Laserfiche WebLink
Jeryl Fry Page 2 <br /> On December 20, 1989 Acetone tank number 2 was removed. This tank contained waste Acetone.Two samples were <br /> taken from a depth of 15 feet. The North sample was reported to have a strong odor by the inspector present at the <br /> removal. The results of this analysis indicates residual Acetone at a concentration of 930 ppm in the soil sample. <br /> The South sample was non detectable for all constituents in EPA method 8240. <br /> Remediation of the site was discontinued after the tank removal excavation was backfilled. <br /> Cleanup levels for the Acetone tanks and the other constituents associated with these tanks are governed by the State <br /> Water Resources Control Board Resolution No. 92-49. Section 4 of the resolution states "WC (Water Code Section <br /> 13001) requires that any person who has discharged or discharges waste into waters of the state in violation of any <br /> waste discharge requirements or other order or prohibition issued by a Regional Water Board or the State Water <br /> Board, or who has caused or permitted, causes or permits, or threatens to cause or permit any waste to be <br /> discharged or deposited where it is, or probably will be, discharged into the waters of the state and creates, <br /> or threatens to create,a condition of pollution or nuisance may be required to cleanup the discharge and abate <br /> the effects thereof. This section authorizes Regional Water Boards to require complete cleanup of all waste <br /> discharged and restoration of affected water to background conditions (i.e., the water quality that existed <br /> before the discharge). The term waste discharge requirements includes those which implement the National <br /> Pollutant Discharge and Elimination System program." <br /> PHS/EHD and the Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board has interpreted the statement that says, a <br /> waste deposited where it may create a condition of pollution, to include soil contamination. Certain types of <br /> discharges such as petroleum fuels have been determined to be non threatening under certain site conditions allowing <br /> residual levels to remain in place. There has been no similar determination made for contaminants such as Acetone. <br /> Therefore, the cleanup is governed by the Board Resolution and cleanup levels are background. Since Acetone is <br /> not a naturally occurring compound at this site, background levels are achieved when Acetone and its associated <br /> compounds are no longer detectable by laboratory analysis. <br /> PHS/BHD recommends that additional investigation be conducted in the area of the former product and waste acetone <br /> tank areas to determine an estimation of the amount of contamination currently present. Choice of remediation <br /> technology and cost are both dependent upon the concentration, and the lateral and vertical extent of residual <br /> contamination, which exists at the site. <br /> At this time, PHS/EHD requests that you submit a workplan which will address the scope of work suggested in this <br /> letter by April 15, 1995. <br /> If you have any questions please call Steven Sasson at (209) 468-3459. <br /> Donna Heran, REHS, Director <br /> Environmental Health Division <br /> *StevenSassn, Senior REHS Diane M. Hinson, REHS <br /> Site Mitigation Unit Supervisor <br /> SS <br /> cc: Mr. Vanni- Vanni, Fraser, Hartwell and Rogers <br /> cc: Elizabeth Thayer- CVRWQCB <br />