1 patrick l. rendon, esq. (sbn 126227) · patrick l. rendon, esq. (sbn 126227) lamb & kawakami...

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

Patrick L. Rendon, Esq. (SBN 126227)LAMB & KAWAKAMI LLP333 South Grand Avenue, Suite 4200Los Angeles, California 90071Email: [email protected]: (213) 630-5500Facsimile: (213) 630-5555

Attorneys for RespondentBusiness Industrial Group

STATE OF CALIFORNIA

STATE WATER RESOURCES CONTROL BOARD

In the Matter of The Petition Of

BUSINESS INDUSTRIAL GROUP

Petitioner

110316

Petition Number:

PETITION FOR REVIEW OF THE JUNE24,2010 ORDER OF THE CALIFORNIAREGIONAL WATER QUALITYCONTROL BOARD, LOS ANGELESREGION

INTRODUCTION AND SUMMARY

This Petition for Review is submitted on behalf of Business Industrial Group ("Petitioner"

or "BIG") pursuant to California Water Code §13320 & 13321 and California Code of

Regulations ("CCR") Title 23, §2050-2066 and concerns that certain order issued on June 24,

2010 by the California Regional Water Quality Control Board, Los Angeles Region ("RWQCB"),

directed at Business Industrial Group and T.A. Davis Company, and which references the

properties located at 13255 South Broadway, 360-366 West l32" Street and 363 West l33'' Street

in Los Angeles, California (collectively, the "Property"), Site Cleanup Number 0817, Site

Identification Number 2040358 (the "Order").

Petitioner provides the following information in support of this Petition as required by

Petition for Review re June 24, 2010 RWQCB Order to BIG

Patrick L. Rendon, Esq. (SBN 126227) LAMB & KAWAKAMI LLP 333 South Grand Avenue, Suite 4200 Los Angeles, California 90071 Email: [email protected] Telephone: (213) 630-5500 Facsimile: (213)630-5555

Attorneys for Respondent Business Industrial Group

STATE OF CALIFORNIA



Petition Number:

BUSINESS INDUSTRIAL GROUP PETITION FOR REVIEW OF THE JUNE

Petitioner 24,2010 ORDER OF THE CALIFORNIA REGIONAL WATER QUALITY CONTROL BOARD, LOS ANGELES REGION







properties located at 13255 South Broadway, 360-366 West l32" Street and 363 West l33’’ Street




1

2

3

4

5

6

VA

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

Petition for Review re June 24, 2010 RWQCB Order to BIG 110316

California Water Code § 13320 and 23 CCR §2050(a).

CONTACT INFORMATION OF PETITIONER

The contact information for Petitioner is as follows:

Business Industrial Groupdo Jess Herbst27675 ChapalaMission Viejo, CA 92692Fax (949) 215-2965

Patrick L Rendon, Esq.Lamb & Kawakarni LLP333 South Grand Avenue, Ste. 4200Los Angeles, CA 90071Tel. (213) 630-5570Fax (213) 630-5555Email [email protected]

THE ACTION FOR WHICH PETITIONER SEEKS REVIEW

Petitioner respectfully requests that the RWQCB review the Order. A copy of which is

attached as Exhibit A. Petitioner further requests that the RWQCB hold the Petition in abeyance

pursuant to 23 CCR §2050.5(d) and the practices of the RWQCB. In addition, to the extent that

this Petition is made active, then Petitioner requests a hearing pursuant to California Water Code

§ 13321 and a stay on any action directed at Petitioner under the Order pending a final adjudication

decision.

THE DATE THE RWQCB ACTED

The RWQCB, through its Interim Executive Officer, issued the Order on June 24, 2010.

STATEMENT OF REASONS WHY THE ACTION WAS

AND IS INAPPROPRIATE OR IMPROPER

The RWQCWs Order is inappropriate or improper for the following reasons:

1. The RWQCB abused its discretion in naming BIG in the Order pursuant to

2

110316


I California Water Code § 13320 and 23 CCR §2050(a).

2 CONTACT INFORMATION OF PETITIONER

3

4 The contact information for Petitioner is as follows:

5 Business Industrial Group do Jess Herbst

6 27675 Chapala Mission Viejo, CA 92692

7 Fax (949) 215-2965

8 Patrick L Rendon, Esq. Lamb & Kawakami LLP

9 333 South Grand Avenue, Ste. 4200 Los Angeles, CA 90071

10 Tel. (213) 630-5570 Fax (213) 630-5555

11 Email [email protected]

12

13 THE ACTION FOR WHICH PETITIONER SEEKS REVIEW

14 Petitioner respectfully requests that the RWQCB review the Order. A copy of which is

15 attached as Exhibit A. Petitioner further requests that the RWQCB hold the Petition in abeyance

16 pursuant to 23 CCR §2050.5(d) and the practices of the RWQCB. In addition, to the extent that

17 this Petition is made active, then Petitioner requests a hearing pursuant to California Water Code

18 § 13321 and a stay on any action directed at Petitioner under the Order pending a final adjudication

19 decision.

20

21 THE DATE THE RWOCB ACTED

22 The RWQCB, through its Interim Executive Officer, issued the Order on June 24, 2010.

23 STATEMENT OF REASONS WHY THE ACTION WAS

24 AND IS INAPPROPRIATE OR IMPROPER

25

26 The RWQCWs Order is inappropriate or improper for the following reasons:

27 1. The RWQCB abused its discretion in naming BIG in the Order pursuant to

28

2 Petition for Review re June 24, 2010 RWQCB Order to BIG

110316

I1 California Water Code § 13267. BIG is not the proper orappropriate party to be named in the

2 Order. California Water Code § 13267(b) states, in pertinent part, that the RWQCB authority to

3 issue an order is limited to ... any person who has discharged, discharges, or is suspected of having

4 discharged or discharging, or who proposes to dischargewaste within its region..." BIG has not

5 discharged and is not suspected of having discharged waste at the Property. This is corroborated

6 by the independent factual findings of the RWQCB which are set forth in the Order. These

7 findings are based on the RWQCB records that include environmental reports submitted to the

8 RWQCB by BIG and others and which are incorporated herein by this reference. Based on the

9 foregoing data and studies, the RWQCB acknowledges and confirms in the Order that there is no

10 homogeneity in the distribution of contaminants of concern in the soil and, in any case, any

11 contaminants of concern radiate laterally and vertically from "hot spots" around suspected source

12 areas of operators. (See, e.g., Order, Findings § l.a., 2.a., 2.b., 3, 4, see also, RWQCB Order

13 dated July 1, 2010, directed at Standard Metals, 378 West 133'' Street, Los Angeles, California,

14 Site Cleanup No. 0818A, Site ID No. 2044D00 (the "Standard Metals Order"), a copy of which is

15 attached as Exhibit B.) Furthermore, as a matter of practice and policy and due process, BIG is not

16 responsible or obligated to respond simply by virtue of its ownership of the Property. Rather, the

17 Order should be directed at those persons who are responsible for the contaminants of concern.

182. The RWQCB abused its discretion by failing to consider substantial, undisputed

19evidence that the source of the contamination relating to the Property was from others, including

20off-site sources. (See, Exhibits A & B.)

21

22 3. The RWQCB abused its discretion in that the burden, including costs, of BIG

23 providing the reports requested in the Order do not bear a reasonable relationship to BIG based on

24 the above-discussed findings of the RWQCB.

254. The features at issue are not "waters of the State" and, therefore, the actions are

26beyond the jurisdiction of the RWQCB.

27

28 5. The Order violates BIG's constitutional rights to due process and equal protection.

3


110316

1 California Water Code § 13267. BIG is not the proper or appropriate party to be named in the

2 Order. California Water Code §13267(b) states, in pertinent part, that the RWQCB authority to

3 issue an order is limited to "... any person who has discharged, discharges, or is suspected of having

4 discharged or discharging, or who proposes to discharge waste within its region..." BIG has not



7 findings are based on the RWQCB records that include environmental reports submitted to the


9 foregoing data and studies, the RWQCB acknowledges and confirms in the Order that there is no

DI homogeneity in the distribution of contaminants of concern in the soil and, in any case, any


12 areas of operators. (See, e.g., Order, Findings §§ La., 2.a., 2.b., 3, 4, see also, RWQCB Order

13 dated July 1, 2010, directed at Standard Metals, 378 West 133’’ Street, Los Angeles, California,





18

2. The RWQCB abused its discretion by failing to consider substantial, undisputed 19

evidence that the source of the contamination relating to the Property was from others, including 20

off-site sources. (See, Exhibits A & B.) 21

22

3. The RWQCB abused its discretion in that the burden, including costs, of BIG



25

4. The features at issue are not "waters of the State" and, therefore, the actions are 26

beyond the jurisdiction of the RWQCB. 27

28

5. The Order violates BIG’s constitutional rights to due process and equal protection.


110316

THE MANNER IN WHICH BIG IS AGGRIEVED

Petitioner is aggrieved for the reasons set forth in the immediately preceding section of this

Petition. Petitioner is further aggrieved because the Order imposes duplicate and unnecessary

requirements on BIG and subjects BIG to penalties.

REMEDY SOUGHT BY PETITIONER

Petitioner requests that the RWQCB remove or dismiss BIG from the Order altogether or,

at a minimum, that the RWQCB hold the Order in abeyance (pursuant to 23 CCR §2050.5(d)) with

respect to BIG, pending the further actions of the RWQCB and information provided by the other

persons identified in the Order and in the Standard Metals Order. In the event this Petition is made

active, BIG will submit, as an amendment to this Petition, a full and complete statement of points

and authorities in support of the legal and factual issues raised by this Petition. In connection

therewith, BIG respectfully requests that the RWQCB provide an evidentiary hearing and oral

argument on the Order pursuant to the United States Constitution, the California Constitution,

California Water Code § 13321, California Government Code §11400, et seq., 23 CCR §648, et

seq., and 23 CCR §2050.6(a), (b). In addition, in the event this Petition is made active, BIG

respectfully requests a stay of any action directed at BIG under the Order until a final adjudicated

decision of the matters raised herein pursuant to 23 CCR §2053, and at such time BIG will submit

an amendment to this Petition that will set forth the additional facts and proof that show the

necessity for a stay.

STATEMENT OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES

Petitioner will provide a detailed statement of points and authorities in the event the

RWQCB takes further action which necessitates that this Petition take active status.

STATEMENT OF DELIVERY OF PETITION TO INTERESTED PERSONS

As indicated in the attached proof of service, this Petition has been sent to the RWQCB and

to other persons who Petitioner understands are interested persons.

4

110316



2


3 Petition. Petitioner is further aggrieved because the Order imposes duplicate and unnecessary

4 requirements on BIG and subjects BIG to penalties.

5 REMEDY SOUGHT BY PETITIONER

6

7 Petitioner requests that the RWQCB remove or dismiss BIG from the Order altogether or,


9 respect to BIG, pending the further actions of the RWQCB and information provided by the other

10 persons identified in the Order and in the Standard Metals Order. In the event this Petition is made

11 active, BIG will submit, as an amendment to this Petition, a full and complete statement of points

12 and authorities in support of the legal and factual issues raised by this Petition. In connection

13 therewith, BIG respectfully requests that the RWQCB provide an evidentiary hearing and oral

14 argument on the Order pursuant to the United States Constitution, the California Constitution,

15 California Water Code § 13321, California Government Code §11400, et seq., 23 CCR §648, et

16 seq., and 23 CCR §2050.6(a), (b). In addition, in the event this Petition is made active, BIG

17 respectfully requests a stay of any action directed at BIG under the Order until a final adjudicated

18 decision of the matters raised herein pursuant to 23 CCR §2053, and at such time BIG will submit

19 an amendment to this Petition that will set forth the additional facts and proof that show the

20 necessity for a stay.

21 STATEMENT OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES

22 Petitioner will provide a detailed statement of points and authorities in the event the

23 RWQCB takes further action which necessitates that this Petition take active status.

24 STATEMENT OF DELIVERY OF PETITION TO INTERESTED PERSONS

25

26 As indicated in the attached proof of service, this Petition has been sent to the RWQCB and

27 to other persons who Petitioner understands are interested persons.

28


110316

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

STATEMENT ON RAISING OF SUBSTANTIVE ISSUES

Petitioners had no prior formal opportunity to raise the issues or objections raised to the

June 24, 2010 because it was issued unilaterally by the RWQCB without a hearing or the taking of

evidence. Petitioner is interested in discussing these issues with RWQCB staff on an informal

basis but is required to formally submit this Petition pursuant to the relevant statutes and

regulations.

REQUEST FOR PREPARATION OF ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD

By copy of this Petition to the RWQCB, Petitioner requests the preparation of the

Administrative Record.

Dated: July 26, 2010 A & KAWAKAMI LLP

By:

110316

Patiick L. RendonAttorneys for PetitionerBUSINESS INDUSTRIAL GROUP

5


1


2 Petitioners had no prior formal opportunity to raise the issues or objections raised to the

3 June 24, 2010 because it was issued unilaterally by the RWQCB without a hearing or the taking of

4 evidence. Petitioner is interested in discussing these issues with RWQCB staff on an informal

5 basis but is required to formally submit this Petition pursuant to the relevant statutes and

6 regulations.

7

8 REQUEST FOR PREPARATION OF ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD

9


10 Administrative Record.

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28


By: (1’~, �ick L. Rendon

Attorneys for Petitioner BUSINESS INDUSTRIAL GROUP


110316

EXHIBIT AEXHIBIT A

California Regional Water Quality Control BoardLos Angeles Region

320 W. 4th Street, Suite 200, Los Angeles, California 90013

Linda S. Adams Phone (213) 576.6600 FAX (23) 576-6640 - Internet Address: http:I/www.waterboards.ca.gov/losangeles Arnold SchwarzeneggerGovernor

June 24, 2010

Cal/EPA Secretaiy

Mr. James HerbstBusiness Industrial Group (BIG)27675 ChapalaMission Viejo, CA 92692

Mr. Larry BemaT.A Davis Company (TADCO)19500 South AlamedaStreetEast Rancho Dominguez, CA 90221

CERIIkThD MAILRETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED

7009 0820 0001 6811 9282

CERTIFIED MAILRETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED

7009 0820 0001 6811 9299

REQUIREMENT FOR A TECIINCAL REPORT PURSUANT TO CALIFORI'IA WATER CODESECTION 13267 ORDER - BIG PROPERTY ANI) FORMER TADCO FACILITY, 13255 SOUThBROADWAY, 360-366 WEST 132ND STREET AND 363 WEST 133' STREET, LOS ANGELES,CALIFORNIA (SITE CLEANUP NO. 0817, SITE ID NO. 2040358)

Dear Messrs Herbst and Berna:

The California Regional Water Quality Control Board, Los Angeles Region (Regional Board) is the publicagency'with primary responsibility for the protection of ground and surface water quality for all beneficialuses within major portions of Los Angeles County and Ventura County, including the above-referencedsites.

The Regional Board has been investigating soil and groundwater contamination at sites ajacent to and on aportion of the Business Industrial Group (BIG) property since approximately 1998. The fanner TADCOfacility that had occupied a parcel at. 363 West 1 33 Street on the BIG property has been the focus of thesesite investigations.

Based on our review of site assessment data collected from the former TADCO facility and adjacent sites,we believe that the former TADCO facility could be a source of the volatile organic compounds (VOCs)such as acetone, benzene, ethylbenzene, toluene, and xylenes (BTEX) and polychiorinated biphenyls (PCBs)detected in the soil and groundwater beneath the property. We also believe additional site assessments mustbe conducted on adjacentparcels to the former TADCO facility on BIG property to fully define the extent ofcontamination in the soil and groundwater and to identify any contributing offsite sources.

As part of our ongoing investigation of soil and groundwater contamination in the general vicinity of theTADCO facility, you are hereby directed to provide the required technical report requested in the enclosedOrder pursuant to California Water Code section 13267. You are required to comply with the Order toensure that progress is made in our continuing investigation in the area.

C'alfornia Environmental Protection Agency

Recycled PaperOur mission Is to preserve and enhance the quali ofCalifornia's water resources for the benefit ofpresent andfuture generailons.

California Regional Water Quality Control Board Los Angeles Region

320 W. 4th Street, Suite 200, Los Angeles, California 90013 Linda S. Adams Phone (213) 576.6600 FAX (23) 576-6640 - Internet Address: http:I/www.waterboards.ca.gov/losangeles Arnold Schwarzenegger Cal/EPA Secretary Governor

June 24, 2010

Mr. James Herbst Business Industrial Group (BIG) 27675 Chapala Mission Viejo, CA 92692

Mr. Larry Bema T.A Davis Company (TADCO) 19500 South Alameda Street East Rancho Dominguez, CA 90221

CER1I1thD MAIL RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED

7009 0820 0001 6811 9282

CERTIFIED MAIL RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED

7009 0820 0001 6811 9299

REQUIREMENT FOR A TECIINCAL REPORT PURSUANT TO CALIFORNIA WATER CODE SECTION 13267 ORDER - BIG PROPERTY AND FORMER TADCO FACILITY, 13255 SOUTH BROADWAY, 360-366 WEST 132ND STREET AND 363 WEST 133’ STREET, LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA (SITE CLEANUP NO. 0817, SITE ID NO. 2040358)


The California Regional Water Quality Control Board, Los Angeles Region (Regional Board) is the public agency’with primary responsibility for the protection of ground and surface water quality for all beneficial uses within major portions of Los Angeles County and Ventura County, including the above-referenced sites.

The Regional Board has been investigating soil and groundwater contamination at sites ajacent to and on a portion of the Business Industrial Group (BIG) property since approximately 1998. The former TADCO facility that had occupied a parcel at. 363 West 133" d Street on the BIG property has been the focus of these site investigations.

Based on our review of site assessment data collected from the former TADCO facility and adjacent sites, we believe that the former TADCO facility could be a source of the volatile organic compounds (VOCs) such as acetone, benzene, ethylbenzene, toluene, and xylenes (BTEX) and polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) detected in the soil and groundwater beneath the property. We also believe additional site assessments must be conducted on adjacent parcels to the former TADCO facility on BIG property to fully define the extent of contamination in the soil and groundwater and to identify any contributing offsite sources.

As part of our ongoing investigation of soil and groundwater contamination in the general vicinity of the TADCO facility, you are hereby directed to provide the required technical report requested in the enclosed Order pursuant to California Water Code section 13267. You are required to comply with the Order to ensure that progress is made in our continuing investigation in the area.

California Environmental Protection Agency

Recycled Paper Our mission Is to preserve and enhance the quality of California’s water resources for the benefit ofpresent andfuture generations.

Mr. James Herbst - 2 - June 24, 2010Mr. Larry BernaBusiness Industrial Group (BIG) and TADCO

If you have any questions regarding this letter, please contact Mr. Bizuayehu Ayele at (213) 576-6747.

Sincerel

effrey ' nit ChiefSite Cleanup Program, Unit II

Enclosure: Requirement to Provide a Technical Report

cc: Mr. Patrick Rendon, Lamb & Kawakami LLPMrs. Barbara Vidmar, General WeldingMs. Julie Marshall, Rincon Consultants, Inc.Mr. Walt Hamann, Rincon Consultants, Inc.Ms. Emily Yukich, Folger Levin & Kahn LLPMr. Greg Levine, Standard MetalsMr. Michael Baum, Resch Polster & Berger LLPMr. John Payne, Frey Environmental, Inc.Mr. Brett Bowyer, Bowyer Environmental Consulting, Inc.Mr. Kenneth Ehrlich, Jeffer, Mangels, Butler & Mamaro LLP


Recycled PaperOur mission is to preser.e and enhance the quality of California s water resources for the benefit ofpresent and future generations.

Mr. James Herbst - 2 - June 24, 2010 Mr. Larry Berna Business Industrial Group (BIG) and TADCO


Sincerel

effrey AQ Jnit Chief Site Cleanup Program, Unit II


cc: Mr. Patrick Rendon, Lamb & Kawakami LLP Mrs. Barbara Vidmar, General Welding Ms. Julie Marshall, Rincon Consultants, Inc. Mr. Walt Hamann, Rincon Consultants, Inc. Ms. Emily Yukich, Folger Levin & Kahn LLP Mr. Greg Levine, Standard Metals Mr. Michael Baum, Resch Polster & Berger LLP Mr. John Payne, Frey Environmental, Inc. Mr. Brett Bowyer, Bowyer Environmental Consulting, Inc. Mr. Kenneth Ehrlich, Jeffer, Mangels, Butler & Mamaro LLP


Recycled Paper Our mission is to preserve and enhance the quality of California’s water resources for the benefit ofpresent and future generations.


320W. 4th Street, Suite 200, Los Angeles, California 9003

Linda S. Adams Phone (213) 576-6600 FAX (213) 576-6640 - Internet Address: http:I/www.waterboardS.ca.SOV/lOSaflgeleS Arnold SchwarzeneggerGovernor

REQUIREMENT TO PROVIDE A TECHNICAL REPORT(CALIFORNIA WATER CODE SECTION 132671 ORDER)

DIRECTED TO BUSINESS INDUSTRIAL GROUP (BIG)AN]) T.A DAVIS COMPANY (TADCO)

BIG PROPERTY AND FORMER TADCO FACILITY13255 SOUTH BROADWAY, 360-366 WEST l32 STREET AND 363 WEST 133an STREET,

LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA(SITE CLEANUP NO. 0817, SITE I]) NO. 2040358)

You are legally obligated to respond to this Order. Please read this carefully.

The Regional Board has been investigating soil and groundwater contamination at sites adjacent to and

on a portion of the Business Industrial Group (BIG) property since approximately 1998. The BIGproperty is a rectangular lot approximately 3.7 acres, divided into three distinct parcels with addresses at

13255 South Broadway, 360-366 West l32 Street and 363 West 133th Street in Los Angeles. The 0.7-

acre parcel at 363 West 133' Street was leased by TADCO from BIG from approximately 1979 to 1996for polyurethane resin manufacturing facility. The other two parcels were historically occupied by

garment and display manufacturers.

Adjacent to the BIG property are Standard Metals site, located at 378 West l33 Street, and General

Welding site, lqcated at 352 West 133 Street, which are scarp metal recycling and acetylene gasmanufacturing facilities, respectively.

Site investigations conducted at TADCO, Standard Metals and General Welding sites indicate that thesoil and groundwater are contaminated with volatile organic compounds (VOCs) such as trichioroethene(TCE) and acetone, aromatic hydrocarbons such as benzene, ethylbenzene, toluene, and xylenes (BTEX),polychiorinated biphenyls (PCBs) and petroleum hydrocarbons. The site investigations also show that thesoil and groundwater contamination encountered in the general vicinity might have been resulted frommultiple sources. Groundwater monitoring results obtained from StandardMetals and General Weldingsites indicate that the former TADCO facility and the BIG property are located upgradient relative to the

locations of these adjacent sites.

In response to the Regional Board's section 13267 Order, dated.March 19, 2009, TADCO submitted atechnical report, dated June 8, 2009, compiling historical site assessment data collected from its former

facility and adjacent sites and presenting its interpretation of the data.

The Regional Board also issued a section 13267 Order, dated November 19, 2009, to BIG, requiringsubmittal of any technical report they might have for their property. BIG submitted copies of some

Cal/EPA Secretary

1 California Water Code section 13267 states, in part: (b)(1) In conducting an investigation.. .,the regional board

may require that any person who has discharged, discharges, oris suspected of having discharged or, discharging, orwho proposes to discharge Waste within its region ... shall furnish, under penalty of perjury, technical or monitoring

program reports which the regional board requires. The burden, iic1uding costs, of these reports shall bear areasonable relationship to the need for the report and the benefits to be obtained from the reports. Inrequiring those

reports, the regional board shall provide the person with a written explanation withregard to the need for the reports,and shall identif' the evidence that supports requiring that person to provide the reports.


uc Recycled PaperOur mission is to preserve and enhance the quality ofCalifornia's water resources for the benefit ofpresentandfuture generations.

California Regional Water Quality Control Board ’IIIIIIIIp/ Los Angeles Region

320W. 4th Street, Suite 200, Los Angeles, California 9003 Linda S. Adams Phone (213) 576-6600 FAX (213) 576-6640 - Internet Address: http:I/www.waterboards.ca.gov/losangeles Arnold Schwarzenegger Cal/EPA Secretary Governor

REQUIREMENT TO PROVIDE A TECHNICAL REPORT (CALIFORNIA WATER CODE SECTION 132671 ORDER)

DIRECTED TO BUSINESS INDUSTRIAL GROUP (BIG) AND T.A DAVIS COMPANY (TADCO)

BIG PROPERTY AND FORMER TADCO FACILITY 13255 SOUTH BROADWAY, 360-366 WEST 132 STREET AND 363 WEST 133an STREET,

LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA (SITE CLEANUP NO. 0817, SITE I]) NO. 2040358)


The Regional Board has been investigating soil and groundwater contamination at sites adjacent to and on a portion of the Business Industrial Group (BIG) property since approximately 1998. The BIG property is a rectangular lot approximately 3.7 acres, divided into three distinct parcels with addresses at 13255 South Broadway, 360-366 West 132 Street and 363 West 133th Street in Los Angeles. The 0.7-acre parcel at 363 West 133’d Street was leased by TADCO from BIG from approximately 1979 to 1996 for polyurethane resin manufacturing facility. The other two parcels were historically occupied by garment and display manufacturers.

Adjacent to the BIG property are Standard Metals site, located at 378 West 133 w Street, and General Welding site, located at 352 West 133 Street, which are scarp metal recycling and acetylene gas manufacturing facilities, respectively.

Site investigations conducted at TADCO, Standard Metals and General Welding sites indicate that the soil and groundwater are contaminated with volatile organic compounds (VOCs) such as trichioroethene (TCE) and acetone, aromatic hydrocarbons such as benzene, ethylbenzene, toluene, and xylenes (BTEX), polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) and petroleum hydrocarbons. The site investigations also show that the soil and groundwater contamination encountered in the general vicinity might have been resulted from multiple sources. Groundwater monitoring results obtained from Standard Metals and General Welding sites indicate that the former TADCO facility and the BIG property are located upgradient relative to the locations of these adjacent sites.

In response to the Regional Board’s section 13267 Order, dated-March 19, 2009, TADCO submitted a technical report, dated June 8, 2009, compiling historical site assessment data collected from its former facility and adjacent sites and presenting its interpretation of the data.

The Regional Board also issued a section 13267 Order, dated November 19, 2009, to BIG, requiring submittal of any technical report they might have for their property. BIG submitted copies of some

1 California Water Code section 13267 states, in part: (b)(l) In conducting an investigation.. ., the regional board may require that any person who has discharged, discharges, or is suspected of having discharged or, discharging, or who proposes to discharge Waste within its region ... shall furnish, under penalty of perjury, technical or monitoring program reports which the regional board requires. The burden, including costs, of these reports shall bear a reasonable relationship to the need for the report and the benefits to be obtained from the reports. In requiring those reports, the regional board shall provide the person with a written explanation with regard to the need for the reports, and shall identify the evidence that supports requiring that person to provide the reports.


uc Recycled Paper Our mission is to preserve and enhance the quality of California water resources for the benefit ofpresent andfuture generations.

technical reports on the BIG property on February 16, 2010. However, some of the data contained in the

reports appear to have been compiled in other technical reports submitted by adjacent property owners.

FJNDThGS

Based on our review of the technical reports submitted by TADCO, Standard Metals and GeneralWelding, we made the following findings:

1. a. TADCO, in their technical report, dated June 8, 2009, Appendix A, Response to R WQCB, page 1

to 3 (see attached), indicated that their former facility was excavated, re-graded and filled with anolder, homogenized, contaminated fill material in 1973 and argued that this contaminated soil isthe possible source of acetone and other contaminants detected in the soil and groundwater.However, based on our review of the site assessment data collected to date from the TADCO siteand adjacent properties, we do not find technical information supporting your assertion.

The fill thiclaiess map included in TADCO's report shows that the entire TADCO site and alarge portion of' the adjacent BIG prdperty were excavated up to approximately 20 feet belowground surface (bgs) and filled with fill material. Soil analytical data for many of the soil boringsadvanced on the TADCO site and adjacent BIG property do not indicate homogeneity in thedistribution of acetone in the soil laterally and vertically. Rather, the data show the existence ofhot spots close suspected sources such as the former underground storage tanks (USTs) and drum

storage areas.

Acetone was detected in the soil from near-surface to the maximum depth drilled in B14 which is

close to the former UST and drum storage areas, indicating an onsite release(s) [see the attachedsite map]. The highest concentration of acetone in the soil was detected in 132 which is locatedclose to 1314. The eitent of contamination map for acetone in the. soil also shows that a hot spotfor acetone is centered near B2 and B 14, both of which are located close to suspected sources. Asone goes away from this hot spot, the concentration of acetone in the soil decreases latcraily andvertically. Soil borings B19, B20, B22, and B24 which are all located within the area excavatedupto approximately 11 feet bgs and filled with the "homogenized and contaminated soil" did notdetect acetone in the soil samples. Analytical data from other soil borings also did not showuniform vertical and lateral distribution of acetone in the soil that one expects in soil boringsadvanced into a "homogenized and contaminated fill".

b. TADCO's statement in their technical report, dated June 8, 2009, Appendix A, Response toR WQCB, page 1 to 3 (see attached), that surface water runoff from the Standard Metals sitebrought acetone detected in the fill surrounding the tJSTs is not supported with data. Datacollected from numerous soil borings advanced at Standard Metals site indicate that the site isnot a significant source of acetone in the soil and groundwater and that some localized spills mayhave been responsible for acetone detected in some of the soil borings.

The concentrations of acetone detected in the soil beneath the Standard Metals site are muchlower than those reported for soil beneath the former TADCO facility. Moreover, the lateral andvertical distribution of acetone in the soil beneath the former TADCO facility is more extensivethan the one observed beneath the Standard Metals site.


Recycled PaperOur mission is to preserve and enhance the quality ofCalIfornia's waler resources for the benefit ofpresent andfuture generations.

Mr. James Herbst -2 - June 24, 2010

Mr. Larry BernaBusiness Industrial Group (BIG) and Former TADCO Facility


Mr. Larry Berna Business Industrial Group (BIG) and Former TADCO Facility

technical reports on the BIG property on February 16, 2010. However, some of the data contained in the reports appear to have been compiled in other technical reports submitted by adjacent property owners.

FINDINGS

Based on our review of the technical reports submitted by TADCO, Standard Metals and General Welding, we made the following findings:

1. a. TADCO, in their technical report, dated June 8, 2009, Appendix A, Response to R WQCB, page 1 to 3 (see attached), indicated that their former facility was excavated, re-graded and filled with an older, homogenized, contaminated fill material in 1973 and argued that this contaminated soil is the possible source of acetone and other contaminants detected in the soil and groundwater. However, based on our review of the site assessment data collected to date from the TADCO site and adjacent properties, we do not find technical information supporting your assertion.

The fill thickness map included in TADCO’s report shows that the entire TADCO site and a large portion of the adjacent BIG prdperty were excavated up to approximately 20 feet below ground surface (bgs) and filled with fill material. Soil analytical data for many of the soil borings advanced on the TADCO site and adjacent BIG property do not indicate homogeneity in the distribution of acetone in the soil laterally and vertically. Rather, the data show the existence of hot spots close suspected sources such as the former underground storage tanks (USTs) and drum storage areas.

Acetone was detected in the soil from near-surface to the maximum depth drilled in B14 which is close to the former UST and drum storage areas, indicating an onsite release(s) [see the attached site map]. The highest concentration of acetone in the soil was detected in 132 which is located close to 1314. The eitent of contamination map for acetone in the. soil also shows that a hot spot for acetone is centered near B2 and B 14, both of which are located close to suspected sources. As one goes away from this hot spot, the concentration of acetone in the soil decreases laterally and vertically. Soil borings B19, B20, B22, and B24 which are all located within the area excavated up to approximately 11 feet bgs and filled with the "homogenized and contaminated soil" did not detect acetone in the soil samples. Analytical data from other soil borings also did not show uniform vertical and lateral distribution of acetone in the soil that one expects in soil borings advanced into a "homogenized and contaminated fill".

b. TADCO’s statement in their technical report, dated June 8, 2009, Appendix A, Response to R WQCB, page 1 to 3 (see attached), that surface water runoff from the Standard Metals site brought acetone detected in the fill surrounding the tJSTs is not supported with data. Data collected from numerous soil borings advanced at Standard Metals site indicate that the site is not a significant source of acetone in the soil and groundwater and that some localized spills may have been responsible for acetone detected in some of the soil borings.

The concentrations of acetone detected in the soil beneath the Standard Metals site are much lower than those reported for soil beneath the former TADCO facility. Moreover, the lateral and vertical distribution of acetone in the soil beneath the former TADCO facility is more extensive than the one observed beneath the Standard Metals site.


Recycled Paper Our mission is to preserve and enhance the quality ofCalIfornia’s water resources for the benefit ofpresent andfuture generations.

June 24, 2010Mr. James Herbst - 3 -Mr. Larry BernaBusiness Industrial Group (BIG) and Former TADCO Facility

c. TADCO's hypothesis in their technical report, dated June 8, 2009, Appendix A, Response toRWQCB, page 1 to 3 (see attached) that the acetone release(s) on the General Welding property

may have migrated to TADCO's property is not supported with data collected from both onsiteand offsite. Many site assessments conducted on General Welding property showed that the

extent of acetone contamination in the soil beneath the General Welding property is

confined to the limits of the property. Moreover, the General Welding property is located

downgradient of the TADCO site.

a. TADCO's statement in their technical report, dated June 8, 2009, Appendix A, Response toRWQCB, page 4 (see attached), that the former oil field pit arid/or the adjacent Standard Metalssite are the sources for BTBX in the soil is not supported by data. The former drum storage area

is located outside the footprint of the former oil field pit.

It appears that the highest concentrations of aromatic hydrbcarbons such as BTEX were detectedin the soil at or adjacent to areas of concerns (AOCs) on the former TADCO facility such as theformer drum storage area and the former office and shop building (see the attached site map). Atthese two AOCs, BTEX were detected up to 17,353 micrograms per kilogram (rg/'Kg) and178,290 pgfKg in soil borings B28 and B23, respectively from near- surface to the water table.

No significant BTEX were detected in the soil beneath Standard Metals site. The reported BTEXin the soil beneath Standard Metals site was dominantly detected near or below the water table.Hence, Standard Metals could riot be the source forBTEX in the soil.

b. TADCO's statement in their technical report, dated June 8, 2009, Appendix A, Response toRWQCB, page 4 (see attached), regarding BTEX also appears to be in conflict with theirargument provided for acetone. If the source of contaminants was the "homogenized andcontaminated fill" spread over the site, BTEX would be detected in the soil at other portions of

the site, instead of just the two AOCs.

Although total petroleum hydrocarbons (rPH) has not yet been adequately assessed in the soil,limited data collected from some of the soil borings suggest that some AOCs on the former TADCOfacility could be sources of the TPH detected in the soil and groundwater. TPH was detected in some

of the soil borings such as B 14 and B2 in the former UST area from near-surface to the water table.The former UST area is located outside the footprint of the former oil field pit (see the attached site

map).

Data in our files suggest that the former briquetting press pit on Standard Metals site could be the

source of TCE in the soil and groundwater beneath the site. However, the source of TCE on theformer TADCO facility has not also been adequately assessed. The soil data collected from theborings at the TADCO site appears to indicate that the former septic tank area could be the source of

TCE in the soil. Soil samples collected below the presumed depth of the bottom ofthe tank have the

highest TCE concentrations as data from B28 shows while samples collected from shallow depths (or

the presumed fill in the tank area) did not detect any TCE in the same boring.

In other areas of the site, TCE was mostly detected in soil samples collected near the water tablewhere the fluctuating water table causes migration of contaminants from the groundwater to the soil.

C'al?fornia Environmental Protection Agency

Recycled PaperOur mission Ls to preserve and enhance the quality of California's water resourceefor the benefit ofpresent andfuiuregenerations.

Mr. James Herbst - 3 - June 24, 2010 Mr. Larry Berna Business Industrial Group (BIG) and Former TADCO Facility

c. TADCO’s hypothesis in their technical report, dated June 8, 2009, Appendix A, Response to RWQCB, page 1 to 3 (see attached) that the acetone release(s) on the General Welding property may have migrated to TADCO’s property is not supported with data collected from both onsite and offsite. Many site assessments conducted on General Welding property showed that the extent of acetone contamination in the soil beneath the General Welding property is confined to the limits of the property. Moreover, the General Welding property is located downgradient of the TADCO site.

2. a. TADCO’s statement in their technical report, dated June 8, 2009, Appendix A, Response to RWQCB, page 4 (see attached), that the former oil field pit arid/or the adjacent Standard Metals site are the sources for BTBX in the soil is not supported by data. The former drum storage area is located outside the footprint of the former oil field pit.

It appears that the highest concentrations of aromatic hydrocarbons such as BTEX were detected in the soil at or adjacent to areas of concerns (AOCs) on the former TADCO facility such as the former drum storage area and the former office and shop building (see the attached site map). At these two AOCs, BTEX were detected up to 17,353 micrograms per kilogram (rg(Kg) and 178,290jig/Kg in soil borings B28 and B23, respectively from near- surface to the water. table.

No significant BTEX were detected in the soil beneath Standard Metals site. The reported BTBX in the soil beneath Standard Metals site was dominantly detected near or below the water table. Hence, Standard Metals could not be the source for BTEX in the soil.

b. TADCO’s statement in their technical report, dated June 8, 2009, Appendix A, Response to RWQCB, page 4 (see attached), regarding BTEX also appears to be in conflict with their argument provided for acetone. If the source of contaminants was the "homogenized and contaminated fill" spread over the site, BTEX would be detected in the soil at other portions of the site, instead of just the two AOCs.

Although total petroleum hydrocarbons (1’PH) has not yet been adequately assessed in the soil, limited data collected from some of the soil borings suggest that some AOCs on the former TADCO facility could be sources of the TPH detected in the soil and groundwater. TPH was detected in some of the soil borings such as B 14 and B2 in the former UST area from near-surface to the water table. The former UST area is located outside the footprint of the former oil field pit (see the attached site map).

4. Data in our files suggest that the former briquetting press pit on Standard Metals site could be the source of TCE in the soil and groundwater beneath the site. However, the source of TCE on the former TA])CO facility has, not also been adequately assessed. The soil data collected from the borings at the TADCO site appears to indicate that the former septic tank area could be the source of TCE in the soil. Soil samples collected below the presumed depth of the bottom of the tank have the highest TCE concentrations as data from B28 shows while samples collected from shallow depths (or the presumed fill in the tank area) did not detect any TCE in the same boring.

In other areas of the site, TCE was mostly detected in soil samples collected near the water table where the fluctuating water table causes migration of contaminants from the groundwater to the soil.


Recycled Paper Our mission Is to preserve and enhance the quality of California’s water resourcesfor the benefit ofpresent andfuiure generations.


Mr. Larry BemaBusiness Industrial Group (BIG) and Former TADCO Facility

If the source of contaminants was the "homogenized and contaminated fill" spread over the site, TCEwould uniformly be detected in the soil at various depths at other portions of the site. Rather, TCEwas dete,cted in certain AOCs such as the former septic tank area where release(s) had occurred.

Vinyl chlorideand cis-1 ,2 dichioroethene (cis-1 ,2-DCE) are the breakdown products of TCE. Thesoil data collected from the sOil borings on the former TADCO facility' show that the distribution ofvinyl chloride in the soil appears, in most cases, to correlate with the distribution of TCE. Althoughlimited data were collected on cis-1 ,2-DCE, it appears to have a similar distribution with that of TCEin the soil. The source of TCE is therefore responsible for the existence of these contaminants in the

soil.

Existing data suggest that the former septic tank area and the former drum storage area could be thesources for TCE in the soil beneath the former TADCO facility. However, additional assessment isneeded to identify other possible source areas on the adjacent BIG property.

PCB was detected in soil samples collected from one of the soil borings (B14). However, the latralextent of the PCB in the soil is not defined.

The eastern and northern extent of the acetone, BTEX, TCE, vinyl chloride,, and cis-1,2-DCEcontaminations in the soil have not yet been fully defined beneath adjacent parcels to the formerTADCO facility on the BIG property.

REQUIREMENTS

Based on the findings enumerated above and pursuant to section 13267 of the California Water Code(CWC), both BIG, because of its ownership of the property including the parcel that had been occupiedby the former TADCO facility, and TADCO, because of its past operation of a polyurethanemanufacturing facility on a parcel of the BIG property, are hereby required to submit a work plan forfurther assessment of the soil and groundwater contamination identified beneath the parcel occupied bythe former TADCO facility arid adjacent parcels on the BIG property. The work plan shall address thefollowing:

The eastern and northern extent of the acetone, BTEX, TCE, vinyl chloride, and cis-1,2-DCEcontaminations in the soil identified beneath the former TADCO facility must be delineated.

The extent and distribution of TPH in the soil must be adequately defined in all directions.

Step-out borings shall be advanced in the area around B-l4 to delineate the lateral arid vertical extentof PCB in the soil in all directions.

The source of TCE on the former TADCO facility must be identified with further assessment.Additional soil borings shall be advanced in the former septic tank area and the former drum storagearea.


Recycled PaperOur mission is to preserve and enhance the quality of Cal(/brnia water resources for the benefit ofpresent andfulure generations.


Mr. Larry Bema Business Industrial Group (BIG) and Former TADCO Facility

If the source of contaminants was the "homogenized and contaminated fill" spread over the site, TCE would uniformly be detected in the soil at various depths at other portions of the site. Rather, TCE was detected in certain AOCs such as the former septic tank area where release(s) had occurred.

5. Vinyl chlorideand cis-1,2 dichioroethene (cis-1 ,2-DCE) are the breakdown products of TCE. The soil data collected from the soil borings on the former TADCO facility show that the distribution of vinyl chloride in the soil appears, in most cases, to correlate with the distribution of TCE. Although limited data were collected on cis-1 ,2-DCE, it appears to have a similar distribution with that of TCE in the soil. The source of TCE is therefore responsible for the existence of these contaminants in the soil.

Existing data suggest that the former septic tank area and the former drum storage area could be the sources for TCE in the soil beneath the former TADCO facility. However, additional assessment is needed to identify other possible source areas on the adjacent BIG property.

6. PCB was detected in soil samples collected from one of the soil borings (B14). However, the latral extent of the PCB in the soil is not defined.

7. The eastern and northern extent of the acetone, BTEX, TCE, vinyl chloride,, and cis-1,2-DCE contaminations in the soil have not yet been fully defined beneath adjacent parcels to the former TADCO facility on the BIG property.

REQUIREMENTS

Based on the findings enumerated above and pursuant to section 13267 of the California Water Code (CWC), both BIG, because of its ownership of the property including the parcel that had been occupied by the former TADCO facility, and TADCO, because of its past operation of a polyurethane manufacturing facility on a parcel of the BIG property, are hereby required to submit a work plan for further assessment of the soil and groundwater contamination identified beneath the parcel occupied by the former TADCO facility and adjacent parcels on the BIG property. The work plan shall address the following:

1. The eastern and northern extent of the acetone, BTEX, TCE, vinyl chloride, and cis-1,2-DCE contaminations in the soil identified beneath the former TADCO facility must be delineated.

2. The extent and distribution of TPH in the soil must be adequately defined in all directions.

3. Step-out borings shall be advanced in the area around B-14 to delineate the lateral and vertical extent of PCB in the soil in all directions.

4. The source of TCE on the former TADCO facility must be identified with further assessment. Additional soil borings shall be advanced in the former septic tank area and the former drum storage area.


Ot Recycled Paper Our mission is to preserve and enhance the quality of California’swater resources for the benefit ofpresent andfulure generations.

Mr. James Herbst - 5 - June 24, 2010


Groundwater monitoring wells shall be installed at upgradient locations to the former TADCOfacility to assess the existence of contributing offsite sources for the VOCs and other contaminantsidentified in the groundwater and to define the full extent of the VOC plume.

After the installation of the groundwater monitoring wells, a quarterly groundwater monitoring shall

be initiated and groundwater monitoring reports shall be submitted according to the following

schedule:

Monitoring Period Report Due Date

April-June July 15th

July-September OctoberOctober - December January l5''January -March April 15th

6.1 A site-wide groundwater elevation contour map showing the groundwater flow direction

and gradient must be included in the groundwater monitoring reports.

6.2 Groundwater samples shall be analyzed for VOCs, BTEX, TPH, and PCBs.

The work plan is due to the Regional Board by August 24, 2010.

As presented in State Water Resources Control Board Resolution 92-49, professionals should bequalified, licensed where applicable, and competent and proficient in the fields pertinent to the required

activities. Moreover, the final report subrnited to this Regional Board must be reviewed, signed andstamped by a California registered geologist, or a California registered civil engineer with at least five

years hydrogeologic experience. Furthermore, the California Business and Professions Code sections

6735, 7835, and 7835.1 require that engineering and geologic evaluations and judgments be performed

by or under the direction of registered professionals Therefore, all future work must be performed by orunder the direction of a registered geologist or registered civil engineer. A statement is required in the

final report that the registered professional in responsible charge actually supervised or personallyconducted all the work associated with the work plan and final report.

Pursuant to section 13267(b) of the CWC, you are hereby directed to submit the required work plan to this

Regional Board by August 24, 2010. Furthennore, pursuant to section 13268 (b)(1) of the CWC, failure

to submit the work plan may result in the imposition of civil liability penalties by the Regional Board of

up to $1,000 per day for each day the work plan is not received after August 24, 2010, due date andwithout further warning.

We believe that the burdens, including costs, of this report bear a reasonable relationship to the need for

the report and the benefits to be obtained from the report. If you disagree and have information about the

burden, including costs, of complying with these requirements, provide such information in writing toMr. Bizuayehu Ayele within ten days of the date of this letter so that we may reconsider therequirements.


J Recycled PaperOur mission is to preserve and enhance the quality of Cal(fornla s water resources for the benefit ofpresent andfuture generations.

Mr. James Herbst - 5 - June 24, 2010 Mr. Larry Bema Business Industrial Group (BIG) and Former TADCO Facility

5. Groundwater monitoring wells shall be installed at upgradient locations to the former TADCO facility to assess the existence of contributing offsite sources for the VOCs and other contaminants identified in the groundwater and to define the full extent of the VOC plume.

6. After the installation of the groundwater monitoring wells, a quarterly groundwater monitoring shall be initiated and groundwater monitoring reports shall be submitted according to the following schedule:

Monitoring, Period

April-June July-September October - December January -March

Report Due Date

July 15 0 ’

October 15th January 15th April 15th

6.1 A site-wide groundwater elevation contour map showing the groundwater flow direction and gradient must be included in the groundwater monitoring reports.


7. The work plan is due to the Regional Board by August 24, 2010.

As presented in State Water Resources Control Board Resolution 92-49, professionals should be qualified, licensed where applicable, and competent and proficient in the fields pertinent to the required activities. Moreover, the final report submitted to this Regional Board must be reviewed, signed and stamped by a California registered geologist, or a California registered civil engineer with at least five years hydrogeologic experience. Furthermore, the California Business and Professions Code sections 6735, 7835, and 78351 require that engineering and geologic evaluations and judgments be performed by or under il 4i rectioqfrgistered professionals. Therefore, all future work must be performed by or under the direction of a registered geologist or registered civil engineer. A statement is required in the final report that the registered professional in responsible charge actually supervised or personally conducted all the work associated with the work plan and final report.

Pursuant to section 13267(b) of the CWC, you are hereby directed to submit the required work plan to this Regional Board by August 24, 2010. Furthermore, pursuant to section 13268 (b)(1) of the CWC, failure to submit the work plan may result in the imposition of civil liability penalties by the Regional Board of up to $1,000 per day for each day the work plan is not received after August 24, 2010, due date and without further warning.

We believe that the burdens, including costs, of this report bear a reasonable relationship to the need for the report and the benefits to be obtained from the report. If you disagree and have information about the burden, including costs, of complying with these requirements, provide such information in writing to Mr. Bizuayehu Ayele within ten days of the date of this letter so that we may reconsider the requirements.


iJ Recycled Paper Our mission is to preserve and enhance the quality of California’s water resources for the benefit ofpresent andfuture generations.

Mr. James Herbst - 6 June 24, 2010


The above technical report is required to be submitted under the CWC section 13267 Order. Please note

that effective immediately, the Regional Board requires you to include a perjury statement in all work

plans and reports submitted under the 13267 Orders. The perjury statement shall be signed by a senior

authorized representative at your company (and not by a consultant). The statement shall be in the

following format:

"1 [NAME], do hereby declare, under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of

California, that I am [JOB TITLE] for [NAME OF RESPONSIBLE

PARTY\DISCHARGER], that I am authorized to attest to the veracity of the information

contained in the report(s) described herein, and that the information contained in JNAME

AND DATE OF REPORT] is true and correct, and that this declaration was executed at

[PLACE], [STATE], on [DATE]."

Any person aggrieved by this action of the Regional Water Board may petition the State Water Board to

review the action in accordance with Water Code section 13320 and California Code of Regulations, title

23, sections 2050 and following. The State Water Board must receive the petition by 5:00 p.m., 3Q days

after the date of this Order, except that if the thirtieth day following the date of this Order falls on a

Saturday, Sunday, or state holiday, the petition must be received by the State Water Board by 5:00 p.m.

on the next business day. Copies of the law and regulations applicable to filing petitions may be found on

the Internet at:

http://www.waterboards.ca.gov/pUblic tjces/petitions/Water quality

or will be provided upon request.

SO ORDERED.

June24,2010

amuel UngeInterim Exe

Enclosures:

ye Officer

Technical Report, Appendix A, Response to RWQCB, Bowyer Environmental

Consulting, June 8, 2009Site Map


Recycled PaperOur mission is to preserve and enhance the quality of California s water resources for the benefit ofpreseni andfuture generations.

Mr. James Herbst - 6 - June 24, 2010 Mr. LanyBerna Business Industrial Group (BIG) and Former TADCO Facility

The above technical report is required to be submitted under the CWC section 13267 Order. Please note that effective immediately, the Regional Board requires you to include a perjury statement in all work plans and reports submitted under the 13267 Orders. The perjury statement shall be signed by a senior authorized representative at your company (and not by a consultant). The statement shall be in the following format:

"1 [NAME], do hereby declare, under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California, that I am [JOB TITLE] for /NAME OF RESPONSIBLE PARTYIDISCHARGER], that lam authorized to attest to the veracity of the information contained in the report(s) described herein, and that the information contained in [NAME AND DATE OF REPORT] is true and correct, and that this declaration was executed at [PLACE], [STATE], on [DATE]."

Any person aggrieved by this action of the Regional Water Board may petition the State Water Board to review the action in accordance with Water Code section 13320 and California Code of Regulations, title 23, sections 2050 and following. The State Water Board must receive the petition by 5:00 p.m., 3Q days after the date of this Order, except that if the thirtieth day following the date of this Order falls on a Saturday, Sunday, or state holiday, the petition must be received by the State Water Board by 5:00 p.m. on the next business day. Copies of the law and regulations applicable to filing petitions may be found on the Internet at:

http://www.waterboards.ca.aov/public notices/petitions/water Quality


SO ORDERED.

1 , June 24, 20 10 Samuel Unge Interim Exe ye Officer

Enclosures: a) Technical Report, Appendix A, Response to RWQCB, Bowyer Environmental Consulting, June 8, 2009

b) Site Map

!1


Recycled Paper Our mission Is to preserve and enhance the quality of California s water resources for the benefit ofpreseni andfuture generations.

)

Appendix A

Response to RWQCB Order

March 19, 2009

Appendix A


March 19, 2009

VIA ELECTRONIC MAIL

Mr. TimQthy MartinJMBM I

Jeffer, Mangels, Butler & Marmaro LLP1900 Avenue df the Stars, 7th FloorLos Angeles, California 90067

Subject Response to RWQCB Section 13267 OrderFormer TADCO Facility363 West 133rd StreetLos Angeles, California

Dear Mr. Martin:

As per your request, Bowyer Environmental Consulting, Inc. (BEC) has prepared thispreliminary response to the Section 13267 Order issued by the Los Angeles Region -Regional Water uality Control Board (RWQCB) on March 19. 2009 (Order). The Orderwas issued to the T.A. Davies Company (TA Davies). The following comments are inresponse to the specific Findings and Recommendafioris preseiiied in the Order. -Theresponses have been organized based on the order of the Findings aIid Requirementspresented in the March 19, 2009 RWQCB letter.

FINDINGS

1. Acetone was detected in the soil from near-surface to the maximum depth drilled inB-14 advanced southwest of the UST area, indicating an onsite release(s). Inaddition, acetone was detected in samples collected from both shallow and deep

sample intervals in other portionsof the site. Samples collected from beneath thetanks after the UST removal had also elevated concentrations of acetone.

Comment: As presented in the Technical Report 'BE, May 31, 2009), the property

that TAD CO operated on (363 W. 133rd Street) was part of a larger property that is, andhas been owned by B.I. G. for some time. TAD CO operated on this property between

Bowyer Environmental Consulting

26458 BOLSA CH]CA STREET, #422. HUNTINGTON SEACH, CALIFORNIA 92649- 877/232-4620. 714/840-4963 (FAX)bowyerenvtronmentaLcOm

4IiMay 30, 2009 "BEC


4J1 May 30, 2009

"BEC

VIA ELECTRONIC MAIL

Mr. TimQthy Martin JMBM I Jeffer, Mangels, Butler & Marmaro LLP 1900 Avenue of the Stars, 7th Floor Los Angeles, California 90067

Subject Response to RWQCB Section 13267 Order Former TADCO Facility 363 West 133rd Street Los Angeles, California

Dear Mr. Martin;

As per your request, Bowyer Environmental Consulting, Inc. (BEC) has prepared this preliminary response to the Section 13267 Order issued by the Los Angeles Region - Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) on March 19. 2009 (Order). The Order was issued to the T.A. Davies Company (TA Davies). The following comments are in response to the specific Findings and Recommendations p iiiedin the Order. The responses have been organized based on the order of the Findings ajid Requirements presented in the March 19, 2009 RWQCB letter.

FINDINGS

� 1. Acetone was detected in the soil from near-surface to the maximum depth drilled in B-14 advanced southwest of the UST area, indicating an onsite release(s). In addition, acetone was detected in samples collected from both shallow and deep sample intervals in other portions-of the site. Samples collected from beneath the tanks after the UST removal had also elevated� concentrations of acetone.

Comment: As presented in the Technical Report (BEc, May 31, 2009), the property that TAD CO operated on (363 W. 133rd Street) was part of a larger property that is, and has been owned by B.I.G.for some time. TAD CO operated on this property between

26458 BOLSA CH]CA STREET, #422. HUNTINGTON BEACH, CALIFORNIA 92649- 877/232-4620,714/840-4963 (FAX) bowyerenvtronmentaLcom

Mr. Timothy MarlinMay 30, 2009Page 2

1983 and 1 996 As specificall ji documented in the Technical Report, all of the BJ. G.properties were utilized extensively for industrial activities since before 1928 o thepresent data. These activities have included long-term (over 40 years) oil fieldoperations, long-term pest control facilities (over approjcimately 30 years) and anelectrical company (1964 at a minimum). Duriiig these operations, large pit structureswere present on the B.LG. properties, one on 363 W 133rd Street, and another further to

the east. As TAD CO did not store or utilize acetone in their operations (only very small

quantities were used in the laboratorij), the most likely scenario to explain the acetonepresence on this facility is that prior to the g-rading.operation in 1973, spent and/or off-

spec acetone was disposed of within the former oil field pit. Subsequently; the upper 5 to

10 feet of soil in this area zt'ere excavated during grading operations, homogenized and

redistributed across a btoader area of the overall B.LG. properties. This scenario isconsistent with the relatively widespread low level acetone concentrations obserpedacross a large section of the properties at relatively hallow depths, and the much higherconcentrations observed within the detper soil (which was not graded). The prese'ice ofacetone in soil samples collected from 4 and 13 feet in soil beneath and near the former

LISTs is consistent with this scenario, as the highest concentration of acetone within the

LIST area at 4 feet area was 70 ugilcg, and the highest concentration at 13 feet was 14,000

ugilcg. Outside of the LJST area (B-14), but still within the probable overall footprint of

the former oilfleld pit structu'ej the higlest acetone concentrations in soil were 640 ug,/kg

ut 5 feet, and 75,000 ug,'kg at 15 feet. In addition, information pertaining the septic

system which was formerly present at the former TADCOfacilthjfurther supports theconclusion that acetone was not sig fianly utilized by T4D CO. This system Waspermitted in 1982, apparently,installed in 1983, nd removed on September 27, 1996.Liquid/sludge samples collected from within the former septic system prior to removal did

not con-tam detectable concentrations of acetone. Acetone was present it a relativilj. lowconcentration (61 ug/kg) in only one of the four soil samples collected from beneath the

septic tank and leach line associated with the former septic systems. Again, the low

observed concentration in soil is consistent with the concentrations observed over arelatively wide area of shallow soil otz and off the former TADCOfacilihj, and, this

information is consistent with Tvhat would be expected due to the homogenization and

spreading of an older problems during grading activities in 1973. Two other potential

explanations for the presenceof acetone on the 33 W. 1333rd Street property arepresented as follows:

Acetone and other chemicals ran off of the Standard Metzlsfaduihj and entered the

permeable fill surrounding the EDA and PD LISTs. Runofffronz Standard Metals to

the former TAD CO facility occurred on numerous occasions based on observations

made by TAD CO. employees.

16458 BOLSA CHICA STREET, #422 - HUNTINGTON BEACH, CAUFORNIA g2649 - 877/232-4620, 714/840-4963 (FAX)

bowyerenviromnental.cOfli

Mr. Timothy Marlin I May 30, 2009

Page 2

1983 and 1996. As specifically documented in the Technical Report, all of the B.I. G. properties were utilized extensively for industrial activities since before 1928 to the present data. These activities have included long-term (over 40 years) oil field operations, long-term pest control facilities (over approximately 30 years) and an electrical company (1964 at a minimum). During these operations, large pit structures were present on the B.I.G. properties, one on 363 W 133rd Street, and another further to the east. As TAD CO did not store or utilize acetone in their opertitions (only very small quantities were used in the laboratory), the most likely scenario to explain the acetone presence on this facility is that prior to the g -rading.operat-ion in 1973, spent and/or off-spec acetone was disposed of within the former oilfield pit. Subsequently; the Upper 5 to 10 feet of soil in this area zt’ere excavated during grading operations, homogenized and redistributed across a broader area. of the overall B.I.G. properties. This scenario is consistent with the relatively widespread low level acetone concentrations obserped across a large section of the properties at relatively hallow depths, and the much higher concentrations observed within the deper soil (which was not graded). The prese’ice of acetone in soil samples collected from 4 and 13 feet in soil beneath and near the former LISTs is consistent with this scenario, as the highest concentration of acetone within the LIST area at 4 feet area was 70 ugilcg, and the highest concentration at 13 feet was 14,000 ug/lcg. Outside of the LIST area (B-14), but still within the probable overall footprint of the former oilfleld pit "structure, the highest acetone concentrations in soil were 640 ug/kg ut 5 feet, and 75,000 ug,’kg at 15 fret. In addition, information pertaining the septic system which was formerly present at the former TADCOfacilthjfurther supports the conclusion that acetone was not sig fianly utilized by T4D CO. This system Was permitted in 1982, apparently,installed in 1983, and removed on September 27, 1996. Liquid/sludge samples collected from unthin th.eforiner septic system prior to removal did not contain detectable concentrations of acetone. Acetone was present it a relativiIiJ low concentration (61 ug,’kg) in only one of the four soil samples collected from beneath the septic tank and leach line associated with the former septic systems. Again, the low observed concentration in soil is consistent with the concentrations observed over a relatively wide area of shallow soil on and off the former TADCOfacilihj, and, this information is consistent with Tvhat would be expected due to the homogenization and spreading of an older problems during grading activities in 1973. Two other potential explanations for the presenceof acetone on the 353 W. 1333" Street property are presented as follows:

� Acetone and other chemicals ran off of the Standard Metals facility and entered the permeable fill surrounding the EDA and PD LISTs. Runofffronz Standard Metals to tlwforiner TAD CO facility occurred on numerous occasions based on observations made by TAD CO. employees.

16458 BOLSA CHICA STREET, #422 - HUNTINGTON BEACH, CALIFORNIA 92649 - 877/232-4620, 714/840-4963 (FAX) bowyerenviroiunental.coni

Mi. Timothy MartinMay 30, 2009Page 3

An as yet unidentified preferential pathway may existbetween the primary user of

acetone in the area (General Welding,) and the permeable fill surrounding the EDA

and P0 LiSTs, and/or historic oil-field pits.

2. Your position that the acetone release(s) on the General Welding propei'ty migratedto TADCO's is not supported with data collected from the Site and offsite. Acetone

was not detected in any of the soil samples collected from borings B-21 and B-22, aswell as MW-i, which were close to the General Welding property, indicating that therelease(s) on General Welding property is 'confined to the limits of the property.MW-I was installed by Frey as part, of the groundwater investigation for Standard

Metals.

Comment: Noted. However, given the histo'y of large scale acetone use by

General Welding, and the lack of any significant use by TAD CO, the potential that

the General Welding facility serued as the ultimate sourcefqr acetone in the area.

should be fully evaluated. ..

3. It is also unlikely that dissolved acetone migrated with groundwater from theGeneral Welding property to the Site because the groundwater flow direction in

-'the vicinity of the Site is towards the southwest, i.e. towards the General

Welding property.

Comment: We agree that based on the groundwater flow 'information

presented by Frey Environmental and Rincbn consultants that groundwater appears

to flow towards the southwest. However, as documented in the Technical Report, the

General Welding property and the 363 W 133rd Street property appear to be 'cross

gradient from one another.. The availabe data snggasts that there are at leapt two

separate sources of acetone to groundwater in the area. It should also be noted that

large pOrtions of the B.LG., General Welding, and Standard Metals properties remain

under investigated at this point., Additional éources of acetone to groundwater may

be identified once these sites have been fully characterized.

4.. You have not supported your position with evidence; showing the chemicals

detected in the soil and groundwater were used during historical oil explorationand production at the Site. Moreover, the oil wells 'produce from much deeper

depths than the depth intervals investigated at the Site. No evidence waspresented that crude oil was detected in the soil, indicating contamination asresult of historical oil operations..Tbe hydrocarbons detected in 'the soil and

groundwater were constituents of refined petroleum products like gasoline and

diesel fuel.

Comment As presented in the Technical Report aerial photographs and

16458 BOLSA CHICA STREET. 422 - HUNTINGTON BEACH, CALIFORNIA 92649- 877/232-4620, 714/8404963 (FANbowyerenylronmental.cOrn

Mi. Timothy Martin 1 May 30, 2009

Page 3

� An as yet unidentified preferential pathway may exist between the primary user of acetone in the area (General Welding) and the permeable fill surrounding the EDA and P0 LISTs, and/or historic oil-field pits.

2. Your position that the acetone release(s) on the General Welding propei -ty migrated to TADCO’s is not supported with data collected from the Site and offsite. Acetone was not detected in any of the soil samples collected from borings B-21 and B-22, as well as MW-1, which were close to the General Welding property, indicating that the release(s) on General Welding property is confined to the limits of the property. MW-1 was installed by Frey as part of the groundwater investigatthn for Standard Metals.

Comment: Noted. However, given the histth’y of large scale acetone use by General Welding, and the lack of any significant use by TAD CO, the potential that the General Welding facility served as the ultimate source fqr acetone in the area. should beflully evaluated. .

3. It is also unlikely that dissolved acetone migrated with groundwater from the General Welding property to the Site because the groundwater flow direction in

-’the vicinity of the Site is towards the southwest, i.e. towards the General Welding property.

Comment: We agree that based on the groundwater flow information presented by Frey Environmental and Rincbn consultants that groundwater appears to flow towards the southwest. However, as documented in the Technical Report, the General Welding property and the 363 W 133rd Street property appear to be cross gradient from one another... The availabe data suggests that there are two separate sources of acetone to groundwater in the area. It should also be noted that large pOrtions of the B.LG., General Welding, and Standard Metals properties remain under investigated at this point. Additional Øources of acetone to groundwater may be identified once these sites have been fully characterized.

4.. You have not supported your position with evidence; showing the chemicals detected in the soil and groundwater were used during historical oil exploration and production at the Site. Moreover, the oil wells produce from much deeper depths than the depth intervals investigated at the Site. No evidence was presented that crude oil was detected in the soil, indicating contamination as result of historical oil operations.. The hydrocarbons detected in the soil and groundwater were constituents of refined petroleum products like gasoline and diesel fuel.


16458 BOLSA CHICA STREET. 4)422 - HUNTINGTON BEACH, CALIFORNIA 92649- 877/2324620,714/840-4963 (FAX) bowyerenyIronmentaI.con

Mr. Timothy MarthaMay 30, 2009Page 4

historical property use records have been reviewed that document the long-term

presence of oil field and other non-TADCQ related operations on this B.LG. owned.

property. The presence of aromatic compounds (including benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene and xylenes,) within crude oil is well documented, and various sources forthis information can be sited if necessary. As a matter offactfractinal distillation isa primary refining process, during i.vhich various hydrocarbon classes are separated.

This and other refining processes are used to generate petroleum products like

gasoline, which are relatively enriched in aroizatics when compared to otherpetroleum classes. However, it should be noted that the aromatic sourcesfir gasoline

and other products is the crude oil itself and they are not additives. As discussed indetail in the Technical Report, the presence of the large pit. structurefor an extended

period of time (during which staidard industrial practices tijpicqlly involved sonic

level of on-site disposal as the most economic means of dealing with off-spec and/or

spent material) represent probable source areas for crude oil, refined products, and

other chemicals from the various induttrial operations conducted pt this andsurrounding sites between the 192 Os and the 1970s. Starting in late 1970s and early

1980s waste management practices changed as a result ofenvironmental regulations.

(Constituents found in refined petroleum products such as toluene, ethyl b.enzene,and xylenes were detected in the soil from near-surface to the maximum depthdrilled in boring B-23 that was advanced in the drum storage area, indicatingonsite release(s). BTEX was also detected in soil samples collected from bothshallow and deep sampled intervals in this area. Toluene was also detected in allsoil samples collected in boring B-29 in the septic tank area.

Comment: As presented in the technical report, it appears that a ource ofaromatic compounds .(BTEX) is present on the 33 W. 133rd Street parcel . Similnr to

the distribution pattern for acetoi.ië, the areas of soil containing relatively higharomatic concentrations on,the site are in the vicinity of the former oil-field si.lnlp

structi.re. HistOric disposal of aromatic compounds to the oil.pit are the likely cause

of the on-site aroniatc impacts to soil. Other possible explanations include the noted

runofffrom the Standard Metals ite which was observed byfornier TADCO

employees; In finy event, as documented in the Technical Report, aromatic

compounds appear to be having very minor impacts to roundwater in the area.

More signzficant.issues associated with the observations of very high levels of

chlorinated hydrocarbons, including trichloroethene (TCE), cis- 1,2dichloroethene(cis-1,2-DCE), and vinyl chloride) in groundwater need to be addressed as a priori hj

within the general area of the 363 W 1331d Street site

Diesel fuel range TPH was detected in the AST farm area with a maximumconcentration of 2,000 mg/Kg. Diesel.fuel was stored in one of the ASTs in this

16458 BOLSA CHICA STREET, 4422 - }IIJNTINGTON BEACH, CALIFORNIA 92649. 877/232-4620, 714/840-4963 (FAX)bowyerenvlronmefltaLcOm

Mr. Timothy Martin May 30, 2009 Page 4

historical property use records have been reviewed that document the long-term presence of oilfield and other non-TAD CO related operations on this B.L G. owned. property. The presence of aromatic compounds (including benzene, toluene, ethyl benzene and xylenes) within crude oil is well documented, and various sources for this information can be sited if necessary. As a matter offactfractiirnal distillation is a primary refining process, during .vhich various hydrocarbon classes are separated. This and other refining processes are used to generate petroleum products like gasoline, which are relatively enriched in arorizatics when compared to other petroleum classes. However, it should be noted that the aromatic sources fir gasoline and other products is the crude oil itself, and they are not additives. As discussed in detail in the Technical Report, the presence of the large pit . structure for an extended period, of time (during which standard industrial practices typic?zlly involved some level of on-site disposal as the most economic ’means of dealing with off-spec and/or spent material) represent probable source areas for crude oil, refined products, and other chemicals from the various industrial operations’ conducted .at this and surrounding sites between the 2920s and the 1970s. Starting in late 1970s and early 1980s waste managenient practices changed as a result of environmental regulations.

5. ( Constituents found in refined petroleum prOducts such as toluene, ethyl benzene,, and xylenes were detected in the soil from near-surface to the maximum depth drilled in boring B-23 that was advanced in the drum storage area, indicating

� onsite release(s). BTEX was also detected in soil samples collected from both shallow and deep sampled intervals in this area. Toluene was also detected in all soil samples collected in boring 13-29 in the septic tank area.

Comn-ient: As ’presented in the technical report, it appears that a source of aromatic compoIinds.’BTEX,) is present on the. 363 W 13" Street parcel Similar to the distribution pattern for acetoi.iº, the areas of soil containing relatively high aromatic concentrations on the site are in the vicinity of the former oil-field sump structm.re. Historic disposal of aromatic compounds to the oil-pit are the likely cause of the on-site aromatic impacts to soil. Other possible explanations include the noted runofffrom the Standard Metals site which was Observed byfornier TAD’CO employees; In any event, as documented in the Technical Report, aromatic comnpoundsappear to be having very minor impacts to groundwaterin the area. More signzficant.issues associated with the observations of very high levels of chlorinated hydrocarbons, including trichloroethene (TCE), cis- 1,2dichloroethene (cis-1,2-DCE), and vinyl chloride) in groundwater need to be addressed as a priority Within the general area of the 363 W. 13311 Street site

6. Diesel fuel range TPH was detected in the AST farm area with a maximum concentration of 2,000 mg/Kg. Diesel.fuel was stored in one of the ASTs in this

16458 BOLSA CHICA STREET, 4422 - HUNTINGTON BEACH, CALIFORNIA 92649. 877/232-4620, 714/840-4963 (FAX) bowyerenvlronmentaLcom

Mi. Timothy MartinMay 30, 2009Page 5

area.

Comment Based on all of the available data, diesel range TPI-1 TPH-d)

impacts are extremely limited within the above ground tank farm (AST) area. As a

reference, Table 4-1 of the RWQCB May 1996 Interim Site Assessment and Cleanup

Guideboolc provides soil cleanup screening criteriafor TPI-J based on depth to water.

Given that groundwater at thisite is presentat depths of approximately 40 fret, the

TPH-d screening level Jrm Table 4-1 is 1,000 mg/lcg. Ten samples were initially

collected frbm a depth of 2 foot. in the AST area. Only one 'HA-6) of thes.e ten

shallow soil saniples contained concentrations in excess of the TPH-d scieening

criteria. Based on this result, an additional boring (B..27,) was installed in close

proxinitij to I-IA-6, and samples were collected at 5, 10, 20, 25 and 30 fret. All of the

TPH-d results from B-27 were nondetect. Based on these results, additional

investigation in association with the release ofTPH-d in the AST area appears tobe

unwarranted.

Although use and storage of acetone at the facility was not reported, thischemical is known to be used in the Polyurethane industry s an auxiliaryblowing agent to supplement water for modifying the physical properties of the

polyurethane resin. In addition, it was indicated byone of TADCO's managers

that TAD CO traded chemicals with one of its neighbors. Acetone and TCE are

also known to be used for cleaning chemical mixing equipment aiid containers at

such facilities.

Comment Npted. T. A. Davies did not utilize acetone or TCE within their

primary process as a blowing agent or any other purpose. Sniall quantities of acetone

were used in the Laboratory on ite. 4 p rob. 2 cenrio to explain the relativel!) wide

spread presence and elevated concentrations of acetone and TCE observed on the site

has been presented in the Technical Report and summarL ed in the comment to No. 1.

Copies of Material Safety Data Sheets (MSDS) for chemictls used at yourformer facility indicate that some of the contaminants found in the soil and

groundwater beueath the Site are actually ingredients of the chemicals used

onsite. These chemicals include; xylenes,trimethylbenZefle, naphthalene,toluene, ethylbènzene and others.

Comment: Noted. 1-lowever, other probable explanations as to the source of

these corn poiLnds in the subsuface at the site have been presented. In addition, based

On the available data, these compounds are not the most ignifi cant or widespread

compounds that have been detected within the area. In addition, there is no

information of any release of these compounds by TADCO at the site.

The Regional Board directed you in a letter dated August 31, 2001 to initiate a

16458 BOLSA CHICA STREET, 4422- HUNTIIGTON BEACH, CALIFORNIA 92649- 877/232-4620, 714/840-4963 (FAX)

bowyerenvlronnlefltaLCOm

Mi. Timothy Martin May 30, 2009 Page 5

area.

Comment: Based on all of the available data, diesel range TPI-1 (TPH-d) impacts are extremely limited within the above ground tank farm (AST) area. As a reference, Table 4-1 of the RWQCB May 1996 Interim Site Assessment and Cleanup Guidebook provides soil cleanup screening criteria for TPI-J based on depth to water. Given that groundwater at this site is present at depths of approximately 40 feet, the TPH-d screening level form Table 4-1 is 1,000 mg/kg. Ten samples were initially collected from a depth of 2 foot. in the AST area. Only one (HA-6) of these ten shallow soil saniples contained concentrations in excess of the TPH-d screening criteria. Based on this result, an additional bOring (B..27) was installed in close proxiiitij to I-IA-6, and samples were collected at 5, 10, 20, 25 and Sofeet. All of the TPH-d results from B-27 were nondetect. Based on these results, additional investigation in association with the release of TPH-d in the AST area appears to be unwarranted.

7. Although use and storage of acetone at the facility was not reported, this chemical is known to be used in the Polyurethane industry s an auxiliary blowing agent to supplement water for modifying the physical properties of the polyurethane resin. In addition, it was indicated by - one of TADCO’s managers that TAD CO traded chemicals with one of its neighbors; Acetone and TCE are also known to be used for cleaning chemical mixing equipment and containers at such facilities.

Comment Noted. T. A. Davies did not utilize acetone or TCE within their primary process as a blowing agent or any other purpose. Small quantities of acetone were used in the laboratory site. 4 p robabl cenrio to explain the relatively) wide spread presence and elevated concentrations of acetone and TCE observed on the site has been presented in the Technical Report and summarized in the comment to No. 1.

8. Copies of Material Safety Data Sheets (MSDS) for chemicals used at your former facility indicate that some of the contaminants found in the soil and groundwater beneath the Site are actually ingredients of the chemicals used onsite. These chemicals include; xylenes,trimethylbenzene, naphthalene, toluene, ethylbŁnzene and others.

I Comment: Noted. However, other probable explanations as to the source of these compounds in the subsurface at the site have been presented. In addition, based on the available data, these compounds are not the mostignifl cant or widespread compounds that have been detected within the area. In addition, there is no information of any release of these compounds by TADCO at the site.

9. The Regional Board directed you in a letter dated August 31, 2001 to initiate a

16458 BOLSA C}IICA STREET, #422 - HUNTINGTON BEACH, CALIFORNIA 92649- 877/232-4620, 714/840-4963 (FAX) bowyerenvlronnaentaLcom

/

Mr. Timothy MartinMay 30, 2009Page 6

quarterly groundwater monitoring program. However, you have never.implemented this requirement. Moreover, the background concentration VOCsin the groundwater are not known upgradient of the Site. Two active drinkingwater production wells are also located at an approximate maximum distance of0.85 miles dowugradient of your Site.

Comment: TA Davis issued a response to the August 31, 2001 Order anSeptember 24, 2001. TA Davies has been uflder the reasonable impression that the

RWQCB was satisfied with TAD COs response and was seeking action from other

parties responsible for the significant releases at and near the site. As described in the

Technical Reporta significant source of chlorinated hydrocarbons appears to be

present up gradient in the B.LG. owned property east of the former TADCO facility..

Other parties should conduct investigations on these properties to evaluate the nature

and extent. of this source. These invstigations should include the installation of

grounduater wells, which woitld fulfill the RWQCB requirement for up gradient.

wells.

REQIREMENTS

Delineate the lateral extent of VOC and TPH contamination in the soil.Step out soil borings shall be advanced to delineate the VOC nd TPHcontamination to their full extent.

Response: The Technical Report provjdes a series ofio-concentration maps

which summarize available data. As shown on these maps, the definition of the

extent of VOC and TPH impacts on the 363 W 133rd Street is complete. However,

as shown in the Tecimical- Report, -additional investigations need to he_peijorined at

the Standard Metals, General Welding and B.LG. owned property east of the former

TAD CO facility.

Delineate the vertical extent of the VOC and TPH contamination in thesoil. Deeper borings shall be advanced in those areas where VOC and TFHcontamination was encountered at shallow depths.

Response: See Technical Report and response to No. 1.

Additional assessment needs to be conducted to investigate the source ofPCBs detected in soil samples from boring B-14. Stepout borings shall beadvanced in the area around B44 to delineate the lateral and vertical extentof the PCB soil contamination.

Response: The five foot sample collected from B-14 contained 3,050 ug/kg of

16458 BOLSA CIUCA STREET. #422 - HUNTINGTON BEICH, CAUFORNIA92649- 877/232-4620.714/8404963 (FAX)bowyerenvlroumefltal.COm

Mr. Timothy Martin

Th May 30, 2009 Page 6

quarterly groundwater monitoring program. However, you have never, implemented this requirement. Moreover, the background concentration VOCs in the groundwater are not known upgradient of the Site. Two active drinking water production wells are also located at an approximate maximum distance of 0.85 miles dowugradient of your Site.

Comment: TA Davis issued a response to the August 31, 2001 Order an September 24, 2001. TA Davies has been under the reasonable impression that the RWQCB was satisfied with TADCOs response and was seeking action from other parties responsible for the significant releases at and near the site. As described in the Technical Reporta significant source of chlorinated hydrocarbons appears to be present up gradient in the B.I.G. owned property east of the foæner TADCO facility.. Other parties should conduct investigations on these properties to evaluate the nature and extent of this source. These invstigations should include the installation of groundwater wells, which woitld fulfill the RWQCB requirement for up gradient. wells.

REQIREMENTS

1. Delineate the lateral extent of VOC and TPH contamination in the soil. Step out soil borings shall be advanced to delineate the VOC and TPH contamination to their full extent. 1.

Response: The Technical Report provides a series of io-concentration maps which summarize available data. As shown on these maps, the definition of the extent of VOC and TPH impacts on the 363 W. 133rd Street is complete. However,

- - as shown- in the Technical Report, additional investigatioiis nee4 to beforiied at the Standard Metals, General Welding and B.I. G. owned property east of the former TAD CO facility.

2. Delineate the vertical extent of the VOC and TPH contamination in the soil. Deeper borings shall be advanced in those areas where VOC and TFH contamination was encountered at shallow depths.


3. Additional assessment needs to be conducted to investigate the source of PCBs detected in soil samples from boring B-14. Stepout borings shall be advanced in the area around B-IA to delineate the lateral and vertical extent of the PCB soil contamination.


16458 BOLSA CrnCA STREET. #422 - HUNTINGTON BEACH, CALIFORNIA 92649- 8771232-4620.714/8404963 (FAX) bowyerenvlroumental.com


aroclor 1242 aiid 108 ug,ilcg of aroclor 1260. The 35 foot sample collected from B-14did not contain a detectable concentration of PCBs. As the California 1-luman I-lealthScreening Level (HHSL,) for commercial/industrial sites is 300 ug/kg, additidnalstepout testing should be peifornied in this area td define the nature and extent of thisissue. TAD CO did not utilize or deposit PCBs on this site between 198J and 1996.Former inaustrial uses of the facility included an electrical company in 1964(Starlight Electrical). As the source for PCBs it the site is other than TA Davies, theproperty owner (B.LG.) should be responsible for conducting this additional work.

Contaminant specific iso-concentration maps showing the lateral extent ofmajor contaminants in the soil shall be prepared and submitted.

Response: This task has bien completed and these maps have been provided aspart of the Tecimical Report.

Contaminant-specific cross-sections with color gradational iso-concentration contoursmaps showing the v&tical extent of majorcontaminants in the soil shall be prepared and submitted.

Response: The Technical Report provides a series of color gradational mapsshot qing the vertical extent of major contaminants in lieu of cross sections.

Soil Screening Levels (SSLs) that are protective, of human health andgroundwater quality shall be developed for the Site in accordance withInterim Site Assessment and Cleanup Guidebook publisiied by theRegional Board in May 1996. The guidebook is available online on theRegional Board's website; Alternatively, yeu-thay.proposesite--specificSSLs using various models available, based on data collected from the Site.A summary.of historical and current soil analytical results shall besummarized in tables to compare site-specific values against the SSLs andshow exceedences.

Response: As presented in the Technical Report, historical industrialoperations other than TADCO'sforiner operations and off-site impacts appear tohqve resulted in the obsen;ed chemical presence at the 363 1/V. J33rf Street facilitij.

As a result, it would appear that B.I.G. and/or other responsible parties shouldproceed with flLrther evaluations regarding the need and extent of necessary clean-up

actions.

The United States Environmental Protection Agency's (USEPA's) orCalifornia Department of Public Health's Maximum Contaminant Levels

16458 BOLSA CHICA STREET, #422. HUNTINGTON BEACH, CALIFORNIA 92649- 877/232-4620, 714/840-4963 (FAX)

bowyerenvlronrnenth].com

Mr. Timothy Martin I ) May 30, 2009

Page 7

aroclor 1242 and 108 u&/kg of aroclor 1260. The 35 foot sample collected from B-14 did not contain a detectable concentration of PCBs. As the California 1-luman I-lealth Screening Level (HHSL) for commercial/industrial sites is 300 ug/kg, additional stepout testing should be peifornied in this area td define the nature and extent of this issue. TAD CO did not utilize or deposit PCBs on this site between 1983 and 1996. Former industrial uses of the facility included an electrical company in 1964 (Starlight Electrical). As the source for PCBs it the site is other than TA Davies, the property owner (B.LG.) should be responsible for conducting this additional work.

4. Contaminant specific iso-concentration maps showing the lateral extent of major contaminants in the soil shall be prepared and submitted.

Response: This task has been completed and these maps have been provided as part of the Technical Report.

5. Contaminant-specific cross-sections with color gradational iso-concentration contoursmaps showing the vertical extent of major contaminants in the soil shall be prepared and submitted.

Response: The Technical Report provides a series of color gradational maps shot qing the vertical extent of major contaminants in lieu of cross sections.

6. Soil Screening Levels (SSLs) that are protective, of human health and groundwater quality shall be developed for the Site in accordance with Interim Site Assessment and Cleanup Guidebook published by the Regional Board in May 1996. The guidebook is available online on the Regional Board’s website; Alternatively, yei -thay.proposesite--specific SSLs using various models available, based on data collected from the Site. A summary. of historical and current soil analytical results shall be summarized in tables to compare site-specific values against the SSLs and show exceedences.

Response: As presented in the Technical Report, historical industrial operations other than TADCO’sforiner operations and off-site impacts appear to have resulted in the observed chemical presence at the 363 1/V. 733rf Street facilitij. As a result, it would appear that B.I.G. and/or other responsible parties should proceed with flLrtller evaluations regarding the need and extent of necessary clean-up actions.

7. The United States Environmental Protection Agency’s (USEPA’s) or California Department of Public Health’s Maximum Contaminant Levels

16458 BOLSA CHICA STREET, #422. HUNTINGTON BEACH, CALIFORNIA 92649- 877/232-4620, 714/840-4963 (FAX) bowyerenvlronrnenth].com

Mr. Timothy MartinMay 30, 2Q09Page8

(MCLs) for drinking water, whichever is more stringent,, shall be used toscreen groundwater analytical results. Contaminant levels above the MCLsshall be shown in tables in bold face.

Response: As presented in the Technical Report, there are significantgroundwater impacts in the vicinity oftheforiner TADCOfabilitij. However, based

on the available data, these impacts appear to be associated with historical industrialoperations at the site other than TAD CD's, and/or offsite sources that should be

investigated by others. As a result, it would appetir that B.LG. and/or other

responsible pnrties should proceed with further evaluations, regarding the needl and

extent of necessary clean-up actions.

Soil borings shall be advanced in the approximate location of former pondwhere drilling mud and other wastes were reportedly dumped duringhistorical oil production operations. Soil samples shall be submitted to acertified laboratory for fingerprinting analyses to identify the occurrenceand source of crude oil.

Response: As documented in the. Technical Report, the former oil-field

pit was present long before TADCO operated on the site. TADCO has neverowned this site. As such, it would appear apprôriate that B.I.G. (which

owns the site now and has owned the site since prior to TADCO ue of thefacility) should be responsible for implementing any work associated with the

former oil-field pit.

At least one groundwater monitoring well upgradient of MW4 near thenc)tthern pthpertyboundary'andtwc cross -gradient monitoring-wells onthe eastern nd western property boundaries shall be installed todetermine the groundwater flow.diiection beneath the Site. You shall.usedata from these wells to develop a conceptual site model (CSM) and to

assess the background concentrations of the groundwater entering the Siteand the aerial extent of the VOC plume.

Response: A CSM was presented within the Technical 1eport. This CSM.

consists of the documented historjc long-term industrial use of this and surroundingproperties (in particular the long-term oil pits located on this and the up gradient

property to the east), the grading and redistribution of impacts within the upper 5 to

20 feet on the pro ert-ij in 1973, and migration pattern of elevated compounds from

up-gradient sources. As such, it would appear appropriate the B.LG. to be

responsible for the installation of these groundwater wells. Following the

implementation of this arid investigations at Standard Metals and General Welding,

B.L G. and/or other responsible parties should re-evaluate and update the CSM, as

16458 BOLSA CHICA STREET, #422 - UNTITqGTOI'l BEACH, CALIFORNIA 92649- 877/232-4620. 714/840.4963 (FAX)

bowyerenvlronmental.com

Mr. Timothy Martin I ’ May 30, 2Q09

Page 8

(MCLs) for drinking water, whichever is more stringent,, shall be used to screen groundwater analytical results. Contaminant levels above the MCLs shall be shown in tables in bold face.

Response: As presented in the Technical Report, there are significant groundwater impacts in the vicinity oftheforiner TADCOfabilitij. However, based on the available data, these impacts appear to be associated with historical industrial operations at the site other than TAD CD’s, and/or offsite sources that should be investigated by others: As a result, it would appear that B.I.G. and/or other responsible parties should proceed with further evaluations, regarding the need and extent of necessary clean-up actions.

B. Soil borings shall be advanced in the approximate location of former pond where drilling mud and other wastes were reportedly dumped during historical oil production operations. Soil samples shall be submitted to a certified laboratory for fingerprinting analyses to identify the occurrence and source of crude oil.

Response: As documented in the. Technical Report, the former oil-field pit was present long before TADCO operated on the site. TADCO has never owned this site. As such, it would appear apprôniate that B.I.G. (which owns the site now and has owned the site since prior to TADCO use of the facility) should be responsible for implementing any work associated with the former oil-field pit.

9. At least one groundwater monitoring well upgradient of M1’V4 near the northern property cross gradientmonitoring-wells on the eastern and western property boundaries shall be installed to determine the groundwater flow-direction beneath the Site. You shall.use data from these wells to develop a conceptual site model (CSM) and to assess the background concentrations of the groundwater entering the Site and the aerial extent of the VOC plume.

Response: A CSM was presented within the’ Technical Report. This CSM. consists of the documented historic long-term industrial use of this and surrounding properties (in particular the long-term oil pits located on this and the up gradient property to the east), the grading and redistribution of impacts within the upper 5 to 20 feet on the pro ert-ij in 1973, and migration pattern of elevated compounds from up-gradient sources. As such, it would appear appropriate the B.I.G. to be responsible for the installation of these groundwater wells. Following the implementation of this and investigations at Standard Metals and General Welding, B.L G. and/or other responsible parties should re-evaluate and update the CSM, as

16458 BOLSA CHICA STREET, #422 - UNTITqGTOI’l BEACH, CALIFORNIA 92649- 877/232-4620,714/840-4963 (FAX) bowyerenvlronmental.com

necessnnj.

Mr. Timothy MartinMay 30, 2009P(age 9

In order to address Item Numbers 1 through 9, you shall prepare andsubmit a work plan to the Regional Board by April 27, 2009. The work planshall b:e prepared in accordance with the Regional Board's GeneralRequirements for Subsurface Soil Investigations and GeneralRequirements for Groundwater Investigations (see attached).

Response: In lieu of a workplan, a Technical Report has been prepared and

submitted 'BEc, May 31, 2009).

After the installation of the groundwater monitoring wells a quarterlygroundwater monitoring s1all be initiated and groundwater monitoring reportsshall be submitted according to the following schedule:

Monitoring Period Report Due DateApril-June July 15th

July-September October 15th

October-December January 15th

January-March April 15th

Response: See response to No. 9. This work should b.c conducted by the

propertij owner (B.I.G.) and/or other responsible paitis.

12. .A site-wide groundwater elevation contour map showing the groundwaterflow direction and gradieit must be included in the groundwatermonitoring reports. Groundwater samples shall be analyzed fr VOCs,BTEX, TPH, PCBs and dissolved heavy metals.'

Response: See response to .No. 11. This work should also be conducted by the

property owner (B.I.G.) and/or other responsible parties.

16458 BOLSA C}I]CA STREET, 4422 - HUNTINGTON BEACH, CALIFORNIA 92649- 877/232-4620. 714/840-4963 (AXJbowyerenvironrnentaLCOm

Mr. Timothy Martin ( ) May 30, 2009

P(age9

necessnnj.

10. In order to address Item Numbers 1 through 9, you shall prepare and submit a work plan to the Regional Board by April 27, 2009. The work plan shall be prepared in accordance with the Regional Board’s General Requirements for Subsurface Soil Investigations and General Requirements for Groundwater Investigations (see attached).

Response: In lieu of a workplan, a Technical Report has been prepared and submitted ’BEc, May 31, 2009).

11. After the installation of the groundwater monitoring wells a quarterly groundwater monitoring shall be initiated and groundwater monitoring reports shall be submitted according to the following schedule:

Monitoring Period April-June July-September October-December January-March

Report Due Date July October lSth January 15th April 15th

Response: See response to No. 9. This work should be conducted by the propertij owner (B.I.G.) and/or other responsible paitis..

12. .A site-wide groundwater elevation contour map showing the groundwater flow direction and gradient must be included in the groundwater monitoring reports. Groundwater samples shall be analyzed for VOCs, BTEX, TPH, PCBs and dissolved heavy metals.’

Response: See response to .No. 11. This work should also be conducted by the property owner (B.I.G.) and/or other responsible parties.

16458 BOLSA C}I]CA STREET, 4422- HUNTINGTON BEACH, CALIFORNIA 92649. 877/232-4620.714/840-4963 (FAX) bowyerenvironrnentaLcom


CLOSING

BEC has prepared this document at the request of Jeffer, Mangels, Butler & Marma.ro

LLP and their client T. Davies. If you have any questions regarding this document,

please do not hesitate to call.

Sincerely,

Brett H. Bowyer, P.C.PrincipalBow yer Environmental Consulting, inc.

2.6458 BOLSA CHICA STRRET, #422- HUNTINGTON BEACH, CALIFORNIA 92649- 877/232-4620. 714/840.4963 (FAX)

bowyerenvlroflmeflta].COm

- Mr. Timothy Martin

( May 30, 2009 Page 10.

CLOSING

BEC has prepared this docuthent at the request of Jeffer, Mangels, Butler & Marmaxo LLP and their client T. Davies. If you have any questions regarding this document, please do not hesitate to call.

� Sincerely,

Brett H. Bowyer, P.C. � Principal Bowyer Environmental Consulting, inc. � �

16458 BOLSA CHICA STREET, #422 HUNTINGTON BEACH, CALIFORNIA 92649- 677/232-4620,714/840-4963 (FAX) bowyeren*onmenta].com

8

8

GENERAL WELDING352W. 133RD STREET

EXPLANAtiON

GROUNDWATER MONITORING WELl. LOCATION

VAPOR ExTRACTION WELl. LOCATION

S SOIl. BORING LOCATION

- PROPERTY BOUNDARY

ABoVE-GROUND STORAGE TANK

OIL WELl.

SOUTHERNJ PACIFIC RAILROAD

SOURCIL FREY ENSTROBAIENTAI. srrE SICETEN REP. SEYTREI8ER 1998. UlS RINCONC0r5635. COURT Z JAEURRY298R

AU. LOCASONS ESINTIBTENSIONS USE APPROSMATE

13255S. BROADWAY

BUILDING

BEC

BJ.G.PROPERTY

I I,,chSO feet

BEG16458 BoIse CI9ICVSITINBt 5422

00 Fletd Related Features -1928P,n(ectN Figure

HuntIngton BeZCh CA 92649TeL (877) 222-4620Fex (714) 840-4963

FORMER TADCO FACILifYLosAngeleS, CA

09001001 3

SOUTHERN PACIFIC RAILROAD

STANDARD METALS 378W. 133RD STREET

FORMER UOY

r 1 r 1 I

in I UNIINORM STRUCTURE

hull BUILDING 1L1 �R

I �OR UILDIN

L_,LJ � MW-2 �,

SFOS W.- RILFFO 5 SHE s F-1 RUNOEMP1FD M

B.I.G. L AERTEYCENE GENERATOR

Sb

H H fl FORMER PROPERTY TA000

363W. MAIN SUKONG

OR

Trip 1 33RD S,TRE U Li Er

LAJ FORMER

UST �S � FORMERAGTREA

eG-8 &GWN-1 / eGwD-I APPARENT PIT B.I.G.

’i �OR SR

PROPERTY’ FORMER

TINGAOTN UST AN \ W

GENERAL WELDING \ \’ 352W. 133RD STREET \ \ \ \ 13255 S. BROADWAY

000 \\ \\ BUILDING

JARENTPIT

EXPLANATION

ig GROUNDWATER MONITORING WELL LOCATION

VAPOR EXTRACTION WELL LOCATION

S SOIl. BORING LOCATION

- PROPERTY BOUNDARY

ABOVE-GROUND STORAGE TANK

OR. WRI.I.

SOURCIL FREY ENVIRONMENTAL. SITE SKETCH MAP. SEYTEYABER 1998. ABC RINCON CONSLETAFO5. FGIJRE Z JABUURY2RM

.91.1. LOCATIONS AND DICCENSIONS UPS APPROTOMA1E

I I,ch5O fORt

EXHIBIT BEXHIBIT B

Linda S. AdameCal/EPA Secraaiy


320W. 4th Street. Suite 200, Lot An5eIe, Cn1ifbmi 90013

Phone (23) 76-6600 PAX (23) 576.6640 - internet Address: httpdfwww,wa erbo .ca.gov/losangctes Arnold SchwarzefleggerGovernor

July 1, 2010

Mr. Greg Levindo M±. Michael BaumReh Poister & Berger LLP9200 Sunset Boulevard, Ninth FloorLos Angeles, CA 90069

,REQTJIREMI.NT FOR A TECBMCAL RE1ORT PURTJANT TO CAL1FQBNJA WATR CODE .(CWC)

SECnON 13267 ORDER - STANDARD METALS, 378 WEST 133' STREET, LOS ANGELES, CA (SiTE

CLEANU] NO. OSISA AND SITE B) NO. 20441)00)

Dear Mr. Levin;

The California Regional Water Quality Control Board, Los Angeles Region (Regional Board) is the public agency

with primary responsibility for the protection of ground and surface water quality for all beneficial uses within

major portions of Los Angeles County and Ventura County, including the above-referenced site.

In response to our previous Order, dated March 19, 2009, you conducted additional site assessment snd submitted

a site assessment report3 dated January 19, 2010, Baaód on our review of this site assessment report and other

historical site assessment reports for the adjacent sites, we outlined our findings and requirements in the enclosed

Order. You are required to comply with this new Order to ensure that progress is made in our continued

investigation at the site. and in the general vicinity.

The State Water Resources Control Board EState Water Board) adopted regulations requiring :the electronic

submittais of information over the Internet using the State Water Board QeoTracker database. You are required

not on1y to submit hard opy reprts requfred in this Order but also to comply by uploading all repOrtS and

correspondence prepared to date and additional required data formats to the GeoTraoker3 system. Information

about GeoTracker submittals, including links to text of the governing regulations, can be found on the Internet at

the following link:

on ov/water 1s. e ama nat/electronic submittal

Jeffrey Hu nit ChiefSite Cleanup Program, Unit II

CiiJifornianvironmefltal ,ProtectioflAgncyRecyclad PaIper

Our mi&ion re to prswrve and enhance the quoThy qi Caljforsia water resources/or the benefit Qfpruent widfiaure generalion:.

CERTWJ.IIL) MAILRETURN RECEIPT REQUESTBD

2Q09 0820 0001 6811 917

If you have any questions regarding this letter, please contact Mr. Btzuayehu Ayele at (213) 576-6747 or by

email it bayelewaterbOflrdS.Ca.gOV.

Sioerel

California Regional Water Quality Control Board -. Los Angeles Region .

320W. 4th Street, SuIte 200, Lot AneIe, California 90013 Linda S. Adams’ Phone (23) 76-6600 PAX (23) 576-6640 - Internet Address: httpV/www.waterboards .cR,Soy/losangoics Arnold Schwarzenegger Cal/EPA Secraaiy Governor

July 1, 2010

Mr, Greg Levin do Mr. Michael Baum Reach Poister & Berger LLP 9200 Sunset Boulevard, Ninth Floor Los Angeles, CA 90069

CERTWJJ) MAIL RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED

7009 0820 0001 6811 9176

.flEQTJILEM]N � T FOR A TECflNICAL REPORT PURSUANT TO cAL1PQRNL4 WAER CODE .(CWC SECTION 13267 ORDER - STANDARD 1LET. LS, 378 WEST 133’ STREET, LOS AN CA (SiTE CLEANUP NO. OSISA AND SITE B) NO. 20441)00)

Dear Mr, Levin;

The California Regional Water Quality Control Board, Los Angeles Region (Regional Board) is the public agency with primary responsibility for the protection of ground and surface water quality for all beneficial uses within major portions of Los Angeles County and Ventura County, including the above-referenced site.

In response to our previous Order, dated, March 19, 2009, you conducted additional site assessment and submitted a site assessment report dated January 19,’2010, Baad on our review of this site assessment report and other historical site assessment reports for the adjacent sites, we outlined our findings and requirements in the enclosed Order. You are required to comply with this new Order to ensure that progress is made in our continued investigation at the site, and in the general vicinity.

The State Water Resources Control Board (State Water Board) adopted regulations requiring :the electronic submittals of information over the Internet using the State Water Board QeoTracker database. You are required not only to submit hard copy reports recjufred in this Order but _aJso. to comply byipioading all-repprts aid correspondence prepared to date and additional required data formats to the GeoTraokersystern. ’Information about GeoTracker submittals, including links to text of the governing regulations, can be found on the Internet at the following link:

http:llwww,waterboards.cn.ov/waterissi.ies/proçrnms/ust/electronic_subinIttal

If you have any questions regarding this letter, please contact Mr. Btzuayehu Ayele at (213) 576-6747 or by email it bayelewaterbonrds.ea.gov .

Sinoerel

Jeffrey Hu nit Chief Site Cleanup Program, Unit IE

Recyclad Paper Our mteion is to prswrve and.cnkanoe the gunThy qfCaljforsia water resources/or the benefit Qfpruen( widflrnire generalion:

Enolostire: Requirement to Provide a Technical Report

cc: Mr. Michael Baui, Resob Poister & Berger LLPMr. John Payne, Frey Environmental, Inc.Mr. James Herbst, Business Industrial Gr.oup (BIG)Mr. Patrick Rendon, Lamb & Kawalcami LLFMr. Lany Bema, TADCOMr. Brett Bowyer, Bowyer Eivironmeta1 Consulting, Jnc.Mr. Kenneth Ehrlich, Jeffer, Mangels, Butler & Marmaro LU'Mrs. Barbara Vidmar, eeneral WeldingMs. Julie M2rshall, BJnoon Consultants, Inc.Mr. Walt Hamann, Rincon Consultants, Inc.Ma, Emily Yukioh, Folger Levin & Kahn LLP

Callfonta.EivironmenaiPr6UonAeflcyReg,ycled Pqper

Our miex/on Is to preserve and enhance the qually of California s water rarources for the beneft ofpr.seni andji41ur6 gelwrallon.r.

Mr. (3reg Lesrin -2- July 1, 2010

Standard MetalsMr. Greg Levin Standard Metals Metals


cc: Mr. Michael Batu, Resob Poister & Berger LLP Mr. John Payne, Frey Environmental, Inc. Mr, James Herbst, Business Industrial Group (BIG) Mr. Patrick Rendon, Lamb & Kawalcami LLF Mr. Larry Bema, TADCO Mr. Brett Bowyer, Bowyer Eivironmeta1 Consulting, Inc. Mr. Kenneth Ehrlich, Jeffer, Mangels, Butler & Marmaro LU’ Mrs. Barbara Vidmar, General Welding Ma, Julie Marshall, BJnoon Consultants, Inc. Mr. Walt Hamann, Rincon Consultants, Inc. Ma, Emily Yukioh, Folger Levin & Kahn LLP

July 1, 2010

Recycled Paper Our mler/n Is to preserve and enhance the quality ofCalifornia’s water rarources for the benefit ofpr.s,eni and ji41ur6 geflerallonS.

REQT.JIREMENT TO PROVIDE A TECINICAL REPORT(CALIFORMA WATER CODE SECTION 13267 OBDER)

DLR.ECTED TO STAIDAJAD METALS

STANDAR]) IOtTALS378 WEST 133 STREET, LOS ANGELE CALIFOR!IA

(SITE CLEANUP NO. 0818A, SITE ID NO. 2044D00)


You are tle responsible party identified for soil, soil vapor and gronndwater investigation at the property

at 378 West l33 Street in Los Angeles, California. The Begional Board baa been investigating soil and

groundwater contamination at Standard Metals site and at adjacent sites since approxiniatelY 1998. These

sites are the T.A Davis Company (TADCO) site, located at 363 West l33 Street and General Welding

site, located at 352 West 133' Street. The TADCO site is located on the Business Industrial Group (BIG)

prcperty with a site address 363 West l33 Street. Various industrial operations were or are still being

conduoted at these sites.

Site investigations conducted at these sites indicate that the soil and groundwater arc contaminated with

volatile organic compounds (VOCa) such as trichioroethene (TCE) and acetone, arorntic hydrocarbons.

such as benzene, ethylbenzene, toluene, and xylenes (BTEX), polychiorinated biphenyls (PCBs) and

petroleum hydrocarbons. The site investigations also show that the soil and groundwater contamination

encountered in flit general vicinity might have been resulted from multiple sources.

The most recent site- assessment -at the-Standurd Metals. site wasconducted in }loveinber 2009, in

response to a Regional Boaid Order, slated March 19, 2009. Regional oard staff reviewed a site

assessment report5 titled Additional Site A.sersment and dated January 19, 2010. The report, submitted by

Frey Environmental, Inc., documents . the site assessment activities, results, and conclusions and

reconameridatious.

In a letter,. dated March 4, 2010, Standard ietals also requested the Regional Board to reduce the

groundwater monitoring frequency from quarterly to semi-annually, citing absence of groundwater

monitoring data from adjacent TADCO site, which can provide important information on contaminant

plumes in the groundwater beneath the site vicinity.

Califomia Water Code section 13267 states, inpart (b)(l)In conducting aninvestigatiOrL. ., the regional board

may require that any person who has discharged, discharges, or is suspected of having discharged or, discharging, or

who proposes to discharge, waste within its region .. shall furnish, under penalty of pe1juY, tecimical or monitoring

program reports which. the regional board requires. The burden, including costs, of these reports shall bear a

reasonable relationship to the need for the report and the benefits to be obtained from the reports. In requiring those

reports. the regional board shall provide the person with a written eplatmion with regard to the need for the reports,

ansi shall identit' the evidence that supports requiring that person to provide the reports.

'"I" Ca font viro (W1 C,)'

djecycle paperOur m:Ion ta cc' prcs8rve and enhance he qiwlib' ,fCal(jbrnta'; watdr reaouroa3 for the benejil afpréSOnI andfutU'e geflertuiO'25.

California Regional Water Quality Control BoardAngeles Region -

320 W. 4th Street, Suit 200, Las MgclC, çn1ifomi 90013

Phone (213) 576-6600 PAX (213) 516-6640 . Internet AddresB:Arnold Scbwarzefleger

GovernorLinda S. AdamgCal/EPA ScreIaz'

ja California Regional Water Quality Control Board Los Angeles Region

320 W. 4th Street, Suit 200, Las Mgcle, California 90013 Linda S. Adams Phone (213) 576-6600 PAX (213) 516-6640 - Internet Address: httpdlwww.waterbcwds.ca ,gov/bmgoloo Arnold Scbwarzeneger Cal/EPA Swalary Governor

REQUIREMENT TO PROVIDE A TECm’ICAL REPORT (CALIFORNIA WATER CODE SECTION 13267 ORDER)

STANDARD METALS 378 WEST 133 STREET, LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA

. (SITE AM NO. 0818A4 SITE NO. 2044D00)


You are the responsible party Identified for soil, soil vapor and groundwater investigation at the property at 378 West 133rd Street in Los Angeles, California. The Regional Board bus been investigating soil and groundwater contamination at Standard Metals site and at adjacent sites since approximately 1998. These sites are the T.A Davis Company (TADCO) site, located at 363 West 133 Street and General Welding site, located at 352 West 133 d Street. The TADCO site is located on the Business Industrial Group (BIG) property with a site address 363 West 133 Street. Various industrial operations were or are still being conducted at these sites.

Site investigations conducted at these sites indicate that the soil and groundwater are contaminated with volatile organic compounds (VOCs) such as trichioroethene (TCE) and acetone, aromatic hydrocarbons. such as benzene, ethylbenzerie, toluene, and xylenes (BTEX), polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) and petroleum hydrocarbons. The site investigations also show that the soil and groundwater contamination encountered in the general vicinity might have been resulted from multiple sources.

The- most recent -site�assessment-at Abe -Standard- Metals. aite_wsconducteLinorember i

response to a Regional Board Order, dated March 19, 2009. Regional Board staff reviewed a site assessment report, titled Additional Site Assessment and dated January 19, 2010. The report, submitted by Frey. Environmental, Inc., documents the site assessment activities, ’results, and conclusions and recommendations.

In a letter,. dated March 4, 2010, Standard Metals also requested the Regional Board to reduce the groundwater monitoring frequency from quarterly to semi-annually, citing absence of groundwater monitoring data from adjacent TADCO site, which can provide important information on contaminant plumes in the groundwater beneath the site vicinity.

California Water Code section 13267 states, in part (b)(l) In conducting an investigation.. ., the regional board may require that any person who has discharged, discharges, or is suspected of having discharged or, discharging, or who proposes to discharge waste within its region .. shall furnish, under penalty of peijury, technical or monitoring program reports which. the regional board requires. The burden, including costs, of these reports shall bear it reasonable relationship to the need for the report and the benefits to be obtained from the reports. In requiring those reports, the regional board shall provide the person with a written explanation with regard to the need for the reports, and shall identify the evidence that supports requiring that person to provide the reports.

- ... :’. ..-’.’-’� CaornaEmron1Frecaoiz4gency .

kccycled Paper Our m:Ion 0to pr&rervs and enhanoc she qMalib’ qf Cal(fornta’; wa/dr reaourcafor The benejil afpre.ee.nI afldfuture geertLliO2a

Mr. Greg Levin - 2 - July 1; 2010

Standard Metals

FiNDINGS AN]) COMMENTS

Based on our review of your Additional Site Asse.stnent report and other torical site asessinoflt

reports submitted by you and by the adjacent property owners, we have swnxnurized the following

findings and comments:

I. The Regional Board required you, in its previous Order, dated March 19, 2009, to provide detailedinformation on the source of scrap metal, the type of solid waste bcing recycled, suppliers of thescrap metal and the entire metal recycling process at your facility. In your July 23, 2009 work plan

submitted for the additional site assessrnent, you provided only limited infomistion which was not

supported with documented evidence,

The Bite data suggest that the former baler pit, where the hydraulic baling press was installed, is the

source of TCE in the soil and groundwater beneath the site. Even though there might be contributing

offsitc sources, such as the TADCO site, the site assessment data collected to date indicate that thebulk of the TCE was sourced in this area that caused soil and groundwater contamination beneath the

Site,

The soil data collected from the soil bprings at the site show that the distribution of vinyl chlorideand ois-1,2 dichioroetbene (cis..1,2-DCE) in the soil appears, in most cases, .to correlate with thedistribution of TCE. Vinyl chloride and ois-1,2-DCE are the breakdown products of TCE. Therefore,

the TCE release at the former baler pit is responsible for existence of these breakdown products in

the soil and groundwater beneath the site.

In the Regional Board's previous Order, dated March 19, 2009, you were directed to install anadditional groundwater monitoring well downgradient of' the existing groundwater monitoring wellsto assess the cutrent extent of the VOCs plume and to periodically monitor for the detectedcontaminants in the groundwater. You proposed in yofr July 23, 209 work plan to postpone theinstallation of the required groundwater monitoring well until two additional quarters of groundwatermonitoring are completed to establish a cu rent general groundwater flow direotionbeneath the alte.

You have conducted two additional quarters of groundwater monitoring since the request was made.Besides many years of groundwater monitoring data from the adjacentGenera) Wlding site as wellas data from the groundwater monitoring activities conducted from 1997 to 1999 and in 2009 atStandard Metals site show that the groundwater flow direction beneath the site and adjacent sites isdominantly to the south and southwest. The groundwater flow direction occasionally swings to the

southeast.

The full extent of the VOCs and TPI{ plumes is not yet fully defined dowrigradient of the ex.istinggroundwater monitoring wells. In the 'nest recent groundwater monitoring event conducted inNovember 2009, the offaite downgradfent groundwater monitoring well, MW.2, detected 'IPH asgasoline, cis1,2-DCE, TCE and vinyl chloride at concentrations of 1,400 micrograms per litre(p.g/L), 180 .iWL, 510 ig/L and 430 j.tg/L, respectively.

', CallforniaEnvirwzmnMl F,otèdioN'AgJzç'

0 JirclPapeOur minion 1 lopre.Ierve and enhpnc 1/w qua/ID' of Caltfo,'nla waler re5ourcei/or 11w b&en(fli ofpPi1 wuifuiure gsneraIOns.

'I

Mr. Greg Levin "2 1 July 1; 2010 Standard Metals

FINDINGS AND COMMENTS

Based on our review of your Additional Site Assessment report and other historical site assessment reports submitted by you and by the adjacent property owners, we have swnmurized the following findings and comments:

I. The Regional Board required you, in its previous Order, dated March 19, 2009, to provide detailed information on the source of scrap metal, the type of solid waste bcing recycled, suppliers of the scrap metal and the entire metal recycling process at your facility. In your July 23, 2009 work plan submitted for the additional site assessment, you provided only limited information which was not supported with documented evidence,

The site data suggest that the former baler pit, where the hydraulic baling press was installed, is the source of TCE in the soil and groundwater beneath the site. Even though there might be contributing offsitc sources, such as the TADCO site, the site assessment data collected to date indicate that the bulk of the TCE was sourced in this area that caused soil and groundwater contamination beneath the Site.

2. The soil data collected from the soil borings at the site show that the distribution of vinyl chloride and ois-1,2 dichioroetbene (cis..1,2-DCE) in the soil appears, in most cases, .to correlate with the

� distribution of TCE. Vinyl chloride and cis-1,2-DCE are the breakdown products of TCE. Therefore, the WE release at the former baler pit is responsible for existence of these breakdown products in

� the soil and groundwater beneath the site.

3. In the Regional Board’s previous Order, dated March 19, 2009, you were directed to install an additional groundwater monitoring well downgradient of the existing groundwater monitoring wells to assess the cutrent extent of the VOCa plume and to periodically monitor for the detected contaminants in the groundwater. You proposed in yofr July 23, 209 work plan to postpone the installation of the required groundwater monitoring well until two additional quarters of groundwater monitoring are completed to establish a etgbnerai dw flwfr obtth the alt.

You have conducted two additional quarters of groundwater monitoring since the request was made. Besides, many years of groundwater monitoring data from the adjacent Genera) Wlding site as well as data from the groundwater’monitoring activities conducted from 1997 to 1999 and in 2009 at Standard Metals site show that the groundwater flow direction beneath the site and adjacent sites is dominantly to the south and southwest. The groundwater flow direction occasionally swings to the southeast.

The full extent of the VOCs and TPI{ plumes is not yet fully defined dowrigradient of the ex.isting groundwater monitoring wells. In the most recent groundwater monitoring event conducted in November 2009, the offaite downgradfent groundwater monitoring well, MW.2, detected ’IPH as gasoline, cis..1,2-DCE, TCE and vinyl chloride at concentrations of 1,400 micrograms per litre (p.g/L), 180 .ig’L, 510 ig/L and 430 4g/L, respectively.

� ’�- -. CallfornjaEnvirwzmrn(âl F,otdioN’AgJz4

0 Jpde4 Paper Our minion is loprecerve and enhance the qua/ID’ qfCaJfo,’nIa water Pecourceifor the benefit ofpreceiU wuIfuftire generations.

-,

The western edge of the VOC and TPH plumes is also not defined. Grab groundwater samplecollected with a. Hydropunch at FB 13A during the additional site assessment contained cis-1 2-

]DCE at a concentration of 19 p.g/L. No additional .VOCs were detected in the sample.

Installation of additional groundwater monitoring wells is necessary at the southern and western.

portions of the site to monitor the expansion of the VOCs and, TPH plumes southward and westwardbeneath the site,

4. In a letter,.dated Maroh4 .20l.O Standard Metals also requested the. P,.egional Board to reduce thegroundwater monitoring frequency from quarterly to semi-armually citing absence of groundwatermonitoring data from adjcent TADCO site, which can provide important infonuation oncontaminant plumes in .the groundwater.beneath the site vicinity. . - -

The Regional Board has directed the adjacent TADCO and BIG property oier8 to conductadditional site assessments and install additional groundwater monitoring wells.. Tha Regional Boardexpects full compliance with its Orders from these site owners and additional site assessment dataand groundwater monitoring data will be forthcoming.

RQUREMENTS

Based on our review of the submitted.infoxx3ation and pursuant to section 13267 of the California WaterCode (CWC), you are hereby directed to implement the following:

1, You hail submit a work plan for Regional. Board's review and approval to conduct .rthergroundwater assessment at the Standard Metals site. At least two additional groundwater monitoring.wells shall be installed downgradient of the xisffng grcnmdwater monitoring wells in the southernportion of the site aad in the western part of the site to define the southern and western edges of theVOCs and TPH plumes in the groundwater.

In the southern portion of the site, attempts to collect grab groundwater samples with a I3yd,±opunoh)at two locations (F316 and FBI7) failed in the most recent site assessment due to encounteredrefusal. Alternate locations sbaiLbese1ected br the installation of o.groundwatermonitoring.wellin that part of the site.

The work plan is due to the itegional Board by August 30, 2010.

2. You shall continue quarterly groundwater monitoring for the following reasons:

The Regional Board is making efforts to bring the property owners for TACO and BIG sitesinto compliance and additional site assessment data are expeted from these sites.

Groundwater monitoring data collected at the Standard Metals site in itriportent to makeregulatory decisions about the site &Ld adjacent sites and to.monitor the VOCs arid.TPU plumesin the groundwater. Two active production wells arc, located at an approximate maximumdistance of 0.85 miles downgradient of the site,

Ca1iforia.EnvironrncmtalPotectio?IAge1Cy

Rscyaled Paper - -

Our mIeion le to pTurv.e and enhance the quality q,'caftfornla water yelource3for the bençfll ofpresern and,/iuure generaI(ori,

Mr.GregLevin -3- July 1,2010

Standard MetalsMr. Greg Levin -3 - July 1, 2010

Standard Metals

The western edge of the VOC and TPH plumes is also not defined. Grab groundwater sample collected with a. Hydropunchfi at FB 13A during the additional site assessment contained cis-1,2- DCE at a concentration of 19 p.g/L. No additional .VOCs were detected in the sample.

Installation of additional groundwater monitoring wells is necessary at the southern and western. portions of the site to monitor the expansion of the VOCs and TPH plumes southward and westward beneath the site,

4. Ina letter,.dated March 4 .201.0 Standard Metals also requested the Regional Board to reduce the groundwater monitoring frequency from quarterly to semi-armually, citing absence of groundwater monitoring data from adjcent TADCO site, which can provide important information on contaminant plumes in .the groundwater.beneath the site vicinity.

The Regional Board has directed the adjacent TADCO and BIG property owners ’to conduct additional site assessments and install additional groundwater monitoring wells.. Tha Regional Board expects full compliance with its Orders from these site owners and additional site assessment data and groundwater monitoring data will be forthcoming.

RQIJ1REMENTS

Based on our review of the submitted.infoxx3ation and pursuant to section 13267 of the California Water Code (CWC), you are hereby directed to implement the following:

1, . You shall submit a work plan for Regional . Board’s review and approval to conduct .rther groundwater assessment at the Standard Metals site. At least two additional groundwater monitoring. wells shall be installed downgradient of the misting groundwater monitoring wells in the southern portion of the site and in the western part of the site to define the southern and western edges of the VOCs and TPH plumes in the groundwater.

In the southern portion of the site, attempts to collect grab groundwater swnPles with aI3yd–opunoh at two locations (F316 and FBI7) failed in the most recent site assessment due to encountered refusal. Alternate locations sbaiLbese1ected for.the installation: of o.groundwatermonitoring.well in that part of the site. .



a. The Regional Board is making efforts to bring the property owners for TACO and BIG sites into compliance and additional site assessment data are expeted from these sites.

b. Groundwater monitoring data collected at the Standard Metals site in important to make regulatory decisions about the site &Ld adjacent sites and to monitor the VOCs arid.TPU plumes in the groundwater. Two active production wells arc, located at an approximate maximum distance of 0.85 miles downgradient of the site,

:ri -, ...’. . . . . Ca1ifo,iiia.EnvirwnncmtalPraOg81Cy. ..

Rsc)saI.4 Paper Our mI&Tion 13 to PTFJUTVH and enhance the quality q,’C’aftfornla water reeource3for the benefit ofpresern and,/iuure generaltone,

Mr. Greg Levin -4 . July 1 2010

Standard Metals

c. The adjacent General Welding site has been conducting quarterly groundwater rnonitoring.sinceapproximately 2003. Groundwater ntonitoring data from all three sites (Standard Metals, GeneralWelding nd TADCOI.BIG sites) are important for future regulatory decisions and to rnonitor4

VOCs and TP}I plumes.

You shall submit the quarterly groundwater monitoring reports in accordance with the scheduleprovided in our previous Order, dated March 19. 2009,

3. The site data suggest that the Standard Metals site is the main source of' TCE and its breakdownproducts such as cfs-1,2-DCE and vinyl chloride despite the fact that there might be offaitecontributing sources. The Regional Board Will require you in the future to submit a Remedial ActionPlan (RAP) to clean up the contaminated soil and groundwater either jointly with the adjacentproperty owners or alone once site assessment is completed in the general vi9inity and depending onthe results of further site assessments at the site and adjacent sites. The due date for submission ofthe RAP will be determined by the Regional Board at a future date,


Rgiona1Board by August 30, 2010. Furthermore, pursuant to section 13268 (b)(1) of the CWC, failure

to submit the work plan may result in the imposition of civil liability penalties by the Regional Board ofup to $1,000 per day for each day the work plan is not received after August 30, 2010, due date andwithout f.trther warning.

We believe that the burdens, including costs, of this report bear a reasonable relationship to the need forthe report and the benefits to be obtained from the report. If you disagree.and have information abcint the

burden, including costs, of complying with these requirements, provide such information in writing toMr. Bizuayehu Ayele within ten days of the date of this letter so that we may reconsider therequirements.

The above teohiica1 report is required to be submitted under the CWC section 13267 Order. Please noteth.t effective immediae1y, the Regional Board requires you to include a peiury stteineat in all workplans and reports submitted under the 13267 Orders. The perjury statement shall be signed by a seniorauthorized representative at your company (and not, by a consultant). The statement shall be in thefollowing format

"1 [NAME], do hereby declare, under penally of perjury under the laws of the State ofCalfornia1 that I am [JOB TITLE] for. [NAME OF RESPONSIBLEFARTYIDISCHARGERJ, that I am authorized to attest to the veracity ofthe informationóontalnd In the report(s) described herein, and that the information contained in /NAME

AND DATE OF REPORT] Is :ne and correc4 and that this declaration was executed at

[PLACEJ,[STATEJ, O!2[DA7]."

Any person aggrieved by this action of the Regional Water Boar4 may petition th'e State Water Board toreview the action in accordance with Water Code section 13320andCaliforniaCode of Regulations, title23, sections .2050 nd following. The State Water Board must.reoeive the petition by 5:00.p.im, 30 daysafter the date of' this Order, except that if thirtieth day following the date Of this Order falls on aSaturday, Sunday, or state holidn.y, the petition must be received by the State Water Board by 5:00 p.m.

Calfori4a Envfronmental RtectionAgenc"..;(1cyG16d Papar

Our m/,slon I.c Jo p cervc nd inhWe Ihr qua1i q(CoJ(fo,'nfa wI.r ,'&,owc,for thu btntfll of'p?e.w?zI andfuturB gnralloni.

Mr. Greg Levin -4 July I t 2010 Standard Metals

c. The adjacent General Welding site has been conducting quarterly groundwater monitoring -since approximately 2003. Groundwater monitoring data from all three sites (Standard Metals, General Welding and TADCOI.BIG sites) are important for future regulatory decisions and to monitor-the VOCs and TP}I plumes.

You shall submit the quarterly groundwater monitoring reports in accordance with the schedule provided in our previous Order, dated March 19, 2009,

3. The site data suggest that the Standard Metals site is the main source of TCE and its breakdown products such as cis-1,2-]DCE and vinyl chloride despite the fact that there might be offaite contributing sources. The Regional Board Will require you in the futurp to submit a Remedial Action Plan (RAP) to clean up the contaminated soil and groundwater either jointly with the adjacent property owners or alone once site assessment is completed in the general vicinity and depending on the results of further site assessments at the site and adjacent sites. The due date for submission of the RAP will be determined by the Regional Board at a future date.

Pursuant to section 13267(b) of the CWC, you are hereby directed to submit the required work plan to this Rgiona1Board by August 30, 2010. Furthermore, pursuant to section 13268 (b)(1) of the CWC, failure to submit the work plan may result in the imposition of civil liability penalties by the Regional Board of up to $1,000 per day for each day the work plan is not received after August 30, 2010, due date and without f.trther warning.

We believe that the burdens, including costs, of this report bear a reasonable relationship to the need for the report and the benefits to be obtained from the report. If you disagree. and have information abcint the burden, including costs, of complying with these requirements, provide such information in writing to Mr. Bizuayehu Ayele within ten days of the date of this letter so that we may reconsider the requirements. ,

The above technical report is required to be submitted under the CWC section 13267 Order. Please note that fftie ithdine1y, ti gio 1 Bad i6quirts you -to i1u-dc U P�Oury -61-atement in all wk plans and reports submitted under the 13267 Orders, The perjury statement shall be signed by a senior authorized representative at your company (and not, by a consultant). The statement shall be in the following format

"1 [NAME], do hereby declare s under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of Ca4fornia, that I am [JOE TiTLE] for. [NAME OF PESPONSIBLE FARTYIDISCHARG.ERJ, that I am authorized to attest to the veracity of the information contained In the report(s) 4e3cribed herein, and that the information contained in /NAME AND DATE OF REPORT] Is true and correct, and that this declaration was executed at [PL A CHI, [STATE], on [DATE]."

Any person aggrieved by this action of the Regional Water Board may petition th’e State Water Board to review the action in accordance with Water Code section 13320andCalifornia.Code 0 Regulations, title 23 sections .2050 and following. The State Water Board muit.reoelve’ the petition by 5:00.p.m., 30 days after the date of this Order, except that if thirtieth day following the date Of this Order falls on a Saturday, Sunday, or state holiday, the petition must be received by the State Water Board by 5:00 p.m.

-. Calorna Environmental PteaionAgw ..... . ..

Amwed paper Our ,nis4on I.c Jo pre.ervc and inhwe the quality nj Cd(fo,’nma wager ’.aow’se.for the btntfii of’pz’e,..nI andfutura gannralloni.

Samuel lingerInterim Executive fficer

:

Mr,GregLevin .5- July12O10

Standard Metals

on the next business day.Copies o'tie law and regulations applicable to filing petitions may be found on

the Internet at:

hTh,://www.waterboârds.ca.gov/pUbliC notices/petitions/water quality

or will be provided upon request,

SO oRDEE.D

CalfornaEnvirozunenWl Pi'otecaeiz4gency......'.

iec,voiei Paper - -Our mtuion ii to preserve and enhance the quality of Ce(jfornla i water reeourcee for the ben4fl ofpreseflt aNdJWUr teneraion3.

July 1 2010

Mr, Greg Levin - 5 - July 1, 2010 Standard Metals

on the next business day. Copies of the law and regulations applicable to filing petitions may be found on the Internet at:

htti://www.waterboÆrds.qg.gov/public notices/petitions/water gualits’

or will be provided upon request,

SO ORDERED, .

iiJ - .......... . July 1, 2010

Samuel linger Interim Executive fficer

CalforniaEnvirownenWl ProtectiaiAgenqy.... .�

� . Recycled Paper Our minion is to preserve and enhance the quality of C&iljfornla i water re3ource.?for the benefit ofpreeent andjWure teneraicn3,

PROOF OF SERVICEIn the Matter of the Petition of BUSINESS INDUSTRIAL GROUP

I am employed in the County of Los Angeles, State of California, I am over the age of 18and not a party to the within action; my business address is 333 South Grand Avenue, Suite 4200,Los Angeles, California 90071.

On July 26, 2010, I served the foregoing document(s) described as: PETITION FORREVIEW OF THE JUNE 24, 2010 ORDER OF THE CALIFORNIA REGIONAL WAQTERQUALITY CONTROL BOARD, LOS ANGELES REGION on the interested parties in this action,at the addresses listed below, as follows:

Jeannette L. Bashaw, Legal AnalystOffice of Chief CounselState Water Resources Control BoardP.O. Box 100Sacramento, CA 95712-0100Fax: (916) 341-5199Email: jbashawwaterboards.ca.gov

Bizuayehu AyeleCal/EPALos Angeles Regional Water Quality ControlBoardSite Cleanup Unit II320 W. 4th Street, Ste. 200Los Angeles, CA 90013Tel: (213) 576-6747Fax: (213) 576-6717Email: bayelewaterboards.ca.gov

(X) For Collection. By placing a true copy (copies) thereof enclosed in a sealedenvelope(s), addressed as above, and by placing said sealed envelope(s) for collection and mailingon that date following ordinary business practices. I am "readily familiar" with the business'practice for collection and processing of correspondence for mailing the U.S. Postal Service.Under that practice, it would be deposited with the U.S. Postal Service on that same day withpostage thereon fully prepaid at Los Angeles, California, in the ordinary course of business.

() Overnight Delivery. By placing a true copy(ies) thereof enclosed in a sealedenvelope(s) or package(s) as designated by Federal Express, addressed as above, and depositingsaid envelope(s) or package(s), with delivery fees provided for, in a box regularly maintained byFederal Express at 330 South Hope Street, Wells Fargo Center, Los Angeles, California 90071.

(X) Via Facsimile. By transmitting a true copy(ies) thereof to each of the designatedcounsel on the service list to their facsimile numbers as listed below.

(X) Via E-mail. I caused to be served by e-mail the foregoing documents to the abovepersons at the e-mail addresses listed above.

() Personal Delivery. I caused to be served by messenger for personal delivery thatsame day the foregoing documents in a sealed envelope to the above persons at the address(es)listed above.

I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that theforegoing is true and correct.

Executed on July 26, 2010, at Los Angeles, California.

#110322 vi - PROOF OF SERVICE

Tina Schubert

PROOF OF SER VICE

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

PROOF OF SERVICE In the Matter of the Petition of BUSINESS INDUSTRIAL GROUP

I am employed in the County of Los Angeles, State of California, I am over the age of 18 and not a party to the within action; my business address is 333 South Grand Avenue, Suite 4200, Los Angeles, California 90071.

On July 26, 2010, I served the foregoing document(s) described as: PETITION FOR REVIEW OF THE JUNE 24, 2010 ORDER OF THE CALIFORNIA REGIONAL WAQTER QUALITY CONTROL BOARD, LOS ANGELES REGION on the interested parties in this action, at the addresses listed below, as follows:

Jeannette L. Bashaw, Legal Analyst Office of Chief Counsel State Water Resources Control Board P.O. Box 100 Sacramento, CA 95712-0100 Fax: (916) 341-5199 Email: ibashawwaterboards.ca. gov

Bizuayehu Ayele Cal/EPA Los Angeles Regional Water Quality Control Board Site Cleanup Unit II 320 W. 4" Street, Ste. 200 Los Angeles, CA 90013 Tel: (213) 576-6747 Fax: (213) 576-6717 Email: bayele(waterboards.ca.gov

(X) For Collection. By placing a true copy (copies) thereof enclosed in a sealed envelope(s), addressed as above, and by placing said sealed envelope(s) for collection and mailing on that date following ordinary business practices. I am "readily familiar" with the business’ practice for collection and processing of correspondence for mailing the U.S. Postal Service. Under that practice, it would be deposited with the U.S. Postal Service on that same day with postage thereon fully prepaid at Los Angeles, California, in the ordinary course of business.

() Overnight Delivery. By placing a true copy(ies) thereof enclosed in a sealed envelope(s) or package(s) as designated by Federal Express, addressed as above, and depositing said envelope(s) or package(s), with delivery fees provided for, in a box regularly maintained by Federal Express at 330 South Hope Street, Wells Fargo Center, Los Angeles, California 90071.

(X) Via Facsimile. By transmitting a true copy(ies) thereof to each of the designated counsel on the service list to their facsimile numbers as listed below.

(X) Via E-mail. I caused to be served by e-mail the foregoing documents to the above persons at the e-mail addresses listed above.

() Personal Delivery. I caused to be served by messenger for personal delivery that same day the foregoing documents in a sealed envelope to the above persons at the address(es) listed above.

I declare under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California that the foregoing is true and correct.


Tina Schubert

PROOF OF SERVICE




On July 26, 2010, I served the foregoing document(s) described as: PETITION FORREVIEW OF THE JUNE 24,2010 ORDER OF THE CALIFORNIA REGIONAL WAQTERQUALITY CONTROL BOARD, LOS ANGELES REGION on the interested parties in this action,at the addresses listed below, as follows:

Michael C. BaumResch Poister, et al.9200 W. Sunset Blvd., 9th FloorLos Angeles, CA 90069Tel: (310) 788-7520Fax: (310) 552-3209E-mail: mbaumrpblaw.com

Emily J. YukichHolme Roberts & Owen LLP800 W. Olympic Blvd., 4th Fl.Los Angel3es, CA 90015Tel: (213) 572-4300Fax: (213) 572-4400E-mail: [email protected]

LA 58161v1

PROOF OF SER VICE

Kenneth A. EhrlichJeffer Mangels et al. LLP1900 Ave. of the Stars, 7th FloorLos Angeles, CA 90067Tel: (310) 203-8080Fax: (310) 203-0567Email: KAEjmbm.com

(X) For Collection. By placing a true copy (copies) thereof enclosed in a sealedenvelope(s), addressed as above, and by placing said sealed envelope(s) for collection and mailingon that date following ordinary business practices. I am "readily familiar" with the business'practice for collection and processing of correspondence for mailing the U.S. Postal Service.Under that practice, it would be deposited with the U.S. Postal Service on that same day withpostage thereon ftilly prepaid at Los Angeles, California, in the ordinary course of business.


() Via Facsimile. By transmitting a true copy(ies) thereof to each of the designatedcounsel on the service list to their facsimile numbers as listed below.





Tina Schubert

2

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28



On July 26, 2010, I served the foregoing document(s) described as: PETITION FOR REVIEW OF THE JUNE 24,2010 ORDER OF THE CALIFORNIA REGIONAL WAQTER QUALITY CONTROL BOARD, LOS ANGELES REGION on the interested parties in this action, at the addresses listed below, as follows:

Michael C. Baum Kenneth A. Ehrlich Resch Poister, et al. Jeffer Mangels et al. LLP 9200 W. Sunset Blvd., 9th Floor 1900 Ave. of the Stars, 7th Floor Los Angeles, CA 90069 Los Angeles, CA 90067 Tel: (310) 788-7520 Tel: (310) 203-8080 Fax: (310) 552-3209 Fax: (310) 203-0567 E-mail: [email protected] Email: [email protected]

Emily J. Yukich Holme Roberts & Owen LLP 800 W. Olympic Blvd., 4 th Fl. Los Angel3es, CA 90015 Tel: (213) 572-4300 Fax: (213) 572-4400 E-mail: [email protected]



() Via Facsimile. By transmitting a true copy(ies) thereof to each of the designated counsel on the service list to their facsimile numbers as listed below.





Tina Schubert

PROOF OF SER VICE LA 58161v1

Patrick L. Rendon, Esq. (SBN 126227)LAMB & KAWAKAMI LLP333 South Grand Avenue, Suite 4200Los Angeles, California 90071Email: prendon@lkfirm cornTelephone: (213) 630-5500Facsimile: (213) 630-5555

Attorneys for RespondentBusiness Industrial Group

STATE OF CALIFORNIA




Petitioner

110316

Petition Number:

PETITION FOR REVIEW OF THE JUNE24, 2010 ORDER OF THE CALIFORNIAREGIONAL WATER QUALITYCONTROL BOARD, LOS ANGELESREGION







properties located at 13255 South Broadway, 360-366 West l32' Street and 363 West 133' Street





1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

1 Patrick L. Rendon, Esq. (SBN 126227) LAMB & KAWAKAMI LLP

2 333 South Grand Avenue, Suite 4200 Los Angeles, California 90071

3 Email: [email protected] Telephone: (213) 630-5500

4 Facsimile: (213) 630-5555

5 Attorneys for Respondent Business Industrial Group

6

7 STATE OF CALIFORNIA

8 STATE WATER RESOURCES CONTROL BOARD

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17


18 This Petition for Review is submitted on behalf of Business Industrial Group ("Petitioner"

19 or "BIG") pursuant to California Water Code § § 13320 & 13321 and California Code of

20 Regulations ("CCR") Title 23, §2050-2066 and concerns that certain order issued on June 24,

21 2010 by the California Regional Water Quality Control Board, Los Angeles Region ("RWQCB"),

22 directed at Business Industrial Group and T.A. Davis Company, and which references the

23 properties located at 13255 South Broadway, 360-366 West l32’ Street and 363 West 133 rd Street 24

in Los Angeles, California (collectively, the "Property"), Site Cleanup Number 0817, Site 25

Identification Number 2040358 (the "Order"). 26

27


28

I In the Matter of The Petition Of


Petitioner

Petition Number:

PETITION FOR REVIEW OF THE JUNE 24, 2010 ORDER OF THE CALIFORNIA REGIONAL WATER QUALITY CONTROL BOARD, LOS ANGELES REGION

Petition for Review re June 24, 2010 RWQCB Order to BIG 110316

California Water Code § 13320 and 23 CCR §2050(a).

CONTACT INFORMATION OF PETITIONER

The contact information for Petitioner is as follows:

Business Industrial Groupdo Jess Herbst27675 ChapalaMission Viejo, CA 92692Fax (949) 215-2965

Patrick L Rendon, Esq.Lamb & Kawakarni LLP333 South Grand Avenue, Ste. 4200Los Angeles, CA 90071Tel. (213) 630-5570Fax (213) 630-5555Email [email protected]

THE ACTION FOR WHICH PETITIONER SEEKS REVIEW

Petitioner respectfully requests that the RWQCB review the Order. A copy of which is

attached as Exhibit A. Petitioner further requests that the RWQCB hold the Petition in abeyance

pursuant to 23 CCR §2050.5(d) and the practices of the RWQCB. In addition, to the extent that

this Petition is made active, then Petitioner requests a hearing pursuant to California Water Code

§ 13321 and a stay on any action directed at Petitioner under the Order pending a final adjudication

decision.

THE DATE THE RWOCB ACTED

The RWQCB, through its Interim Executive Officer, issued the Order on June 24, 2010.

STATEMENT OF REASONS WHY THE ACTION WAS

AND IS INAPPROPRIATE OR IMPROPER

The RWQCB's Order is inappropriate or improper for the following reasons:

1. The RWQCB abused its discretion in naming BIG in the Order pursuant to

2

110316


I California Water Code §13320 and 23 CCR §2050(a).

2 CONTACT INFORMATION OF PETITIONER

3

4 The contact information for Petitioner is as follows:

5 Business Industrial Group do Jess Herbst

6 27675 Chapala Mission Viejo, CA 92692

7 Fax (949) 215-2965

8 Patrick L Rendon, Esq. Lamb & Kawakami LLP

9 333 South Grand Avenue, Ste. 4200 Los Angeles, CA 90071

10 Tel. (213) 630-5570 Fax (213) 630-5555

11 Email [email protected]

12

13 THE ACTION FOR WHICH PETITIONER SEEKS REVIEW

14 Petitioner respectfully requests that the RWQCB review the Order. A copy of which is

15 attached as Exhibit A. Petitioner further requests that the RWQCB hold the Petition in abeyance

16 pursuant to 23 CCR §2050.5(d) and the practices of the RWQCB. In addition, to the extent that

17 this Petition is made active, then Petitioner requests a hearing pursuant to California Water Code

18 § 13321 and a stay on any action directed at Petitioner under the Order pending a final adjudication

19 decision.

20

21 THE DATE THE RWQCB ACTED

22 The RWQCB, through its Interim Executive Officer, issued the Order on June 24, 2010.

23 STATEMENT OF REASONS WHY THE ACTION WAS

24 AND IS INAPPROPRIATE OR IMPROPER

25

26 The RWQCB’s Order is inappropriate or improper for the following reasons:

27 1. The RWQCB abused its discretion in naming BIG in the Order pursuant to

28


110316

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

California Water Code § 13267. BIG is not the proper or appropriate party to be named in the

Order. California Water Code § 13267(b) states, in pertinent part, that the RWQCB authority to

issue an order is limited to "... any person who has discharged, discharges, or is suspected of having

discharged or discharging, or who proposes to discharge waste within its region..." BIG has not

discharged and is not suspected of having discharged waste at the Property. This is corroborated

by the independent factual findings of the RWQCB which are set forth in the Order. These

findings are based on the RWQCB records that include environmental reports submitted to the

RWQCB by BIG and others and which are incorporated herein by this reference. Based on the

foregoing data and studies, the RWQCB acknowledges and confirms in the Order that there is no

homogeneity in the distribution of contaminants of concern in the soil and, in any case, any

contaminants of concern radiate laterally and vertically from "hot spots" around suspected source

areas of operators. (See, e.g., Order, Findings § l.a., 2.a., 2.b., 3, 4, see also, RWQCB Order

dated July 1, 2010, directed at Standard Metals, 378 West l33'' Street, Los Angeles, California,

Site Cleanup No. 0818A, Site ID No. 2044D00 (the "Standard Metals Order"), a copy of which is

attached as Exhibit B.) Furthermore, as a matter of practice and policy and due process, BIG is not

responsible or obligated to respond simply by virtue of its ownership of the Property. Rather, the

Order should be directed at those persons who are responsible for the contaminants of concern.

The RWQCB abused its discretion by failing to consider substantial, undisputed

evidence that the source of the contamination relating to the Property was from others, including

off-site sources. (See, Exhibits A & B.)

The RWQCB abused its discretion in that the burden, including costs, of BIG

providing the reports requested in the Order do not bear a reasonable relationship to BIG based on

the above-discussed findings of the RWQCB.

The features at issue are not "waters of the State" and, therefore, the actions are

beyond the jurisdiction of the RWQCB.

The Order violates BIG's constitutional rights to due process and equal protection.

3

110316


1 California Water Code § 13267. BIG is not the proper or appropriate party to be named in the

2 Order. California Water Code § 13267(b) states, in pertinent part, that the RWQCB authority to

3 issue an order is limited to "... any person who has discharged, discharges, or is suspected of having

4 discharged or discharging, or who proposes to discharge waste within its region..." BIG has not



V1 findings are based on the RWQCB records that include environmental reports submitted to the


foregoing data and studies, the RWQCB acknowledges and confirms in the Order that there is no

10 homogeneity in the distribution of contaminants of concern in the soil and, in any case, any


12 areas of operators. (See, e.g., Order, Findings §§ La., 2.a., 2.b., 3, 4, see also, RWQCB Order

13 dated July 1, 2010, directed at Standard Metals, 378 West 133 rd Street, Los Angeles, California,





18

2. The RWQCB abused its discretion by failing to consider substantial, undisputed 19

evidence that the source of the contamination relating to the Property was from others, including 20

off-site sources. (See, Exhibits A & B.) 21

22

3. The RWQCB abused its discretion in that the burden, including costs, of BIG



25

4. The features at issue are not "waters of the State" and, therefore, the actions are 26

beyond the jurisdiction of the RWQCB. 27

28

5. The Order violates BIG’s constitutional rights to due process and equal protection.


110316

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

110316



Petition. Petitioner is further aggrieved because the Order imposes duplicate and unnecessary

requirements on BIG and subjects BIG to penalties.

REMEDY SOUGHT BY PETITIONER

Petitioner requests that the RWQCB remove or dismiss BIG from the Order altogether or,


respect to BIG, pending the further actions of the RWQCB and information provided by the other

persons identified in the Order and in the Standard Metals Order. In the event this Petition is made

active, BIG will submit, as an amendment to this Petition, a full and complete statement of points

and authorities in support of the legal and factual issues raised by this Petition. In connection

therewith, BIG respectfully requests that the RWQCB provide an evidentiary hearing and oral

argument on the Order pursuant to the United States Constitution, the California Constitution,

California Water Code § 13321, California Government Code § 11400, et seq., 23 CCR §648, et

seq., and 23 CCR §2050.6(a), (b). In addition, in the event this Petition is made active, BIG

respectfully requests a stay of any action directed at BIG under the Order until a final adjudicated

decision of the matters raised herein pursuant to 23 CCR §2053, and at such time BIG will submit

an amendment to this Petition that will set forth the additional facts and proof that show the

necessity for a stay.

STATEMENT OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES

Petitioner will provide a detailed statement of points and authorities in the event the

RWQCB takes further action which necessitates that this Petition take active status.

STATEMENT OF DELIVERY OF PETITION TO INTERESTED PERSONS

As indicated in the attached proof of service, this Petition has been sent to the RWQCB and

to other persons who Petitioner understands are interested persons.

4Petition for Review re June 24, 2010 RWQCB Order to BIG


2


3 Petition. Petitioner is further aggrieved because the Order imposes duplicate and unnecessary

4 requirements on BIG and subjects BIG to penalties.

5 REMEDY SOUGHT BY PETITIONER

6

7 Petitioner requests that the RWQCB remove or dismiss BIG from the Order altogether or,

8 at a minimum, that the RWQCB hold the Order in abeyance (pursuant to 23 CCR §2050.5(d)) with

9 respect to BIG, pending the further actions of the RWQCB and information provided by the other

10 persons identified in the Order and in the Standard Metals Order. In the event this Petition is made

11 active, BIG will submit, as an amendment to this Petition, a full and complete statement of points

12 and authorities in support of the legal and factual issues raised by this Petition. In connection

13 therewith, BIG respectfully requests that the RWQCB provide an evidentiary hearing and oral

14 argument on the Order pursuant to the United States Constitution, the California Constitution,

15 California Water Code § 13321, California Government Code § 11400, et seq., 23 CCR §648, et

16 seq., and 23 CCR §2050.6(a), (b). In addition, in the event this Petition is made active, BIG

17 respectfully requests a stay of any action directed at BIG under the Order until a final adjudicated

18 decision of the matters raised herein pursuant to 23 CCR §2053, and at such time BIG will submit

19 an amendment to this Petition that will set forth the additional facts and proof that show the

20 necessity for a stay.

21 STATEMENT OF POINTS AND AUTHORITIES

22 Petitioner will provide a detailed statement of points and authorities in the event the

23 RWQCB takes further action which necessitates that this Petition take active status.

24 STATEMENT OF DELIVERY OF PETITION TO INTERESTED PERSONS

25

26 As indicated in the attached proof of service, this Petition has been sent to the RWQCB and

27 to other persons who Petitioner understands are interested persons.

28


110316

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28






regulations.





By:

110316

Patffck L. RendonAttorneys for PetitionerBUSINESS INDUSTRIAL GROUP

Petition for Review re June 24, 2010 RWQCB Order to BIG5

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28






regulations.




Dated: July 26, 2010

aPatrickL.

WAKAMI LLP

By: Q Rendon

Attorneys for Petitioner BUSINESS INDUSTRIAL GROUP


110316

EXHIBIT AEXHIBIT A


320 W. 4th Street, Suite 200, Los Angeles, California 90013

Linda S. Adams Phone (213) 576-6600 FAX (213) 576-6640 - Internet Address: http://www.waterboavds.ca.gov/IosangelCS Arnold SchwarzeneggerGovernor

June 24; 2010

Cal/EPA Secretary

Mr. James HerbstBusiness Industrial Group (BIG)27675 ChapalaMission Viejo, CA 92692

Mr. Larry BemaT.A Davis Company (TADCO)19500 South AlamedaStreetEast Rancho Dominguez, CA 90221

CERThIED MAILRETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED

7009 0820 0001 6811 9282

CERTIFIED MAILRETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED

7009 0820 0001 6811 9299

REQUIREMENT FOR A TECII]NICAL REPORT PURSUANT TO CALIFORNIA WATER CODESECTION 13267 ORDER - BIG PROPERTY AND FORMER TADCO FACILiTY, 13255 SOUTHBROADWAY, 360-366 WEST 132ND STREET AND 363 WEST 133 STREET, LOS ANGELES,CALIFORNIA (SITE CLEANUP NO. 0817, SITE 11) NO. 2040358)


The California Regional Water Quality Control Board, Los Angeles Region (Regional Board) is the publicagency'with primary responsibility for the protection of ground and surface water quality for all beneficial

uses within major portions of Los Angeles County and Ventura County, including the above-referenced

sites.

The Regional Board has been investigating soil and groundwater contamination at sites adjacent to and on a

portion of the Business Industrial Group (BIG) property since approximately 1998. The former TADCO

facility that had occupied a parcel at. 363 West 1 33 Street on the BIG property has been the focus of thesesite investigations.

Based on our review of site assessment data collected from the former TADCO facility and adjacent sites,we believe that the former TADCO facility could be a source of the volatile organic compounds (VOCs)such as acetone, benzene, ethylbenzene, toluene, and xylenes (BTEX) and polychiorinated biphenyls (PCBs)

detected in the soil and groundwater beneath the property. We also believe additional site assessments mustbe conducted on adjacentparcels to the former TADCO facility on BIG property to fully define the extent ofcontamination in the soil and groundwater and to identif' any contributing offsite sources.

As part of our ongoing investigation of soil and groundwater contamination in the general vicinity of theTADCO facility, you are hereby directed to provide the required technical report requested in the enclosedOrder pursuant to California Water Code section 13267. You are required to comply with the Order toensure that progress is made in our continuing investigation in the area.


Recycled PaperOur mission is to preserve and enhance the quality of California's water resources for the benefit ofpresent andfuture generations.

California Regional Water Quality Control Board I1I_I, Los Angeles Region

320 W. 4th Street, Suite 200, Los Angeles, California 90013 Linda S. Adams Phone (213) 576-6600 FAX (213) 576-6640 - Internet Address: http://www.waterboards.ca.gov/IosangelCS Arnold Schwarzenegger Cal/EPA Secretary Go-nor

June 24; 2010

Mr. James Herbst Business Industrial Group (BIG) 27675 Chapala Mission Viejo, CA 92692

Mr. Larry Bema T.A. Davis Company (TADCO) 19500 South Alameda Street East Rancho Dominguez, CA 90221


7009 0820 0001 6811 9282


7009 0820 0001 6811 9299

REQUIREMENT FOR A TECHNICAL REPORT PURSUANT TO CALIFORNIA WATER CODE SECTION 13267 ORDER - BIG PROPERTY AND FORMER TADCO FACILITY, 13255 SOUTH BROADWAY, 360-366 WEST 132ND STREET AND 363 WEST 133 STREET, LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA (SITE CLEANUP NO. 0817, SITE 11) NO. 2040358)


The California Regional Water Quality Control Board, Los Angeles Region (Regional Board) is the public agency’with primary responsibility for the protection of ground and surface water quality for all beneficial uses within major portions of Los Angeles County and Ventura County, including the above-referenced sites.

The Regional Board has been investigating soil and groundwater contamination at sites adjacent to and on a portion of the Business Industrial Group (BIG) property since approximately 1998. The former TADCO facility that had occupied a parcel at. 363 West 133 d Street on the BIG property has been the focus of these site investigations.

Based on our review of site assessment data collected from the former TADCO facility and adjacent sites, we believe that the former TADCO facility could be a source of the volatile organic compounds (VOCs) such as acetone, benzene, ethylbenzene, toluene, and xylenes (BTEX) and polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) detected in the soil and groundwater beneath the property. We also believe additional site assessments must be conducted on adjacent parcels to the former TADCO facility on BIG property to fully define the extent of contamination in the soil and groundwater and to identify any contributing offsite sources.

As part of our ongoing investigation of soil and groundwater contamination in the general vicinity of the TADCO facility, you are hereby directed to provide the required technical report requested in the enclosed Order pursuant to California Water Code section 13267. You are required to comply with the Order to ensure that progress is made in our continuing investigation in the area.


Recycled Paper Our mission is to preserve and enhance the quality of California’s water resources for the benefit ofpresent andfuture generations.

Mr. James Herbst - 2 - June 24, 2010Mr. Larry BernaBusiness Industrial Group (BIG) and TADCO


Sincerel

effrey ' nit ChiefSite Cleanup Program, Unit II


cc: Mr. Patrick Rendon, Lamb & Kawakami LLPMrs. Barbara Vidmar, General WeldingMs. Julie Marshall, Rincon Consultants, Inc.Mr. Walt Hamann, Rincon Consultants, Inc.Ms. Emily Yukich, Folger Levin & Kaim LLFMr. Greg Levine, Standard MetalsMr. Michael Baum, Resch Poister & Berger LLPMr. John Payne, Frey Environmental, Inc.Mr. Brett Bowyer, Bowyer Environmental Consulting, Inc.Mr. Kenneth Ehrlich, Jeffer, Mangels, Butler & Marmaro LLP


Recycled PaperOur mission is to preserve and enhance the quality of Cal(fornia s water resources for the benefit ofpresent and future generatians.

Mr. James Herbst - 2 - June 24, 2010 Mr. Larry Berna Business Industrial Group (BIG) and TADCO


Sincerel ,

Alt

effrey nit Chief Site Cleanup Program, Unit II


cc: Mr. Patrick Rendon, Lamb & Kawakami LLP Mrs. Barbara Vidmar, General Welding Ms. Julie Marshall, Rincon Consultants, Inc. Mr. Walt Hamann, Rincon Consultants, Inc. Ms. Emily Yukich, Folger Levin & Kahn LLF Mr. Greg Levine, Standard Metals Mr. Michael Baum, Resch Poister & Berger LLP Mr. John Payne, Frey Environmental, Inc. Mr. Brett Bowyer, Bowyer Environmental Consulting, Inc. Mr. Kenneth Ehrlich, Jeffer, Mangels, Butler & Marmaro LLP

California Environmental Protection Agency OR

Recycled Paper Our mission is to preserve and enhance the quality of Cal(fornia s water resources for the benefit ofpresent and future generations.

California Regional Water Quality Control BoirdLos Angeles Region

320W. 4th Street, Suite 200, Los Angeles, California 90013

Linda S. Adams Phone (213) 576-6600 FAX (213) 576.6640 - Internet Address: http://www.waterboards.ca.gov/losangeIeS Arnold SchwarzeneggerGovernor

REQTJIREMENTTO PROVIDE A TECHNICAL REPORT(CALIFORNIA WATER CODE SECTION 132671 ORDER)

DIRECTED TO BUS]NESS INDUSTRIAL GROUP (BIG)AND T.A DAVIS COMPANY (TADCO)

BIG PROPERTY AND FORMER TAD CO FACILITY13255 SOUTH BROADWAY, 360-366 WEST 132 STREET AND 363 WEST 133 STREET,

LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA(SITE CLEANUP NO. 0817, SITE ID NO. 2040358)


The Regional Board has been investigating soil and groundwater contamination at sites adjacent to andon a portion of the Business Industrial Group (BIG) property since approximately 1998. The BIGproperty is a rectangular lot approximately 3.7 acres, divided into three distinct parcels with addresses at13255 South Broadway, 360-366 West 132" Street and 363 West 133" Street in Los Angeles. The 0.7-acre parcel at 363 West 133"' Street was leased by TADCO from BIG from approximately 1979 to 1996for polyurethane resin manufacturing facility. The other two parcels were historically occupied bygarment and display manufacturers.

Adjacent to the BIG property are Standard Metals site, located at 378 West l33" Street, and GeneralWelding site, Iqoated at 352 West 133'" Street, which are scarp metal recycling and acetylene gasmanufacturing facilities, respectively.

Site investigations conducted at TADCO, Standard Metals and General Welding sites indicate that thesoil and groundwater are contaminated with volatile organic compounds (VOCs) such as trichloroethene(TCE) and acetone, aromatic hydrocarbons such as benzene, ethylbenzene, toluene, and xylenes (BTEX),polychiorinated biphenyls (PCBs) and petroleum hydrocarbons. The site investigations also show that thesoil and groundwater contamination encountered in the general vicinity might have been resulted frommultiple sources. Groundwater monitoring results obtained from Standard Metals and General Weldingsites indicate that the former TADCO facility and the BIG property are located i.ipgradient relative to thelocations of these adjacent sites.

In response to the Regional Board's section 13267 Order, dated. March 19, 2009, TADCO submitted atechnical report, dated June 8, 2009, compiling historical site assessment data collected from its formerfacility and adjacent sites and presenting its interpretation of the data.

The Regional Board also issued a section 13267 Order, dated November 19, 2009, to BIG, requiringsubmittal of any technical report they might have for their property. BIG submitted copies of some

Cal/EPA Secretary

California Water Code section 13267 states, in part: (b)(1) In conducting an investigation. . ., the regional board

may require that any person who has discharged, discharges, or is suspected of having discharged or, discharging, orwho proposes to discharge vaste within its region ... shall furnish, under penalty of peijury, technical or monitoringprogram reports which the regional board requires. The burden, iic1uding costs, of these reports shall bear areasonable relationship to the need for the report and the benefits to be obtained from the reports. In requiring thosereports, the regional board shall provide the person with a written explanation with regard to the need for the reports,and shall identif' the evidence that supports requiring that person to provide the reports.

California Environmental Frotection Agency

Recycled PaperOur mi.r:Ion is topreserve and enhance the quality of Calfornta 's water re.sourcesfor the benefit ofpresent andfuture generations.

California Regional Water Quality Control Board Los Angeles Region

320W. 4th Street, Suite 200, Los Angeles, California 90013 Linda S. Adams Phone (213) 576-6600 FAX (213) 576.6640 - Internet Address: http://www.waterboards.ca.gov/losangeleS Arnold Schwarzenegger Cal/EPA Secretary Governor

REQUIREMENT TO PROVIDE A TECHNICAL REPORT (CALIFORNIA WATER CODE SECTION 132671 ORDER)

DIRECTED TO BUSINESS INDUSTRIAL GROUP (BIG) AND T.A DAVIS COMPANY (TADCO)

BIG PROPERTY AND FORMER TAD CO FACILITY 13255 SOUTH BROADWAY, 360-366 WEST 132 ND STREET AND 363 WEST 133 RD STREET,

LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA (SITE CLEANUP NO. 0817, SITE ID NO. 2040358)


The Regional Board has been investigating soil and groundwater contamination at sites adjacent to and on a portion of the Business Industrial Group (BIG) property since approximately 1998. The BIG property is a rectangular lot approximately 3.7 acres, divided into three distinct parcels with addresses at 13255 South Broadway, 360-366 West 132" Street and 363 West 133" Street in Los Angeles. The 0.7-acre parcel at 363 West 133’d Street was leased by TADCO from BIG from approximately 1979 to 1996 for polyurethane resin manufacturing facility. The other two parcels were historically occupied by garment and display manufacturers.

Adjacent to the BIG property are Standard Metals site, located at 378 West 133’ Street, and General Welding site, located at 352 West 133’" Street, which are scarp metal recycling and acetylene gas manufacturing facilities, respectively.

Site investigations conducted at TADCO, Standard Metals and General Welding sites indicate that the soil and groundwater are contaminated with volatile organic compounds (VOCs) such as trichloroethene (TCE) and acetone, aromatic hydrocarbons such as benzene, ethylbenzene, toluene, and xylenes (BTEX), polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) and petroleum hydrocarbons. The site investigations also show that the soil and groundwater contamination encountered in the general vicinity might have been resulted from multiple sources. Groundwater monitoring results obtained from Standard Metals and General Welding sites indicate that the former TADCO facility and the BIG property are located i.ipgradient relative to the locations of these adjacent sites.

In response to the Regional Board’s section 13267 Order, dated. March 19, 2009, TADCO submitted a technical report, dated June 8, 2009, compiling historical site assessment data collected from its former facility and adjacent sites and presenting its interpretation of the data.

The Regional Board also issued a section 13267 Order, dated November 19, 2009, to BIG, requiring submittal of any technical report they might have for their property. BIG submitted copies of some

California Water Code section 13267 states, in part: (b)(l) In conducting an investigation. . ., the regional board may require that any person who has discharged, discharges, or is suspected of having discharged or, discharging, or who proposes to discharge waste within its region ... shall furnish, under penalty of peijury, technical or monitoring program reports which the regional board requires. The burden, including costs, of these reports shall bear a reasonable relationship to the need for the report and the benefits to be obtained from the reports. In requiring those reports, the regional board shall provide the person with a written explanation with regard to the need for the reports, and shall identify the evidence that supports requiring that person to provide the reports.


Recycled Paper Our mission is to preserve and enhance the quality ofCalifornia’s water re.rourcesfor the benefit ofpresent andfuture generations.

technical reports on the BIG property on February 16, 2010. However, some of the data contained in thereports appear to have been compiled in other technical reports submitted by adjacent property owners.

FINDINGS

Based on our review of the technical reports submitted by TADCO, Standard Metals and GeneralWelding, we made the following findings:

1. a. TADCO, in their technical report, dated June 8, 2009, Appendix A, Response to R WQCB, page 1to 3 (see attached), indicated that their former facility was excavated, re-graded and filled with anolder, homogenized, contaminated fill material in 1973 and argued that this coniaminated soil isthe possible source of acetone and other contaminants detected in the soil and groundwater.However, based on our review of the site assessment data collected to date from the TADCO siteand adjacent properties, we do not find technical information supporting your assertion.

The fill thiclmess map included in TADCO's report shows that the entire TADCO site and alarge portion of the adjacent BIG property were excavated up to approximately 20 feet belowground surface (bgs) and filled with fill material. Soil analytical data for many of the soil boringsadvanced on the TADCO site and adjacent BIG property do not indicate homogeneity in thedistribution of acetone in the soil laterally and vertically. Rather, the data show the existence ofhot spots close suspected sources such as the former underground storage tanks (USTs) and drumstorage areas.

Acetone was detected in the soil from near-surface to the maximum depth drilled in B14 which isclose to the former UST and drum storage areas, indicating an onsite release(s) [see the attachedsite map]. The highest concentration of acetone in the soil was detected in B2 which is locatedclose to B14. The etcnt of contamination map for acetone in the soil also shows that a hot spotfor acetone is centered near B2 and B14, both of which are located close to suspected sources. Asone goes away from this hot spot, the conceniration of acetone in the soil decrease1atcrai1y andvertically. Soil borings B 19, B20, B22, and B24 which are all located within the area excavatedup to approximately 11 feet bgs and filled with the "homogenized and contaminated soil" did notdetect acetone in the soil samples. Analytical data from other soil borings also did not showuniform vertical and lateral distribution of acetone in the soil that one expects in soil boringsadvanced into a "homogenized and contaminated fill".

b. TADCO's statement in their technical report, dated June 8, 2009, Appendix A, Response toR WQCB, page 1 to 3 (see attached), that surface water runoff from the Standard Metals sitebrought acetone detected in the fill surrounding the USTs is not supported with data. Datacollected from numerous soil borings advanced at Standard Metals site indicate that the site isnot a significant source of acetone in the soil and groundwater and that some localized spills mayhave been responsible for acetone detected in some of the soil borings.

The concentrations of acetone detected in the soil beneath the Standard Metals site are muphlower than those reported for soil beneath the former TADCO facility. Moreover, the lateral andvertical distribution of acetone in the soil beneath the former TADCO facility is more extensivethan the one observed beneath the Standard Metals site.


Recycled PaperOur mission is to preserve and enhance the quality of Calfornla 's water resources for the benefit ofpresent andfuture generations.

Mr. James Herbst -2 - June 24, 2010Mr. Larry BemaBusiness Industrial Group (BIG) and Former TADCO Facility

Mr. James Herbst -2 - June 24, 2010 Mr. Larry Bema Business Industrial Group (BIG) and Former TADCO Facility

technical reports on the BIG property on February 16, 2010. However, some of the data contained in the reports appear to have been compiled in other technical reports submitted by adjacent property owners.

FINDINGS

Based on our review of the technical reports submitted by TADCO, Standard Metals and General Welding, we made the following findings:

1. a. TADCO, in their technical report, dated June 8, 2009, Appendix A, Response to R WQCB, page 1 to 3 (see attached), indicated that their former facility was excavated, re-graded and filled with an older, homogenized, contaminated fill material in 1973 and argued that this contaminated soil is the possible source of acetone and other contaminants detected in the soil and groundwater. However, based on our review of the site assessment data collected to date from the TADCO site and adjacent properties, we do not find technical information supporting your assertion.

The fill thickness map included in TADCO’s report shows that the entire TADCO site and a large portion of the adjacent BIG property were excavated up to approximately 20 feet below ground surface (bgs) and filled with fill material. Soil analytical data for many of the soil borings advanced on the TADCO site and adjacent BIG property do not indicate homogeneity in the distribution of acetone in the soil laterally and vertically. Rather, the data show the existence of hot spots close suspected sources such as the former underground storage tanks (USTs) and drum storage areas.

Acetone was detected in the soil from near-surface to the maximum depth drilled in B14 which is close to the former UST and drum storage areas, indicating an onsite release(s) [see the attached site map]. The highest concentration of acetone in the soil was detected in B2 which is located close to B14. The etcnt of contamination map for acetone in the soil also shows that a hot spot for acetone is centered near B2 and B14, both of which are located close to suspected sources. As one goes away from this hot spot, the concentration of acetone inthe soil decreases laterally and vertically. Soil borings B19, B20, B22, and B24 which are all located within the area excavated up to approximately 11 feet bgs and filled with the "homogenized and contaminated soil" did not detect acetone in the soil samples. Analytical data from other soil borings also did not show uniform vertical and lateral distribution of acetone in the soil that one expects in soil borings advanced into a "homogenized and contaminated fill".

b. TADCO’s statement in their technical report, dated June 8, 2009, Appendix A, Response to R WQCB, page 1 to 3 (see attached), that surface water runoff from the Standard Metals site brought acetone detected in the fill surrounding the USTs is not supported with data. Data collected from numerous soil borings advanced at Standard Metals site indicate that the site is not a significant source of acetone in the soil and groundwater and that some localized spills may have been responsible for acetone detected in some of the soil borings.

The concentrations of acetone detected in the soil beneath the Standard Metals site are much lower than those reported for soil beneath the former TADCO facility. Moreover, the lateral and vertical distribution of acetone in the soil beneath the former TADCO facility is more extensive than the one observed beneath the Standard Metals site.


Recycled Paper Our mission is to preserve and enhance the quality of California’s water resources for the benefit ofpresent andfuture generations.

Mr. James Herbst - 3 - June 24,2010

Mr. Larry BernaBusiness Jndustrial Group (BIG) and Former TADCO Facility

c. TADCO's hypothesis in their technical report, dated June 8, 2009, Appendix A, Response toRWQCB, page 1 to 3 (see attached) that the acetone release(s) on the General Welding propertymay have migrated to TADCO's property is not supported with data collected from both onsiteand offsite. Many site assessments conducted on General Welding property showed that the

extent of acetone contamination in the soil beneath the General Welding property isconfined to the limits of the property. Moreover, the General Welding property is locateddowngradient of the TADCO site.

a. TADCO's statement in their technical report, dated June 8, 2009, Appendix A, Response toRWQCB, page 4 (see attached), that the former oil field pit and/or the adjacent Standard Metalssite are the sources for BTBX in the soil is not supported by data. The former drum storage areais located outside the footprint of the former oil field pit.

It appears that the highest concentrations of aromatic hydrocarbons such as BTEX were detectedin the soil at or adjacent to areas of concerns (AOCs) on the former TADCO facility such as theformer drum storage area and the former office and shop building (see the attached site map). Atthese two AOCs, BTEX were detected up to 17,353 micrograms per kilogram (.tg/Kg) and178,290 j.tg/Kg in soil borings B28 and B23, respectively from near- surface to the watertable.

No significant BTEX were detected in the soil beneath Standard Metals site. The reported BTEXin the soil beneath Standard Metals site was dominantly detected near or below the water table.Hence, Standard Metals could not be the source for BTEX in the soil.

b. TADCO's statement in their technical report, dated June 8, 2009, Appendix A, Response toR WQCB, page 4 (see attached), regarding BTEX also appears to be in conflict with their

argument provided for acetone. If the source of contaminants was the "homogenized andcontaminated fill" spread over the site, BTBX would be detected in the soil at other portions ofthe site, instead of just the two AOCs.

Although tota1 petroleum hydrocarbons (TPH) has not yet been adequately assessed in the soil,limited data collected from some of the soil borings suggest that some AOCs on the former TADCOfacility could be sources of the TPH detected in the soil and groundwater. TPH was detected in someof the soil borings such as B14 and B2 in the former UST area from near-surface to the water table.The former UST area is located outside the footprint of the former oil field pit (see the attached sitemap).

Data in our files suggest that the former briquetting press pit on Standard Metals site could be the

source of TCE in the soil and groundwater beneath the site. However, the source of TCE on theformer TADCO facility has not also been adequately assessed. The soil data collected from theborings at the TADCO site appears to indicate that the former septic tank area could be the source ofTCE in the soil. Soil samples collected below the presumed depth of the bottom of the tank have thehighest TCE concentrations as data from B28 shows while samples collected from shallow depths (orthe presumed fill in the tank area) did not detect any TCE in the same boring.

In other areas of the site, TCE was mostly detected in soil samples collected near the water tablewhere the fluctuating water table causes migration of contaminants from the groundwater to the soil.

C'alfornia Environmental Protection Agency

!J Recycled PaperOur mission L to preserve and enhance the quality of CalVornia !s water resources/or the benefit 0/present andfuture generations.

Mr. James Herbst -3- June 24, 20 10

Mr. LariyBerna Business Industrial Group (BIG) and Former TADCO Facility

c. TADCO’s hypothesis in their technical report, dated June 8, 2009, Appendix A, Response to

RWQCB, page 1 to 3 (see attached) that the acetone release(s) on the General Welding property may have migrated to TADCO’s property is not supported with data collected from both onsite and offsite. Many site assessments conducted on General Welding property showed that the extent of acetone contamination in the soil beneath the General Welding property is confined to the limits of the property. Moreover, the General Welding property is located downgradient of the TADCO site.

2. a. TADCO’s statement in their technical report, dated June 8, 2009, Appendix A, Response to RWQCB, page 4 (see attached), that the former oil field pit and/or the adjacent Standard Metals site are the sources for BTBX in the soil is not supported by data. The former drum storage area is located outside the footprint of the former oil field pit.

It appears that the highest concentrations of aromatic hydrocarbons such as BTEX were detected in the soil at or adjacent to areas of concerns (AOCs) on the former TADCO facility such as the former drum storage area and the former office and shop building (see the attached site map). At these two AOCs, BTEX were detected up to 17,353 micrograms per kilogram (.tgIKg) and 178,290 j.tg/Kg in soil borings B28 and B23, respectively from near- surface to the water table.

No significant BTEX were detected in the soil beneath Standard Metals site. The reported BTEX in the soil beneath Standard Metals site was dominantly detected near or below the water table. Hence, Standard Metals could not be the source for BTEX in the soil.

b. TADCO’s statement in their technical report, dated June 8, 2009, Appendix A, Response to R WQCB, page 4 (see attached), regarding BTEX also appears to be in conflict with their argument provided for acetone. If the source of contaminants was the "homogenized and contaminated fill" spread over the site, BTBX would be detected in the soil at other portions of the site, instead of just the two AOCs.

3. Although total petroleum hydrocarbons (TPH) has not yet been adequately assessed in the soil, limited data collected from some of the soil borings suggest that some AOCs on the former TADCO facility could be sources of the TPH detected in the soil and groundwater. TPH was detected in some of the soil borings such as B14 and B2 in the former UST area from near-surface to the water table. The former UST area is located outside the footprint of the former oilfield pit (see the attached site map).

4. Data in our files suggest that the former briquetting press pit on Standard Metals site could be the source of TCE in the soil and groundwater beneath the site. However, the source of TCE on the former TADCO facility has not also been adequately assessed. The soil data collected from the borings at the TADCO site appears to indicate that the former septic tank area could be the source of TCE in the soil. Soil samples collected below the presumed depth of the bottom of the tank have the highest TCE concentrations as data from B28 shows while samples collected from shallow depths (or the presumed fill in the tank area) did not detect any TCE in the same boring.

In other areas of the site, TCE was mostly detected in soil samples collected near the water table where the fluctuating water table causes migration of contaminants from the groundwater to the soil.


!J Recycled Paper Our mission is to preserve and enhance the quality of California’s water resources/or the benefit 0/present andfuture generations.



If the source of contaminants was the "homogenized and contaminated fill" spread over the site, TCEwould uniformly be detected in the soil at various depths at other portions of the site. Rather, TCEwas dete,cted in certain AOCs such as the former septic tank area where release(s) had occurred.

Vinyl chlorideand cis-1 ,2 dichioroethene (cis-1 ,2-DCE) are the breakdown products of TCE. Thesoil data collected from the sOil borings on the former TADCO facility show that the distribution ofvinyl chloride in the soil appears, in most cases, to correlate with the distribution of TCE. Althoughlimited data were collected on cis-1 ,2-DCE, it appears to have a similar distribution with that of TCE

in the soil. The source of TCE is therefore responsible for the existence of these contaminants in the

soil.

Existing data suggest that the former septic tank area and the former drum storage area could be the

sources for TCE in the soil beneath the former TADCO facility. However, additional assessment is

needed to identi other possible source areas on the adjacent BIG property.

PCB was detected in soil samples collected from one of the soil borings (B 14). However, the latraIextent of the PCB in the soil is not defmed.

The eastern and northern extent of the acetone, BTEX, TCE, vinyl chloride,, and cis-1,2-DCE

contaminations in the soil have not yet been fully defined beneath adjacent parcels to the former

TADCO facility on the BIG property.

REQUIREMENTS

Based on the findings enumerated above and pursuant to section 13267 of the California Water Code(CWC), both BIG, because of its ownership of the property including the parcel that had been occupied

by the former TADCO facility, and TADCO, because of its past operation of a polyurethanemanufacturing facility on a parcel of the BIG property, are hereby required to submit a work plan forfurther assessment of the soil and groundwater contamination identified beneath the parcel occupied bythe former TADCO facility and adjacent parcels on the BIG property. The work plan shall address the

following:

The eastern and northern extent of the acetone, BTEX, TCE, vinyl chloride, and cis-1,2-DCE

contaminations in the soil identified beneath the former TADCO facility must'be delineated.

The extent and distribution of TPH in the soil must be adequ tely defined in all directions.

Step-out borings shall be advanced in the area around B-14 to delineate the lateral and vertical extent

of PCB in the soil in all directions.

The source of TCE on the former TADCO facility must be identified with further assessment.Additional soil borings shall be advanced in the former septic tank area arid the former drum storagearea.

Calforn1a Environmental Protection Agency

uc Recycled PaperOur mission is to preserve and enhance the quality of Cal(fornia water resources for the benefit ofpresent andfuture generations.

Mr. James Herbst -4 - June 24, 2010 Mr. Larry Berna Business Industrial Group (BIG) and Former TADCO Facility

If the source of contaminants was the "homogenized and contaminated fill" spread over the site, TCE would uniformly be detected in the soil at various depths at other portions of the site. Rather, TCE was dete,cted in certain AOCs such as the former septic tank area where release(s) had occurred.

5. Vinyl chlorideand cis-1,2 dichioroethene (cis-1 ,2-DCE) are the breakdown products of TCE. The soil data collected from the soil borings on the former TADCO facility show that the distribution of vinyl chloride in the soil appears, in most cases, to correlate with the distribution of TCE. Although limited data were collected on cis-1 ,2-DCE, it appears to have a similar distribution with that of TCE in the soil. The source of TCE is therefore responsible for the existence of these contaminants in the soil.

Existing data suggest that the former septic tank area and the former drum storage area could be the sources for TCE in the soil beneath the former TADCO facility. However, additional assessment is needed to identify other possible source areas on the adjacent BIG property.

6. PCB was detected in soil samples collected from one of the soil borings (B14). However, the latraI extent of the PCB in the soil is not defined.

7. The eastern and northern extent of the acetone, BTEX, TCE, vinyl chloride,, and cis-1,2-DCE contaminations in the soil have not yet been fully defined beneath adjacent parcels to the former TADCO facility on the BIG property.

REQUIREMENTS

Based on the findings enumerated above and pursuant to section 13267 of the California Water Code (CWC), both BIG, because of its ownership of the property including the parcel that had been occupied by the former TADCO facility, and TADCO, because of its past operation of a polyurethane manufacturing facility on a parcel of the BIG property, are hereby required to submit a work plan for further assesment of the soil and groundwater contamination identified beneath the parcel occupied by the former TADCO facility and adjacent parcels on the BIG property. The work plan shall address the following:

1. The eastern and northern extent of the acetone, BTEX, TCE, vinyl chloride, and cis-1,2-DCE contaminations in the soil identified beneath the former TADCO facility must-be delineated.

2. The extent and distribution of TPH in the soil must be adequ tely defined in all directions.

3. Step-out borings shall be advanced in the area around B-14 to delineate the lateral and vertical extent of PCB in the soil in all directions.

4. The source of TCE on the former TADCO facility must be identified with further assessment. Additional soil borings shall be advanced in the former septic tank area and the former drum storage area.


uc Recycled Paper Our mission is to preserve and enhance the quality of California’swater resources for the benefit ofpresent andfuture generations.

Mr. James Herbst - 5 - June 24, 2010


Groundwater monitoring wells shall be installed at upgradient locations to the former TADCOfacility to assess the existence of contributing offsite sources for the VOCs and other contaminantsidentified in the groundwater and to define the full extent of the VOC plume.

After the installation of the groundwater monitoring wells, a quarterly groundwater monitoring shall

be initiated and groundwater monitoring reports shall be submitted according to the following

schedule:

Monitoring Period Report Due Date

April-June July 15th

July-September October l5"October - December January l5I

January -March April 15th

6.1 A site-wide groundwater elevation contour map showing the groundwater flow direction

and gradient must be included in the groundwater monitoring reports.



As presented in State Water Resources Control Board Resolution 92-49, professionals should bequalified, licensed where applicable, and competent and proficient in the fields pertinent to the required

activities. Moreover, the final report submitted to this Regional Board must be reviewed, signed andstamped by a California registered geologist, or a California registered civil engineer with at least five

years hydrogeologic experience. Furthermore, the California Business and Professions Code sections

6735, 7835, and 7835.1 require that engineering and geologic evaluations and judgments be performed

by or under the direction ofregisteredprofessionals. Therefore, all future work must be performed by or

under the direction of a registered geologist or registered civil engineer. A statement is required in the

fmal report that the registered professional in responsible charge actually supervised or personallyconducted all the work associated with the work plan and final report.


Regional Board by August 24, 2010. Furthermore, pursuant to section 13268 (b)(l) of the CWC, failure

to submit the work plan may result in the imposition of civil liability penalties by the Regional Board of

up to $1,000 per day for each day the work plan is not received after August 24, 2010, due date andwithout further warning.

We believe that the burdens, including costs, of this report bear a reasonable relationship to the need for

the report and the benefits to be obtained from the report. If you disagree and have information about the

burden, including costs, of complying with these requirements, provide such information in writing toMr. Bizuayehu Ayele within ten days of the date of this letter so that we may reconsider the

requirements.


%c Recycled PaperOur mission is to preserve and enhance the quality ofCalifornia's waler resources for the benefit ofpresent andfuture generations.

Mr. James Herbst - 5 - Mr. Larry Bema Business Industrial Group (BIG) and Former TADCO Facility

June 24, 2010

5. Groundwater monitoring wells shall be installed at upgradient locations to the former TADCO facility to assess the existence of contributing offsite sources for the VOCs and other contaminants identified in the groundwater and to define the full extent of the VOC plume.

6. After the installation of the groundwater monitoring wells, a quarterly groundwater monitoring shall be initiated and groundwater monitoring reports shall be submitted according to the following schedule:

Monitoring Period

April-June July-September October - December January -March

Report Due Date

July 15th October 15th January 15"

April 15th

6.1 A site-wide groundwater elevation contour map showing the groundwater flow direction and gradient must be included in the groundwater monitoring reports.


7. The work plan is due to the Regional Board by August 24, 2010.

As presented in State Water Resources Control Board Resolution 92-49, professionals should be qualified, licensed where applicable, and competent and proficient in the fields pertinent to the required activities. Moreover, the final report submitted to this Regional Board must be reviewed, signed and stamped by a California registered geologist, or a California registered civil engineer with at least five years hydrogeologic experience. Furthermore, the California Business and Professions Code sections 6735, 7835, and 78351 require that engineering and geologic evaluations and judgments be performed by or under the direction of re,gistered professionals. Therefore,, all future work must be performed by or under the direction of a registered geologist or registered civil engineer. A statement is required in the final report that the registered professional in responsible charge actually supervised or personally conducted all the work associated with the work plan and final report.

Pursuant to section 13267(b) of the CWC, you are hereby directed to submit the required work plan to this Regional Board by August 24, 2010. Furthermore, pursuant to section 13268 (b)(1) of the CWC, failure to submit the work plan may result in the imposition of civil liability penalties by the Regional Board of up to $1,000 per day for each day the work plan is not received after August 24, 2010, due date and without further warning.

We believe that the burdens, including costs, of this report bear a reasonable relationship to the need for the report and the benefits to be obtained from the report. If you disagree and have information about the burden, including costs, of complying with these requirements, provide such information in writing to Mr. Bizuayehu Ayele within ten days of the date of this letter so that we may reconsider the requirements.


%7 Recycled Paper Our mission is to preserve and enhance the quality of California’s water resources for the benefit ofpresent andfuture generations.

Mr. James Herbst - 6 June 24, 2010

Mr. LartyBernaBusiness Industrial Group (BIG) and Former TADCO Facility


that effective immediately, the Regional Board requires you to include a perjury statement in all work

plans and reports submitted under the 13267 Orders. The perjury statement shall be signed by a senior

authorized representative at your company (and not by a consultant). The statement shall be in the

following format:

"I [NAME], do hereby declare, under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of

California, that I am [JOB 11'ILEJ for [NAME OF RESPONSIBLEPARTYIDISCHARGERJ, that I am authorized to attest to the veracity of the information

contained in the report(s) described herein, and that the information contained in [NAME

AND DATE OF REPORT] is true and correct) and that this declaration was executed at

[PLACE], [STATE], on [DATE]."

Any person aggrieved by this action of the Regional Water Board may petition the State Water Board to

review the action in accordance with Water Code section 13320 and California Code of Regulations, title

23, sections 2050 and following. The State Water Board must receive the petition by 5:00p.m., 3Q days

after the date of this Order, except that if the thirtieth day following the date of this Order falls on a

Saturday, Sunday, or state holiday, the petition must be received by the State Water Board by 5:00 p.m.

on the next business day. Copies of the law and regulations applicable to filing petitions may be found on

the Internet at:

http://www.waterboards.ca.gOV/Public notices/petitions/Water quality


SO ORDERED.

June24,2O1O

amuel TingeInterim Exefve Officer

Enclosures: a) Technical Report, Appendix A, Response to RWQCB, Bowyer Environmental

Consulting, June 8, 2009b) Site Map

C'alifornia Environmental Protection Agency

uc Recycled PaperOur mission Is to preserve and enhance the quality ofCalifornia's water resources for the benefit ofpresentandfuture generations.

Mr. James Herbst - 6- June 24, 2010 Mr. Larry Berna Business Industrial Group (BIG) and Former TADCO Facility

The above technical report is required to be submitted under the CWC section 13267 Order. Please note that effective immediately, the Regional Board requires you to include a perjury statement in all work plans and reports submitted under the 13267 Orders. The perjury statement shall be signed by a senior authorized representative at your company (and not by a consultant). The statement shall be in the following format:

"1 [NAME], do hereby declare, under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California, that I am [JOB TITLE] for [NAME OF RESPONSIBLE PARTIIDISCHARGER], that I am authorized to attest to the veracity of the information contained in the report(s) described herein, and that the information contained in [NAME AND DATE OF REPORT] is true and correct, and that this declaration was executed at [PLACE], [STATE], on [DA TE]."

Any person aggrieved by this action of the Regional Water Board may petition the State Water Board to review the action in accordance with Water Code section 13320 and California Code of Regulations, title 23, sections 2050 and following. The State Water Board must receive the petition by 5:00p.m., 3Q days after the date of this Order, except that if the thirtieth day following the date of this Order falls on a Saturday, Sunday, or state holiday, the petition must be received by the State Water Board by 5:00 p.m. on the next business day. Copies of the law and regulations applicable to filing petitions may be found on the Internet at:

http://www.waterboards.ca.gov/public notices/petitions/waterquality


SO ORDERED

4Exeve

June 24, 2010 Sa ) In cer

Enclosures: a) Technical Report, Appendix A, Response to RWQCB, Bowyer Environmental Consulting, June 8, 2009

b) Site Map

’I


01 Recycled Paper Our mission is to preserve and enhance the quality of California’s water resources for the benefit ofpresent andfulure generations.

)

Appendix A


March 19, 2009N

� � Appendix A


� � March 19, 2009 N -

May 30, 2009

VIA ELECTRONIC MAIL

Mr. TimQthy MartinJ14BM I

Jeffer, Mangels, Butler & Marmaro LLP1900 Avenue df the Stars, 7th FloorLos Angeles, California 90067

Subject Response to RWQCB Section 13267 OrderFormer TADCO Facility363 West 133rd StreetLos Apgeles, California

Dear Mr. Martin:

As per your request, Bowyer Environmental Consulting, [nc. (BEC) has prepared thispreliirLinary response tothe Section 13267 Order issued by the Los Angeles Region -Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) on March 19. 2009 (Order). The Orderwas issued to the T.A. Davies Company (TA Davies). The following comments are inresponse to the specific Fmdings and Recommendations preseiited inthe Order. Theresponses have been organized based on the order of the Findings ai-id Requirementspresented in the March 19, 2009 RWQCB letter.

FINDINGS

1. Aéetone was detected in the soil from near-surface to the maximum depth drilled in

B-14 advanced southwest of the UST area, indicating an ousite release(s). Inaddition, acetone was detected in samples collected from both shallow and deepsample intervals in other portions-of the site. Samples collected from beneath thetanks after the UST removal had also elevated concentrations of acetone. -

Comment: As presented in the Technical Report (DEc. May 31, 2009.), the property

that TAD CO operated on ('363 W. 133rd Street) was part of a larger property that is, and

has been owned by B .1. G. for some time. TAD CO operated on this property between

16458 BOLSA CHICA STREET, 4#422- HUNTiNGTON BEACN CAUFOBJ'1IA 92649- 877/232.4620. 714/840-4963 (FAX)bowyerenvironmentaLcom


/: I

4"N; 1/

BEC


4Ji May 30, 2009 \ BEC

VIA ELECTRONIC MAIL

� Mr. Timothy Martin J14BM I Jeffer, Mangels, Butler & Marmaro LLP 1900 Avenue Of the Stars, 7th Floor Los Angeles, California 90067

Subject Response to RWQCB Section 13267 Order Fourier TADCO Facility 363 West 133rd Street Los Angeles, California

Dear Mr. Martin:

As per your request, Bowyer Environmental Consulting, Inc. (BEC) has prepared this preliminary response to the Section 13267 Order issued by the Los Angeles Region - Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) on March 19. 2009 (Order). The Order was issued to the T.A. Davies Company (TA Davies). The following comments are in response to the specific Findliig äd Recommendations presented -ha the Order. The responses have been organized based on the order of the Bindings ai’id Requirements presented in the March 19, 2009 RWQCB letter.

FINDINGS

� 1. Acetone was detected in the soil from near-surface to the maximum depth drilled in B-14 advanced southwest of the UST area, indicating an ousite release(s). In addition, acetone was detected in samples collected from both shallow and deep sample intervals in other portions-of the site. Samples collected from beneath the tanks after the UST removal had also elevated concentrations of acetone.

� Comment: As presented in the Technical Report (DEC. May 31, 2009, the property that TAD CO operated on (363 W. 133rd Street) was part of a larger property that is, and has been owned by B .1. G. for some time. TAD CO operated on this property between

16458 BOLSA CHICA STREET, 4#422. HUNTiNGTON BEACH, CALIFORNIA 92649- 877/232.4620. 714/840-4963 (FAX) bowyerenvironmental.com

16458 BOLSA CHICA STREET, #422 - HUNTINGTON BEACH, CALIFORNIA 92649- 877/2324620, 714/840-4963 (FAX)bowyerenvlronmenta].cOfll

Mr. Timothy MartinMay 30, 2009Page2

1983 and 1996 As specificalli docunzèn fed in the Technical Report, all of the BJ.G.

properties were utilized extensively for industrial activities since before 1928 to thepresent data. These activities have included long-term (over 40 years) oil fieldoperations, long-term pest cont-rol facilities (over appro'cimately 30 years) and anelectrical company (1964 at a minimum). During these operations, large pit structureswere present on the B.I.G. properties, one on 363 W. 133rd Street, and cmother further to

the east. As TAD CO did not store or utilize ace tone in their operations ('only very small

quantities were used in the laboratory), the most likely scenario to explain the acetonepresence on this facility is that prior to the g-racling,operation in 1973, spent and/or off-

spec acetone was disposed of within the former oil field pit. Subsequently; the upper 5 to

10 feet of soil in this area were excavated during grading operations, homogenized and

redistributed across a- broader arça of the overall B.1.G. properties. This scenario isconsistent with the relatively widespread low level acetone concentrations obserped

across a large section of the properties at relatively hallow depths, and the much higherconcentrations observed within the deeper- soil (which was not graded). The preseice of

acetone in soil samples collected from 4 and 13 feet in soil beneath and near the former

LISTs is consieterit wit/i this scenario, as the highest concentration of acetone within the

LIST area at 4 feet area was 70 ug/kg, and the highest concentration at 13 feet was 14,000

ug/kg. Outside of the LIST area (B-14), but still within the probable ovè rail footprint of

the former oilfleld pit structuZ- the higlest acetone concentrations in soil were 640 ug/kg

at 5 fret, and 75,000 ug/kg at 15 feet. In addition, information pertaining the septic

system t'hich was formerly present at the former TADCOfacilityfurther supports theconclusion that acetone was not sigiiflnnly utilized by T4D CO. This system Waspermitted in 1982, apparently installed in 1983, tind removed on September 27, 1996.

Liqui4/sludge samples collected from within the former septic system prior to removal did

-not contain detectable- concentrations of acetone. Acetonewas present at a relative1j low

concentration (61 ug/kg) in only one of the four soil samples collectedfrom beneath the

septic tank and leach line associated with the former septic systeins. Again, the low

observed concentration in soil is consistent with the concentrations observed over a

relatively wide area of shallow soil oiz and off the former TADCOfacilitij,and. this

information is consistent ?L'ith vhat would be expected due to the homogenization and

spreading of an oldir problems during grading activities in 1973. Tzt'o other potentialexplanations for the presenceof acetone on the 33 W 1333rd Street property. arepresented as follows:

Acetone and other chemicals ran off of the Standard Metals facility and entered the

permeable fill surrounding the EDA and P0 LISTs. Runofffrom Standard Metals to

the former TAD CO facility occurred on numerous occasions based on observations

made by TAD CO. employees.

Mr. Timothy Martin � May 30, 2009

Page2

1983 and 1996 As specifically documŁn fed in the Technical Report, all of the B.I.G. properties were utilized extensively for industrial activities since before 1928 to the present data. These activities have included long-term (over 40 years) oil field operations, long-term pest control facilities (over approximately 30 years) and an electrical company (1964 at a minimum). During these operations, large pit structures were present on the B.I.G. properties, one on 363 W. 133r4 Street, and another further to the east. As TAD CO did not store or utilize acetone in their operations (’only very small quantities were used in the laboratory), the most likely scenario to explain the acetone presence on this facility is that prior to the grading,operation in 1973, spent and/or off-spec acetone was disposed of within the former oil field pit. Subsequently; the upper 5 to 10 fret of soil in this area were excavated during grading operations, homogenized and

redistributed across a- broader area of the overall B.I.G. properties. This scenario is consistent with the relatively widespread low level acetone concentrations obserped across a large section of the properties at relatively hallozi’ depths, and the much higher concentrations observed within the deeper- soil (which was not graded). The preseice of acetone in soil samples collected from 4 and 13 feet in soil beneath and near the former LISTs is consistent with this scenario, as the highest concentration of acetone within the LIST area at 4 fret area was 70 ug,’kg, and the highest concentration at 13 feet was 14,000 ugIlcg. Outside of the LIST area (B-14), but still within the probable ovŁ rail footprint of the former oilfleld pit ’structure, the highest acetone concentrations in soil were 640 ug/kg at 5 fret, and 75,000 ug/kg at 15 feet. In addition information , info pertaining the septic system t’hich was formerly present at the former TADCOfacilityfurther supports the conclusion that acetone was not sigiiiflnnly utilized by TAD CO. This system Was permitted in 1982, apparently installed in 1983, and removed on September 27, 1996. Liqui4/sludge samples collected from within the former septic system prior to removal did not contain detectable- concentrations of acetone. Acetone -was present at a relatively, low concentration (61 ug/Jcg) in only one of the foul’ soil samples collected from beneath the septic tank and leach line associated with the former septic systems. Again, the low observed concentration in soil is consistent with the concentrations observed over a relatively wide area of shallow soil oiz and off the former TADCOfacilitij, and. this information is consistent with what would be expected due to the homogenization and spreading of an older problems during grading activities in 1973. Two other potential explanations for the presenceof acetone on the 33 W. 1333rd Street property- are

� presented as follows:

� Acetone and other chemicals ran off of the Standard Metals facility and entered the permeable fill surrounding the EDA and P0 LISTs. Runofffrom Standard Metals to the former TADCO facility occurred on numerous occasions based on observations made by TAD CO. employees.

16458 BOLSA CHICA STREET, #422 - HUNTINGTON BEACH, CALIFORNIA 92649- 877/2324620, 714/840-4963 (FAX) bowyerenvlrorunenta].corn


An as yet unidentfied preferential pathway may exist bthveen the primary user of

acetone in the area (General Welding.) and the permeable fill surrounding the EDA

and PD LISTs, and/or historic oil-field pits.

2. Your position that the acetone release(s) on the General Welding propeity migratedto TADCO's is not supported with data collected from the Site and offsite. Acetone

was not detected in any of the soil samples collected from borings B-21 and B-22, aswell as MW-i, which were close to the General Welding property, indicating that therelease(s) on General Welding property is confined to thelimits of the property.MW-I was installed by Frey as part, of the groundwater investigation for Standard

Metals.

Comment: Noted. However, given the histoy of large scale acetone use by

General Welding, and the lack of any significant use by TAD CO, the potential that

the General Welding facility seived as the ultimate sourcefqr acetone in the area.

should be fully evaluated.

3. It is also unlikely that dissolved acetone migrated with groundwater from theGeneral Welding property to the Site because the groundwater flow direction in

"the vicinity of the Site is towards the southwest, i.e. towards the General

Welding property.

Comment: We agree that based on the groundwater flow 'information

presented by Frey Environmental and Rincon consultants that groundwater appears

to flow towards the southwest. However, as documented in the Technical Report, the

General Welding property and the 363 W. 133w Street property appear to be 'cross

gradient from one another. The av.ailabe dati sl1ggests that there are at leapt two

separate sources of acetww to groundwater in the area. It should also be noted that

large portions of the B.LG., General Welding, and Standard Metals properties remain

under investigated at this point. Additional ourcesof acetone to groundipater may

be identified once these sites have been fully characterized.

4.. You have not supported your position with evidence; showing the chemicals

detected in the soil and groundwater were used during historical oil exploration

and production at the Site. Moreover, the oil wells produce from much deeperdepths than the depth intervals investigated at the Site. No evidence waspresented that crude oil was detected in the soil, indicating contamination as

result of historical oil operations..The hydrocarbons detected in the soil andgroundwater were constituents of refined petroleum products like gasoline and

diesel fuel.


16458 B01.SA CHICA STREET. #422 - HUNTINGTON BEACH, CALIFORNIA 92649. 877/232-4620, 714/8404963 (FAX)bowyerenyironmental.COm

Mi. Timothy Martin 1 May 30, 2009

Page 3

� An as yet unidentified preferential pathway may exist hetween the primary user of acetone in the area (General Welding) and the permeable fill surrounding the EDA and PD LISTs, and/or historic oil-field pits.

2. Your position that the acetone release(s) on the General Welding propeity migrated to TADCO’s is not supported with data collected from the Site and offsite. Acetone was not detected in any of the soil samples collected from borings B-21 and 13-22, as well as MW-1, which were close to the General Welding property, indicating that the release(s) on General Welding property is confined to the limits of the property. MW-1 was installed by Frey as part, of the groundwater investigation for Standard Metals.

Comment: Noted. However, given the history of large scale acetone use by General Welding, and the lack of any significant use by TAD CO, the potential that the General Welding facility seived as the ultimate source fqr acetone in the area. should be fully evaluated.

3. It is also unlikely that dissolved acetone migrated with groundwater from the General Welding property to the Site because the groundwater flow direction in

"the vicinity of the Site is towards the southwest, i.e. towards the General Welding property.

Comment: We agree that based on the groundwater flow ’information presented by Frey Environmental and Rincon Consultants that groundwater appears to flow towards the southwest. However, as documented in the Technical Report, the General Welding property and the 363 W. 133rd Street property appear to be cross gradient from one another... Theav.ailabfr data suggests that the ar&at least two separate sources of acetone to groundwater in the area. It should also be noted that large portions of the B.L�G., General Welding, and Standard Metals properties remain under investigated at this point. Additional sources of acetone to groundipater may be identified once these sites have been fully characterized.

4.. You have not supported your position with evidence; showing the chemicals detected in the soil and groundwater were used during historical oil exploration and production at the Site. Moreover, the oil wells produce from much deeper depths than the depth intervals investigated at the Site. No evidence was presented that crude oil was detected in the soil, indicating contamination as result of historical oil operations..The hydrocarbons detected in the soil and groundwater were constituents of refined petroleum products like gasoline and diesel fuel.


16458 BOLSA CHICA STREET. 0422 - HUNTINGTON BEACH, CALIFORNIA 92649. 877/2324620, 714/8404963 (FAX) bowyerenvironmental.com

I


historical pro perty use records have been reviewed that document the long-term

presence of oil field and other non-TADCQ related operations on this B.1.G. owned.

property. The presence of aromatic compoun4s (including benzene, toluene, ethyl

benzene and xylenes.) within crude oil is well documented, and various sources for

this information can be sited if necessnrtj. As a matter offactfractibnal distillation is

a primary refining prOCeSS, during which various hydrocarbon classes are separated.

This and other refining processes are used to generate petroleum products like

gasoline, which are relatively enriched in arornatics when compared to other

petroleum classes. 1-lowever, it should be noted that the aromatic sources fr gasoline

and other products is the crude oil itself and they are not additives. As discussed in

detail in the Technical Report, the presence of the large pit;structure for an extended

period of time (during which staidard industrial practices typically involved sonic

level of on-site disposal as the most economic means ofdealing with off-spec and/or

spent material,) represent probable source areasfor crude oil, refined products, and

other clwmicalsfroin the various indutrial operations conducted at this nzdsurrounding sites between the 192 Os and the 1970s. Starting in late 1970s and early

1980s waste management practices changed as a result of environmental regulations.

(Constituents found in refined petroleum products such as toluene, ethy) bnzene,and xylenes were detected in the soil from near-surface to the maximum depthdrilled in boring B-23 that was advancedin the drum storage area, indicating

onsite release(s). BTEX was also detected in soil samples collected from bothshallow and deep sampled Intervi1s in this area. Toluene was also detected in allsoil samples collected in boring B-29 in the septic tank area.

Comnielit: As presented in the technical report, it appears that a ource ofaromatic compoIinds(BTEX.) is present on the 3_63 W. 133 Street parcel. Similar to

the distribution pattern for acetoi.ië, the areas of soil containing relatively high

aromatic concentrations on, the site are in the vicinitij of the former oil-field sump

structire. I-listbric disposal of aromaticcompounds to the oil pit are the likely cause

of the on-site aroiizatc impacts to soil. Other possible explanations include the noted

runofffrom the Standard Metals ite which was Observed byfornier TADCO

employees; In tiny event, as documented in the Technical Report, aromatic

compounds appear to be having very minor impacts to groundwater 'in the area.

More significant.issues associated tt'ith the observations of very high levels of

chlorinated hydrocarbons, including tricliloroethene (TCE), cis- 1,2dichloroethefle

(cis-2,2-DCE), and vinyl chloride) in groundwater need to be addressed as a priority

within the general area of the 363 W. 133'' Street site

Diesel fuel range TPH was detected in the AST farm, area with a maximumcoucntration of 2,000 mg/Kg. Diesel.fuel was stored in one of the ASTs in this

16458 BOLSA CHICA $TRBET, 41422 -HUNTiNGTON BEACH, CALIFORNIA 92649- B77/232-462O 714/B4O-496 (FAX)bowyerenvironmefltai.COrfl

I

Mr. Timothy Martin 1. ) May 30, 2009

Page

historical property use records have been reviewed that document the long-term presence of oilfield and other non-TAD CO related operations on this B.1. G. owned. property. The presence of aromatic compounds (including benzene, toluene, ethyl benzene and xylenes) within crude oil is well documented, and various sources for this inforinaiwn can be sited if necessary. As a matter offactfractibnal distillation is a primary refining process, during which various hydrocarbon classes are separated. This and other refining processes are used to generate petroleum products like gasoline, which are relatively enriched in aromatics when compared to other petroleum classes. However, it should be noted that the aromatic sources fr gasoline and other products is the crude oil itself, and they are not additives. As discussed in detail in the Technical Report, the presence of the large pit: t’u strucre for an extended period. of time (’during which standard industrial practices typically involved some level of on-site disposal as the most economic means of dealing with off-spec and/or spent material) represent probable source areas for crude oil, refined products, and other chemicals from the various indutrial operations conducted at this and surrounding sites between the 1920s and the 1970s. Starting in late 1970s and early 1980s waste management practices changed as a result of environmental regulations.

5. 1 Constituents found in refined petroleum products such as tolune, ethyl benzene, and xylenes were detected in the soil from near-surface to the maximum depth drilled in boring B-23 that was advancedin the drum storage area, indicating onsite release(s). BTEX was also detected in soil samples collected from both shallow and deep sampled iutervi1s in this area. Toluene was also detected in all soil samples collected in boring B-29 in the septic tank area.

Commelit: As presented in the technical report, it appears that a Source of aromatic compoIsnds(BTEX) is present on the 363 w 133rd 5ireet parceL Similar to the distribution pattern for acetone, the areas of soil containing relatively high aromatic concentrations on, the site are in the mcmzi -ij of the former oil-field sump st-i-uctire. Historic disposal of aromaticcompounds to the oil pit are the likely cause of the on-site aromatic impacts to soil. Other possible explanations include the noted runofffrom the Standard Metals site which was Observed byfornier TADCO employees; In any event, as documented in the Technical Report, aromatic compounds appear to be having very minor impacts to groundwater in the area. More significantissues associated with the observations of very high levels of chlorinated hydrocarbons, including tricliloroethene (TCE), cis- 1,2dichloroethene (cis-2,2-DCE), and vinyl chloride) in groundwater need to be addressed as a priority Within the general area of the 363 W. 133M Street site

6. Diesel fuel range TPH was detected in the AST farm, area with a maximum concentration of 2,000 mg/Kg. Diesel.fuel was stored in one of the ASTs in this

16458 BOLSA CHICA $TRBET, #422. HUNTiNGTON BEACH, CALIFORNIA 92649- 877/232-4620, 714/B40-496 (FAX) bowyerenvironmentai.corn

Mi. Timothy MarlinMay 30, 2009Page5

area.

Comment Based on all of the available data, diesel range TPI-I ('TPH-d)

impacts are extreniely limited within the above ground tank farm (AST) area. As a

reference, Table 4-1 of the RWQCB May 1996 Interim Site Assessment and Cleanup

Guideboolc provides soil cleanup screening criteria for TPH based on depth to water.

Given that groundwater at this site is presentat depths of approximately 40 feet, the

TPH-d screening level form Table 4-2 is 1,000 mg4cg. Ten samples were initially

collected frOnz a depth of 2 foot. in the AST area. Only one c'HA-6) of these ten

shallow soil samples contained concentrations in excess of the TPH-d screening

criteria. Based on this result, an additional boring (B27) was installed in close

proxizitij to HA-6, and samples were ollected at 5, 10, 20, 25 and 30 feet. All of the

TPH-d results from B-27 were nondetect. Based on these results, additionalinvestigation in association with the release of TPI-i-d in the AST area appears Lobe

unwarranted.

Although use and storage o acetone at the facility was not reported, thischemical is known to be used in the Polyurethane industry s an auxiliaryblowing agent to supplement water for modifying the physical properties of thepolyurethane resin. In addition, it was indicated byone of TADCO's managersthat TADCO traded chemicals with one of its neighbors. Acetone and TCE arealso icuown to be used for cleaning chemical mixing equipment and containers at

such facilities.

Comment Npted. T. A. Davies did not utilize acetone or TCE within their

primary process as a blowing agent or any other purpose. Small quantities of acetone

'ere used in the laboratory on site. A probable scenario to explain the relatively) wide

spread prsence and elevated concentrations of acetome and TCE observed on the site

has been presented in the Technical Report and summarized in the comment to No. 1.

Copies of Material Safety Data Sheets (MSDS) for chemicls used at yourformer facility indicate that some of the contaminants found in the soil andgroundwater beneath the Site are actually ingredients of the chemicals used

onsite. These chemicals include; xylenes,.trimethylbenzefle, naphthalene,toluene, ethylbnzene and others.

Comment: Noted. 1-lowever, other probable explanations as to the source of

these compounds in the subsuiface at the site have been presented. In addition, based

on the available data, these compounds are not the most ignificant or widespread

compounds that have been detected within the area. in addition, there is no

information of any release of thesç compounds by TAD CO at the site.

The Regional Board directed you in a letter dated August 31, 2001 to initiate a

16458 BOLSA CHICA STREET, 4422 - HUNTINGTON BEACH, CALIFORNIA 92649- 877/232-4620, 714/840-4963 (FAX)bowyerenvlronmentaLCorn

Mi. Timothy Martin ) May 30, 2009

Page

area.

Comment Based on all of the available data, diesel range TPI-I (’TPH-d) impacts are extremely limited within the above ground tank farm (AST) area. As a reference, Table 4-1 of the RWQCB May 1996 Interim Site Assessment and Cleanup Guidebook provides soil cleanup screening criteria for TPH based on depth to water. Given that groundwater at this site is present *at depths of approximately 40 feet, the TPH-d screening level form Table 4-2 is 1,000 mg,ilcg. Ten samples were initially collected froni a depth of 2 foot. in the AST area. Only one (HA-6) of these ten shallow soil samples contained concentrations in excess of the TPH-d screening criteria. Based on this result, an additional boring (B27) was installed in close proxünitij to HA-6, and samples were collected at 5, 10, 20, 25 and 30 feet. All of the TPJ-i-d results from B-27 were nondetect. Based on these results, additional investigation in association with the release of TPI-i-d in the AST area appears to . be unwarranted.

7. Although use and storage of acetone at the facility was not reported, this chemical is known to be used in the Polyurethane industry as an auxiliary blowing agent to supplement water for modifying the physical properties of the polyurethane resin. In addition, it was indicated by - one of TADCO’s managers that TADCO traded chemicals with one of its neighbors. Acetone and TCE are also known to be used for cleaning chemical mixing equipment and containers at such facilities.

Comment Noted. T. A. Davies did not utilize acetone orTCE within their primary process as a blowing agent or any other purpose. Small quantities of acetone were used in the laboratory on site. A probable scenario to explain the relatively) wide spread prsence and elevated concentrations of acetone . and TCE observed on the site has been presented in the Technical Report and summarized in the comment to No. 1.

8. Copies of Material Safety Data Sheets (MSDS) for chemicls used at your former facility indicate that some of the contaminants found in the soil and CF beneath the Site are actually ingredients of the chemicals used onsite. These chemicals include; xylenes,.trirnethylbenzene, naphthalene, toluene, ethylbnzene and others.

I Comment: Noted. However, other probable explanations as to the source of these compounds in the subsuifoce at the site have been presented. In addition, based on the available data, these compounds are not the mostigriificant or widespread compounds that have been detected within the area. in addition, there is no information of any release of these compounds by TAD CO at the site.

9. The Regional Board directed you in a letter dated August 31, 2001 to initiate a

16458 BOLSA CHICA STREET, 4422 - H BEACH, CALIFORNIA 92649- 877/232-4620. 714/840-4963 (FAX) bowyerenvlronmentaLcom


quarterly groundwater monitoring program. However, you have neverimplemented this requirement. Moreover, the background concentration VOCsin the groundwater are not known up gradient of the Site. Two active drinkingwater production wells are also located at an approximate maximum distance of0.85 miles downgradient of your Site.

Coniment: TA Davis issued a response to the August 31, 2001 Order Qn

September 24, 2001. TA Davies has been under the reasonable impression that the

RWQCB was satisfied with TAD COs response and was seeking actionfrom other

parties responsible for the significant releases at and near the site. As described in the

Technical Reporta significant source of chlorinated hydrocarbons appears to be

present up gradient in the B1.G. owned property east of the former TADCO facility.

Other parties should conduct investigations on these properties to evaluafe the nature

and extent. of this source. These inzstigations should include the installation ofgroundwater wells, which woitid fulfill the RWQCB requirement for up gradient.

wells.

REQIREMENTS

Delineate the lateral extent of VOC and TFH contamination in the soil.Stepout soil borings shall be advanced to delineate the VOC nd TPHcontamination to their full extent.

Response: The Technical Report provjdes a series of io-concentration mapswhich summarize available data. As shown on these maps, the definition of the

extent of VOC and TPH impacts on the 363 W 133rd Street is complete. However,

as shown-in the Technical Report, additional investigations neec tv be.peformed atthe Standard Metals, General Welding and BJ.G. owned property east oftheforiner

TADCO facility.

Delineate the vertical extent of the VOC and TPH contamination in thesoil. Deeper borings shall be a4vanced in those areas where VOC and TPHcontaniination was encountered at shallow depths


Additional assessment needs to be conducted to investigate the source ofPCBs detected in soil samples from boring 13-14. Stepout borings shall beadvanced in the area around 13-14 to delineate the lateral and vertical extentof the PCB soil contamination.

Response: The five foot sample colicted from B-14 contained 3,050 ug/kg of

16438 BOLSA CHICA STRBET. 4422- HUNTINGTON BEACH, CALIFORNIA 92649- 877/232-4620 714/840-4963 (FA)I)bowyerenvironmental.COrfl

Mr. Timothy Martin 1) May 30, 2009

Page 6

quarterly groundwater monitoring program. However, you have never, implemented this requirement. Moreover, the background concentration VOCs in the groundwater are not known up gradient of the Site. Two active drinking water production wells are also located at an approximate maximum distance of 0.85 miles downgradient of your Site.

Comment: TA Davis issued a response to the August 31, 2001 Order on September 24, 2001. TA Davies has been under the reasonable impression that the RWQCB was satisfied with TAD COs response and was seeking action from other parties responsible for the significant releases at and near the s4e. As described in the Technical Reporta significant source of chlorinated hydrocarbons appears to be present up gradient in the B.I.G. owned proberlij east of the fonner TADCO facility. Other parties should conduct investigations on these properties to evaluate the nature and extent. of this source. These inzbstigations should include the installation of groundwater wells, which woitid fulfill the RWQCB requirement for up gradient. wells.

REQIREMENTS

1. Delineate the lateral extent of VOC and TFH contamination in the soil. Stepout soil borings shall be advanced to delineate the VOC and TPH contamination to their full extent.

Response: The Technical Report provides a series of io-concentration maps which summarize available data. As shown on these maps, the definition of the extent of VOC and TPH impacts on the 363 W. 133rd Street is complete. However, as shown-in the Technical Report, additional investigations nee4 to plfQrmth at the Standard Metals, General Welding and B.I.G. owned property east oftheforiner TADCO facility.

2. Delineate the vertical extent of the VOC and TPH contamination in the soil. Deeper borings shall be advanced in those areas where VOC and TPH contamination was encountered at shallow depths


3. Additional assessment needs to be conducted to investigate the source of PCBs detected in soil samples from boring 13-14. Stepout borings shall be advanced in the area around 13-14 to delineate the lateral and vertical extent of the PCB soil contamination..


- 16438 BOLSA CHICA STREET, 4422- HUNTINGTON BEACH, CALIFORNIA 92649- 877/232-4620. 714/840-4963 (FAX) bowyerenvironmental.corn


aroclor 1242 aiid 108 ug/kg of aroclor 1260. The 35 foot sample collected from B-14did not contain a detectable concentration of PCBs. As the Califol7lia 1-luinan HealthScreening Level (HHSL for commercial/industrial sites is 300 ug/kg, additionalstepout testing should be peiformed in this area to' define the nature and extent of thisiSSUC. TAD CO did not utilize or deposit PUBs on this site between 1981 and 1996.Former inaustrial uses of the facility included an electrical company in 1964(Starlight Electrical,). As the source for PCBs at the site is other than TA Davies, the

property owner (B.LG.) should be responsible for conducting this additional work.

Contaminant specific iso-concentration maps showing the lateral extent ofmajor contaminants in the soil shall be prepared and submitted.

Response: This taslc has ben completed and these maps have been provided aspart of the Technical Report.

Contaminant-specific cross-sections with color gradational iso-concentration contoursmaps showing the vrtical extent of majorcontaminants in the soil shall be prepared and submitted.

Response: The Tecimical Report provides a series of color gradational mapsshou,ing the vertical extent of major contaminants in lieu of cross sections.

Soil Screening Levels (SSLs) that are protective of human health andgroundwater quality shall be developed for the Site in accordance withInterim Site Assessment and Cleanup Guidebook publisied by theRegional Board in May 1996. The guidebook is available oriuine on theRegional Board'swebsite; Alternatively, you-thay prpose-site--specificSSLs using various models available, based on data collected from the Site.A summary.of historical and current soil analytical results shall besummarized in tables to compare site-specific values against the SSLs andshow exceederices.

Response: As presented in the Technical Report, historical industrialoperations other than TADCO'sfcnner operations and off-site impacts appeai tolzqve resulted in the obSeroed chemical presence at the 363 W 133rd Street facilitij.

As a result, it would appear that B.I.G. and/or other responsible parties shouldproceed with further evaluations regarding the need and extent of necessrinj clean-up

actions.

The United States Environmental Protection Agency's (IJSEPA's) orCalifornia Department of Public Health's Maximum ContaminantLevels

16458 BOLSA CHICA STREET. #422-HUNTINGTON BEACH, CALIFOR}IIA 92649 877/232-4620, 714/840-4963 (FAX)bowyerenvironmentaLcom

Mr. Timothy Martin ( ) May 30, 2009

Page 7

� aroclor 1242 and 108 ug/kg of aroclor 1260. The 35 foot sample collected from B-14 did not contain a detectable concentration of PCBs. As the Califoryiia 1-luinan Health Screening Level (CHHSL) for commercial/industrial sites is 300 ug/kg, additional stepout testing should be peiformed in this area to’ define the nature and extent of this issue. TAD CO did not utilize or deposit PCBs on this site between 1981 and 1996. Former inaustrial uses of the facility included an electrical company in 1964 (Starlight Electrical,). As the source for PCBs at the site is other than TA Davies, the property owner (B.L G.) should be responsible for conducting this additional work.

4. Contaminant specific iso-concentration maps showing the lateral extent of major contaminants in the soil shall be prepared and submitted.

Response: This task has bten completed and these maps have been provided as part of the Technical Report.

5. Contaminant-specific cross-sections with color gradational iso-concentration contours , maps showing the vertical extent of major contaminants in the soil shall be prepared and submitted.

Response: The Technical Report provides a series of color gradational maps shot çing the vertical extent of major contaminants in lieu of cross sections.

6. Soil Screening Levels (SSLs) that are protective of human health and groundwater quality shall be developed for the Site in accordance with Interim Site Assessment and Cleanup Guidebook published by the Regional Board in May 1996. The guidebook is available online on the Regional Board’s website: Alternatively, you-may proposesite--specific SSLs using various models available, based on data collected from the Site. A summary. of historical and current soil analytical results shall be summarized in tables to compare site-specific values against the SSLs and show exceederices.

Response: As presented in the Technical Report, historical industrial operations other than TADCO’s former operations and off-site impacts appear to have resulted in the observed chemical presence at the 363 W. 133rd Street facilitij. As a result, it would appear that B.I.G. and/or other responsible parties should proceed with flirther evaluations regarding the need and extent of necesscirij clean-up actions.

7. The United States Environmental Protection Agency’s (IJSEPA’s) or California Department of Public Health’s Maximum Contaminant Levels

16458 BOLSA CHICA STREET. #422-HUNTINGTON BEACH, CALIFORNIA 92649. 877/232-4620, 714/840-4963 (FAX) bowyerenvironmental.com

I')

Mr. Timothy MartinMay 30, 2Q09Page 8

(MCLs) for drinking water, whichever is more stringent,, shall be used toscreen groundwater analytical results. Contaminant levels above the MCLsshall be shown in tables in bold face.'

Response: As presented in the Tecimical Report, there are sigrzifi cant'groundwater impacts in the vicinity of the former TAD CO faàilitij. However, based

on the available data, these impacts appear to be associated with historical industrialoperations at the site other than TAD CD's, and/or offsite sources that should be

investigated by others: As a result, it would appear that B.1.G. and/or other

responsible partEes should proceed with flirther evaluations, regarding the needL and

extent of necessary clean-up actions.

Soil borings shall be advanced in the approximate location of former pondwhere drilling mud and other wastes were reportedly dumped duringhistorical oil production operations. Soil samples shall be submitted to acertified laboratory for fingerprinting analyses to identify the occurrenceand source of crude oil.

Response: As documented in the. Tednica1 Report, the former oil-field

pit was present long before TADCO operated-on-the--pite.--TAD-CO-haS never

owned this site. As 'such, it would appear appróriate that B .1.0. (which

owns the site now and has owned the site since prior to TADCO ue of thefacifity) should be responsible for implementing any work associated with the

former oil-field pit.

At least one groundwater monitoring well upgradient of MW4 near thenorthern property botrndaryaxrdl.wo cross-gradient mothtoring-wellsonthe eastern nd western property boundaries shallbe installed todetermine the groundwater flow.dfrection beneath the Site. You shall.usedata from these wells to develop a conceptual site model (CSM) and toassess the background concentrations of the groundwater entering the Siteand the aerial extent of the VOC plume.

Response: A CSM was presented within the Technical Jeport. This CSM.

consists of the documented historic long-term industrial use of this and surroundingproperties (in particular the long-term oil pits located on this and the up gradient

property to the east), the grading and redistribution of impacts within the upper 5 to

20 fret on the projierty in 1973, and migration pattern of elevated compounds from

up-gradient sources. As such, it would appear appropriate the B.LG. to be

responsible for the installation of these groundwater wells. Following the

implementation of this mid investigations at Standard Metals and General Welding,

B .1. G. and/or other res-ponsthle pnrtie should re-evaluate and update the CSM, as

16458 BOLSA CHICA STREET, #422- HUNTINGTON BEACH, CALIFORNIA 92649-877/232-4620. 714/840.4963 (FAX)bowyerenvlronmental.com

Mr. Timothy Martin I May 30, 2Q09

Page 8

(MCLs) for drinking water, whichever is more stringent,, shall be used to screen groundwater analytical results. Contaminant levels above the MCLs shall be shown in tables in bold face.

Response: As presented in the Tecimical Report, there are significant’ groundwater impacts in the vicinity of the former TAD CO faàilitij. However, based on the available data, these impacts appear tobe associated with historical industrial operations at the site other than TAD CD’s, -and/or offsite sources that should be investigated by others: As a result, it would appear that B.I.G. and/or other responsible parties should proceed with further evaluations, regarding the need and extent of necessary clean-up actions.

8. Soil borings shall be advanced in the approximate location of former pond where drilling mud and other wastes were reportedly dumped during historical oil production operations. Soil samples shall be submitted to a certified laboratory for fingerprinting analyses to identify the occurrence and source of crude oil.

Response: As documented in the. Technical Report, the former oil-field pit was present long before TADCO operated-on-the-- site. TAD-COhas never owned this site. As ’such, it would appear appróriate that B.1.0. (which owns the site now and has owned the site since prior to TADCO use of the facility) should be responsible for implementing any work associated with the former oil-field pit.

9. At least one groundwater monitoring well upgraclient of MW4 near the northern piopeboundary and1wo cross gradientmonitoring-wells-on the eastern and western property boundaries shall be installed to determine the groundwater flow.dfrection beneath the Site. You shall.use

- data from these wells to develop a conceptual site model (CSM) and to assess the background concentrations of the groundwater entering the Site and the aerial extent of the VOC plume.

Response: A CSM was presented within the Technical Report. This CSM. consists of the documented historic long-term industrial use of this and surrounding properties (in particular the long-term oil pits located on this and the up gradient property to the east), the grading and redistribution of impacts within the upper 5 to 20 fret on the property in 1973, and migration pattern of elevated compounds from up-gradient sources. As such, it would appear appropriate the B.I. G. to be responsible for the installation of these groundwater wells. Following the - implementation of this and investigations at Standard Metals and General Welding, B.I. G. and/or other responsible parties should re-evaluate and update the CSM, as

16458 BOLSA CHICA STREET, #422- HUNTINGTON BEACH, CALIFORNIA 92649-877/232-4620,714/840-4963 (FAX) - bowyerenvlronmental.com

Mr. Timothy MartinMay 30, 2009P1age9

necessanj.

In order to address Item Numbers 1 through 9, you shall prepare andsubmit a work plan to the Regional Board by April 27, 2009. The work planshall he prepared in accordance with the Regional Board's GeneralRequirements for Subsurface Soil Investigations and GeneralRequirements for Groundwater Investigations (see attached).

Response: In lieu of a workplan, a Technical Report has been prepared and

submitted (BE C, May 31, 2009).

After the installation of the groundwater monitoring wells a quarterlygroundwater monitoring slall be initiated and groundwater monitoring reportsshall be submitted according to the following schedule:

Monitoring Period Report Due DateApril-June July l5

July-September October 15thOctober-December January 15th

January-March April 15th

Response: See response to No. 9. This work should b.c conducted by the

property owner (B.I.G.) and/or other responsible paitis.

A site-wide groundwater elevation contour map showing the groundwaterflow direction and gradieit must be included in the groundwatermonitoring reports. Groundwater samples s1ail be ailyzed f-or VOCs,BTEX, TPH, PCBs and dissolved heavy metals.'

Response: See response to No. 11. ThiS work should also be conducted by the

property owner B.I.G.) and/or other responsible parties.

16458 BOLSA CHICA STREET, 41422- HUNTINGTON BEACH, CALIFORNIA 92649-877/232.462O 714/840-4963 (FAX)bowyerenvironrnental.cOrfl

Mr. Timothy Martin ( ’ May 30, 2009

P(age9

necessanj.

10. In order to address Item Numbers 1 through 9, you shall prepare and submit a work plan to the Regional Board by April 27, 2009. The work plan shall be prepared in accordance with the Regional Board’s General Requirements for Subsurface Soil Investigations and General Requirements for Groundwater Investigations (see attached).

Response: In lieu of a workplan, a Technical Report luis been prepared and submitted (BE C, May 31, 2009).

11. After the installation of the groundwater monitoring wells a quarterly groundwater monitoring shall be initiated and groundwater monitoring reports shall be submitted according to the following schedule:

Monitoring Period Report Due Date April-June July 15 July-September �October 15th October-December . January 15th January-March April 15t1

Response: See response to No. 9. This work should be conduced by the property oumer (B.I.G.) and/or other responsible paitis..

12.A site-wide groundwater elevation contour map showing the groundwater flow direction and gradieit must be included in the groundwater monitoring reports. Groundwater samples shall be analyzed for VOCs, BTEX, TPH, PCBs and dissolved heavy metals:

� � Response See response to No. 11. This work should also be conducted by the � property owner (B.I.G.) and/or other responsible parties.

16458 BOLSA CHICA STREET, p422- HUNTINGTON BEACH, CALIFORNIA C)2649-877/232-4620,714/840-4963 (FAX) bowyerenvironrnental.corn

Mr. Timothy MartinMay 30, 2009Page 10.

CLOSING

BEC has prepared this document at the request of Jeffer, Mangels, Butler & Marmaro

LLP and their client PA Davies. If you have any questions regarding this document,

please do not hesitate to cafl.

Sincerely,

Brett H. Bowyer, P.G.PrincipalBow yer Environmental consulting, Inc.

1645 B BOLSA CHICA STREET, #422 - HUNTINGTON BEACH, CALIFORNIA 92649- 877/232-4620,714/840.4963 (FAX)bowyerenvironmental.com

- Mr. Timothy Martin ( May 30, 2009

Page 10.

CLOSiNG

BBC has prepared this document at the request of Jeffer, Marigels, Butler & Marmaro LLP and their client PA Davies. If you have any questions regarding this document, please do not hesitate to call.

Sincerely,

Brett H. Bowyer, P.G. Principal Bowyer Environmental consulting, Inc.

1645B BOLSA CHICA STREET, #422 - HUNTINGTON BEACH, CALIFORNIA 92649- 8771232-4620,714/840.4963 (FAX) bowyerenvironmental.com

&GW.Y-3

GENERAL WELDING352W. 133RD STREET

EXPLANATION

j GROUNDWATER MONITORING WELl. LOCATION

e VAPOR EXTRACTION WElL LOCATION

SOIL BORING LOCATION -

PROPERTY BOUNDARY

OIL WELl.

GWAL1

L__JFORMER

UST

9GVS-2

SOUTHERN PACIFIC RAILROAD

SOURCIL FREY ENURORMENTAD. STTE SICETCEtARP. SEPTMR8ER 19RE AND EtHERSCONSLLTMECD. FCGUEE Z JRNUANY

ALL. LOCAnONS ARID DCMEtCSIOWS ARE AJ'PROXLMAlE

Sat.

13255 S. BROADWAY

8UILDINO

BEC

BIG.PROPERTY

, sea-

0 50

I bath50 foot

BEC16458 Balsa ClARa Sheet, #422 Oil Field Related Festures -1928

Prc4eIDN FIgARHuntington Beach, CA 92649

Tel. (877) 232-4620Fax(714) 840-4963

FORMER TADCO FACILItYLos Angeles, CA

09001001 3ABOVE-GROUND STORAGE TANK*

PACIFIC RAILROAD

STANDARD METALS 378 W. 133RD STREET

FOUNDS UST

r, El I fl i

INKNDVN STRUCTURE

111111 L

BUILDING

I . UILO

LTLJ � 19MVi-2

I22I SHED

-

&GTAW-3 F U ANOVEGR UN EMPTFO RACK

BIG. SUMP L

ACETEYL7M GENERATOR

, � B fl H H

FORMER PROPERTY TADCO

MAIN E I 363W

GELS ’ Li 133RD S

M . DOCK

[ rET..,

LIST

RE IPA 4 FOBMGRASTUNEA

&G%MN-1 / eGVREI

APPARENT PIT

PROPERTY TINS A \

GENERAL WELDING I \ \

352W. 133RD STREET 92

\ \ \ \ 13255 S. BROADWAY

000 \\ \\ BUDDING

JARENT PIT

EXPLANATION

j GROUNDWATER MONITORING WELL LOCATION

ED VAPOR EXTRACTION WELL LOCATION

� SOIL BORING LOCATION

PROPERTY BOUNDARY

ABOVEEROUND STORAGE TANK

OIL WELl.

SOURCIL FE VENATROTRIENTAL SITE SKETCH MAP. SEPTREABER TINE AND RECOIl CONSLLTANTU. FIGURE Z

JANUARY""

ALL LOCATIONS AND DIMENSIONS ARE AJ’PROTGMATE

� !!RE-

0 50

I bAh50 TeNt

EXHIBIT BEXHIBIT B

Linda S. AdamsCal/EPA Sgcr6taJY


320 W. 4th Sweet. Suite 200, Lo AB5CIeB, Ca1ifonii 90013

Pboiie (213) 576-6600 FAX (213) 576-6640 - Internet Mdrese: ht pf/www.waterbo .ca,gov/10angc1ø8 Arnold SchwkrzeneggerGovernor

July 1. 2010

Mr. Greg Levindo Mr. Michael BaumReach Poister & Berger LLP9200 Sunset Boulevard, Ninth FloorLos Angeles, CA 90069

,REQU]1EM1.NT FOR A TECfl11CAL R1PORT PIJRSTJANT TO CALif O1NIA WAT1IR CODE (CWC)

SECTION 13267 ORDER - STA1DABD NTALS, 318 WEST 133 STREET, LOS ANGELES, CA (SiTE

CLEANUP NO. 0818A AND SITE ID NO. 20441)00)

Dear Mr. Levin;

The California Regional Water Quality Conirol Board, Los Angeles Region (Regional Board) is the pubJic agency

with primary responsibility for the protection of ground and surface water quality for all beneficial uses within

major portions of Los Angeles County and Ventura County, including the above-referenced site.

In response to our previous Order, dated March 19, 2009, you conducted additional site assessment and submitted

a site assessment reports dated January 19, 2010. Based on our review of this site assessment report and other

historical site assessment reports for the adjacent sites, we outlined our findings and requirements in the enclosed

Order. You are required to comply with this new Order to ensure that progress is made in our continued

investigation at the site. and in the general vicinity.

The State Water Resources Control Board EState Water Board) adopted regulations requiring :the electronic

submittais of information over the Intrnet using the State Water Board GeoTracker database. You are Tequired

not only in submit hardcopy reports required in this Order but also to comply by 1ploading all rports and

correspondence prepared to date and additional required data formats to the GeoTxacker system. Information

about GeoTracker submittals, including links to text of the governing regulations, can be found on the J.nternet at

the following .1i

:Ilwww.w

If you have any questions regarding this letter, please coiitact Mr. Btzuayehu Ayele at (213) 576-6747 or by

email it baye1ewaterbOaTdS.Ca.gOV.

Sinoerel

Jeffrey Hu nit ChiefSite Cleanup Program, UnitiE

CaiforinvironmeJZtal .Protection Ancy

a a

CBRTWJJJ MAILRETtJ1N RECEIPT RBQUESTED

09 0820 0001 6811 9176

Recycled PaperOirr mlion ie 10 preei-ve and.cnlw.iwe the qualty p/Calforflia ., waler resourcefor the benefil fpreeenç wuijiure generaliO77.

nina ust/elecironic submittalca oV/water is e

California Regional Water Quality Control Board - Los Angeles Region

320 W. 4th Sweet. Suite 200, Los AB5CIeB, Califomis 90013 Linda S. Adam Pbaiie (213) 576-6600 FAX (213) 576.6640 - Intwnet Mdress: htpi/www,wawrboutd.ca.gOV/lOEaflgC 1e8 Arnold Schwarzsnegger Cal/EPA Secrewy Governor

July 1, 2010

Mr, Greg Levin do Mr. Michael Baum Reach Poister & Berger LLP 9200 Sunset Boulevard, Ninth Floor Los Angeles, CA 90069

CBRTWJJ.) MAIL RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED

7009 0820 0001 6811 9176

REQUIREMENT FOR A TECflNICAL REPORT PURSUANT TO CALrFORNIA WATER CODE (CWC) SECTION 13267 OIU)ER - STANDARD I.1ITALS, 318 WEST 133 STREET, LOS ANGELES, CA (SITE CLEANUP NO. 0818A AND SITE ID NO. 20441)00)

Dear Mr, Levin;

The California Regional Water Quality Control Board, Los Angeles Region (Regional Board) is the public agency with primary responsibility for the protection of ground and surface water quality for all beneficial uses within major portions of Los Angeles County and Ventura County, including the above-referenced site.

In response to our previous Order, dated March 19, 2009, you conducted additional site assessment and submitted a site assessment report, dated January 19,’2010, Based on our review of this site assessment report and other historical site assessment reports for the adjacent sites, we outlined our findings and requirements in the enclosed Order. You are required to comply with this new Order to ensure that progress is made in our continued investigation at the site. and in the general vicinity.

The State Water Resources Control Board (State Water Board) adopted regulations requiring :the electronic submittals of information over the Intrnet using the State Water Board GeoTracicer database. You are required not only in .submit hard--copy reports required in this Qr& butaiso to cot ply by isaciin all rpprts and correspondence prepared to date and additional required data formats to the GeoTracker. system. Information about GeoTracker submittals, including links to text of the governing regulations, can be found on the Internet at the following link:

http//www.wuterboards.ca ,ov/waterissrtesfi,roarnxns/ustIe1ecironicsubrnIttal

If you have any questions regarding this letter, please contact Mr. Blzuayehu Ayele at (213) 5764747 or by email it bayelefiwatcrbonrds.ca.gov .

Sincerel

Jeffrey Hu it Chief Site Cleanup Program, Unit -H

�� .. . . .

California -,EniironmentalProtectionAgdney ..�. -.

RecycIe4P2pP.r - Our mArion is 10 prei-ve and.cn/w,we the quahuy f California t waler resourcee.for the benefti qfpreeeni and jiaure genealion.

Enolosure Requirement to Provide a Technical Report

cc: Mr. Michael Baui, Resob Poister & Berger LU'Mr. John ?ayne Frey Environmental, Jnc,Mr. James Herbat, Business Industrial (3r.oup (BIG)Mr. Patrick Rendon, Lamb & Kawakami LLPMr. Lany Berna, TADCOMr. Brett Bowyer, Bowyer Environmental Consulting, Inc.Mr. Kenneth Ebrlich, Jeffer, Mangels, Butler & Marmaro LU'Mrs. Barbara Vidmar, eenerai WeldingMa, Julie Msrshall, Rinoon Consultants, Inc.Mr. Walt Hamann, Rincon Consultants, Inc.Ma, Emily Yukiah, Folger Levin & Kahn IL?

Our mLf n lr o preserve and fnhance the qua1Ip of California .r water re.ourcez for the benefit ofpreunl andfuiup generaaon,

Califoa.EnvironmenaiFrOnAieftt,yRcycIed iaper

Mr. 3reg Levin -2- Inly 1, 2010

Standard MetalsMr. c3reg Levin - 2 July 1, 2010

Standard Metals

Enolosure Requirement to Provide a Technical Report

cc: Mr. Michael Baui, Resob Poister & Berger LL? Mr. John Payne, Frey Environmental, Jnc, Mr, James Herbst, Business Industrial (3r.oup (BIG) Mr. Patrick Rendon, Lamb & Kawakami LLP Mr. Larry Berna, TADCO Mr. Brett Bowyer, Bowyer Environmental Consulting, Inc. Mr. Kenneth Ehrlich, Jeffer, Mangels, Butler & Marmaro LU’ Mrs. Barbara Vidmar, General Welding Ma, Julie Marshall, Rinoon Consultants, Inc. Mr. Walt Hamann, Rincon Consultants, Inc. Ma, Emily Yukiah, Folger Levin & Kahn IL?

...

Recycled Paper Our mission is lo preserve and flthance the qua1Ip of Calffornia .r water reeourcez for the benefit ofpreunl and/ulupe generation,

3 California Regional Water Quality Control BoardLos Ane1es Region

Linda S. AdamzCal/EPA Secrelary

320W. 4th Street, Suit 200, Lca MgclCe Ca1ifomi 9001

Phone (213) 576-6600 ?AX (213) 516664O -. jtnematAddre8: htp//wWW.WaterbOeTd.ca.g0b050 Arnold scbwarzeneggerGawiwr

REQTIREMENT TO PRO V]DE A TECENICAL REPORT(CALIFORNIA WATER CODE SECTION 132671 ORDER)

DIRECTED TO STAIWABD METALS

STANDARI) METALS378 WEST 133 STREET, LOS ANGELES, CALIFORNIA

(SITE CLEANUP NO. O81SA, SITE ID N9. 2044D00)

You are, legally obligated to respond to this Order. Please read this carefully.

You are the responsible party identified for soil, soil vapor and grundwater investigation at the property

at 378 West 133 Street in Los Angeles, California. The Begional Board has been investigating soil and

groundwater contamination at Standard Metals site and at adjacent sites since approximately 1998. These

sites are the T.A Davis Company (TAIDCO) site, located at 363 West l33" Street and Oeneral Welding

site, located at 352 West 133'd Street. The TADCO site is located on the Business IiidUstxial Group (BIG)

prOperty with a site address 363 West l33" Street. Various industrial operations were or are still being

conduoted at these sites.

Site investigations conducted at these sites indicate that the soil and groundwater are contaminated with

volatile organic compounds (VOCs) such as trichioroethefle (TCB) and acetone, aromatic hydrocarbons

such as benzeiie, ethy1benzene toluene, nd xylenes (BTEX), polychiorinated biphenyls (Ps) andpetroleum hydrocarbons. The site investigations also show that the soil and groundwater contamination

encountered in the general vicinit' might have been resulted frommultiple sources.

The- 3nOst recentsite ssessmentatthe_St8ndar Metals. itewaseOndUCteL1jB vem'oer 20O9 in

response to a Regiona Boaid Order, slated March 19, 2009. Regional Board staff reviewed a site

assessment report, titled Additional Site Assessment and dated January 19, 2010. The report, submitted by

lrey Environmental, Inc., documents the site assessment activities, 'results, end conclusions and

recommendations.

In a letter, dated March 4, 2010, Standard Metals also requested the Regional Board to reduce the

groundwater monitoring frequency from quarterly to semi-annually, citing absence of groundwater

monitoring data from adjacent TADCO site, which can provide important information on ontamin2flt

plumes in the groundwater beneath the site vicinity.

Clifomia Water Code section 13267 states, in part: (b)(1) In conducting an investigation.. ., the regional board

may require that any person who has discharged, discharges, or is suspected of having discharged ox, discharging, or

who proposes to discharge waste within its region ... shall furnish, under penalty of peijury, technical or monitoring

program reports which, the regional board requires. The burden, including costs, of these reports shall bear a

reasonable relationship to the need for the report and the benefits to be obtained from the reports. In requiring those

reports, the regional board shallprovide the person with a written explanation with regard to the need for the reports,

and hafl identify the evidence that supports requiring that person to provide the reports.

Jecycicd PaperOur mkelon £ to pre.ervs and enhance the qioIie' nj Caltforntar water reaaww far the benefitofpre.tefll andfiaure general!on:.

7a California Regional Water Quality Control Board Los Angeles Region

320W. 4th Street, Suit 200, Los Mgcice, CalifomiR 9001 Linda S. Adams Phone (213) 576-6600 ?AX (213) 5166640 -, jütematAddres: http//www.waterboard.ca.goV/1osangoICt Arnold Scbwarzenegger Cal/EPA Secretary Gawiwr

REQT.JIRMENT TO PROVIDE A TECRNICAL REPORT (CALIFORNIA WATER CODE SECTION 132671 ORDER)

DIRECTED TO STANDARD METALS

STANDARD METALS 378 WEST 133 STREET, LOS ANGELES, CALIFORIRA

- .., ..

(SITE EAW NO. 0818 SITE NO. 2044D00)


You are the responsible party identified for soil, soil vapor and groundwater investigation at the property at 378 West 133 1d Street in Los Angeles, California. The R.egioiial Board has been investigating soil and groundwater contamination at Standard Metals site and at adjacent sites since approximately 1998. These sites are the T.A Davis Company (TAIDCO) site, located at 363 West 133" Street and Oeneral Welding site, located at 352 West 133’4 Street. The TADCO site is located on the Business Industrial Group (BIG) property with a site address 363 West 133 Street. Various industrial operations were or are still being conducted at these sites,

Site investigations conducted at these sites indicate that the soil and groundwater are contaminated with volatile organic compounds (VOCs) such as trichioroethene (TCB) and acetone, aromatic hydrocarbons such as benzene, ethylbenzene, toluene, and xylenes (BIEX), polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) and petroleum hydrocarbons. The site investigations also show that the soil and groundwater contamination encountered in the general vicinity might have been resulted from multiple sources.

The- most r-ecent -site sessmentatthe_Standard Metals. sitewaseonductedin.Ncivcmber 2CX)9, in response to a Regional Boaid Order, slated March 19, 2009. Regional Board staff reviewed a site assessment report, titled Additional Site Assessment and dated January 19, 2010. The report, submitted by Irey. Environmental, Inc., documents. the site assessment activities, ’results, and conclusions and recommendations.

In a letter,. dated March 4, 2010, Standard Metals also requested the Regional Board to reduce the groundwater monitoring frequency from quarterly to semi-annually, citing absence of groundwater monitoring data from adjacent TADCO site, which can provide important information on contaminant plumes in the groundwater beneath the site vicinity.

California Water Code section 13267 states, in part: (b)(1) In conducting an investigation.. .,the regional board may require that any person who has dlschrged, discharges, or is suspected of having discharged ox, discharging, or who proposes to discharge waste within its region ... shall furnish, under penalty of peijuxy, technical or monitoring program reports which, the regional board requires. The burden, including costs, of these reports shall bear a reasonable relationship to the need for the report and the benefits to be obtained from the reports. In requiring those reports, the regional board shall provide the person with a wzitten explanation with regard to the need for the reports, and shall identify the evidence that supports requiring that person to provide the reports.

- ’ .�’.".

CaUfornia ,

Reyclg4 Paper Our mklon M to pre.ervs and enhance the queue’ q/ CaltfornWr water rea.w’aa.far the benefit ofpre,tefll andfiaure genera’!on:.


Standard Metals

FJNDJNGS AND COMMIiNTS

Based on our review of your Additional Site Asse.rsrnent report and other torica] site assessmentreports submitted by you and by the adjacent property owners, we have sumnaried the followingfindings and comments:

The Regional Board required you, in its previous Order, dated March 19, 2009, to provide detailedinformation on the source of scrap metal, the type of solid waste being recycled, suppliers of thescrap metal arid the entire metal recycling process at your facility. Tn your July 23 2009 work plansubmitted for the additional site assessnent, you provided only limited information which was not

supported with documented evidence,

The site data suggest that the former baler pit, where the hydraulic baling press was installed, is the

source of TCE 'in the soil and groundwater beneath the site. Even though there might be contributingoffaite sources, such as the TADCO site, the site assessment data collected to date indicate that thebulk of the TCE was sourced in this area that caused soil and groundwater contamination beneath the

Site.

2. The soil data collected from the soil borings at the site show that the distribution of' vinyl chlorideand ois-1,2 dichioroetbene (cis..l,2-DCE) in the soil appears, in most cases, ..to correlate 'with thedistribution of TCE. Vinyl chloride and cis-1,2-]DCE are the breakdown products of TCE. Therefore,the TCE release at the former baler pit is responsible for existence of these breakdown products inthe soil and groundwater beneath the site.

3, In the Regional Board's previous Order, dated March 19, 2009, you were directed to install anadditional groundwater monitoring well downgradient of the existing groundwater monitoring wellsto assess the current extent of the VOCs plume and to periodically monitor for the detectedcontaminants in the groundwater. You proposed in yoth July 23, 2609 work plan to postpone theinstallation of the required groundwater monitoring well until two additional quarters of groundwatermonitoring are completed to-establish a mirreit general groundwater flow diretlonbeneath the Site.

You have conducted two additional quarters of groundwater monitoring since the request was made.Besides, many years of groundwater monitoring data from the adjacent General WIding site as wellas data from the groundwater monitotiug activities conducted from 1997 to 1999 and in 2009 atStandard Metals site show that the groundwater flow direction beneath the site and adjacent sites isdominantly to the south and southwest. The groundwater flow direction occasionally swings to thesoutheast

The full extent of the VOCs nd TPU plumes is not yet fully defined downgradient of the existinggroundwater monitoring wells. In the most recent groundwater monitoring event conducted inNovember 2009, the offsite dowxigradient groundwater monitoring well, MW2, detectod 'I'PH asgasoline, cis..1,2-DCE, TCE and vinyl chloride at concentrations of 1,400 micrograms per litre(p.g/L), 180 .&g/L, 510 jig/L and 430 jxgIL, respectively.

C'allforniaEnvironnziztal F,otetioI1Agk90 Recycled Paper

Our tnhj3ion 13 Lopreeer.Pe and enhanae the quality of CalfIor,21a waterpe3Qurce?/or the b&eMft: o.fpra..en1 am/future generailenz.

3,

44


Standard Metals

FJNDJNGS AND COMMENTS

Based on our review of your Additional Site Assessment report and other Wstorical site assessment reports submitted by you and by the adjacent property owners, we have sumnsried the following findings and comments:

3, The Regional Board required you, in its previous Order, dated March 19, 2009, to provide detailed information on the source of scrap metal, the type of solid waste being recycled, suppliers of the scrap metal and the entire metal recycling process at your facility. in your July 23, 2009 work plan submitted for the additional site assessient, you provided only limited information which was not supported with documented evidence.

The site data suggest that the former baler pit, where the hydraulic baling press was installed, is the source of TCE in the soil and groundwater beneath the site. Even though there might be contributing offaite sources, such as the TADCO site, the site assessment data collected to date indicate that the bulk of the TCE was sourced in this area that caused soil and groundwater contamination beneath the Site.

2. The soil data collected from the soil borings at the site show that the distribution Of vinyl chloride and ois-1,2 dichioroetbene (cis..1,2-DCE) in the soil appears, in most cases, ..to correlate with the-distribution of TCE. Vinyl chloride and cis-1,2-]DCE are the breakdown products of TCE. Therefore, the TCE release at the former baler pit is responsible for existence of these breakdown products in the soil and groundwater beneath the site.

3,’ In the Regional Board’s previous Order, dated March 19, 2009, you were directed to install an additional groundwater monitoring well downgradient of the existing groundwater monitoring wells to assess the current extent of the VOCs plume and to periodically monitor for the detected contaminants in the groundwater. You proposed in yoth July 23, 2609 work plan to postpone the installation of the required groundwater monitoring well until two additional quarters of groundwater monitoring are completed to establish a on general gro -undWater flow dfrnatb the Site.

You ’have conducted two additional quarters of groundwater monitoring since the request was made. Besides, many years of groundwater monitoring data from the adjacent General WIding site as well as data from the groundwater monitoring activities conducted from 1997 to 1999 and in 2009 at Standard Metals site show that the groundwater flow direction beneath the site and adjacent sites is dominantly to the south and southwest. The groundwater flow direction occasionally swings to the southeast

The full extent of the VOCs 9nd TPU plumes is not yet fully defined downgradient of the existing groundwater monitoring wells. In the most recent groundwater monitoring event conducted in November 2009, the offsite dowxigradient groundwater monitoring well, MW2, detected ’I’PH as gasoline, cis..1,2-DCE, TCE and vinyl chloride at concentrations of 1,400 micrograms per litre (p.g/L), 180 &g/L, 510 jig/L and 430 jxgIL, respectively.

allforniaErnronmntªl

0 Recycled Paper our ,minion 13 Lopreeer.Pe and enhance the quality qfCalffibriflaIx water pe3Qurce?/or the benefit o.fpra..en1 am/future generailene.

Reo1ed PaperOur mIIan i tapreiervs and enhance the quality q,'ca4fbrnIae Water reource2for the benq711 pfpre3ern endJluure generafton.z

Mr.GregLevin -3- July 1, 2010'

Standard Metals

The western edge of the \FQC and TPH plumes is also not defined. Grab groundwater sample

collected with a. Hydropunch 'i at FB 13A during the additional site assessment contained c±s-1 ,2-

DCE at a concentration of 19 ig/L. No additional .VOCs were detected in the sample.

Installation of additional groundwater monitoring wells is necessary at the southern and western.portions of the site to monitor the expansion of the VOCs an. TPH plumes southward and westwardbeneath the site,'

4. In a letter,.dated March 4, .2010, Standard Metals also requested the. E.egional Board to reduce thegroundwater monitoring frequency from quarterly to semi-annually, cithg absence of. groundwatermonitoring data from adjcent TADCO site, which can provide important infonuation oncontaminant plumes in the groundwater.beneath the site vicinity.

The Regional Board has irccted the adjacent TADCO and BIG property owners to conductadditional site assessments and install additional groundwater monitoring wells..Th RegionalBoardexpects full compliance with its Orders from these site owners and additionni site assessment data

and groundwater monitoring data Will be forthcoming.

REQ1JIKEMENTS

Based on ur review of the submitted.inormation and pursuant to section 13267 of the California WaterCode (CWC), you are hereby directed to implement the following:

'1, You shall submit a work plan for Regional. Board's review and approval to conduct .trt1iergroundwater assessment at the Standard Metals site. At least two additional groundwater monitoring.wells shall be installed downgradient of the isting groundwater monitoring wells in the southernportion of the site aid In the western part of the site to define the southern and western edges of the'VOCs and TPH plumes in the groundwater.

In the southern portion of the site, attempts to collect grab groundwater samples with a Kyd±opuncli)at two locations (I'B 16 and FBI7) failed in the most recent site assessmen due to encountered

r refrisal. Alternate. locations shaflbeaelected 'orthe in ailation.of one.groundwaternonitoring.Wellin that part of the site.



The Regional Board is maldng efforts to bring the property owners for TACO azid BIG sitesinto compliance and additional site assessment data are expeted from these sites.

Groundwater monitoring data collected at the Standard Metals site is important to makeregulatory decisions about the site nd adjacent sites and to.monitor the VOCs and.TPB plumesin the groundwater. Two active production wells are, located at an approximatemaximnumdistance of 0.85 miles downgradient of the site.

',,. frJ , ..': CaufOfliaE,ViroiflneThtUlQtCcaOflAg61iCy

Mr. Greg Levin -3- July 1, 2010

Standard Metals

The western edge of the \FQC and TPH plumes is also not defined. Grab groundwater sample collected with a. Hydropunchfi at FB 13A during the additional site assessment contained cis- 1,2- DCE at a concentration of 19 LS/L. No additional .VOCs were detected in the sample.

Installation of additional groundwater monitoring wells is necessary at the southern and western. portions of the site to monitor the expansion of the VOCs and TPH plumes southward and westward beneath the site,’

4. Ina letter,.dated March 4,2010, Standard Metals also requested the. E.egional Board to reduce the groundwater monitoring frequency from quarterly to semi-annually, citing absence of, groundwater monitoring data from adjcent TADCO site, which can provide important information on contaminant plumes in the groundwater.beneath the site’ioinity.

The Regional Board has directed the adjacent TADCO and BIG property owners to conduct additional site assessments and install additional groundwater monitoring wells..Tha Regional Board expects full compliance with its Orders from these site owners and additional site assessment data and groundwater monitoring data Will be forthcoming.

REQ1JIKEMENTS

Based on our review of the submitted-information and pursuant to section 13267 of the California Water Code (CWC), you are hereby directed to implement the following:

1, You shall submit a work plan for Regional . Board’s review and approval to conduct .trt1ier groundwater assessment at the Standard Metals site. At least two additional groundwater monitoring wells shall be installed downgradient of the codsting groundwater monitoring wells in the southern portion of the site aid In the western part of the site to define the southern and western edges of the VOCs and TPH plumes in the groundwater.

In the southern portion of the site, attempts to collect grab groundwater samples with aHyd–opuncl3fi at two locations (l’B 16 and FBI7) failed in the most recent site assessment due to encountered

� 1 refrisal. Alternate locations shafl:heaelected 4for.the in ailation.of one.groundwatermothtoring.well in that part of the site.



a. The Regional Board is maldng efforts to bring the property owners for TACO and BIG sites into compliance and additional site assessment data are expeted from these sites.

b. Groundwater monitoring data collected at the Standard Metals site is important to make regulatory decisions about the site nd adjacent sites and to monitor the VOCE and.TPB plumes in the groundwater. Two active production wells are, located at an approximatemaximum distance of 0.85 miles downgradient of the site.

’,,. frJ , ...’: ,. CaufOfliaVirourneThtUlQtCcaOflA61iCy . . ..

Roe o1ed Paper Our mIIan is tapre.,ervs and enhance the quality q,’ca4fbrnIae Water reource2for the benqfll pfpre3ern endJluure gene1’afton

c. The adjacent General Welding site has been conducting quarterly groundwater monitoring.sinceapproximately 2003. Groundwater ntonitoring data from all Three ite (Standard Metals'GeneralWelding and TADCOI.BIG sites) are important for future regulatory decisions and to xnonitorth

VOCs and '17}1 plumes.

You shall submit the cluarter]y groundwater monitoring reports in accordance with the scheduleprovided in our previous Order, dated March 19. 2009.

3. The site data suggest that the Standard Metals site is the main source of TCE and its breaic1ownproducts such as cis-12-DCE and vinyl chloride despite the fact that there might be offsitecontributing sources. The Regional Board will require you in the futur to submit a Remedial ActionPlan (RAP) to clean up the contaminated soil and groundwater either jointly with the adjacentproperty owners or alone once site assessment is completed in the general vininity and depending onthe results of further site assessments at the site and adjacent sites. The due date for submission ofthe RAP will be determined by the Regional Board at a future date,

Pursuant to section 13267(b) of the CWC you are hereby directed to submit the required work plan to thisRgionalBoard by August 30, 2010. Furthermore, pursuant to section 13268 (b)(1) of the CWC, failureto submit the work plan may result in the imposition of civil liability penalties by the Regional Board ofup to $1,000 per day for each day the work plan is not received after August 30, 2010, due date andwithout further warning.

We believe that the burdens, including oosts of this report bear a reasonable relationship to the need forthe report and the benefits to be obtained from the report. If you disagree.and have Information abrint the

burden, including costs, of complying with these requirements, provide such information in writing toMr. Bizuayehu Ayele within ten days of the date of this letter so that wc may reconsider therequirements.


that ectve inimediately, the egiOnal Board requires you to include a peiury sttemeit in all workplans an4 reports submitted under the 13267 Orders. The perjury statement shall be signed by a seniorauthorized representative at your company (and not, by a consultant). The tateent shall be in thefollowing format:

"1 [NAJkIE], do hereby declare, under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of

Ca4foriiia, that I am [JOB TiTLE] for. [NAME OF RESPONSIBLEPARTYIDISCHARGERJ, that I am authorized to attest to the veracity of the informationóontalndd In the reports) described herein, and that the information contained in [NAMEAND DATE OF REPORT] Is true and correct, and that this declaration was executed at.[PLACEJ;[STATE], on TDATFJ."

Miy person. aggrieved by This action of the Regional Water Boar4 may petition the State.Wa.tcr Board toreview the action in accordance with Water Code section 13320andCalifornia'Codc of Regulations, title23, sections .2050 and following. The State Water Board must.reoeive'the petition by 500.p.m., 30 daysafter the date of this Order, except That if the thirtieth day following the date Of' this Order falls on aSaturday, Sunday, or state holiday, the petition must be received by the State Water Board by 5:00 prn.

Calforr4a Envfronmental Rrotection:Agern"..;.L1

jecycJdPqperOur in.:lQn Is Jo prsscrv çznd nhanc Ihe qualily o s walcr rc..wwce3 for Iha bn#flI ofprescni andfuiur gnsrailon3.

Mr. Greg Levin July 2010

Standard Metals

Mr. Greg Levin ’ - 4. July l i 2010 Standard Metals

c. The adjacent General Welding site has been conducting quarterly groundwater monitoring.since approximately 2003. Groundwater monitoring data from all Three sites (Stendnrd Metals,’General,. Welding and TADCOLBIG sites) are important for future regulatory decisions and to monitor-the’ VOCs and ’l?II plumes.

You shall submit the quarterly groundwater monitoring reports in accordance with the schedule provided in our previous Order, dated March 19, 2009,

3. The site data suggest that the Standard Metals site is the main source of TCE and its breakdownproducts such as cis-1,2-DCE and vinyl chloride despite the fact that there might be offsite contributing sources. The Regional Board will require you in the future to submit a Remedial Action Plan (RAP) to clean up the contaminated soil and groundwater either jointly with the adjacent property owners or alone once site assessment is completed In the general vicinity and depending on the results of further site assessments at the site and adjacent sites. The due date for submission of the RAP will be determined by the Regional Board at a future date.

Pursuant to section 13267(b) of the CWC, you are hereby directed to submit the required work plan to this Rgiona1Board by August 30, 2010. Furthermore, pursuant to section 13268 (b)(1) of the CWC, failure to submit the work plan may result in the imposition of civil liability penalties by the Regional Board of up to $1,000 per day for each day the work plan is not received after August 30, 2010, due date and without further warning.

We believe that the burdens, including costs, of this report bear a reasonable relationship to the need for the report and the benefits to be obtained from the report. If you disagree. and have information about the burden, including costs, of complying with these requirements, provide such information in writing to Mr. Bizuayehu Ayele within ten days of the date of this letter so that wc may reconsider the requirements.

The above technical report is required to be submitted under the CWC section 13267 Order. Please note that eccnve immediately, the eona1 Board requines you -to- include inent in all Wk plans an4 reports submitted under the 13267 Orders, The perjury statement shall be signed by a senior authorized representative at your company (and not, by a consultant). The statement shall be in the following format:

"1 [NAME], do hereby declare s under penalty of perjury under the laws of the State of California, that I am [JOB TITLE] for. [NAME OF RESPONSIBLE PAR TYIDISCHARGER], that I am authorized to attest to the veracity of the information contqlndd In the report(s) described herein, and that the information contained in [NAME AND DATE OF REPORT] Is true and correct, and that this declaration was executed at [PLACE];[STATE], on [D-47EJ.

Any person aggrieved by this action of the Regional Water Board may petition the State.Wa.tcr Board to review the action in accordance with Water Code section 13320andCalif6rnia.’Codc of Regulations, title 23, sections .2050 and following. The-’State Water Board must.reoeive’the petition by 500.p.m., 30 days after the date of this Order, except That if the thirtieth day following the date of This Order falls on a Saturday, Sunday, or state holiday, the petition must be received by the State Water Board by 5:00 p.m.

. � Calorna Environmental Protection , Agm ... �

JepcJd Paper Our rn.,:lon Is lopreserm and enhande Ihe qua1Iiy of C’aI(/b,?,ia s walcr r.,owce, for Iha bntflI ofpz’esc,zI andfu(ure generations.

Samuel UngerInterim Executive Officer

... ?,'.

Mr. Greg Levin - 5 - July 1, 2010

Stnderd Meta1

on the next business day. Copies of the law and regulations applicable to filing petitions may be foun1 on

the internet at

httrd/www.waterboards.ca,gov/publiC notices/petitions/Water., quality


SOORDERED.

CalfpnzaEnvirovmenal ProtecaonAgency...Rwycl&1 Paper

Our mie.yion is topre3erye and enhance she quallc' of'C fornlz t water reeonrceifor the ben4fll ofprc.e,U amiJWUre ,enerations,

July 2010

Mr, Greg Levin . 5 - July 1, 2010 Standard Metals

on the next business day. Copies of the law and regulations applicable to filing petitions may be found on the internet at

httm//www.waterboards.qa ,gov/public notices/petitions/water quality


SO ORDERED. .

SamuelUnger Interim Executive fficer .

�... �: . . Calfpnhia:E14virovmenal ProtectionAgency,. � .

Recycled Paper Our mission is topreierye and enhance the quality afC fornl�z water reeonrcei for the benefit ofprcse,u andJwure generations,

.3 R

g




Jeannette L. Bashaw, Legal AnalystOffice of Chief CounselState Water Resources Control BoardP.O. Box 100Sacramento, CA 95712-0100Fax: (916) 341-5199Email: bashaw waterboards.ca. ov

Bizuayehu AyeleCal/EPALos Angeles Regional Water Quality ControlBoardSite Cleanup Unit II320 W. 4th Street, Ste. 200Los Angeles, CA 90013Tel: (213) 576-6747Fax: (213) 576-6717Email: ba ele waterboards.ca. ov



(X) Via Facsimile. By transmitting a true copy(ies) thereof to each of the designatedcounsel on the service list to their facsimile numbers as listed below.




Executed on July 26, 2010, at Los Angeles, C ifornia.

i a Schubert

PROOF OF SER VICE


6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28




Jeannette L. Bashaw, Legal Analyst Office of Chief Counsel State Water Resources Control Board P.O. Box 100 Sacramento, CA 95712-0100 Fax: (916) 341-5199 Email: ibashawwaterboards.ca.gov

Bizuayehu Ayele Cal/EPA Los Angeles Regional Water Quality Control Board Site Cleanup Unit II 320 W. 4 th Street, Ste. 200 Los Angeles, CA 90013 Tel: (213) 576-6747 Fax: (213) 576-6717 Email: bayele(2lwaterboards.ca.gov



(X) Via Facsimile. By transmitting a true copy(ies) thereof to each of the designated counsel on the service list to their facsimile numbers as listed below.




Executed on July 26, 2010, at Los Angeles, i1ornia./g1ç

10a Schubert

2

3

PROOF OF SERVICE


yyuk

LA 58161v1




Michael C. BaumResch Polster, et al.9200 W. Sunset Blvd., 9th FloorLos Angeles, CA 90069Tel: (310) 788-7520Fax: (310) 552-3209E-mail: [email protected]

Emily J. YukichHolme Roberts & Owen LLP800 W. Olympic Blvd., 4th F!.Los Angel3es, CA 90015Tel: (213) 572-4300Fax: (213) 572-4400E-mail: Emil . ich hor.com

Kenneth A. EhrlichJeffer Mangels et al. LLP1900 Ave. of the Stars, 7th FloorLos Angeles, CA 90067Tel: (310) 203-8080Fax: (310) 203-0567Email: KAEjmbrn.com



() Via Facsimile. By transmitting a true copy(ies) thereof to each of the designatedcounsel on the service list to their facsimile numbers as listed below.




Executed on July 26, 2010, at Los Angeles, C ornia.

chu ert

2

PROOF OF SERVICE

2

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28




Michael C. Baum Kenneth A. Ehrlich Resch Polster, et al. Jeffer Mangels et al. LLP 9200 W. Sunset Blvd., 9th Floor 1900 Ave. of the Stars, 7th Floor Los Angeles, CA 90069 Los Angeles, CA 90067 Tel: (310) 788-7520 Tel: (310) 203-8080 Fax: (310) 552-3209 Fax: (310) 203-0567 E-mail: [email protected] Email: [email protected]

Emily J. Yukich Holme Roberts & Owen LLP 800 W. Olympic Blvd., 4th F!. Los Angel3es, CA 90015 Tel: (213) 572-4300 Fax: (213) 572-4400 E-mail: [email protected]



() Via Facsimile. By transmitting a true copy(ies) thereof to each of the designated counsel on the service list to their facsimile numbers as listed below.




Executed on July 26, 2010, at Los Angeles, C ornia.

1A,4, � , - 2

PROOF OF SERVICE

7

LA 58161v1

1 patrick l. rendon, esq. (sbn 126227) · patrick l. rendon, esq. (sbn 126227) lamb & kawakami...

Documents