COMPLIANCE INFO_2008-PRESENT - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Mr. Tom Canales September 30, 2013 Page 2 Exposure Pathways Additionally, you raised the issue of whether the PEA report considered the effect of fires as an alternate exposure pathway. The PEA report did not consider fires specifically as an alternate exposure pathway; but it did explore inhalation (airborne particulates) as a pathway. The PEA report analyzed a hypothetical situation where humans were exposed via inhalation to airborne particulates from the Site over the course of 24 hours and determined that the likely health risk to neighboring residents of the Site would be below regulatory screening levels at which regulatory action would be required. This is due to anticipated short, intermittent exposure duration and relatively low chemical concentrations present in the soil of the Site. Based on this analysis, DTSC does not think it is necessary to consider fires separately as an exposure pathway. Weed Abatement and Site Security DTSC contracted for weed abatement three times between 2009 and 2011 in order to gain access for investigation and remediation activities at the Site. However, DTSC has not found it necessary to contract for weed control since completion of the PEA. The fence and warning signs that DTSC required are intended to prevent accidental exposure to contaminated soil. DTSC repaired the fence multiple times from 2009 to 2012. In a recent letter, DTSC reminded the Site owner of his responsibility to maintain the fence and directed him to perform repair work on breaches in the fence. DTSC has issued the owner a follow up letter pertaining to Site security. Currently, DTSC is reviewing its regulatory authority to determine if additional actions against the owner can be taken. Regardless of the condition of the fence, if vagrants move onto the property, and the owner does not deter their residency, the fence will do little to discourage them. Although DTSC may not have specific authority to deter trespassing on private property, local ordinances may require the owner to maintain the fence and prohibit trespassers. In short, the Site owner and local authorities may have the most effective means to intervene and prevent trespassing. Cleanup of the Site Finally, you asked when the Site would be completely cleaned up. As stated above, enough cleanup has occurred, to date, to reduce any risk to public health and the environment off-site. However, the Site would have to undergo further remediation to protect onsite residents and workers if it were to be developed. The current owner claims he does not have the funds to conduct the longer-term cleanup and has indicated to DTSC that he would like to sell the Site. DTSC hopes that the next owner will have the funds to conduct a thorough remediation.