Laserfiche WebLink
STATk OF CALIFORNIA Environmental ProtectiPency PETE WILSON Governor <br /> CALIFORNIA REGIONAL WATER QUALITY CONTROL BOARD <br /> CENTRAL VALLEY REGION - a <br /> 3443 Routier Road,Sufte A <br /> Sacramento,CA 95627-3098 _ <br /> PHONE:(916)2553000 1 _ <br /> FAX(916)255-3015 +ouum <br /> 31 December 1996 <br /> Mr. Jack Tierney <br /> Kearney-National, Inc. <br /> Five Corporate Park Drive, Suite 114 <br /> White Plains, NY 10604-3805 <br /> I,4-DI0XANE SAMPLING AT KEARNEY-KPF, STOCKTON, SAN JOAQUIN COUNTY <br /> I have reviewed the 12 November 1996 letter from Dudek and Associates regarding the two <br /> initial sampling events for 1,4-dioxane at the Kearney-KPF site in Stockton. The letter requested <br /> clarification about the toxicological assessment of the hazards posed by 1,4-dioxane. The <br /> enclosed memorandum from the Board's Assistant Executive Officer to the Department of Toxic <br /> Substances Control(DTSC) should help to clarify the Board's position on 1,4-dioxane. <br /> As the memo states, DTSC's position is inconsistent with the Central Valley Regional Water <br /> Quality Control Board's Basin Plan cleanup policy and water quality objective for toxicity. The <br /> memo requests that DTSC reconsider its directive or amend or clarify its memo to inform DTSC <br /> staff and responsible parties (RPs)that the Regional Boards may have more stringent <br /> requirements with which RPs must comply. A meeting is scheduled for 6 January 1997 between <br /> DTSC and Board staff to discuss these issues. <br /> The Board is requiring monitoring for 1,4-dioxane at sites with trichlorethylene or <br /> 1,1,1-trichloroethane contamination in ground water to meet the requirements in the Basin Plan. <br /> Sites with confirmed 1,4-dioxane in ground water are being required to determine the extent of <br /> contamination and implement remediation, if appropriate. <br /> One monitoring well and one extraction well at Keamey-KPF contained 1,4-dioxane in the first <br /> two sampling events for this contaminant. Mr. Peter Quinlan of Dudek and Associates has <br /> informed me that the same laboratory which analyzed the first two samples could not achieve the <br /> 2 µg/1 detection limit previously achieved in subsequent samples of effluent from the treatment <br /> system for 1,4-dioxane. Based on the problems with the detection limit and the variations noted <br /> in the 12 November 1996 letter in the concentrations of 1,4-dioxane between the two sampling <br /> events, Mr. Quinlan expressed concern about the reliability of the initial data. <br /> Given these concerns, quarterly sampling for 1,4-dioxane should continue. If future sampling <br /> confirms the presence of 1,4-dioxane in ground water at Keamey-KPF the Board will require that <br /> the extent of the contamination be determined and the contamination remediated. <br />