Laserfiche WebLink
On February 28, representatives from SPPL and Arcady Oil Company met <br />with representatives of various regulatory agencies to discuss the status <br />of the investigations and cleanup activities, and to set a time schedule <br />for development of a "work plan". During this meeting it was suggested <br />that the leak may have started as a small and unnoticeable leak on January <br />9, 1986, if not earlier. It was stated by Arcady Oil that petroleum <br />products had been detected in Monitoring Well #9 on January 9, 1986, and <br />hydrocarbon odors were also detected in Wells 1, 8, and "Old" 2. It was <br />noted that since metering of the pipeline waii accurate to 5 barrels in <br />10,000 (which is o7 the same accuracy as the precision tank testing <br />recommended by the National Fire Protection Association in NFPA .329), any <br />leakage less than this would not be detected by pipeline operators. <br />1.2 Objectives and Scope <br />At the meeting held on February 28, the Regional Water Quality Control <br />Board requested that SPPL prepare a work plan for characterizing the <br />distribution of petroleum fuel at the Arcady landfill and surrounding. <br />areas (if required) and establishing the need for any remedial action. <br />SPPL contracted with The MARK Group to prepare the work plan as well as to <br />analyze data and provide technical assistance during emergency cleanup <br />procedUres. <br />The following report presents descriptions of the site, the spill, the <br />emergency activities employed for cleanup, and fuel containment. The report <br />also assesses the existing database and provides a description of the tasks <br />directed at site characterization and development of data for assessment of <br />remedial action alternatives. <br />1--2