changed and disposed?, What are the associated emissions?) Because the flow chart provided does not indicate a bioreactor, please specify on the flow chad where the bioreactor fits into process Because you stipulate the system is closed loop, please indicate how oxygen for the bioreaction is provided and how off gassing is handled? Specify how treated soil/material is actively aerated (e,g. Are windrows physically turned or mixed?, Is air induced through venting?...etc.) Response to question #19 did not include maximum area for windrow storage or windrow dimensions (height and width) Specify what waste stream is sampled every 100 tons (e.g. after treatment or every 100 tons received) Thank you for your cooperation in this matter. Should you have any questions, please contact Mr. Steve Tomlin or Mr. Raymond Rodriguez of Permit Services at (805) 862-5200. Sincerely, Seyed Sadr~ Director~f Permit Set, ,din rmit Services ;off, P.E. 'ices Manager svt/rgr Enclosures SOIL .FEED weir overflow tank Initial oil/water separation ].j preScreenlng -1, ordinance separation I SPRAY BARS UPPER WASH solids sand screw DESILTER 5' CONES dews taring screens $olld$ ~ SPRAY BARS ® OIL/H20 SEP. FILTERS return water tank makeup water I-- leclanl floculent (~ t a nk s CENTRFUGES solid BYPASS dews taring flow screort solids STATIC MIXERS solid ~ I I TECHNOLOGIES V^LV~ pump solld~jj L'EGEND -iL .... SYSTEM FLOW DIAGRAM 0 0 z -r'J :3> X Z o CD CiD SJVU~POD SO REGION 8058625201 San Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution Control District P. 02/04 January 26, 1999 Mr. Ralph Huey, Zone Administrator City of Bakersfield Permit Consolidation Zone Office of Environmental Services 1715 Chester Avenue Bakersfield, CA 93301 RE: List of Questions for S°il Rem Corporation Dear Mr. Huey: Pursuant to your January 22, 199 meeting with Mr, Tom Goff, Mr. Raymond Rodriguez, and Mr. Steve Tomlin of the District's Permit Services Division, the following information must be obtained from Soil Rem Corporation in order to determine the applicability of various District rules and regulations: Receiving and Storage identification of all possible emission points in the process including a description .of all particulate PM10 and VOC emission control devices (e.g. enclosed conveyor;, enclosed screening, venting to fabric baghouse or venting to thermal oxidizer, vehicular emissions from driving on unpaved areas/roadways...etc.) identify all types of generators/sources of contaminated soil/material or liquid waste to be received and processed (e.g. gasoline and diesel from tank pulls or spills, heavy or light crude oil storage tank bottoms, gasoline contaminated water, car wash waste water, fabric laundry waste water.., etc.) specify maximum hourly, daily, and annual amounts of contaminated soil/material and liquid waste received (these will become permit limitations) specify maximum possible concentration of all 188 State Toxic Air Contaminants/EPA l~azardous Air Pollutants (see attached list) in soil/material or liquid waste as received (these will become permit limitations) describe how contaminated soil/material is received and stored (e.g. How high are drop points?, Are delivery trucks covered?, What am storage piles covered with?) David L Crow E. vecutiz,e Director/Air Pollution Cotttrol Of J~cer ;999 %:;~L..mne Sb'ee;. Su4e 200 o Cresno. C/, 93721 · f209) 497-10o0 * FAX {209) 233.2057 Northern Resion 4230 K~eman Avenue, Suite 130 ' Moaesto, CA 95355 (209) 545-7000 · Fax {20g) $45.86S2 Central Re~Jon Tu0tumne Street. Suite 200 ' Fresno, CA 93721 ¢97-1000 * Fax (20g~, 233-2057 Southeen Region 2700 M Street, Su4e 275 · Baket3st~elc: CA 53301 (805) 662-'~2gO - gm((80S) ~e~-E20l ~, JAN-28-99 THU 08:33 SJVU~POD SO REGION FAX NO. 8058625201 P. 03/04 Mr. Ralph Huey January 26, 1999 ' Page 2 6. specify maximum possible concentration of VOC's (see attached definition) in soil/material or liquid waste as received using EPA SW-846 test methods 7. describe proposed sampling plan and procedures specifying sampling frequenCy and methods for all materials received (these will become permit limits) describe how contaminated liquid waste is received and stored (e.g. How is it delivered?, Is it ever exposed to the open atmosphere?, How long is it stored on site?, What type of containers is it stored in? What is the daily and annual volume received?) 9. identify minimum soil/material moisture content as received and maintained in storage piles, as loaded into the inlet hopper to be screened 10. identify the volume and area of contaminated soil/material that is open to the atmosphere in the "working" portion of the Storage piles and the volume and area that is covered. Processing 11. describe what happens to solids removed'from the process (e.g. Are the solids removed from site?, How are the solids stored and transferred?, What is the moisture content and VOC concentration of the solids?) 12. description of how generated wastewater and separated waste oil is treated, recycled or removed, include a process flow chart that indicates any points in the process that are in communication with the atmosphere 13. if a bioreactor is to be used, describe where it would be placed within the process flow chart and the internal operation of the bioreactor (e.g. mass balance). 14. specify the chemical composition of surfactants and floculents used in the process 15. supply Material Data Safety Sheet for surfactants Finished Product Handling 16. specify maximum hourly, daily, and annual amounts of contaminated soil/material and liquid waste processed by the operation (these will become permit limits) JAN-28-99 THU 08:34 SJVU~PCD SO REGION FaX NO, 8058625201 P, 04/04 Mr. Ralph Huey January 26, 1999 Page 3 17. 18. 19. 20. describe how treated soil/material is stored (e.g. Is it covered?, VVhat is the maximum VOC 'concentration of soil/material?, Is it actively or passively aerated?, How long is it stored on site? At what VOC concentration is it deemed remediated?) specify maximum concentration of VOC's and moisture content of effluent soil/material or liquid waste before exposed to the atmosphere or placed in windrows specify maximum area for windrow storage describe proposed sampling.plan and procedures specifying sampling frequency and methods Miscellaneous 21. identify any lC engine to be used at the.facility with a manufacturer's maximum continuous brake horsepower rating of greater than 50 hp (if any exist, see attached supplemental information sheet) 22. identify any boiler to be used at the facility and if liquid fuel fired, natural gas fired or 75 x 108 Btu/hr (if any exist, see attached supplemental information.sheet) Thank you for your cooperation in this matter. Should you have any questions, please contact Mr. Steve Tomlin or Mr. Raymond Rodriguez of Permit Services at (805) 882-5200. Sincerely, Seyed Sadredin ~~.~~~ff~itp.Si~ices Permit Services Manager svt/rgr Enclosures i S,O~L .FEED I Initial oil/water prescreening separation ordinance separation weir overflow tBnk SPRAY BARS UPPER WASH solids SPRAY BARS sand screw DESILTER ~ CONES solids dewaterlng screens OIL/H20 SEP mak. eup wa~er floculent tanks FILTERS flow return water suffactant tank solid~ DESILTER BYPASS GRAVITY dew~terlng I Ilow screen ~ STATIC MIXERS (2} solids iiu,~,ll PROFESSIONAL ENVIRONMENTAL '-' ~ II TECHNOLOGIES V^LV~ pump ,olldsll ' ~E--~'~-N~' Il ...... SYSTEM FLOW DIAGRAM FEB-02-99 TUE 13:40 SJVUAPCD SO REG]0N FAX NO, 8058625201 P, 01/04 FAX Transmittal Sheet TO: Name: '~~ ~)/-.~.(J Company; FAX No.: 2700 "M" Street, Suite 275 .San Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution Control District Southern Regio~ffice Bakersfield, CA 93301 Voice: (805) 862-5200 FAX: (805) 862-5201 Total Pages (including cover page): Date: [] Hard Copy to Follow [] Hard Copy Does Not Follow [] Per Our Conversation [] For Your Information Review & Respond Please Reply ASAP Comments '/ BAKERSFIELD FIRE DEPARTMENT FAX Transmittal TO: COMPANY: FROM: FAX No: Office of Environmental Services FAX No. {805) 326-0576 · Bus No. (805) 326-3979 1715 Chester Ave. ° Bakersfield, CA 93301 01/29/99 12:27 ~805 326 0576 BFD HAZ MAT DIV ~001 ACTIVITY REPORT TRANSMISSION OK TX/RX NO. CONNECTION TEL CONNECTION ID START TIME USAGE TIME PAGES RESULT 0216 01/29 12:19 08'00 11 OK 8625201 01/28/99 08:33 8805 326 0576 BFD HAZ MAT DIV ~001 *** ACTIVITY REPORT *** TRANSMISSION OK TX/RX NO. CONNECTION TEL CONNECTION ID START TIME USAGE TIME PAGES RESULT 0195 01/28 08:31 02'19 4 OK 3974508 BAKERSFIELD FIRE DEPARTMENT ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES 1715 Chester Ave. · Bakersfield, CA 93301 Business Phone (805) 326-3979 · FAX (805) 326-0576 FAX Transmittal FAX No. COMMENTS: J~-26-99 TUE ~6:~2 SJVURPOD SO ~£G~ON F~× NO, 80~B62~20! ,. P. 02/04_~ , , San Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution Control District January 26,1999 Mr. Ralph Huey, Zone Administrator City of Bakersfield Permit Consolidation Zone Office of Environmental Services 1715 Chester Avenue Bakersfield, CA 93301 RE: List of Questions for Soil Rem Corporation Dear Mr. Huey: Pursuant to your January 22, 199 meeting with Mr. Tom Goff, Mr. Raymond Rodriguez, and Mr. Steve Tomlin of the District's Permit Services Division, the following information must be obtained from Soil Rem Corporation in order to determine the applicability of various District rules and regulations: Receiving and Storage identification of all possible emission points in the process including a description of all particulate PM10 and VOC emission control devices (e.g. enclosed conveyor, enclosed screening, venting to fabric baghouse or venting to thermal oxidizer, vehicular emissions from driving on unpaved areas/roadways...etc.) identify all types of generators/sources of contaminated soil/material or liquid waste to be received and processed (e.g. gasoline and diesel from tank pulls or spills, heavy or light crude oil storage tank bottoms, gasoline contaminated water, car wash waste water, fabric laundry waste water.., etc.) specify maximum hourly, daily, and annual amounts of contaminated soil/material and liquid waste received (these will become permit limitations) specify maximum possible concentration of all 188 State Toxic Air Contaminants/EPA I~azardous Air Pollutants (see attached list) in soil/material or liquid waste as received (these will become permit limitations) describe how contaminated soil/material is received and stored (e.g. How high are drop points?, Are delive~ trucks covered?, What are storage piles covered with?) David L. Crow Executive Director/Air Prdlution Control O~cer 1999 Yuoh~cr]ne Sltt.~.'L Suite 200 o Presno, CA, ~3721 * (209) 497-1;~"J0 o FAX (209) 233-2057 Northern Region 4230 Kiernan Avenue, Suite 130 · Modeelo, CA 95355 {209) 545-7000' Fax (209) 545-8652 Central Region 1999 Tuo[umrm Street, ~ta 200. Fresh, CA 93721 {209) 497-1000 * Fax (209) 233-2057 Southern Region 2700 M Street. Suite 275 · Bakec$fierd, CA ~3301 (805) 862-5200 o Fax (B05) 862-5~01 'J -26-99 ?UE t6:42 SJVU PC $0 RE ION FR× NO, 805 62520 ?,03/,04 Mr. Ralph Huey January 26, 1999 Page 2 10. specify maximum possible concentration of VOC's (see attached definition) in soil/material or liquid waste as received using EPA SW-846 test methods describe proposed sampling plan and procedures specifying sampling frequency and methods for all materials received (these will become permit limits) describe how contaminated liquid waste is received and stored (e.g. How is it delivered?, Is it ever exposed to the open atmosphere?, How long is it stored on site?, What type of containers is it stored in? What is the daily and annual volume received?) identify minimum soil/material moisture content as received and maintained in storage piles, as loaded into the inlet hopper to be screened identify the volume and area of contaminated soil/material that is open to the atmosphere in the "working" portion of the storage piles and the volume and area that is covered. Processing 11. 12. 13. 14. 15. descdbe what happens to solids removed from the process (e.g. Are the solids removed from site?, How are the soltds stored and transferred?, What is the moisture content and VOC concentration of the solids?) description of how generated wastewater and separated waste oil is treated, recycled or removed, include a process flow chart that indicates any points in the process that are in communication with the atmosphere if a bioreactor is to be used, describe where it would be placed within the process flow chart and the internal operation of the bioreactor (e.g. mass balance). specify the chemical composition of surfactants and floculents used in the process supply Material Data Safety Sheet for surfactants Finished Product Handling 16. specify maximum hourly, daily, and annual amounts of contaminated soil/material and liquid waste processed by the operation (these will become permit limits) 'J~-26-99 TUE ~6~43 SJVURPCD SO REGION FAX NO, 8058625201 P, 04/04 Mr. Ralph Huey January 26, '1999 Page 3 17. describe how treated soil/material is stored (e.g. Is it covered?, What is the maximum VOC concentration of soil/material?, Is it actively or passively aerated?, How long is it stored on site? At what VOC concentration is it deemed remediated?) 18. specify maximum concentration of VOC's and moisture content of effluent soil/material or liquid waste before exposed to the atmosphere or placed in windrows 19. specify maximum area for windrow storage 20. describe proposed sampling plan and procedures specifying sampling frequency and methods Miscellaneous 21. identify any lC engine to be used at the facility with a manufacturer's maximum continuous brake horsepower rating of greater than 50 hp (if any exist, see attached supplemental information sheet) 22. identify any boiler to be used at the facility and if liquid fuel fired, natural gas fired or 75 x 10s Btu/hr (if any exist, see attached supplemental information sheet) Thank you for your cooperation in this matter. Should you have any questions, please contact Mr. Steve Tomlin or Mr. Raymond Rodriguez of Permit Services at (805) 862-5200. Sincerely, Seyed Sadredin Director,ef/)Permit Services "1'homas E./Goff, P.E. Permit Services Manager svt/rgr Enclosures ,t JAN-28-99 THU 08:32 SJVUa~OD SO REGION FaX NO, 80586~5201 P. 01/04 FAX Tra-nsmittal Sheet TO: Name: _ ./~c.~..~ ~,'~")"~,~ Company: FAX No.:. ~ ~-~ - ~5'7 ~ From: Total Pages (including cover page): .San Joaquin Valley .. Unified Air Pollution Control District Southern Regi~)ffice 2700 "M" Street, Suite 275 Bakersfield, CA 93301 Voice: (805) 862-5200 FAX: (805) 862-5201 [] Hard Copy to Follow ~Per Our Conversation [] Hard Copy,Does Not Follow [] For Your Information [] [] Review & Respond Please Reply ASAP Comments SoilRem Corporation P.O. Box 40764 South Station 524 Bakersfield, Ca. 93304-9998 1-805-834-8471 1-805-828-8479 cell ph 1-805-397-4508 fax# SoilRern@aoI.com January27,1999 To: Mr. Wines From: John Arnold Dear Mr. Wines, Enclosed you will find: 1). Third and Fourth Quarter Monitoring reports on Clean Soils monitoring well's. I also have a letter giving Soil Rem permission to monitor the wells as needed, per our meeting with you and Mr. Huey. 2). Insurance requirements: Walter Mortensen Insurance has forms from you, enclosed also is a letter that I am currently purchasing insurance, One million liability as requested will be purchased when I receive permission to open site. 3). Also please be advised that Soil Rems treatment trade secrets on all surfactants and treatment of soils are safeguarded. Mr. Wines I appreciate all yours and Mr. Huey's help during this process. I would · appreciate it if you could offer any help regarding the estimate fees of $4,000.00 required by the Regional Water Quality Board. I still think that fee is way out of line. Please Mr. Wines I would appreciate it if your office would fast tr~ck my application with all different agencies as soon as possible. I will then pay the fees when accepted. Thank you, John E. Arnold Soil Rem Corporation J~N-26-99 TUE 16:41 SJVU~POD SO REGION NO, 8058625201 P, O1/04 San JoaqUin Valley Unified Air Pollution Control District Southern Region - 2700 "M" Street, Suite 275, Bakersfield, California 93301 Phone: (805) 862-5200 FAX: (805) 862-5201 FAX TRANSMITTAL SHEET To: Company: Fax #: From: Steve Tomlin, Air Quality Engineer Message: Sent By: CALIFORNTA RWQCB FRESNO; 559 445 5910; Jan-12-99 10:15AU; Page 1 Winston Hickox Secretary,~r Protection Frtsno Branch Office Gray Davis ]aterme. nt Addmgs: htap*./Iwww,swrcb.ga,gavl-ruzcFb5 Govvrnor 3fil4 ~t AshJn~ A¥¢f~u¢, Frc~-.o, CaJifornin 93726 Phone (559) 445-5116 · FAX (559) 445.5910 8 January 1999 Mr. Ralph IIuey Bakersfield City Fire Department Office of Environmental Services 1715 Chester Avenue Bakersfield, CA 93301 PROPOSED HYDROCARBON CONTAMINATED SOIL RECYCLING FACILITY, SOILREM CORPORATION, INC., BAKERSFIELD, KERN COUNTY On 15 December 1998. Doug Pattc.~on and Lonnie Wass from our office attcndcd a meeting with representatives of Soilrem Corporation, Inc., the City of Bakersfield, and various other government agencies. Soitrem Corporation is proposing to operate a nonhazardous, hydrocarbon contaminated soil recycling facility in Bakersfield near Pacheco and Cottonwood Roads, near the former CleanSoils recycling facility on White Lane. Soilrem Corporation is proposing to prepare a Facility Compliance Plan under SB 1299 (tlic Enviromnental Permit Consolidation Zone Program) instead of obtaining individual permits from each agency. As the Permit Consolidation Zone Administrator, the City of Bakersfield will be the Icad permitting agency. The purpose of this letter is to assist you by outlining ~~ thc rcquircmcnts which need to be incorporated into the Facility Compliance Plan to be consistent with State Laws and Regulations and for the Regional Board to consider such a plan. General Site Conditions In 1.994, the groundwater table ncm' the proposed site occurred at 30 feet below the ground surface. Greater than normal rainfall in recent years is likely to have caused a recent rise in the groundwater table. Groundwater has aa average specific electrical conductivity of approximately ! 300 prnho/¢m, Soils in the area are classified as moderately permeable. Beneficial uses et' groundwater near the proposed site include municipal and domestic supply, agricultural supply, and industrial process and service supply. Therefore, protection of groundwater from the discharge of wa~ste at the proposed facility is a primary concern. Waste Class.i.fication Soilrem Corporation is proposing to accept nonhazardous hydrocarbon contaminated soils 'for treatment by soil washing and subsequent biorernediation. Reportedly, the process will not generate liquid wikqte. Hydr(x:arbon contmninated soils contain soluble petroleum fractions which pose a threat to water quality when stored as waste piles or if discharged in an uncontrolled manner. Therefore, they are classified as a 'designated' waste and are regulated by the California Code of Regulations (CCR), Title California Environmental Protection Agency Ill I II II I O itecycledPttper Sent By: CALIFORNIA RWQCB FRESNO; 559 445 Jan-12-99 10:16AM; 591 0; -2- Page 2/4 8 January1999 27, Section 20080, et seq. (Title 27). Both incoming soil and treated soil may be classified as designated waste, depending on the concentration of contaminants. Any soil, treated or not, which contains constituents above levels that may threaten water quality must therefore be stored on a lined waste management unit which meets Tide 27 requirements. Title 27 contains siting and construction standards, and performance goals to protect water quality and prevent public nuisances. Therefore, the Facility Compliance Plan must implement Title 27. At the 15 December 1998 meeting, it was stated that Title 27 would be applicable to the proposed facility. Copies of previously 'adopted Waste Discharge Requirements regulating similar soil recycling facilities were provided, along with a copy of the required Standard Provisions and Reporting Requiremenk,~. For your convenience, we have enclosed duplicates of those documents and a copy of Title 27. Sm'ne of the provisions that need [o be included in the Facility Compliance Plan are discussed below. Lincr Desigl3 Designated waste must be discharged to Class II waste m'anagement units designed and constructed to prevent migration of wastes to adjacent geologic materials, groundwater, or surface water [§20310(a)]. Containment structures must be designed by, and construction supervised by a registered civil engineer or certified engineering geologist [§20310(e)], The Facility Compliance Plan needs to require submittal of the design specifications and Quality Assurance/Quality Control plan for review before construction of the unit. The Facility Compliance Plan also needs to require submittal of construction Quality Assurance/Quality Control documentation for review and approval before discharge of waste is allowed [§20323/4]. The liner design must include a leachate collection and removal system (LCRS) [§20340(a)]. The liner must be constructed of at least 2 feet of clay of at lea,ut 90% relative compaction and conductivity less than I x l 0-6 cna/sec [§20330(b)]. Title 27 allows engineered alternatives to the prescriptive liner design, provided Soilrem demonstrates that construction of the prescriptive standard is not feasible and the alternative afford.~ equivalent protection against water quality impairment [§20080(b)]. Monitoring The Facility Compliance Plan needs to contain a 'Water Quality Protection Standard'. The Water Quality Protection Standard consists of a list of 'Constituents of Concern', 'Concentration Limits' for each constituent of concern, and the 'Point of Compliance' and 'Monitoring Points' at which the concentration limits apply [§20390(a)]. The constituents of concern are a list of all waste constituents, reaction products, or other constituents that are reasonably expected to be in or derived from waste [§20395(a)]. Soilrem needs to propose concentration limits for each constituent of concern bas~ on background Monitoring Points [§20400(a)]. Background data must be based on quarterly groundwater sampling for a period of one year, collected before waste is discharged to a waste management unit [§20415(e)(6)]. For anthropogenic (not naturally occurring) constituents, the concentration limit should be the lowest obtainable laboratory detection limit. Sent By: CALIFORNIA RV~QCB Mr, Ralph Huey FRESNO; 559 445 Jan-12-99 10:17AM; 5910; Page 3/4 8 January1999 The point of compliance is a vertical surface located at the hydraulically downgradient limit of the waste management unit that extends through the uppermost aquifer underlying the waste management unit [§20405(a)]. Soilrem needs to establish background monitoring points at appropriate locations and depths to yield groundwater samples that represent the quality of grou'ndwarer passing the Point of Compliance [§20415(b)(B)( t )]. Soilrem needs to establish monitoring points capable of providing the best assurance of thc earliest possible detection of a release from a waste management unit [§20415(b)(B)(2)]. Soilrem 'also needs to propose an unsaturated zone monitoring system for each waste management unit [§20415(d)(1)]. All monitoring systems (for groundwater and the unsaturated zone) must be designed by a registered geologist or a registered civil engineer [§20415(e)(1)]. Closure Plan The Facihty Compliance Plan needs to require submittal of a preliminary closure plan which provides a reasonable estimate of the maximum expected cost that would be incurred at any time during the waste management's projected life for a third party to close the unit and carry out post-closure maintenance [§21769Co)]. The preliminary closure plan must include a lump sum estimate of the cost of carrying out all actions necessary to close the unit, prepare detailed design specifications, develop the final closure and post-closure maintenance plan, and carry out the first thirty years of post-closur~ maintenance [§21769(b)(2)]. Financial. ASS._urance The Facility Compliance Plan needs to require Soilrem to establish an irrevocable closure fund to ensure closure of each waste management unit in accordance with the approved preliminary closure plan [§22207(a)]. The Facility Compliance Plan also needs to require Soilrem to establish an irrevocable fund to ensure that funds are available to address a known or reasonably foreseeable release from a waste management unit [§22222]. Title 27 contains descriptions of acceptable financial assurance mechanisms [§22240 - §22254]. .S. ignator¥ Requirements All submittals from Soilrem containing proposed designs for containment structures and/or monitoring systems must be approved and signed by a registered civil engineer or a certified engineering geologist [§21710(d)]. CEQA In order for the Regional Board to consider the Facility Compliance Plan, the Regional Board must make a finding that the Calitbmia Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) has been implemented. Thc City of Bakersfield, as Lead Agency, needs to provide an adopted CEQA document and Notice of Determination to bc incorporated into the Regional Board's approval et' the Facility Compliance Plan. The CEQA document (either a Negative Declaration or Enviromnental Impact Report) must address the discharge of designated waste at the facility. Sent By: CALIFORNIA RWQCB Mr. Ralph Huey FRESNO; 559 445 Jan-12-99 10:17AM; 5910; -4- Page 4/4 8 January 1999 Fees The State Board fee schedule is based on tilt: program type, threat to water quality and complexity of a discharge. There are three levels of threat to water quality (1-3) and three levels of complexity (A-C). The program type for the proposed facility is Title 27 (Chapter 15). Based on the proposed discharge and the criteria in the fee schedule, the fee rating for Soilrem's proposed operation is classified as 2-B. The required annual fee for a 2-B facility is $4,000. This is consistent with the fee rating for the former CleanSoils facility, adjacent to the proposed Soilrem facility. The fee needs to be received along with the draft Facility Compliance Plan in order for Regional Board staff to proceed with review, Please note that Title 27 contains other requirements that were not specifically addressed above, but which will 'need to implemented by the Facility Compliance Plan. Other statutes or codes (for example domestic well standards or storm water control requirements) may be applicable, depending on Soiirem's operations. We appreciate the opportunity to provide you with our comments and look forward to participating in the review of the draft Facility Compl. iance Plan. Please call Doug Patteson at (559) 445-6191 if you have any questions. Senior Engineering Geologist WILLIAM PFISTER Supervising Engineering Geologist CEG No. 931 Enclosures cc: Mr. Peter Ruggerello, Kern County Permit Assistance Center, Bakersfield Soilrem Corporation, Inc., Bakersfield Pete Wilson Governor Deparl t 'ment of Toxic Substances Jesse R. Huff, Director 400 P Street, 4th Floor, P.O. Box 806 Sacramento, California 95812-0806 ontrol Mr. Peter Ruggerello Director, KC/PAC Kern County Permit Assistance Center 2700 "M" Street, Suite 125 Bakersfield, California 93301-2370 December 23, 1998 Dear Mr. Ruggerello: REQUEST FOR LETTER TO SOILREM CORPORATION Based on the information you supplied in your letter of December 18, 1998, there is not a need for Soilrem Corporation to be authorized by the Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC). ~The specific conditions of their operation that made DTSC's approval unnecessary is that they will not be accepting hazardous waste. The DTSC would only set conditions on their operation if they were treating or accepting hazardous waste. I tried reaching you by telephone December 22, 1998 but~was not successful. I plan to be on vacation until December 3 l, 1998.. If you need assistance before then, you can contact Mr. Jan Radimsky at (916) 324-1819. Peter M. Rooney Secretary for Environmental Protection Sincerely, cc: See next page. Deputy Direc. t&'s Office Hazardous/Waste Management Program /' California Environmental Protection Agency' · 'Printed on Recycled paper Mr. Peter Ruggerello December 23, 1998 Page 2 cC: Mr. Jan Radimsky, P.E., Chief Permit Streamlining Branch Department of Toxic Substances Control P.O. Box 806 Sacramento, California 95812-0806 "~'Mr. Ralph Huey Environmental Health Services City of Bakersfield Kern County Office 2700 "M" Street, Suite 125 Bakersfield, Califomia 93301-2370 Ms. Chris Kinne Assistant for Permit Assistance Kem County Permit Assistance Center 2700 "M" Street, Suite 125 Bakersfield, California 93301-2370 (2) (3) a log of special occurrences and the methods used to resolve the problems, including the details of all incidents that required implementing emergency procedures. Special occurrences may include: fires, injury and property damage accidents, explosions, discharge of hazardous or other wastes not permitted, flooding and other unusual occurrences. a record of any written public complaints received by the operator, including: (a) (b) (c) the nature of the complaint the date the complaint was received if available, the name, address, and telephone number of the person or persons making the compliant (d) any actions taken to respond to the complaint a record, as specified by the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB), of the types and concentrations of constituents, the date, and quantity of contaminated soil accepted at the operation; and the types and concentrations of constituents, the date, and quantity of contaminated and noncontaminated soil leaving the operations. Where no requirements have been specified by the appropriate RWQCB, the operator shall record the same information provided by the generator source. The operator shall also record the name of all transfer, storage, and/or treatment operations where the contaminated soil was located prior to the receipt and the dates the contaminated soil was received at each of these operations and removed. Contaminated Soil Operation and Facility Restoration: All contaminated soil operations shall meet the following requirements: (A) The operator shall provide the enforcement agenCy written notice of intent to perform site restoration, at least 30 days prior to beginning site restoration. (B) The operator(s) and owner(s) shall provide site restoration necessary to protect public health, safety, and the environment.. (C) The operator shall ensure that the following site restoration procedures are performed upon completion of operation and termination of service: (1) the operation grounds, excluding the disposal area, shall be cleaned of all contaminated soil, construction scraps, and other materials related to the operation, and these materials legally recycled, reused, or disposal of. (2) all machinery shall be cleaned of contaminated soil (3) all remaining structures shall be cleaned of contaminated soil Any questions, please contact the Solid Waste Program at 805-862-8700. Revised 12/22/1998 2 Local Enforcement Agency Requirements Contaminated Soil/Transfer Processing Operation Enforcement Agency Notification Local Enforcement Agency Notification: All contaminated soil/transfer processing operations shall comply with the Enforcement Agency Notification requirements as specified in Title 14, Section 18103. This can be accomplished by submittal ora complete Enforcement Agency Notification form (Attached). General Operating Standards: (A) All activities shall be conducted in a manner that minimizes litter, nuisances, dust, noise impacts, other public health and safety and environmental hazards. (B) Unauthorized human or animal access to the operation or facility shall be prevented. (C) Traffic flow into, on, and out of the operation and facility shall be controlled in a safe manner. (D) All operations and facilities open for public business shall post legible signs at all public entrances that include the following: (1) name of the operation (2) name of the operator (3) hours of operation (4) specify that only nonhazardous petroleum contaminated soil will be accepted (5) phone number where the operator or designee can be reached in case of an emergency. (E) The operator shall provide telephone or radio communication capability for emergency purposes. General Record Keeping Requirements: All contaminated soil/transfer operations shall meet the following requirements: (A) All of the following records shall be kept by the operator in one location and accessible for five (5) years: (1) a log of special occurrences and the methods used to resolve the problems, including the details of all incidents that required implementing emergency procedures.. Special occurrences may include: fires, injury and property damage accidents, explosions, discharge of hazardous or other wastes not permitted, flooding and other unusual occurrences. (2) a record of any written public complaints received by the operator, including: (a) the nature of the complaint (b) the date the complaint was received (c) if available, the name, address, and telephone (3) number of the person or persons making the compliant (d) any actions taken to respond to the complaint a record, as specified by the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB), of the types and concentrations of constituents, the date, and quantity of contaminated soil accepted at the operation; and the types and concentrations of constituents, the date, and quantity of contaminated and noncontaminated soil leaving the operations. Where no requirements have been specified by the appropriate RWQCB, the operator shall record the same information provided by the generator source. The operator shall also record the name of all transfer, storage, and/or treatment operations where the contaminated soil was located prior to the receipt and the dates the contaminated soil was received at each of these operations and removed. Contaminated Soil Operation and Facility Restoration: All contaminated soil operations shall meet the following requirements: (A) The operator shall provide the enforcement agency written notice of intent to perform site restoration, at least 30 days priorto beginning site restoration. (B) The operator(s) and owner(s) shall provide site restoration necessary to protect public health, safety, and the environment. (C) The operator shall ensure that the following site restoration procedures are performed upon completion of operation and termination of service: (1) the operation grounds, excluding the disposal area, shall be cleaned of all contaminated soil, construction scraps, and other materials related to the operation, and these materials legally recycled, reused, or disposal of. (2) all machinery shall be cleaned of contaminated soil (3) all remaining structures shall be cleaned of contaminated soil Any questions, please contact the Solid Waste Program at 805-862-8700. L D November 18, 1998 FIRE CHIEF RON FRAZE ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES 2101 'H" Street Bakersfield, CA 93301 VOICE (805) 326-3941 FAX (805) 395-1349 SUPPRESSION SERVICES 2101 'H' Street Bakersfield, CA 93301 VOICE (805) 326-3941 FAX (805) 395-1349 PREVENTION SERVICES 1715 Chester Ave. Bakersfield, CA 93301 VOICE (805) 326-3951 FAX (805) 326-0576 ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES 1715 Chester Ave. Bakersfield, CA 93301 VOICE (805) 326-3979 FAX (805) 326-0576 TRAINING DIVISION 5642 Victor Ave. Bakersfield, CA 93308 VOICE (805) 399-4697 FAX (805) 399-5763 Mr. Pete Ruggerello Kern County Permit Assistance Center 2700 "M" Street, Suite 125 Bakersfield, CA 93301 RE: Intent to Utilize Permit Consolidation Zone Program Dear Mr. Ruggerello: Attached please find the "Notice of Intent" to prepare a Facility Compliance Plan, for Soilrem Corporation, Inc. This is a new business, interested in starting an operation in Bakersfield at 408 E. Pacheco Road. The business operations will consist of a soil washing process, to remove contaminants from soil, utilizing biodegradable chemical surfactants and/or colloidals. I believe that this facility will be replacing San Joaquin Valley Unified Air Pollution Control District, State Water Resources Control Board, Kern County Resource Management Agencies and several local "CUPA" permits with a facility compliance plan. Please see that this notification is processed to the appropriate state agencies. We should then set up a meeting to discuss the specific requirements of the facility cgmpliance plan. Sincerely yours, Director, Office of Environmental Services cc: Ms. Chris Kinne, Cai EPA B L D November 18, 1998 FIRE CHIEF RON FRAZE ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES 2101 'H" Street Bakersfield, CA 93301 VOICE (805) 326-3941 FAX (805) 395-1349 SUPPRESSION SERVICES 2101 'H' Street Bakersfield, CA 93301 VOICE (805) 326-3941 FAX (805) 395-1 349 PREVENTION SERVICES 1715 Chester Ave. Bakersfield, CA 93301 VOICE (805) 326-3951 FAX (805) 326-0576 ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES 1715 Chester Ave. Bakersfield, CA 93301 VOICE (805) 326-3979 FAX (805) 326-0576 TRAINING DIVISION 5642 Victor Ave. Bakersfield, CA 93308 VOICE (805) 399-4697 FAX (805) 399-5763 Steve McCalley, Director Kern County Environmental Health Services Department 2700 "M" Street, Suite 300 Bakersfield, CA 93301 RE: Intent to Utilize Permit Consolidation Zone Program Dear Mr. McCalley: Attached please find the "Notice of Intent" to prepare a Facility Compliance Plan, for Soilrem Corporations, Inc. This is a new business, interested in starting an operation in Bakersfield at,408 E. Pacheco Road. The business operations will consist of a soil washing process, to remove contaminants from soil, utilizing biodegradable chemical surfactants and/or colloidals. I believe this facility will be replacing a Kern County Resource Management Agency Permit (LEA related), as well as State and Local permits, with their facilities compliance plan. I will set up a meeting or · conference call with all of the appropriate agencies to discuss the specific requirements of the facility compliance plan. Sincerely yours, Ralph E. Huey Director, Office of Environmental Services CITY OF BAKEI IELD OFFICE OF ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES 1715 Chester Ave., Bakersfield, CA 93301 (805) 326-3979 FACILITY INFORMATION Business Activities Page I. FACILITY IDENTIFICATION FACILITY lO ~1 (Fo~ office use only- please leave t)lank) ~ I EPA ~O # /~j/./~ 2 I OBA/FACILIT~ NAME II. ACTIVITIES DECLARATION Does Your~Pacility... If Yes, Please Complete... A. HAZARDOUS MATERIALS OYES ONO 4 v' OES FORM 2731 (ch~. 1. Have on site (for any purpose) hazardous materials at or v' CONSOLIDATED COMPLIANCE PLAN above 55 gallons for liquids, 500 pounds for solids, or 200 ,Minimym r~uired Dlannin~l elements: cu ft for compressed gases (include liquids in ASTs and · Emergency Response Plan USTs)? · Maps 2. Have any amount of an explosive material (other than OYES ONO s · Training ammunition) on site? · Prevention · Certifications B. REGU, LATED'SUBSTANCES (RS) OYES ~NO s v~ OES FORM 2731 (Chern~l Have onsite RS at greater than the threshold planning v' RISK MANAGEMENT PLAN (RMP S~,mit lo USEPA) quantities established by the California Accidental v' CONSOLIDATED COMPLIANCE PLAN Release Prevention program (CalARP)? · Incorporating CalARP Program Elements C. UNDERGROUND STORAGE TANKS/USTs) OYES ~INO 7 u~ ' UST FACILITY FORM 1. Own or operate Underground. Storage Tanks? v~ UST ..TANK FORM (~e 2. Intend to upgrade existing or install new USTs? OYES ~NO a v' UST FACILITY FORM v' UST TANK FORM ~ UST INSTALLATION FORM O. TANK 'CLOSURE / REMOVAI~ "OYES ~INO 9 v' UST TANK FORM (c~osure section-one per tank) 1. Need to report closing a UST that held, hazardous materials or waste? 2. Need to report the closure/removal of a tank that was OYES ONO ~0 v' TANK CLOSURE FORM classified as hazardous waste and cleaned onsite? E. ABOVE GROUND PETROLEUM STORAGE TANKS [fASTs) ~YES ONO ~ ~/ CONSOLIDATED COMPLIANCE PLAN Own or operate ASTs above these thresholds.: any tank · Incorporating Federal Spill Prevention capacity is greater than 660 gallons or the total capacity Control and Countermeasure (SPCC) for the facility is greater than/,,320 gallons. Elements pursuant to 40 CFR Part 112 F. HAZARDOUS WASTE: ~' EPA ID number--provide on this page 1. Generate hazardods waste? OYES ~NO ~2 To obtain EPA ID#, please phone (916) 324-1781 2. Recycle more than 100 kg/mo of recyciable materials at OYES ~NO ~3 v' RECYCLING FORM the same location it was generated? 3. Recycle more than 100 kg/mo of recyclable materials at OYES ~NO ~4 v' RECYCLING FORM an offsite location different from the point of generation? 4. Treat Hazardous Waste on site? OYES ~NO ~$ v' TP FACILITY FORM (DTSC Form 1772) v' TP UNIT FORM (one per unit) 5. Subject to Financial Assurance requirements? OYES ONO ~s v' CERTIFICATION OF FINANCIAL ASSURANCE 6. Consolidate Hazardous Waste generated at a remote OYES ~NO ~? V' REMOTE WASTE / CONSOLIDATION SITE site? NOTIFICATION FORM _ '"(~. PI~RMIT QQNSOLIOATION ZONE: ~YES ONO ~8 v' CONSO~IDATEO COMPLIANCE PLAN Intend to consolidate other Cai/EPA agency permits? · Incorporating all other environmental (If yes, please complete Section III and attach) permit requirements per 27 CCR 10410 _ NOTE: v' If you checked YES to any part of Sections IIA-IIG above, then in addition to the forms requested above, please Submit OES Form 2730. July t. 1998 CITY OF BAKER~IELD OFFICE OF ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES 1715 Chester Ave., Bakersfield, CA 93301 (805) 326-3979 FACILITY INFORMATION Business Activities Addendum Page ~ ~ I. FACILITY IDENTIFICATION FACILITY ID # (F<3' 0~C~ ~ O~ly- i~lease leave ~lanlQ ! EPA ID # ~//~/~ 2 DBA~FACILITY NAME 3 m. CON$OUDATED eER~T ACT~VmE$ Is your Facility Compliance Plan subject to review by... for satisfying the conditions of these permits? H. DEPARTMENT QF TQ~IC SUBSTANCES CONTROL OYES I. SANJOAQUIN VALLEY UNIFIED AIR POLLUTION CONTR0~ DISTRICT J. STATE WATER RESOURCES CONTROL BOARD CENTRAl. VALLEY REGIONAL WATER QUALITY CONTROL BOARD K. CALIFORNIAINTEGRATEDWASTE MANAGEMENT BOARD L. KERN COUNTY RESOURCE MANAQEMENTAGENcY ~NO OYES ~NO OYES ~NO M. CITY OF BAKERSFII~I.D WASTE WATER DIVISION OYES OYES ~YES OYES OYES OYES OYES ONO ONO ONO ~NO ONO ~NO ONO OYES ~NO OYES ~NO OYES ~NO OYES ~NO OYes ONO ~YES ONO OYES ~NO OYES ~NO V V STANDARDIZED PERMIT · All Modifications Non-RCRA HAZARDOUS WASTE FACILITY RCRA HAZARDOUS WASTE FACILITY AUTHORITY TO CON$¥AUCT PERMIT TO OPERATE WASTE DISCHARGE REQUIREMENT (WDR) GENE, RAL PERMITS SPECIFIC PERMITS NATIONAL POLLUTION DISCHARGE ELIMINATION SYSTEM (NPDES) REGISTRATION PERMIT ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH SERVICES PERMITS Domestic Water Well Permit Haz Mat Monitoring Well Permit Septic System Permit Public Swimming Pool Permit Food Facility Construction Permit Solid Waste Local Enforcement Agency (LEA) Related Permits Medical Waste Related Permits INDUSTRIAL WASTE WATER DISCHARGE PERMIT NOTE: ~' If you checked YES to any part of Sections III-H to III-M above, then please address all applicable permit requirements in the Facility Compliance Plan. CITY OF BAKEI~'IELD OFFICE OF ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES 1715 Chester Ave., Bakersfield, CA 93301 (805) 326-3979 FACILITY INFORMATION Page __ Of BUSINESS NAME (Same as FACILITY NAME or DBA- Doing Bustnesa As) I. FACILITY IDENTIFICATION Year Ending 3 102 SITE ADDRESS 40 CITY }~--%/~ BUSINESS PHONE ~o~, DUN & BRADSTREET 103 z~P 0330? 1o6 SIC CODE (4 Digit #) / Z~.~:~ COUNTY OPERATOR NAME --~O~'~t/~j ./0~0~ 10e J OPERATOR PHONE ~'O-~'- <~3'~,,~/--~/ ii0! OWNERNAME ~OH~ ~OC~ ~ ~~ ~OE~ iii I OWNERPHONE ~0~. ~.~/ 112 OWNER MAILING P ADDRESS Cl~ BUSINESS PHONE ~O~. ~, ~7) la BUSINESS PHONE 24-HOUR PHONE PAGER ~ Certification: Based on my inquiry of those individuals responsible for obtaining the information, I certify under penalty of law that I have personally examined and am familiar with the information submitted in this inventory and believe the information is true. accurate, and complete. ! SIGNATURE OF OWNER/OPE~ DATE 134 I NAME OF DOCUMENT PREPARER ERATOR (prfnl) 136 TITLE OF OWNER/OPERATOR 137 . ~;£5 FOgM WZSO (7/.0~) p:~OES2'730.TV4 #Pal CITY OF BAKERSFIELD OFFICE OF ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES 1715 Chester Ave., Bakersfield, CA 93301 (805) 326-3979 FACILITY INFORMATION Business Activities Page __ of __ I. FACILITY IDENTIFICATION FACILITY ID # (For office use only - please leave blank) I EPA ID # DBA/FACILITY NAME 3 II. ACTIVITIES DECLARATION Does Your~r-acility... If Yes, Please Complete... A. HAZARDOUS MATERIALS OYES (~NO 4 v' OES FORM 2731 (Chemica~ Description Form) 1. Have on site (for any purpose) hazardous materials at or v' CONSOLIDATED COMPLIANCE PLAN above 55 gallons for liquids, 500 pounds for solids, or 200 Minimum required planninq elements: cu ft for compressed gases (include liquids in ASTs and · Emergency Response Plan USTs)? · Maps 2. Have any amount of an explosive matedal (other than (~)YES ONe 5 · Training ammunition) on site? · Prevention · Certifications B. REGULATED SUBSTANCES (RS) (~YES ONe 8 ¢ OES FORM 2731 (Chemical Description Form) Have onsite RS at greater than the threshold planning V' RISK MANAGEMENT PLAN (RMP Submit to USEPA) quantities established by the California Accidental ¢ CONSOLIDATED COMPLIANCE PLAN Release Prevention program (CalARP)? · Incorporating CalARP Program Elements C. UNDERGROUND STORAGE TANKS (USTs) (~YES ONe 7 V' UST FACILITY FORM 1. Own or operate Underground, Storage Tanks? v' UST TANK FORM (one per tank) 2. Intend to upgrade existing or install new USTs? (~YES ONe 8 v' UST FACILITY FORM v' UST TANK FORM ~' UST INSTALLATION FORM (one per tank) D. TANK CLOSURE / REMOVAL (~YES ONe 9 V' UST TANK FORM (closure section-one per tank) 1. Need to report closing a UST that held hazardous materials or waste? 2. Need to report the closure/removal of a tank that was (~)YES ONe 10 v' TANK CLOSURE FORM classified as hazardous waste and cleaned onsite? E. ABOVE GROUND PETROLEUM STORAGE TANKS (ASTs) OYES (~NO 11 ~/ CONSOLIDATED COMPLIANCE PLAN Own or operate ASTs above these thresholds.: any tank · Incorporating Federal Spill Prevention capacity is greater than 660 gallons or the total capacity Control and Countermeasure (SPCC) for the facility is greater than 1,320 gallons. Elements pursuant to 40 CFR Part 112 F. HAZARDOUS WASTE: v' EPA ID number---provide on this page 1. Generate hazardous waste? (~YES ONe 12 TO obtain EPA ID#, please phone (916) 324-1781 2. Recycle more than 100 kg/mo of recyclable materials at (~YES ONe 13 ~ RECYCLING FORM the same location it was generated? 3. Recycle more than 100 kg/mo of recyclable materials at (~YES ONe 14. v' RECYCLING FORM an offsite location different from the point of generation? 4. Treat Hazardous Waste on site? (~YES ONe 15 v' TP FACILITY FORM (DTSC Form 1772) V' TP UNIT FORM (one per unit) 5. Subject to Financial Assurance requirements? (~YES ~INO 16 v' CERTIFICATION OF FINANCIAL ASSURANCE 6. Consolidate Hazardous Waste generated at a remote (~)YES ONe 17 v' REMOTE WASTE / CONSOLIDATION SITE site? NOTIFICATION FORM G. PERMIT CONSOLIDATION ZONE: OYES (~NO ~8 v' CONSOLIDATED COMPLIANCE PLAN Intend to consolidate other Cai/EPA agency permits? · Incorporating all other environmental (If yes, please complete Section III and attach) permit requirements per 27 CCR 10410 NOTE: v' If you checked YES to any part of Sections IIA-IIG above, then in addition to the forms requested abo~/e, please Submit OES Form 2730. P:~ACTIVITY.TO.wpd July 1. 1998 1 CITY OF BAKERSFIELD OFFICE OF ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES 1715 Chester Ave., Bakersfield, CA 93301 (805) 326-3979 FACILITY INFORMATION Business Activities Addendum Page __ of __ I. FACILITY IDENTIFICATION FACILITY ID # (For office use only - please leave blank) 1 EPA ID # ~/,,/~ 2 DBNFACILITY NAME 3 III. CONSOLIDATED PERMIT ACTIVITIES Is your Facility Compliance Plan subject to review by... for satisfying the conditions of these permits? H. DEPARTMENT OF TOXIC SUBSTANCES CONTROL OYES V I. SAN JOAQUIN VALLEY UNIFIED AIR POLLUTION CONTROL DISTRICT J. STATE WATER RESOURCES CONTROL BOARD CENTRALVALLEY REGIONAL WATER QUALITY CONTROL BOARD K. CALIFORNIAINTEGRATEDWASTE MANAGEMENT BOARD L. KERN COUNTY RESOURCE MANAGEMENT AGENCY M. CITY OF BAKERSFIELD WASTE WATER DIVISION ~lNO OYES ONO (~YES ONO ~YES ONO ~YES ONO ~YES ONO OYES ~NO OYES ONO OYES ~NO OYES ~lNO OYES ~NO OYES ~NO OYES ONO OYES ~NO OYES ~NO ~YES ONO OYES ~NO (::)YES ONO v' V STANDARDIZED PERMIT · All Modifications Non-RCRA HAZARDOUS WASTE FACILITY RCRA HAZARDOUS WASTE FACILITY AUTHORITY TO CONSTRUCT PERMIT TO OPERATE WASTE DISCHARGE REQUIREMENT (WDR) GENERAL PERMITS SPECIFIC PERMITS NATIONAL POLLUTION DISCHARGE ELIMINATION SYSTEM (NPDES) REGISTRATION PERMIT ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH SERVICES PERMITS Domestic Water Well Permit Haz Mat Monitoring Well Permit Septic System Permit Public Swimming Pool Permit Food Facility Construction Permit Solid Waste Local Enforcement Agency (LEA) Related Permits Medical Waste Related Permits INDUSTRIAL WASTE WATER DISCHARGE PERMIT NOTE: · V If you checked YES to any part of Sections III-H to III-M above, then please address all applicable permit requirements in the Facility Compliance Plan. p:~Actlvtty ademlum.w~l July 1, 1998 CITY OF BAKERS~ELD OFFICE OF ENVIRONMENTAL SERVICES 1715 Chester Ave., Bakersfield, CA 93301 (805) 326-3979 FACILITY INFORMATION Page __ Of __ BUSINESS NAME (Same as FACILITY NAME or DBA- Doing Business As) SITE ADDRESS 40 CITY I~/'~ ~-.O.~F'~ ~-C ~ ,o4 CA DUN & BRADSTREET ~oo ] Year Ending ~o~ 3I BUSINESS PHONE ~02 .~o~- , ~4. ~o47/ 103 SIC CODE (4 Digit #) I ~-I[~'- COUNTY ~08 OPERATOR NAME .-]Ob~t/~) ./'3~/~O L-/~ 109 OPE~TOR PHONE ~O~- ~, OWNERNAME UOH~ ~OC~ ~ ~L~M ~Oe~ ,11 ~ OWNERPHONE ~0~. OWNER MAILING P o ~0)6 40 76~- ADDRESS il3 CITY ~.~)¢ l ~'~"~<~ ~--" ~'c.r'~' il4 STATE ~ il5 ZIP 116 CONTACT NAME ~A¢¢~ E. ~O~¢, ~ME ~m,~/ST~%O~ .7 CONTACT PHONE CONTACT MAILING ~/CE~SCtELO (__t'l'-~-' 1L'%F~C O_~01'-. 0¢'1c-,¢E ~ E--x~JV~I['~¢O~:~'U''~-'Z)~(- ~/¢--~/'1c~' 119 ADDRESS 17 IS- d/xEc-~ErA Ax/. _%ut t~' 500 cITY ~)~--~0C~r~ ~2o STATE ~.:/2 121 ZIP ~'~O / ~22 ;'..'"' ...'?:.:", .. :~.:j,'?::~;~ :.~?:~ ...... :~::'~V:':?~ ":~J~'~>':'~:~ ~¢~ '"~:~¥"" :'~':~'~:: ~;::::~::;~:;,;~:~.?.:??:;:;"~:::::': ...... " ..... ":':~' :' "¥",~.~:':~4:~ ~::~:~;f,;" :, , '" TITLE ~¢~ D C~ ~ 125 TITLE BUSINESS PHONE ~O~. ~. ~7) 126 BUSINESS PHONE ~O~- ~4. ~7/ 131 24-HOURPHONE ~O~. ~34- ~4~/ 127 24-HOURPHONE PAGER ~ 128 PAGER ¢ 133 Certification: Based on my inquiry of those individuals responsible for obtaining the information, I certify under penalty of law that I have personally examined and am familiar with the information submitted in this inventory and believe the information is true, accurate, and complete. SIGNATURE OF OWNER/OPERATOR / ~ DATE 134 NAME OF DOCUMENT PREPARER 135 ) 136 TITLE OF OWNERJOPERATOR 137 ERATOR (pdnt.,~(.)~..(/~j //'~--~(~ L'~t'~ F~"~?5 t 0 C'-fxJ""~' OE5 FORM 2750 (7/9¢) P:\OES2730.TV4.wpd