DOCSLIB.ORG

First Five-Year Review Report for Pemaco Superfund Site Maywood, California

Total Page：16

File Type：pdf, Size：1020Kb

Download full-text PDF Read full-text
First Five-Year Review Report for Pemaco Superfund Site Maywood, California SDMS DOCID# 1123240 First Five-Year Review Report for Pemaco Superfund Site Maywood, California September 2010 u.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 9 San Francisco, California Approved by: Date: ~M~~~ Kathleen Salyer Assistant Director Superfund Division California Site Cleanup Branch Table of Contents Executive Summary..............................................................................................................ES-1 Five-Year Review Summary Form .......................................................................................ES-2 1.0 Introduction .....................................................................................................................4 2.0 Site Chronology ..............................................................................................................5 3.0 Background .....................................................................................................................7 3.1 Site Location and Physical Characteristics ...................................................................7 3.2 Former, Current, and Future Land Use.........................................................................8 3.3 History of Contamination...............................................................................................9 3.4 Initial Response.............................................................................................................9 3.5 Basis for Taking Action................................................................................................10 4.0 Remedial Actions ..........................................................................................................11 4.1 Remedy Selection .......................................................................................................11 4.1.1 Surface and Near-Surface Soil Remediation ..........................................................12 4.1.2 Upper Vadose-Zone Soil and Perched Groundwater (3 –35 ft bgs)........................12 4.1.3 Lower Vadose Zone Soil and Exposition Zone Groundwater..................................12 4.2 Remediation Levels.....................................................................................................13 4.3 Remedy Implementation .............................................................................................16 4.3.1 Soil Capping ............................................................................................................16 4.3.2 Groundwater- and Vapor-Extraction System...........................................................16 4.3.3 Electrical Resistance Heating System.....................................................................19 4.3.4 Groundwater and Vapor Treatment Plant ...............................................................19 4.3.5 Institutional Controls................................................................................................20 4.4 Required Monitoring....................................................................................................20 4.5 System Operations/Operation and Maintenance (O&M).............................................21 5.0 Progress Since the Last Five-Year Review.................................................................25 i Table of Contents, Continued 6.0 Five Year Review Process............................................................................................26 6.1 Administrative Components, Community Notification, Document Review ..................26 6.2 Community Notification and Involvement....................................................................26 6.3 Document Review .......................................................................................................26 6.4 Data Review................................................................................................................27 6.4.1 Soil ..........................................................................................................................27 6.4.2 Groundwater............................................................................................................28 6.5 Site Inspection.............................................................................................................48 6.6 Interviews ....................................................................................................................49 6.6.1 Technical Interviews................................................................................................49 6.6.2 Community Interviews .............................................................................................50 7.0 Technical Assessment .................................................................................................51 7.1 Question A: Is the remedy functioning as intended by the decision documents? .......51 7.1.1 Remedial Action Performance.................................................................................51 7.1.2 System Operations / O&M.......................................................................................52 7.1.3 Opportunities for Optimization.................................................................................52 7.1.4 Early indicators of potential issues ..........................................................................53 7.1.5 Implementation of Institutional Controls ..................................................................53 7.2 Question B: Are the exposure assumptions, toxicity data, cleanup levels, and remedial action objectives (RAOs) used at the time of the remedy selection still valid? .........................................................................................................54 7.2.1 Changes in Standards and To-Be-Considered Criteria (TBCs) ..............................54 7.2.2 Changes in Exposure Pathways, Toxicity, and Other Contaminant Characteristics56 7.2.3 Exposure Pathways.................................................................................................56 7.2.4 Toxicity Factors .......................................................................................................56 7.2.5 Changes in Risk Assessment Methods...................................................................56 7.2.6 Expected Progress towards Meeting RAOs ............................................................57 7.3 Question C: Has any other information come to light that could call into question the protectiveness of the remedy?.............................................................57 ii Table of Contents, Continued 8.0 Issues .............................................................................................................................58 8.1 Issue 1: Institutional Control Verification – Zoning ......................................................58 8.2 Issue 2: Institutional Control Verification – Deed Restriction.......................................58 8.3 Issue 3: Exposition ‘D’ Zone Concentrations...............................................................58 9.0 Recommendations ........................................................................................................59 10.0 Protectiveness Statement ............................................................................................60 11.0 Next Review...................................................................................................................61 12.0 References.....................................................................................................................62 Figures 1-1 Site Map 4-1 Pemaco Site Groundwater and Vapor-Extraction System 4-2 Site Plan with All Monitoring and Extraction Wells 6-1 Recent TCE Detections above 25 µg/L 6-2 Pre-HVDPE Maximum Concentrations of TCE in Exposition ‘A’ Zone Groundwater, Pemaco Superfund Site, Maywood CA 6-3 Post-ERH Maximum Concentrations of TCE in Exposition ‘A’ Zone Groundwater, Pemaco Superfund Site, Maywood CA 6-4 Pre-HVDPE Maximum Concentrations of TCE in Exposition ‘B’ Zone Groundwater, Pemaco Superfund Site, Maywood CA 6-5 Post-ERH Maximum Concentrations of TCE in Exposition ‘B’ Zone Groundwater, Pemaco Superfund Site, Maywood CA 6-6 Pre-HVDPE Maximum Concentrations of TCE in Exposition ‘C’ Zone Groundwater, Pemaco Superfund Site, Maywood CA 6-7 Post-ERH Maximum Concentrations of TCE in Exposition ‘C’ Zone Groundwater, Pemaco Superfund Site, Maywood CA 6-8 TCE Concentrations in Exposition ‘C’ Zone Groundwater 6-9 TCE Concentrations in Exposition ‘D’ Zone Groundwater 6-10 D-zone Map 7-1 City of Maywood Municipal Wells iii Table of Contents, Continued Tables 2-1 Chronology of Site Events 4-1 SSRLs Specified in the 2005 ROD 4-2 Current Groundwater and Soil-Vapor Monitoring Program 4-3 Maintenance Log Summary: Significant O&M Activities at Pemaco Superfund Sitefrom 2007 – 2010 4-4 Summary of O&M Costs at Pemaco Superfund Site 6-1 Pre-HVDPE and Post-ERH Maximum Concentrations of Select COCs: Perched Zone Groundwater 6-2 Pre-HVDPE and Post-ERH Maximum Concentrations of Select COCs: Exposition ‘A’ Zone Groundwater 6-3 Pre-HVDPE and Post-ERH Maximum Concentrations of Select COCs: Exposition ‘B’ Zone Groundwater 6-4 Pre-HVDPE and Post-ERH Maximum Concentrations of Select COCs: Exposition ‘C’ Zone Groundwater 6-5 Pre-HVDPE and Post-ERH Maximum Concentrations of Select COCs: Exposition ‘D’ Zone Groundwater 7-1 Optimization Opportunities 7-2 Groundwater Analytical Results, March 2010 8-1 Issues and Recommendations Appendices A Public Notifications
Load more

Recommended publications
  • Renewable and Alternative Energy at Superfund Sites HARNESSING NEW SOURCES of POWER
    Renewable and Alternative Energy at Superfund Sites www.epa.gov HARNESSING NEW SOURCES OF POWER Introduction This report provides interested parties – local governments, communities, utility and energy companies, and federal and state agencies – with an What’s Inside? overview of renewable and alternative energy opportunities at Superfund sites. Renewable energy facilities can be located on formerly contaminated + Superfund Sites and Renewable Energy lands. Renewable energy can also facilitate the cleanup of Superfund sites. In some cases, site wastes can serve as an alternative energy resource. Finally, the report describes available resources for parties interested in + 2010 Update: pursuing these opportunities. EPA-Tracked Sites To ensure domestic energy security and environmental sustainability, the + Taking a Closer Look: identification of diversified, renewable and alternative energy sources is a long-term national priority. In 2008, EPA launched a new effort – the Siting Wind Energy Renewable Energy on Contaminated Land and Mining Sites Initiative – to Biomass Energy highlight opportunities for the development of clean and renewable energy Solar Energy projects on contaminated lands. Georthermal Energy EPA is also working to help turn these opportunities into reality for + Renewable Energy and Green communities across the country. EPA’s Superfund Redevelopment Initiative Remediation (SRI) helps communities reclaim and reuse contaminated lands for a wide range of purposes, including renewable and alternative energy generation. Through tools, partnerships and activities, SRI continues to provide local + Waste Recycling at Superfund Sites communities with new opportunities to grow and prosper. + Taking a Look Back: To date, several significant opportunities have been realized. In Lackawanna, Superfund Sites and Energy Opportunities New York, the Steel Winds project has transformed a former slag pile into a 20-megawatt wind energy facility.
    [Show full text]
  • Ltr: Sep 2016 Monthly Monitoring Rpt, W/Attchs
    SEMS-RM DOCID # 1163863 317 E. Main Street Ventura, CA 93001 Tel: (805) 585-2110 Fax: (805) 585-2111 MONTHLY MONITORING REPORT SEPTEMBER 2016 DATE: October 28, 2016 (revised Jan 4, 2017 to correct groundwater gradient to southeasterly - see Section 2.0, 3rd line). PREPARED FOR: Rose Marie Caraway, Remedial Project Manager/Environmental Scientist U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 9 75 Hawthorne Street, SFD 7-2 San Francisco, California 94105 PREPARED BY: Max Ramos, E.I.T., Staff Environmental Engineer, OTIE Lindsey Larsen, Environmental Scientist, OTIE John Wingate, P.E., Project Manager, OTIE RE: September 2016 Plant Influent and Effluent Sampling Results for the Pemaco Superfund Site Treatment Plant, Maywood, California 1.0 INTRODUCTION The United States Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA) is currently implementing the Long-Term Response Action (LTRA) at the Pemaco Superfund Site in Maywood, California. Oneida Total Integrated Enterprises, LLC (OTIE) performs monthly monitoring work for the U.S. EPA under contract by the United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), Los Angeles District Contract Number W912PL 16-C-0016. OTIE prepared this Report to summarize the results of monthly influent and effluent water and vapor sampling performed on September 13, 2016 at the Pemaco Superfund Site Treatment Plant (Plant). The influent and effluent water samples (SP-201 and SP-209, respectively), and influent and effluent vapor samples (SP-104 and SP-106, respectively) were analyzed for volatile organic compounds (VOCs) and 1,4-dioxane. Samples were analyzed in accordance with the Final Sampling and Analysis Plan, (Field Sampling Plan and Quality Assurance Project Plan), Long-Term Response Action for the Pemaco Remedial Action (OTIE, 2015).
    [Show full text]
  • May 2016 Monthly Monitoring Rpt, W/Attchs
    SEMS-RM DOCID # 1163861 317 E. Main Street Ventura, CA 93001 Tel: (805) 585‐2110 Fax: (805) 585‐2111 MONTHLY MONITORING REPORT MAY 2016 DATE: July 8, 2016 (revised Jan 4, 2017 to correct groundwater gradient to southeasterly - see Section 2.0, 3rd line) PREPARED FOR: Rose Marie Caraway, Remedial Project Manager/Environmental Scientist U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 9 75 Hawthorne Street, SFD 7‐2 San Francisco, California 94105 PREPARED BY: Max Ramos, E.I.T., Staff Environmental Engineer, OTIE John Wingate, P.E., Project Manager, OTIE Lindsey Larsen, Environmental Scientist, OTIE RE: May 2016 Plant Influent and Effluent Sampling Results for the Pemaco Superfund Site Treatment Plant, Maywood, California 1.0 INTRODUCTION The United States Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA) is currently implementing the Long‐Term Response Action (LTRA) at the Pemaco Superfund Site in Maywood, California. Oneida Total Integrated Enterprises, LLC. (OTIE) performs monthly monitoring work for the U.S. EPA under contract by the United States Army Corps of Engineers (USACE), Los Angeles District Contract Number W912PL 13‐D‐0017, Task Order 0002. OTIE prepared this Report to summarize the results of monthly influent and effluent water and vapor sampling performed on May 12, 2016 at the Pemaco Superfund Site Treatment Plant (Plant). The influent and effluent water samples (SP‐201 and SP‐209, respectively), and influent and effluent vapor samples (SP‐104 and SP‐106, respectively) were analyzed for volatile organic compounds (VOCs) and 1,4‐dioxane. Samples were analyzed in accordance with the Final Sampling and Analysis Plan, (Field Sampling Plan and Quality Assurance Project Plan), Long‐Term Response Action for the Pemaco Remedial Action (OTIE, 2015).
    [Show full text]
  • Green Remediation and the Use of Renewable Energy Sources for Remediation Projects
    Green Remediation and the Use of Renewable Energy Sources for Remediation Projects August 2007 Prepared by Amanda D. Dellens National Network for Environmental Management Studies Fellow Case Western Reserve University for U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response Office of Superfund Remediation and Technology Innovation Washington, D.C. www.epa.gov www.clu-in.org Green Remediation and the Use of Renewable Energy for Remediation Projects NOTICE This document was prepared by a National Network for Environmental Management Studies (NNEMS) grantee under a fellowship from the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). This report was not subject to EPA peer review or technical review. The EPA makes no warranties, expressed or implied, including without limitation, warranty for completeness, accuracy, or usefulness of the information, warranties as to the merchantability, or fitness for a particular purpose. Moreover, the listing of any technology, corporation, company, person, or facility in this report does not constitute endorsement, approval, or recommendation by the EPA. The report contains information attained from a wide variety of currently available sources, including project documents, reports, periodicals, Internet websites, and personal communication with both academically and commercially employed sources. No attempts were made to independently confirm the resources used. It has been reproduced to help provide federal agencies, states, consulting engineering firms, private industries, and technology developers with information on the current status of this project. About the National Network for Environmental Management Studies The NNEMS is a comprehensive fellowship program managed by the Environmental Education Division of EPA. The purpose of the NNEMS Program is to provide students with practical research opportunities and experiences.
    [Show full text]
  • Renewable and Alternative Energy at Superfund Sites: Harnessing New
    Renewable and Alternative Energy at Superfund Sites www.epa.gov HARNESSING NEW SOURCES OF POWER Introduction This report provides interested parties – local governments, communities, utility and energy companies, and federal and state agencies – with an What’s Inside? overview of renewable and alternative energy opportunities at Superfund sites. Renewable energy facilities can be located on formerly contaminated + Superfund Sites and Renewable Energy lands. Renewable energy can also facilitate the cleanup of Superfund sites. In some cases, site wastes can serve as an alternative energy resource. Finally, the report describes available resources for parties interested in + 2010 Update: pursuing these opportunities. EPA-Tracked Sites To ensure domestic energy security and environmental sustainability, the + Taking a Closer Look: identification of diversified, renewable and alternative energy sources is a long-term national priority. In 2008, EPA launched a new effort – the Siting Wind Energy Renewable Energy on Contaminated Land and Mining Sites Initiative – to Biomass Energy highlight opportunities for the development of clean and renewable energy Solar Energy projects on contaminated lands. Georthermal Energy EPA is also working to help turn these opportunities into reality for + Renewable Energy and Green communities across the country. EPA’s Superfund Redevelopment Initiative Remediation (SRI) helps communities reclaim and reuse contaminated lands for a wide range of purposes, including renewable and alternative energy generation. Through tools, partnerships and activities, SRI continues to provide local + Waste Recycling at Superfund Sites communities with new opportunities to grow and prosper. + Taking a Look Back: To date, several significant opportunities have been realized. In Lackawanna, Superfund Sites and Energy Opportunities New York, the Steel Winds project has transformed a former slag pile into a 20-megawatt wind energy facility.
    [Show full text]
  • Examples of Groundwater Remediation at NPL Sites
    EPA 542-R-18-002 May 2018 http://www.epa.gov/remedytech http://cluin.org Examples of Groundwater Remediation at NPL Sites Notice and Disclaimer Preparation of this report has been funded by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) Office of Superfund Remediation and Technology Innovation (OSRTI) under Contract Numbers EP-D-09-053 and EP-W-14-001. Information in this report is derived primarily from EPA sources, including personal communications with EPA staff familiar with the remedies discussed in this report. Some information was also obtained from state personnel and remediation contractors. This report is not intended, nor can it be relied upon, to create any rights enforceable by any party in litigation with the United States. Mention of trade names or commercial products does not constitute endorsement or recommendation for use. A PDF version of Examples of Groundwater Remediation at NPL Sites is available for viewing or downloading from https://www.epa.gov/remedytech, or http://www.cluin.org. For questions concerning this document, contact Linda Fiedler at [email protected] or 703-603-7194. Acknowledgements Acknowledgment is given to the federal and state Remedial Project Managers and technical staff and other remediation professionals for providing information for this document. Their cooperation and willingness to share their expertise on Superfund remedies will help regulators and system operators make informed decisions that will promote progress towards remedial action objectives at NPL and other contaminated sites throughout the U.S. and other nations. Cover pictures from top, clockwise: Groundwater treatment facility at Pemaco Superfund Site; In situ thermal treatment at Fort Lewis Logistics Center Superfund Site; Treatment Plant #1 at Holingsworth Solderless Terminal Superfund Site; Treatment building and air stripper tower at Tabernacle Drum Dump Superfund Site.
    [Show full text]
  • Technical Study
    710 Arterial Intersection #71 E Slauson Ave & S Eastern Ave Los Angeles, CA 90040 Inquiry Number: 3167286.12s September 15, 2011 The EDR Radius Map™ Report 440 Wheelers Farms Road Milford, CT 06461 Toll Free: 800.352.0050 www.edrnet.com FORM-NULL-ASH TABLE OF CONTENTS SECTION PAGE Executive Summary ES1 Overview Map 2 Detail Map 3 Map Findings Summary 4 Map Findings 8 Orphan Summary 210 Government Records Searched/Data Currency Tracking GR-1 GEOCHECK ADDENDUM GeoCheck - Not Requested Thank you for your business. Please contact EDR at 1-800-352-0050 with any questions or comments. Disclaimer - Copyright and Trademark Notice This Report contains certain information obtained from a variety of public and other sources reasonably available to Environmental Data Resources, Inc. It cannot be concluded from this Report that coverage information for the target and surrounding properties does not exist from other sources. NO WARRANTY EXPRESSED OR IMPLIED, IS MADE WHATSOEVER IN CONNECTION WITH THIS REPORT. ENVIRONMENTAL DATA RESOURCES, INC. SPECIFICALLY DISCLAIMS THE MAKING OF ANY SUCH WARRANTIES, INCLUDING WITHOUT LIMITATION, MERCHANTABILITY OR FITNESS FOR A PARTICULAR USE OR PURPOSE. ALL RISK IS ASSUMED BY THE USER. IN NO EVENT SHALL ENVIRONMENTAL DATA RESOURCES, INC. BE LIABLE TO ANYONE, WHETHER ARISING OUT OF ERRORS OR OMISSIONS, NEGLIGENCE, ACCIDENT OR ANY OTHER CAUSE, FOR ANY LOSS OF DAMAGE, INCLUDING, WITHOUT LIMITATION, SPECIAL, INCIDENTAL, CONSEQUENTIAL, OR EXEMPLARY DAMAGES. ANY LIABILITY ON THE PART OF ENVIRONMENTAL DATA RESOURCES, INC. IS STRICTLY LIMITED TO A REFUND OF THE AMOUNT PAID FOR THIS REPORT. Purchaser accepts this Report "AS IS". Any analyses, estimates, ratings, environmental risk levels or risk codes provided in this Report are provided for illustrative purposes only, and are not intended to provide, nor should they be interpreted as providing any facts regarding, or prediction or forecast of, any environmental risk for any property.
    [Show full text]