COMPLIANCE INFO_1991-1997 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Mr. William J. Marshall March 24, 1995 Page 2 .,i'• 1iiirii�:!Iir; .• A scaling. If you have any suggestions for dealing with air stripper scaling problems, we would be grateful for any technical assistance you could offer. Acid vapor emissions - we've made several modifications to the HCI acid tank, including installing a venting device to alleviate the corrosion caused by the HCI vapor emissions. Electrical and mechanical equipment malfunctions - we've notified the construction contractor that he must make the electrical and mechanical equipment corrections that he's responsible for by April 15, 1995 (see attached letter). We will continue to work on these and other problems until the treatment plant is running like it should. We feel we can accomplished this by July 1, 1995. Task 2: Define nature and extent of pollutant plume. Because we have not sampled the Northern California Youth Center (NCYC) agricultural well and the two private supply wells on the other side of Austin Road you said in your letter that the City is in violation of the Chapter 15 requirement to define the nature and extent of the pollutant plume. Although we may not agree that failing to sample those wells necessarily means we are in violation of Chapter 15, we do intend to make every effort to find out if the landfill plume could be impacting State property, private property, or both. As indicated in our August 29, 1994 letter to you (copy attached), we have serious concerns about the validity of the data obtained from the State's original agricultural well sampling effort. At your suggestion, we asked the State Office of Real Estate and Design Services (OREDS) on October 5, 1994 for copies of the quality control/quality assurance procedures followed in collecting and analyzing the sample (see attached letter). So far, we have gotten no response from them. After consulting with our City Attorney's Office we don't think sampling the supply wells is in the best interest of the City. We called Mr. Arnie Inouye and to ask for a meeting to discuss our concerns and propose an alternative to sampling the three supply wells. Mr. Inouye said it would be better if we submitted our proposal in writing. We propose to install a third plume migration detection well (MW -14) between the two existing detection wells (MW -12 and MW -13). The attached map shows the proposed location of this new well. Installing and sampling this well should address your concern that the City has no clean monitoring wells directly between the landfill and the three supply wells. Our plan is to install the well and have sampling results available within 90 days of the date you approve our proposal. Task 3: Comply with monitoring requirements of Order No. 92-143. You said in your letter that the City hadn't submitted any groundwater treatment plant monitoring reports for 1994, including the 1994 annual report.