Laserfiche WebLink
STATE OF CALIFORNIA • • GEORGE DEUKMEJIAN. Governor <br /> CALIFORNIA REGIONAL WATER QUALITY CONTROL BOARD— <br /> CENTRAL VALLEY REGION <br /> 3443 ROUTIER ROAD. SUITE A 4 <br /> SACRAMENTO. CA 95827-3098 <br /> 19 December 1990 <br /> Mr. Paul Verma <br /> Department of Public Works <br /> City of Tracy <br /> 520 West Tracy Boulevard <br /> Tracy, CA 95376 <br /> SECOND REQUEST FOR REPORT OF WASTE DISCHARGE AND REVIEW OF DRAFT SPECIFICATIONS <br /> FOR BIOREMEDIATION PROJECT, TRACY MUNICIPAL AIRPORT, (BECK DEVELOPMENT PROPERTY), <br /> TRACY, SAN JOAQUIN COUNTY (CASE# 2946) <br /> We have reviewed the draft bioremediation project specifications given to us in <br /> the S December 1990 meeting at your office and the 11 December 1990 letter <br /> discussing that meeting. Comments and issues regarding the draft specifications <br /> which need to be addressed are stated below. Additionally, statements made in <br /> the 11 December 1990 letter are not consistent with our understanding of how the <br /> major issues were resolved. <br /> We stated that the City had three basic options as far as handling the <br /> contaminated soils excavated from the Schulte road site. First, the City could <br /> take the soil to a permitted disposal facility. Second, the City could leave the <br /> soil on Beck Development property adjacent to the excavation site. Thirdly, the <br /> City could take the soil to the proposed site of the land treatment facility and <br /> incur the risk of having to move the soil again if required. It should be <br /> understood that the decision to excavate the soil and exercise one of the above <br /> options, as well as obtain the required permits, remains the responsibility of <br /> the City. <br /> In regards to your statement that we agree that the soil is not hazardous, this <br /> statement is not true. We said, based on the data verbally presented to date by <br /> the City, the soil is probably not hazardous. We stated that levels of oil and <br /> grease above 1000 mg/kg may not be hazardous if the City had conducted Title 22, <br /> California Code of Regulations tests to see if the material was hazardous. In <br /> your draft specifications, you state that the contaminated soil contains up to <br /> 11 , 100 ppm of oil and grease which is four to six times higher than indicated in <br /> prior conversations. <br /> The City to date has not submitted any actual analytical results from recent <br /> samples taken from the excavation site to demonstrate that the soils are not <br /> hazardous and need not be managed as a hazardous waste. However, we stated that <br /> the City could submit a letter stating that they were self-certifying that the <br /> soils were not hazardous along with the data and documentation supporting the <br /> certification. We also asked the City to send a copy of the self-certification <br /> to the Department of Health Services for review. <br />