<p> San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board EXECUTIVE OFFICER'S REPORT</p><p>A Monthly Report to The Board June 13, 2001</p><p>Proposition 13 – Completion of First Concerns have been raised by the public and Funding Round the news media over the last few months (Carrie Austin) regarding environmental contamination at Hamilton. Those concerns include a large The first funding round of the Costa- MTBE plume, originating at a former Navy Machado Water Action of 2000 (Prop 13) gas station, methane gas at potentially has been completed. The grants awarded in explosive levels in a capped landfill adjacent the San Francisco Bay Region include: to new home construction sites, and water  $750,000 Tomales Bay Watershed quality concerns at Pacheco Pond, a wildlife Enhancement Program (support dairies preserve and stormwater basin adjacent to in implementing nonpoint source the former military base. Congresswoman pollution and assist dairies and beef Woolsey, responding to her constituent ranches in protecting and restoring concerns about Hamilton, called a Press critical riparian habitat) Briefing on May 31, 2001 to hear from the  $200,000 San Francisquito Creek (Palo military and regulatory agencies as to how Alto / Menlo Park) Watershed Analysis we are addressing these concerns. The and Sediment Reduction Plan briefing included presentations by the Navy  $200,000 Codornices Creek (Berkeley / and Army and comments from the two Albany) Watershed Restoration Action regulatory agencies providing oversight for Plan the cleanup and property transfers, the  $80,000 Contra Costa County Regional Board and the Department of Watersheds Inventory and Creeks Toxic Substances Control (DTSC). Also in Restoration Strategy attendance were City of Novato officials and Marin County Supervisor Cynthia Murray. Applicants who were not funded in the first Media activity included newspapers, TV round have been provided feedback and stations, and a media helicopter. A site tour encouraged to reapply in the next round. was conducted after the press briefing. The second funding round is imminent. We Congresswoman Woolsey achieved are keeping the Board website updated so assurances from the Navy that the source of that prospective applicants have advance the MTBE plume would be contained on- notice of the schedule, and we have begun site at the former gas station site and from meeting with prospective applicants to the Army that funding would be made assist them in developing superior projects available to address the landfill methane gas. and grant applications. Another element of the cleanup is the Hamilton Army Airfield (Naomi Feger) remediation of the airfield and the utilization of dredged sediments (primarily from the Hamilton Army Airfield (Hamilton) in Port of Oakland) to construct wetlands over Novato was closed several years ago. the entire runway area. This proposal is Hamilton is now in the process of being sold favored by the State Coastal Conservancy or given to local government or the state (SCC) and federal government (Corps of after the necessary cleanup has been Engineers) and Board staff. To facilitate completed. Cleanup is underway. this, the SCC would take title in an "early" transfer and implement the proposal with</p><p>1 funding from the Corps. Eventually it would community, this project will serve as a be turned over to the US Fish and Wildlife vehicle for public education by Service and may become part of the demonstrating the productive use of proposed Marin Baylands National Wildlife reclaimed wastewater. Refuge. One sticking point is the presence of low levels of DDT on site, probably from Wendt Ranch Project, Contra Costa long-ago mosquito abatement activities, County (Kathryn Hart) which may pose a risk to endangered species that will inhabit the wetlands, specifically The Wendt Ranch Project, proposed by the Clapper Rail. The Corps proposes to Shapell Industries of Northern California, is essentially cover this potential aquatic a small housing development located in the hazard with at least 3 feet of clean sediments vicinity of Danville in Contra Costa County. or to move soils from areas of potential The project is of great concern to a resident scour. Long-term monitoring and adaptive living downstream of the project along management would be used to monitor the Alamo Creek, and several residents in the success of the wetlands and to ensure that Lawrence Road area to the southwest of the residual contamination has not impacted site. These residents are concerned about a wildlife. The Corps called an all-day number of different aspects of the project, Summit on June 5th, where all the including discharge of stormwater, and im- stakeholders reached a tentative agreement pacts to wetlands and groundwater. We be- to go forward with this plan, with some lieve that appropriate stormwater controls details yet to be finalized. We will bring to are included with the project design, and that the Board items on both the DDT proposal wetland issues have been adequately ad- and the placement of the dredge sediment dressed. Because the project is small and later this year. does not involve wetland fill, I will sign the water quality certification and waiver of Vallejo Reclaimed Water Project waste discharge requirements. (Tobi Tyler) Avalon Homes (Keith Lichten) Vallejo Sanitation and Flood Control District (District) is planning to use recycled The Avalon Homes Creek B erosion repair wastewater for the propagation of nursery project is proceeding towards approval and stock on approximately ½ acre at the likely construction this summer. This District’s wastewater treatment plant. project is for repair of significant erosion on Partnering with California Native Plant Creek B within the Avalon Homes Society (CNPS), the District would use subdivision in Fremont. Water Quality recycled wastewater to raise a variety of Certification for the project was previously plants to promote the use of native denied without prejudice based on vegetation in conjunction with best insufficient information on project design management practices for urban runoff and lack of a certified CEQA document. needs. Native plants are superior for mitigating upland soil erosion mitigation, re- Board staff have continued to work with vegetating denuded areas, and stream bank Avalon. Staff met with Avalon most stabilization. Many species also tend to be recently on June 6 to resolve outstanding drought tolerant and do not need pesticides. issues. Last week, Avalon submitted its It is anticipated that multiple agencies and written response to earlier staff comments. organizations would benefit by this project, We are now reviewing their response. At e.g. Greater Vallejo Recreation District, San present, the final remaining barrier to project Pablo Bay National Wildlife Refuge, and approval is agreement on Avalon's provision City of Vallejo’s Landscape Management of acceptable financial assurance (e.g., bond District. In addition to these benefits to the or other instrument) to ensure the success of</p><p>2 the proposed creek fix. Anticipating Palo Alto. The groundwater component of resolution of that issue, staff is preparing a the Remedial Action Plan, adopted by the draft Water Quality Certification for Board in 1992, called for the installation of a signature by the Executive Officer. (Avalon below ground impermeable barrier (slurry has to reactivate its Water Quality wall) and a groundwater pump and treat Certification application.) system to contain groundwater and prevent further migration of arsenic toward the Other agencies, including the State adjacent wetlands. Board staff approved a Department of Fish and Game, City of modified workplan for the slurry wall earlier Fremont, and U.S. Army Corps of this year. Pre-construction activities related Engineers, continue to work towards issuing to installation of the slurry wall began in their approvals. The Fremont City Council early June. The slurry wall itself will be provided initial approval for the project on installed during the week of June 18th. May 24, 2001, and project plans are now Completion of the slurry wall will be the last under review by the City's engineering major remedial action for arsenic department. contamination in the upland portion of this federal Superfund site. All Star Gas/Kelly Engineer (Jolanta Uchman) ARCO Lawsuit (Randy Lee)</p><p>In March 2001 the Board imposed an ACL On February 6, 2001, Atlantic Richfield for late reports against All Star Gas, which Company (ARCO) filed a civil suit in San was subsequently appealed to the State Mateo County Superior Court against the Board. One of the arguments in the appeal State and Regional Boards, petitioning the was that there was no evidence of any Court’s review of a Section 13267 technical- release from the site. On June 8, we received report request letter issued to ARCO. The a subsurface investigation report for the site. Court ruled on May 29 in favor of ARCO. This report appears to indicate there was a In the ruling, the Court found that the release at the site. Analyses of soil and Regional Board proceeded in excess of its groundwater samples confirm that the site jurisdiction in making its determination to has significant soil and groundwater require ARCO to perform acts pursuant to pollution. The consultant has recommended written letter orders without satisfying the performing additional site characterization “hearing requirement” implied in the Water along with the installation of 3 monitoring Code, and that the Regional Board further wells to define groundwater conditions. abused its discretion in not proceeding in the Given the elevated concentrations manner required by law. discovered, Board staff will also request a workplan for interim remedial action Water Code Section 13267 provides that the measures in addition to characterization of Regional Board may investigate the quality groundwater conditions at the site and the of any waters of the State within its region, extent soil and groundwater pollution. and may require any person, who has discharged, discharges, or is suspected of discharging, to submit a technical report. Rhone-Poulenc Update (Mark Johnson) ARCO was required in 1999 by a Section 13267 letter to submit a preliminary The Regional Board has been overseeing investigation work plan of its former investigation and remediation of soil and facilities at San Francisco International groundwater pollution related to arsenic Airport. ARCO responded by filing two releases from the former Rhone- petitions to the State Board for review, and a Poulenc/Aventis, herbicide/pesticide plant, law suit, after the State Board dismissed located at the 1990 Bay Road Site in East both petitions. A satisfactory work plan</p><p>3 was, however, submitted and ARCO has radiological assessment of the activities at substantially completed its preliminary the site. investigation. Therefore, there is no immediate need for a Board hearing. In a related development, on June 6, 2001, approximately 3 weeks after the Navy's We normally issue Section 13267 letters initial discovery, they issued a press release without a Board hearing and have never, that elevated radiation levels were with the exception of ARCO, been requested encountered while excavating contaminated by a letter recipient to hold a hearing. Board soil and sandblast grit on Parcel B. staff did not grant ARCO’s request for a According to the Navy and the U.S. hearing, but explained clearly the reasonable Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA), need for the required investigation. ARCO the radiation levels do not pose a significant was, however, advised of the opportunity to risk to site workers or neighbors. Regional address the Board directly, during the public Board staff are concerned that a large forum session. Legal counsel is currently volume of the sandblast grit may have been assessing the implication of the Court ruling disposed at landfills in the area that are not to decide what legal and/or administrative permitted to receive radiological wastes. follow-up actions may be appropriate. Community groups have threatened to sue the Navy under California Proposition 65 Hunters Point Shipyard (Brad Job) and have alleged that the Navy was negligent in failing to report the presence of In a letter dated May 21, 2001, U.S. radiation to environmental workers and Senators Barbara Boxer and Diane Feinstein neighbors in a timely manner. The USEPA and U.S. Representative Nancy Pelosi have also issued a press release on June 7, 2001 requested that the Navy respond to recent that they intend to fine the Navy $25,000 for allegations that the types and volumes of failure to notify the regulatory agencies of a radioactive material that were handled and landfill fire at HPS that occurred in August the number of locations where radiological of 2000. work was conducted at Hunters Point Shipyard (HPS) have been consistently In-house Training understated. While it has been common knowledge that Navy ships involved in the Our May training was held in early June and Bikini Atoll atomic bomb tests were brought consisted of a field trip to west Contra Costa to HPS for study and decontamination, a County. The training focused on recent article in a local publication has groundwater protection and waste questioned if radioactive sand blast grit, containment issues. Staff visited Point radioactive acid rinsate, and other Molate (a major bulk fuel storage and radioactive materials were disposed at the cleanup site) and West Contra Costa landfill former shipyard. (an unlined bay front landfill). Our regular June training will be on SWIM, the database Although it was previously anticipated that used by the state and regional boards to radiological cleanup activities were track program activities. Brown-bag topics essentially completed at the site, the Navy included a June 13 topic on wetland policies. recently identified several areas that appear to contain unacceptable levels of radiation Staff Presentations including an extensive area of shoreline debris on Parcel E. Although the most Stephen Hill gave a presentation titled "A prevalent radiological contaminant at HPS is Regulatory Perspective on Bioremediation radium, other radioactive fission products and Other Innovative Remedial have been detected in certain areas. The Technologies" at an international Navy is reportedly finalizing a historical groundwater remediation conference in San</p><p>4 Diego on June 6, 2001. Greg Bartow co- efforts, and to remediate nonpoint source authored the presentation, which pollution problems. She emphasized staff’s summarized the results of our recent in- commitment to work with Bay Area house survey on innovative groundwater watershed groups to develop effective and cleanup methods and featured a competitive grant proposals. To this end, bioremediation case example from our Carrie Austin, the Board’s Proposition 13 region. Coordinator, will assist her in holding a workshop at the next Forum meeting, to Several Board staff participated in a June discuss the upcoming Request for Proposals 14-15, 2001, symposium on recalcitrant and (for the second round of Proposition 13 emerging contaminants in San Jose, grants. Carrie plans to conduct similar sponsored by the California Groundwater outreach in other areas of the Region. Resources Association and the Santa Clara Valley Water District. Keith Roberson co- Leslie Ferguson of the Watershed chaired a panel on innovative treatment Management Division recently was awarded technologies, Stephen Hill presented a a graduate fellowship from the Robert and regulatory perspective of innovative Patricia Switzer Foundation. Each year, ten groundwater cleanup methods, and Ravi such fellowships are awarded to graduate Arulanantham presented a risk-based students on the West Coast whose studies approach to MTBE site investigation and are directed toward improving the quality of cleanup. our natural environment and who "have the ability, determination and integrity to Ann Riley (Watershed Division) and Jill become environmental leaders in the 21st Marshall (Planning Unit) were invited century". The fellowship includes a speakers at the First "Annual Meeting" of financial award, a mentoring program and the Statewide Hydromodification ongoing participation in the Switzer Workgroup. The meeting's intent is to Environmental Network. Leslie is pursuing provide a communication forum for State a Master's Degree at UC Davis while Board, Regional Board, and other agency continuing to work at the Board. staff that deal with issues related modification of streams and other On May 24 Wil Bruhns spoke to two classes waterways in California. Ann Riley spoke of eighth graders at Martin Luther King on "Urban Stream Restoration and Changing Middle School in Berkeley, trying to Flood Control Practices " and Jill Marshall’s convince them to consider environmental talk covered stream functions, beneficial engineering as a career. He also discussed uses and basin planning. environmental problems in the Bay area.</p><p>Christine Boschen spoke at the May meeting I spoke at the dedication ceremonies of the of the Contra Costa Watershed Forum. The Delta Diablo Sanitation District’s new Contra Costa Watershed Forum is a recycled water facility on June 1. We are confederation of local stakeholder-driven highly complimentary of the District’s watershed stewardship groups, both public facility and the use of the water for and private, and serves as a nexus for industrial reuse (cooling water for two new communication, networking, and power plants) and parkland watering. cooperation among its members. Her talk focused on funding opportunities available through the State’s Proposition 13, and Federal Clean Water Act Section 319(h) and 205(j) grant programs. Funds from these programs are available to assist eligible watershed planning and enhancement</p><p>5 San Francisco Bay Area Power Plant Construction Summary</p><p>June 13, 2001 New Items in Italics Power Plants Currently Under Construction Project Applicant Capacity Regional Board Status Delta Energy Center Calpine and 880 MW  Facilitated in streamlining the (Pittsburg) Bechtel wastewater reuse permitting process  Reviewed Application for Certification (AFC)  General Industrial Stormwater Permit Notice Of Intent (NOI) has not yet been submitted Los Medanos Energy Center Calpine and 500 MW  Reviewed AFC (Pittsburg) Bechtel  General Industrial Stormwater Permit NOI has not yet been submitted United Golden Gate Peaking Project El Paso 51 MW  Reviewed AFC Phase I (provide power during peak Merchant  General Industrial Stormwater Permit load time only) Energy NOI has not yet been submitted (San Francisco International Airport) Company Total Generation Capacity: 1,431 MW</p><p>Power Plants with Application Currently Being Reviewed by CEC Project Applicant Capacity Regional Board Status Metcalf Energy Center Calpine and 600 MW  Reviewed AFC (San Jose) Bechtel  General Industrial Stormwater Permit NOI has not yet been submitted Potrero Repower Project Mirant 540 MW  Facilitated in the interpretation of (San Francisco) thermal limitation and requirements for thermal exemption  Reviewed AFC  Water Quality Certification application not yet submitted. Siting for cooling water intake structure yet to be determined.  NPDES Permit application submitted.</p><p>Potential Problem with community objections. United Golden Gate Project Phase II El Paso 520 MW No AFC or permit application received to date. (San Francisco International Airport) Merchant Energy Valero Cogeneration Project Valero 102 MW No AFC or permit application received to date. Refining Company Total Generation Capacity: 1,762 MW</p><p>Power Plant with Application Expected in 2001 Project Applicant Capacity Regional Board Status Russell City Energy Center Calpine/Bechtel 600 MW No AFC or permit application received to (Hayward) date. Potential Problem with wetland fill South City South City LLC 550 MW No AFC or permit application received to (South San Francisco) date. Petaluma Project FPL Energy 581 MW Project relocated out of Region.</p><p>6 San Francisco Bay Area Power Plant Construction Summary</p><p>Livermore Project Calpine Unknow No AFC or permit application received to date. Richmond Project City of Unknown No AFC or permit application received to Richmond date. Total Generation Capacity: 1,731 MW</p><p>Power Plant with Application Withdrawn Project Applicant Capacity Remarks Eastshore Substation Reliability Calpine 91.2 MW Provide power during peak load demand only Generation Project (Alameda County) Martin Substation Peaking Project Calpine 91.2 MW Provide power during peak load demand only (San Mateo County) Newark Substation Reliability Calpine 91.2 MW Provide power during peak load demand only Generation Project (Alameda County) San Francisco Bay Barged-Mounted PG&E 95 MW Provide power during peak load demand only Emergency Generator National (San Francisco County) Energy Group San Mateo Substation Peaking Calpine 91.2 MW Provide power during peak load demand only Project (San Mateo County) Scott Substation Peaking Project Calpine 88 MW Provide power during peak load demand only (Santa Clara County) Total Generation Capacity: 547.8 MW</p><p>Definitions: PEAK LOAD -- The highest electrical demand within a particular period of time. Daily electric peaks on weekdays occur in late afternoon and early evening. Annual peaks occur on hot summer days.</p><p>PEAK LOAD POWER PLANT -- A power generating station that is normally used to produce extra electricity during peak load times. A plant usually housing old or low-efficiency steam units, gas turbines, diesels, or pumped storage hydroelectric equipment normally used during the peak- load periods.</p><p>PEAKING UNIT -- A power generator used by a utility to produce extra electricity during peak load times.</p><p>Note: 1,000 MW can provide energy needed by 1 million homes</p><p>7</p>