state of california...notice to comply (ntc) 2 storm water (nov) 1 unregulated (fts’s – tanks) 0...

STATE OF CALIFORNIACALIFORNIA REGIONAL WATER QUALITY CONTROL BOARDCENTRAL COAST REGION

STAFF REPORT FOR REGULAR MEETING OF SEPTEMBER 15, 2000Prepared on August 15, 2000

ITEM: 4

SUBJECT: Executive Officer’s Report to the Board

Brief discussion of some items of interest to theBoard follow. Upon request, staff can providemore detailed information about any particularitem.

Watershed Branch Reports

REGULATION SUMMARY OFJUNE/JULY 2000[Corinne Huckaby 805/549-3504 and Maura Mahon 805/542-4642]

OrdersReports of Waste Discharge Received 10Requirements Pending 42Inspections Made 116*Self-Monitoring Reports Reviewed 412Stormwater Reports Reviewed 190 *Tanks calculated based on 1999 data

EnforcementNon-Compliance Letters Sent:

NPDES Program 1Non-Chapter 15 WDR Program 14Chapter 15 Program 0

Unregulated 1CAOs Issued 0ACL Complaints 1Notice to Comply (NTC) 2Storm Water (NOV) 1Unregulated (FTS’s – Tanks) 0

WATER QUALITY CERTIFICATIONS[Corinne Huckaby 805/549-3504]

Conditional Certification is appropriate when aproject may adversely impact surface waterquality. Conditions allow the project to proceedunder an Army Corps permit, while upholdingwater quality standards.

The Office of Administrative Law (OAL) hasgiven approval of the “rule making record” andproposed regulations to govern Water QualityCertification. The new regulations effect thefollowing changes:

1. Delegate day to day certification action to theRegional Boards (EO). Multi-Region issues andwater rights issues are still handled by State Board.2. Implement a new fee structure. The new feesare: $500 for standard certification and $1000 peracre (up to 10 acres) for conditional certifications.There are three actions available, StandardCertification ($500), Conditional Certification($1000/acre up to 10 acres), and Denial.3. Revise the petition process to include aggrievedparties, not just the applicant.4. Bring the program into better compliance withCEQA, permit streamlining, the Clean Water Actand Porter-Cologne.

In general, staff recommends “Waiver ofCertification” when the applicant proposesadequate mitigation. Measures included in theapplication must assure that beneficial uses will beprotected, and water quality standards will be met.

Staff will recommend “No Action” when nodischarge or adverse impacts are expected.Generally, a project must provide beneficial useand habitat enhancement for no action to be takenby the Regional Board.

A chart on the following page lists applicationsreceived through August 4, 2000.

Item No. 4 2 September 15, 2000Executive Officer’s Report

WATER QUALITY CERTIFICATION APPLICATIONS RECEIVED BETWEEN JUNE 14 THROUGH AUGUST 4, 2000.

Date Applicant Project Description Receiving Water Action TakenJune 15,2000

Calpoly Conduct grading activities indrainage channels and wetlands Wetlands

Inc.application

June 19,2000

Zanoli, Charles After the Fact Permit forEmergen y Retaining Wall Proje t San Luis Creek Pending

June 22, UC Santa Cruz Drainage Restoration Proje t Moore Creek Pending

June 22, UC Santa Cruz Drainage Restoration Proje t Jordan Gul h PendingJune 23,2000

Hosler Residence Vegetated Rock Slop ProtectionRevetment Project West Soquel Creek Pending

June 23,2000

Hamilton Swift Fill wetlands to construct 15 unitsubdivision

Wetlands Pending

June 30, Caltrans Huasna River retrofit project Huasna River Pending

July 3, 2000 Hildago Inc. Subdivision including constructstorm drain outfall into Miller Miller Slough Pending

July 10,2000

Syncon Homes ofCalifornia Village collection/drainage San Antonio Creek Pending

July 11,2000

City of San LuisObispo

Repair Old Garden Creek sewer mainOld Garden Creek

StandardCertifi ation

July 17,2000

Bureau ofReclamation

San Justo Dam Toe DrainRemediation

San JustoReservoir/Unnamed Pending

July 19,2000

Land Conservancy Restoration Projects Stenner, East Fork,San Luis Obispo, Pending

July 19, Caltrans Gifford Creek Bridge Rock Slope Gifford Creek PendingJuly 20,2000

Monterey Co.Water Resources Old Salinas River Channel Salinas River Pending

July 21, PG&E Repairs to exposed pipeline Toro Creek Pending

July 26, Village Glen Build Road Crossing for Annexation Tally Ho CreekStandardCertification

August 1, Jerry Romero Installation of 12 foot span Fern Little Llagas Creek Pending

August 2, CaltransRealign section of HWY 41 andExtend ulvert Wetland

StandardCertifi ation

August 2, CaltransInstall Rockslope protectionaround 3 bridge piers San Benito River Pending

August 2,South CountyHousing Inc. Villa Ciolino Housing Little Llagas Creek Pending

August 3,2000

Monterey Co.Dept. Public

Sandholdt Road Bridge ConstructionMoss Landing Slough Pending

August 3,2000

San BenitoCounty PublicWorks

Temporary Low Water Crossing onNash Road at 2 Locations

San Benito and TresPinos Creeks Pending

August 4,2000

City of ArroyoGrande

Road widening and culvertreplacement

Tally Ho Creek StandardCertification

August 4,2000

Clyde Saylor Minerals extraction project Willow Creek Pending

Item No. 4 September 15, 2000Executive Officer’s Report

3

(Watershed Branch Reports continued)

STATUS REPORTS

Buena Vista Mines, Inc., San Luis Obispo County,[Gerhardt Hubner 805/542-4647]

Site ConditionsStaff conducted inspections at the Buena Vista andKlau Mines on July 26th, and August 8, 2000.The inspections were made with U.S. EPA staffand their designated contractors/consultants.

Notes from the inspections:

• Acid Mine Drainage (AMD) collection,treatment and discharge from the lower pondto the NPDES sampling location (culvert atthe intersection of Klau Mine and CypressMtn. Rd.) were observed on July 26th. Nodischarge from this point was observed onAugust 8th.

• The Mahoney Drift sump level was found tobe low.

• Erosion control measures still largely intact.• Large earthmoving equipment at the Open Pit,

and Western Overburden pile areas at theBuena Vista Mine. In preparing the futuremine waste repository site, excavatingequipment was removing large quantities ofsoil from the Open Pit area, and transferring itto the Western Overburden pile slope. Thesoil then is being compacted, and the sloperegraded. At the Klau Mine, constructiontrucks are transporting soil from the BuenaVista, and capping/covering many of the aditsof the old mine.

U.S. EPA ActionsDuring the week of July 10, 2000, U.S. EPAmobilized and began earthwork operations tocomplete the remaining remedial actions containedin Unilateral Administrative Order issued to BVMIand Harold Biaggini. Over the next several weekswork at the Buena Vista Mine will includeinstalling a leachate collection system at the OpenPit area mine waste repository, design andconstruction of an AMD treatment plant, andmovement of the waste rock retort pile to therepository. At the Klau Mine, the reservoir is

scheduled for draining, eliminating a potentialsurface recharge of the underground workings.Additional slope and erosion control features, re-grading and possible second mine waste repositoryis planned at the Klau Mine. U.S EPA estimates itwill complete its work at both mines by Novemberof this year.

Regional Board DirectivesOn January 31, 2000, staff finalized and sent out amulti-page comment letter on BVMI’s FinalCompliance Plan (Plan), dated September 1999.On March 1, 2000, we received a copy of apetition to the State Board filed by Sullivan andAssociates, attorney for Harold Biaggini andBVMI. The petition asks for a stay of thedirectives and orders contained in the January 31,2000 letter (including the April 1, 2000 submissionof the Engineering Design Report). Staffresponded to the petition by completing a rebuttalargument and compiling the administrative record.On July 6, 2000, staff assisted a file review requestmade by counsel for BVMI.

Los Osos General Wastewater DischargeRequirements, San Luis Obispo County [SorrelMarks 805/549-3695]

At its March 31, 2000 meeting, the Boardapproved General Order No. 00-12, WasteDischarge Requirements for Residential On-siteWastewater Systems within the Bayview Heightsand Martin Tract Areas of Los Osos, San LuisObispo County. Since adoption of General OrderNo. 00-12, six single family residential projectshave filed Notices of Intent (applications) forcoverage under the General Order. Each of theapplicants’ projects complies with the criteriaspecified in General Order No. 00-12 and has beenapproved for coverage under the Order.

Los Osos Wastewater Project, San Luis ObispoCounty [Sorrel Marks 805/549-3695]


4

Following is a brief summary of issues relating tothe Los Osos wastewater project since the statusreport was provided during the Board’s July 14,2000 meeting.The Los Osos Community Services District (CSD)is in the process of revising its proposedwastewater project in response to results from itsevaluation of collection, treatment and disposalalternatives. Significant technical improvementsare expected to be incorporated into the project,however formal submittal of a revised projectdescription has not yet been received. Completediscussion of these issues will be included in theOctober agenda item considering enforcementaction against Los Osos CSD and/or propertyowners discharging waste in violation of the BasinPlan prohibition.

The Los Osos CSD has stated that it will commitby September 7, 2000, to a description ofwastewater project. This commitment is critical tocompleting the draft EIR/S, and initiating theFederal Section 7 consultation with the FederalFish and Wildlife Service.

In order to precipitate dialogue and communicationwith the Los Osos CSD, staff the past two monthsparticipated in the following:

July 25th: Attended the Los CSD WastewaterCommittee meeting. Discussion on AlternativeTreatment Plant sites.August 4th: Meeting with CSD staff to discussprogress with Alternatives Report.August 11th: Meeting with CSD staff to review anddiscuss Treatment Alternative site(s). Also inattendance was State Coastal Commission staff.August 17th: Attended a meeting of the Los CSDBoard of Directors, Vote on Treatment Plant Site.

Morro Bay National Estuary Program [BradHagemann 805/549-3697]

The Morro Bay National Estuary Program ispleased to announce completion of Turning theTide, the Morro Bay Comprehensive Conservationand Management Plan, which was developed asoutlined by the federal Clean Water Act. Pursuantto that Act, State Board member John Brown,acting as an ex-officio member of the Local PolicyCommittee, has requested Governor Davis tosubmit a letter of concurrence to Ms. Carol

Browner, Administrator of the U.S. EnvironmentalProtection Agency.

The Plan reflects a cooperative effort by the U.S.Environmental Protection Agency and ourRegional Water Quality Control Board, along withdozens of other California departments andagencies, the County of San Luis Obispo, the Cityof Morro Bay, scores of industry andenvironmental groups, and hundreds of citizens.The plan has generated a remarkable degree ofconsensus within the community. The Plan isbased on sound science, as well as on genuinegrass-roots participation.

In addition to being a nationally recognizedresource, Morro Bay is also a California StateEstuary—a further acknowledgement of this area’simportance to our State. The Plan provides anoverarching strategy for maintaining andimproving water quality and enhancingenvironmental conditions in Morro Bay and itswatershed. These positive changes will not onlyincrease the estuary’s value to the naturalenvironment, but will also benefit commercialfishing, tourism, recreation, and scientific andeducational opportunities for the people ofCalifornia. The Plan contains over 60 specificactions aimed at improving estuarine ecology,from slowing sedimentation and reducing pollutionto enhancing conditions for the threatenedsteelhead trout. A wide range of governmentagencies, non-profit organizations and citizenvolunteers will undertake these actions. We willprovide an Executive Summary of the threevolume, 1000 page Plan, in our next mailing to theBoard.

Los Osos Creek Wetland Reserve ManagementPlan [Bill Hoffman 805/528-7746]

In 1989, the Morro Bay Watershed EnhancementPlan was initiated to identify solutions to theincreased sedimentation problems entering MorroBay. The enhancement plan recommended a threephase approach to combat these problems: (1)BMP installation on private property; (2)development of a sediment basin on Chorro Creek,and (3) development of a sediment basin on LosOsos Creek. Substantial progress has been madeon all three phases of the plan with the installationof over 240 BMP's on private property, the


5

completion of the Chorro Flats project, and theacquisition of a wetland reserve easement on LosOsos Creek. The next step is the development ofthe Los Osos Creek Wetland Reserve ManagementPlan that will help define future actions at this site.The wetland reserve easement site is located onLos Osos Creek approximately one-half mileupstream of Morro Bay and consists of 111 acres.The site should provide excellent sedimenttrapping opportunities since it is strategicallylocated near the confluence of Los Osos andWarden Creeks.

The State Coastal Conservancy (SCC) previouslygranted the Coastal San Luis ResourceConservation District (CSLRCD) $20,000 for thedevelopment of the management plan. However,when the CSLRCD requested proposals for thework no firms responded. Recently, the SCC andCSLRCD received interest from a well respectedconsulting firm. However, additional funds areneeded to secure a contract for this work and forthe preparation of a detailed topographic base map.The Morro Bay National Estuary Program (NEP)is requesting the expenditure of up to $20,000from the PG&E Consent Decree funds to allowthis much needed project to proceed ahead. Thecompletion of this management plan will helpidentify future needs and direct future design andconstruction activities.

The NEP Local Policy Committee concurred withthe funding request at their August 16, 2000meeting. Regional Board staff also agree that theproject is appropriate and fundable with ConsentDecree funds. If the Board has no objection staffwill advise the NEP that the Regional Boardconcurs with the funding request.

Chateau Julien Winery, Monterey County [TomKukol 805/549-3689]

At the May 2000 Board meeting, the ChateauJulien Winery requested postponement of theiritem, a WDR update, to provide additional time toresolve technical issues at a staff level. TheRegional Board granted the postponement anddirected that the item be brought back for Boardconsideration during their September 15, 2000meeting. Unfortunately, it appears that thetechnical issues cannot be resolved in time for thatmeeting. The Chateau Julien Winery is collecting

site-specific data to further characterize thedischarge. Chateau Julien proposes to continuetheir study through the crush season, then submit arevised report of waste discharge in December. If acomplete ROWD is received in December, thenupdated waste discharge requirements can beproposed to the Regional Board approximately 120days later. Concurrent with data collection,Regional Board staff and Chateau Julienconsultants continue to refine technical issues viameetings, letters and telephone discussions.

Santa Cruz BioTech, Santa Cruz County [HowardKolb 805/549-3332]

This is an update of events regarding Santa CruzBiotechnology Inc. since July 10, 2000.

On July 10, 2000, the Coastal Commission issued aletter confirming Santa Cruz Biotechnology Inc.(hereafter Biotech) had conducted activities in thecoastal zone without securing proper CoastalCommission permits {Section 30600(a) of theCoastal Act (Public Resources Code (PRC) 30000 etseq)}. The letter required Biotech to immediatelystop all development activities on their property thatrequired coastal development permits. In order tocomply with existing Local Coastal PlanningRequirements, Biotech was directed to discontinuelivestock operations including: removal of a) allgoats, b) all manure, and c) all material contaminatedwith feces and/or urine.

On July 13, 2000, John R. Stephenson, Presidentand CEO of Biotech, responded to the CoastalCommission stating “all goats, manure, and allmaterial contaminated with feces and/or urine”would be removed from the property on or beforeJuly 21, 2000.

At the July 14, 2000 Regional Board meeting, theExecutive Officer’s report included a discussionregarding the Biotech facility. The Board heardpublic comment and discussed what actions theBoard may pursue regarding Biotech.

On July 20, 2000, Regional Board staff (BillArkfeld) inspected the manure application areas atBiotech facility. No significant odors were notedduring the July 20, 2000 inspection. Staff observedmanure from trace amounts to approximately ½inch thickness in the manure application areas. Allmanure was applied to areas with slopes of less


6

than 10 percent. Goats were still present at thefacility during this inspection.

On July 28, Regional Board staff (Chris Adair andVern Jones) drove through the Biotech facility andobserved that all goats had been removed from thefacility.

On August 3, 2000, the Regional Board ExecutiveOfficer sent a letter to Matt Mullin of Biotechdocumenting findings from the July 20, 2000 sitevisit and requesting a closure plan. The keyfindings in the letter are listed below:

JULY 20, 2000 MEETING FINDINGS

• BARNS: manure collection was nearlyfinished. Scarifying compacted soil areas wason going.

• MANURE APPLICATION AREAS: DuringJune 2000, manure was land applied to landswith less than 10% slope. On the upperterrace, the land applied manure thickness wasabout ¼ inch. The manure application on thelower terrace was observed to be minimal (toothin to measure). The manure applicationareas contained existing vegetation with aheight of approximately two inches or more.

• DESTINATION OF GOATS & MANURE:As of July 20, the destination(s) of the subjectgoats and collected manure had not beenrevealed to Board staff.

CLOSURE PLAN

Regional Board staff requested Santa CruzBiotechnology Inc. prepare a “Closure Plan” in theform of a technical report, pursuant to Section13267 of the California Water Code. This ClosurePlan shall address the following:

1. Goats: The destination of the goats, manure,and feed that were removed from theStephenson Ranch pursuant to The CoastalCommission’s July 10, 2000 letter.

2. Compacted Soil Restoration: Description ofhow all compacted soil areas have or will berestored.

3. Land Applied Manure: Complete details of allmanure applications on the Ranch, includingwhether the manure was applied at agronomicrates, an evaluation of whether the landapplied manure could pose a threat to groundor surface waters, and a map showing thelocation of all land applied manure.

4. Site Assessment: A discussion of how thepossible impacts from goat manure and urinewill be assessed. Monitoring of soil, groundwater and surface water shall be addressed inthis assessment.

5. Other: A description of all other completedand proposed activities necessary to completeclosure of the subject goat grazing operation atthe Stephenson Ranch.

6. Closure Plan is due August 28, 2000.

Several issues were raised at the July 14 RegionalBoard meeting. Regional Board staff suggest thefollowing actions to address concerns raised at theBoard meeting:

1) Enforcement.

Staff is evaluating enforcement need and type. Asof this writing, we have not received the ClosurePlan1. A Cleanup or Abatement Order (CAO) maybe appropriate for Closure Plan1 follow-up. Toensure implementation of the Closure Plan aremediation bond may also be an appropriate CAOrequirement.

2) Monitoring

The Closure Plan requested should addressmonitoring (both surface and ground water) for thevacated Santa Cruz Biotech facility. Until theClosure Plan is reviewed and approved by theBoard, the Waste Discharge Requirements OrderNo. 99-007 should remain in place to ensurecontinued monitoring of the site.

In addition to the existing Santa Cruz Biotechfacility, staff has recently discovered that the goat 1 This EO report was prepared on August 16, 2000. The ClosurePlan has not been received or reviewed. The Closure Plan mayrequire revision or staff may add conditions to the CAO that arenot covered by the Closure Plan.


7

operation has relocated to the Shandon area in theCounty of San Luis Obispo. Staff has also beeninformed that the new Shandon facility has beenissued approximately 28 building permits.

The transfer of the goat operation from Santa CruzCounty to San Luis Obispo County raises someadditional issues. Waste Discharge RequirementsOrder No. 99-007, Standard Provisions andReporting Requirements for Waste DischargeRequirements, Section C, General ReportingRequirements, item No. 7 states, “The“discharger” shall file a report of waste dischargeor secure a waiver from the Executive Officer atleast 120 days before making any material changeor proposed change in the character, location, orvolume of discharge.”

The transfer of the goat operation from Santa CruzCounty to San Luis Obispo County wouldconstitute a material change in the location ofdischarge. Staff has not received a report of wastedischarge (ROWD), nor have we issued a waiver.Staff recognizes the difficult situation that Biotechencountered as a result of the July 10, 2000Coastal Commission letter. Staff is aware thatBiotech had a short response time in order to avoidadditional enforcement actions. To address thefact that Biotech did not comply with StandardProvision and Reporting Requirements for WasteDischarge Requirements, staff has issued a letterrequesting a ROWD by August 28, 2000.

Staff is following up with Biotech on the newShandon facility. Once the ROWD is receivedstaff will determine the need for waste dischargerequirements or other necessary permits (e.g. stormwater, water quality certification, etc.).

Adventco Holding Corporation, PasatiempoInvestments, Pasatiempo II Investments andRichard S. Gregersen, the Inn at Pasatiempo, SantaCruz County [Howard Kolb 805/549-3332]

This report updates activities for Cease and DesistOrder No. 99-131 since November 19, 1999.

On November 19, 1999, the Central CoastRegional Board adopted Cease and Desist Order(CDO) No. 99-131, Waste DischargeRequirements 99-136, and Monitoring andReporting Program 99-136.

Revised Waste Discharge Requirements Order No.99-136 were adopted to name Pasatiempo I,Pasatiempo II Investments (Pasatiempo II) andRichard S. Gregersen (Gregersen) as additionaldischargers. This was done to ensure that allresponsible dischargers were considered in CDONo. 99-131. CDO 99-131 names Pasatiempo I,Pasatiempo II, Adventco, and Gregersen asdischargers (collectively Dischargers).

Adventco Holding Corporation, (Adventco)violated Waste Discharge Requirements Order No.94-30, which incorporated CDO Order No. 95-15.The other dischargers, Pasatiempo I, PasatiempoII, and Gregersen, are in violation of WasteDischarge Requirements Order No. 99-136. AllDischargers are not in compliance with allconditions of CDO No. 99-131. CDO 99-131requires the following (items in bold with status ofeach item listed below):

1. The Dischargers shall cease and desist fromdischarging waste contrary to Order No.99-136.

The Dischargers continue to discharge from thefacility. Staff continues to work with theDischargers to achieve compliance with CDO No.99-131.

2. The Dischargers shall develop andimplement a wastewater management planapproved by the Executive Officer. Themanagement plan shall be completed byJanuary 7, 2000, and submitted to theRegional Board by February 15, 2000.

A wastewater management plan was submitted tothe Regional Board on February 15, 2000. OnFebruary 23, 2000, a letter was sent to theDischargers for failure to comply with CDO No.99-131. The wastewater management plansubmitted did not fully evaluate all treatmentoptions as required by CDO No. 99-131. Theletter sent February 23, 2000, required theDischargers to comply with CDO No. 99-131 byMarch 8, 2000. On March 9, 2000, a revisedwastewater management plan was submitted to theRegional Board. This report did comply withseveral specific requirements of Order No. 99-131:


8

3. The Dischargers shall comply withResolution No. 95-04 by installing enhancedonsite wastewater treatment or ceasedischarging by connecting to the City sewersystem.

The Dischargers are not in compliance withResolution No. 95-04 since no enhanced onsitewastewater treatment has been installed and theycontinue discharging to onsite leachfields.

4. By April 14, 2000, the Dischargers shallmeet the conditions of Resolution No. 95-04that require nitrogen control measures thatachieve at least 50 % reduction in nitrogen

from wastewater discharged from onsitewastewater disposal systems.

The Dischargers are not in compliance withResolution No. 95-04 since no enhanced onsitewastewater treatment has been installed and theycontinue discharging to onsite leachfields.

5. The Dischargers shall comply with thetimetable below for installation of enhancedonsite wastewater treatment system.Submittal of an engineering reportaddressing how The Inn will consistentlycomply with existing Waste DischargeRequirements and conditions of ResolutionNo. 95-04 is required by February 15, 2000.

INSTALL ENHANCED ONSITE WASTEWATER TREATMENT SYSTEM

TaskCompletion

Due Date Report Date

a. Complete Wastewater Management Plan and evaluation ofwastewater treatment options.

1/14/00 2/15/00

b. Complete construction and installation of enhanced onsitewastewater treatment system or implementation of wastewatertreatment measures acceptable to the Board and/or the ExecutiveOfficer.

4/14/00 5/15/00

On April 14, 2000, Regional Board staff received aletter from the Dischargers requesting additionaltime for design and installation of enhanced onsitewastewater treatment. The Discharger’s request

was based on delivery time for the enhancedtreatment unit and a desire to conduct work in thedriest summer months. The Discharger’s April 14,2000 letter included the following timeline:

TaskCompletion Due

Date

Collect and analyze additional wastewater samples 4/19/00Submit results to Regional Board 4/28/00Finalize system design 5/5/00Provide proof of system purchase to Regional Board 5/5/00Complete system installation 7/27/00


9

Submit system performance report to Regional Board 8/31/00

The Dischargers did collect samples and submitthose results to the Regional Board. On May 5,2000, the Dischargers did finalize system design andprovide proof of purchase (purchase order and copyof check for purchase). On July 20, 2000, RegionalBoard staff received a progress report from theDischargers. The progress report stated that thesystem would not be installed by July 27, 2000. TheDischargers hope to have all system componentsonsite in early August and have the systemoperational shortly thereafter. The Dischargers havenot proposed a new fixed date for when the systemshould be operational. Staff has verbally requestedthis information.

Upon receipt of the April 14, 2000 letter, RegionalBoard staff and legal staff consulted regardingpossible enforcement actions for failure to complywith CDO No. 99-131, concluding that theDischargers had provided reasonable proof that theywere moving forward with the project. Weproceeded with an enforcement letter on May 1,2000, documenting failure to comply with CDO No.99-131.

6. After the Dischargers install an enhancedonsite wastewater treatment system,Dischargers shall install groundwatermonitoring wells by April 14, 2000 asapproved by the Executive Officer orsubmit by January 7, 2000 a reportdemonstrating why monitoring wells arenot necessary. If the Executive Officerdetermines that monitoring wells are notnecessary he may waive that requirement.

On January 20, 2000, we received a letter outliningissues as to why monitoring wells are notnecessary. Staff has reviewed the letter and iswithholding comment pending installation of thewastewater treatment system.

Staff has followed CDO No. 99-131 closely.Although the Dischargers have not completelycomplied with CDO No. 99-131, there has beenconsiderable activity by the Dischargers. TheDischargers appear to be headed toward fullcompliance with the tasks of CDO No. 99-131,although they will be late.

Cleanup Branch Reports

LOW THREAT DISCHARGES

This section is for dischargers who have requestedapproval to discharge water that poses insignificantthreat to water quality or for sites recommendedfor case closure (low risk sites where no furtherregulatory action is required). Consequently, weconditionally approved of these proposals.Conditions common to each approval are:

1. If you, the Regional Board, object to theproposal, an NPDES permit or wastedischarge requirements will be prepared forthe Board’s consideration.

2. The discharger remains liable for anytreatment system failure that results insignificant discharge of pollutants.

3. We have a “low threat discharges” generalpermit for surface water discharges available,and the discharger may be required to file forcoverage by that permit.

Site descriptions and specific conditions are listedbelow for each case.

Santa Barbara Public Works Dept. Road Yard,4415 Cathedral Oaks Rd., Goleta, Santa BarbaraCounty [Richard Aleshire 805/542-4631]

Santa Barbara County Public Works Departmenthas been cleaning up contaminated ground waterfrom a fuel tank leak at their Road MaintenanceYard located at 4415 Cathedral Oaks Road,Goleta. As part of the ground water cleanup, thePublic Works Department was issued the Board’sGeneral NPDES Permit Order No. 96-4 (NPDESNo.CAG993001), Waste Discharge Requirements,General Permit for Discharges with Low Threat toWater Quality for discharging the treated groundwater to a drainage way off-site.


10

On March 24, 2000, the Regional Board’sExecutive Officer issued Santa Barbara CountyPublic Works Department Monitoring andReporting Program No. 99-116 (Revised March22, 2000) for Santa Barbara County Public WorksDepartment Road Maintenance Yard, 4415Cathedral Oaks Road, Goleta – Discharge ofTreated Ground Water to a Tributary ofAtascadero Creek. Revised Monitoring andReporting Program No. 99-116, was issued inconjunction with Order No. 96-4.

In order to qualify as a low threat to water qualitydischarge, each of three carbon treatment units aredesigned to remove all contaminants in groundwater between sampling events. The County’sconsultant, Hoover & Associates, calculated thereis at least a one month capacity (at design flowsand contaminant concentrations) in each 500-pound activated carbon treatment unit. Therefore,monthly sampling of the influent and effluent ofthe three carbon units (4 samples) appearsadequate.

Board staff notified property owners within a 300-foot radius of the treated ground water dischargeas directed by the Regional Board. Staff hasreceived no objection to the notification.

World Oil Marketing Company, Station #52,16720 Monterey Highway, Morgan Hill, SantaClara County [John Mijares 805/549-3696]

On August 2, 2000, staff issued a letter ofauthorization to World Oil Marketing Company(World Oil) to discharge treated ground water tothe storm sewer and ultimately to Llagas Creekunder the terms of the Waste DischargeRequirements - General Permit for Dischargeswith Low Threat to Water Quality (GeneralPermit); Order No. 96-04, NPDES Permit No.CAG 993001. The ground water extraction andtreatment system is designed to completelyremove petroleum hydrocarbon contaminantsincluding methyl tertiary-butyl ether (MTBE) fromthe contaminated ground water prior to discharge.

On June 22, 2000, local residents and propertyowners, within 300 feet of the discharge, werenotified and given the opportunity to providecomments on the proposed treated water discharge

and coverage under the General Permit. As ofAugust 16, staff has not received any commentobjecting to the discharge.

Petroleum hydrocarbons including MTBE haveleaked to soil and ground water beneath the WorldOil service station at 16720 Monterey Highway.World Oil is taking proactive measures to clean upthe contaminated soil and ground water with theinstallation of a ground water removal andtreatment system at the site. Ground watercontaining petroleum hydrocarbons will beremoved from the subsurface via three extractionwells located onsite. Contaminants will beremoved from the extracted ground water via four1000-pound granular activated carbon vesselsconnected in series prior to discharge. The initialtreatment system flow rate will be approximately10 gallons per minute and may be increased in thefuture to assure plume containment and effectiveground water removal and treatment. Treatmentsystem redundancy, routine inspection,maintenance and confirmation sampling ensure thedischarge will pose a low threat to water quality.

A site specific Monitoring and Reporting Programrequired by the General Permit was attached toWorld Oil’s letter of authorization. This programrequires continuous monitoring of the volume andflow rate of the discharge. The treatment system isrequired to be sampled weekly during the firstmonth of operation and monthly thereafter.Representative water samples are required to becollected prior to the treatment system, betweencarbon vessels, and downstream of the final carbonvessel. Water samples are required to be analyzedfor Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons as gasoline(TPH-g), BTEX (benzene, toluene, ethylbenzeneand xylenes), and MTBE. Annually, the discharge isrequired to be sampled in September and analyzedfor pH, total suspended solids, total dissolved solids,temperature, turbidity, and dissolved oxygen. Inaddition, quarterly monitoring of Llagas Creekupstream and downstream of the discharge point isrequired for: floating or suspended matter in thewater; discoloration of the water; bottom deposits;visible films, sheens or coatings; fungi, slimes, orobjectionable growths; and potential nuisanceconditions. Quarterly reports are required to besubmitted on the 30th day of January, April, July,and October.


11

Equiva Services LLC, Shell-Branded ServiceStation, 17905 North Monterey Road, MorganHill, Santa Clara County [John Mijares 805/549-3696]

Petroleum hydrocarbons including methyl tertiary-butyl ether (MTBE) have leaked to soil and groundwater beneath the Shell-branded service station at17905 North Monterey Road, Morgan Hill.Equiva Services LLC (Equiva) is taking proactivemeasures to clean up the contaminated soil andground water with the installation of a groundwater removal and treatment system at the site.Ground water containing petroleum hydrocarbonsis being removed from the subsurface via anextraction well located onsite. Currently, theextracted ground water is pumped to an on-site6500-gallon storage tank, then off-hauled by avacuum truck to the Equilon Martinez RefiningCompany in Martinez, California.

Instead of hauling the extracted ground wateroffsite, Equiva is proposing to treat thecontaminated ground water onsite and dischargethe effluent to the City of Morgan Hill stormsewer. The ground water treatment system consistsof a 6500-gallon storage tank, silt filters, and three1000-pound carbon vessels connected in series.Flow meters, pressure gauges, and sample portswill be installed to control and monitor systemoperation. A telephone auto dialer will be installedto remotely check system status and notify ofautomatic system shutdown events. The groundwater extraction and treatment system is designedto completely remove petroleum hydrocarboncontaminants including MTBE from thecontaminated ground water prior to discharge. Theinitial treatment system flow rate will beapproximately 20 gallons per minute and may beincreased or decreased in the future to assureplume containment and effective ground waterremoval and remediation. Treatment systemredundancy, routine inspection, maintenance andconfirmation sampling ensure the discharge willpose a low threat to water quality.

On July 3, 2000, Equiva submitted a Notice ofIntent (NOI) to comply with the terms of theGeneral Permit for Discharges with Low Threat toWater Quality (General Permit); Order No. 96-04(NPDES Permit No. CAG 993001) for dischargingtreated ground water to a storm sewer thatdischarges to the City of Morgan Hill storm drain

and ultimately to Llagas Creek. Based on theground water extraction and treatment systeminformation and submittal of a complete NOI, theGeneral Permit for Equiva is appropriate.

On August 11, 2000, local residents and propertyowners, within 300 feet of the discharge, werenotified and given the opportunity to providecomments on the proposed treated water dischargeand coverage under the General Permit. Thisreport was written on the same day the letters ofnotification were mailed. If staff receivessubstantial comments or objection to the discharge,before the September 15, 2000 Board meeting,these comments or objections will be reported tothe Board together with staff’s response and/orrecommendation.

If there are no comments or objections to thedischarge, staff will issue Equiva an authorizationto discharge under the General Permit. A sitespecific Monitoring and Reporting Program willbe issued as required by the General Permit. Theprogram will require continuous monitoring of thevolume and flow rate of the discharge. Equiva willbe required to sample the treatment system weeklyduring the first month of operation and monthlythereafter. Representative water samples will becollected prior to the treatment system, betweencarbon vessels, and downstream of the final carbonvessel. Water samples will be analyzed for TotalPetroleum Hydrocarbons as gasoline (TPH-g),BTEX (benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene andxylenes), and MTBE. Annually, the discharge willbe sampled in September and analyzed for pH, totalsuspended solids, total dissolved solids, temperature,turbidity, and dissolved oxygen. In addition,quarterly monitoring of Llagas Creek upstream anddownstream of the discharge point will be requiredfor: floating or suspended matter in the water;discoloration of the water; bottom deposits; visiblefilms, sheens or coatings; fungi, slimes, orobjectionable growths; and potential nuisanceconditions. Quarterly reports will be required to besubmitted on the 30th day of January, April, July,and October.

Jamina Investments, 16470 Vineyard Blvd.,Morgan Hill, Santa Clara County [John Mijares805/549-3696]

On August 9, 2000, staff issued a letter ofauthorization to Jamina Investments to discharge


12

treated ground water to the storm sewer andultimately to Llagas Creek under the terms of theWaste Discharge Requirements - General Permitfor Discharges with Low Threat to Water Quality(General Permit); Order No. 96-04, NPDES PermitNo. CAG 993001. The ground water extractionand treatment system is designed to completelyremove organochlorine pesticides (OCP) andhalogenated volatile organics (HVOC) from thecontaminated ground water prior to discharge.

On June 26, 2000, local residents and propertyowners, within 300 feet of the discharge, werenotified and given the opportunity to providecomments on the proposed treated water dischargeand coverage under the General Permit. As ofAugust 16 staff has not received any commentobjecting to the discharge.

OCP and HVOC have leaked to soil and groundwater beneath the Jamina Investments site at 16470Vineyard Boulevard due to the previous improperhandling and disposal of pesticide-contaminatedwastes and wastewater by the former CastleVegtech, Inc. Jamina Investments, the land owner,is taking proactive measures to clean up thecontaminated soil and ground water with theinstallation of a ground water extraction andtreatment system at the site. Ground watercontaining OCP and HVOC will be removed fromthe subsurface via six extraction wells locatedonsite. The ground water extraction and treatmentsystem consists of six pneumatic submersiblepumps, a 300-gallon accumulator tank with anon/off float level switch, a cartridge filter, two500-pound carbon vessels in series and a flowtotalizer. The extracted ground water is stored inthe accumulator tank and pumped through(controlled by on/off float level switch) thecartridge filter, two 500-pound carbon vessels inseries, flow totalizer, and then into a storm drainthat discharges to Llagas Creek. The averagetreatment system flow rate is approximately twogallons per minute and may be increased in thefuture to assure plume containment and effectiveground water removal and treatment. Treatmentsystem redundancy, routine inspection,maintenance and confirmation sampling ensure thedischarge will pose a low threat to water quality.

A site specific Monitoring and Reporting Programrequired by the General Permit, was also issued toJamina Investments together with the letter ofauthorization. The program requires continuous

monitoring of the volume and flow rate of thedischarge. The treatment system is required to besampled weekly during the first month of operationand monthly thereafter. Representative watersamples are required to be collected prior to thetreatment system, between carbon vessels, anddownstream of the final carbon vessel. Watersamples are required to be analyzed for OCP andHVOC. Annually, the discharge is required to besampled in September and analyzed for pH, totalsuspended solids, total dissolved solids, temperature,turbidity, and dissolved oxygen. In addition,quarterly monitoring of Llagas Creek upstream anddownstream of the discharge point is required for:floating or suspended matter in the water;discoloration of the water; bottom deposits; visiblefilms, sheens or coatings; fungi, slimes, orobjectionable growths; and potential nuisanceconditions. Quarterly reports are required to besubmitted on the 30th day of January, April, July,and October.

Chevron Service Station No. 9-4909, 6325Highway 9, Felton, Santa Cruz County; [BobHurford, (805) 542-4776]

Chevron Products Company requested coverageunder Order No. 96-4, NPDES No. CAG993001,Waste Discharge Requirements General Permit forDischarges with Low Threat to Water Quality(General Permit) for discharge from a groundwater extraction pilot test at the subject site duringJuly 1999. The pilot test consisted of pumpingground water from a monitoring well (MW-2),treating the extracted water with two carboncanisters in series, and discharging the treatedground water to the storm drain. Based on thepilot test results, ground water extraction wasselected as the corrective action alternative and theDischarger requests continued coverage under theGeneral Permit after treatment systemmodifications. Modifications to the system includeincorporating two additional wells for extraction,and one additional carbon canister in series. Due tothe modifications of the treatment systemextending beyond the scope of the original pilottest, public notification is required. Notificationallowing for comment regarding this discharge wassent to interested parties living or owning propertywithin 300 feet of the discharge location. We havereceived no objections.


13

CASE CLOSURES FOR ABOVE ANDUNDERGROUND TANKS (UGT), ANDSPILLS, LEAKS, INVESTIGATIONS ANDCLEANUPS (SLIC)

This section is formatted to easily identify siteswhere staff is recommending case closureconcurrence from the Board. Case closuresgenerally fall into two categories - cases wherecleanup goals have been met and cases wherecleanup goals have not been met. In the first case,staff generally sends the responsible party a letterstating the case is now closed since cleanupobjectives have been met and no further action isneeded. Unless the Board objects, staff willcontinue to send closure letters and simply reportthese cases by way of the Executive Officer’sreport.

The second situation occurs where cleanupobjectives are not yet met, but for various reasons,staff is recommending closure. These cases willbe reported to the Board in more detail. Forexample, staff has discovered that some sites havea plume of contamination confined to a definedarea. Ground water monitoring may show theplume is decreasing both in concentration and size,and does not threaten probable beneficial uses.Other specific circumstances may exist such as theplume may be confined to a shallow portion of theaquifer with no actual or expected uses of thegroundwater. The reasons for staff recommendingclosure will be explained with each case.

We are presenting these closures in a mannersimilar to the way we present waivers of wastedischarge requirements. That is, the case will bediscussed and if the Board does not object to acase or wishes more information, the issue may bediscussed at the Board meeting where we canprovide clarification or the Board may reject ourrecommendation for closure.

Abbreviations commonly used for these cases:TPH - Total Petroleum HydrocarbonsTPHd - TPH measured in the carbon range ofdieselTPHg - TPH measured in the carbon range ofgasoline

BTEX - Benzene, Toluene, Ethylbenzene, Xylene(components of gasoline)MTBE - Methyl Tertiary Butyl Ether (gasolineoxygenate additive)DCA or 1,2, DCA - dichloroethane (gasolineadditive)DCE - dichloroethylene (gasoline additive)PCE -tetrachloroethylene or perchloroethylene(perc - a solvent)TCE - trichloroethylene (a solvent)TCA - trichloroethane (a solvent)

Staff Closed Cases

Uni-Kool, Railroad Avenue & Allison Lane,Pajaro, Monterey County [Matt Keeling 805/549-3685]

Seven underground gasoline/diesel storage tanks(UST) and associated dispensing systems wereremoved from the subject property on July 27,1990. Elevated levels of petroleum hydrocarbonswere detected in soil samples collected frombeneath three of the seven USTs. Approximately663 cubic yards of contaminated soil weresubsequently excavated from the three former USTlocations between July 27, 1990 and February 15,1991. Approximately 60 soil borings were drilledbetween August 30, 1990 and September 17, 1990,to characterize the extent of potential soilcontamination. During this investigation threeadditional USTs were discovered and subsequentlyremoved during October 1990. No soilcontamination was detected in confirmation soilsamples collected from beneath the additionalUSTs. Six piezometers were installed, sampled anddestroyed during August and September 1990.Four of the six ground water samples collectedfrom the piezometers exceeded water qualityobjectives indicating that ground water wasimpacted with petroleum hydrocarbons (totalpetroleum hydrocarbons as gasoline and diesel andBTEX) in the vicinity of the three former USTlocations with notable soil contamination. Noadditional site investigation or corrective actionwas apparently conducted between early 1991 and1997. Regional Board staff directed additional sitecharacterization on February 7, 1997, with theadvancement of three soil borings at locationsadjacent to the former piezometers to verifyground water quality in the vicinity of the threeformer UST locations with noted soil and ground


14

water contamination. Grab ground water samplescollected on May 23, 1997 from the boringsindicated that ground water in the vicinity of oneof the former UST (tank #6) locations was stillpotentially impacted with petroleum hydrocarbons.Pursuant to additional staff guidance threededicated ground water monitoring wells wereinstalled in the vicinity of tank #6 on November 3,1997, and a quarterly monitoring program wasimplemented for the assessment of ground waterquality. Depth to ground water at the site hasranged from 2.4 to 9.4 feet below ground surfaceand four consecutive quarters of ground watersampling conducted during 1997 and 1998 did notdetect any petroleum hydrocarbons includingmethyl tertiary-butyl ether (MTBE). As indicatedby ground water monitoring data and additionalsoil sampling activities directed by the MontereyCounty Health Department during September1998, the remaining petroleum hydrocarbons haveundergone natural attenuation and no adverseimpacts of petroleum hydrocarbons currently existbeneath the site. No new USTs have beeninstalled or operated at the subject site. Based onthe above information, no further ground waterinvestigation or action is necessary and the siteposes an insignificant threat to human health orground water quality. Therefore, staff isproceeding to close this case. The property ownerhas been notified of the case closure and has beendirected to implement and document theabandonment of certain monitoring wells. Staffwill issue a final case closure letter upon receipt ofthe well abandonment report documenting theproper destruction the monitoring wells.

Former Chevron Service Station No. 9-7792, 1137Broadway, King City, Monterey County [JohnGoni 805/542-4628]

A fuel release was discovered at this site in 1988,during excavation for site improvements.Investigations confirmed soil and ground waterdegradation associated with the former tanks onthis site. Soil degradation was addressed byexcavation and off-site disposal in 1990. Groundwater degradation was addressed by a groundwater extraction and treatment system in operationfrom 1989 to 1992. During the three-year period,more than 11,000,000 gallons of ground waterwere extracted and treated. All service stationbuildings, three 10,000-gallon gasoline tanks, one

1,000-gallon waste oil tank, and relatedappurtenances were removed from the site in 1993.No underground tanks have been at the site since1993. Ground water was monitored quarterly bynine monitoring wells from 1988 through 1996. In1997 a review of monitoring data revealed anhistoric lack of contaminants at all wells exceptone monitoring point immediately down-gradientof the underground tank complex. Contaminants atthe one down-gradient monitoring point were closeto but exceeded water quality objectives forBenzene and Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons.Concentrations for all other contaminantsincluding MTBE met water quality objectives.Monitoring was then limited to semi-annualsampling of the one well from 1997 into 1999.Monitoring data from August of 1998 throughJanuary of 1999 showed compliance with all waterquality objectives, including MTBE. Staff thenallowed monitoring to cease. A Case ClosureSummary was approved and the monitoring wellswere subsequently destroyed. Staff then issued aformal closure letter. Depth to ground water at thissite has varied from 23 to 30 feet below groundsurface.

The landowner is aware of the former leakingunderground tank case and case closure.

Former Chevron Service Station No. 9-6381, 715Broadway, King City, Monterey County [JohnGoni 805/542-4628]

A fuel release was discovered at this site in 1987following station closure. Three 10,000-gallongasoline tanks and one 1,000-gallon waste oil tankand related appurtenances were removed from thesite in 1989. Investigations confirmed soil andground water degradation associated with theformer tank complex at the site. Soil degradationwas addressed with a soil vapor extraction system.More than 28,000 pounds of hydrocarbons wereremoved by the extraction system, in operationfrom June 1995 to March 1996. Ground waterdegradation was addressed by a ground waterextraction and treatment system, and additionallyby soil vapor extraction. More than 13,700,000gallons of ground water were extracted and treatedby the system, in operation from 1988 to 1993.Groundwater was monitored quarterly from 1987through 1996 at fourteen monitoring wells, andtwo extraction wells. A review of monitoring datain 1996 confirmed contaminant concentrations


15

were attenuating, monitoring frequency wasrevised to semi-annual, and the number ofmonitored wells was reduced to five. Theremaining five wells were near the former tankcomplex and down-gradient sentry wells. Thewells no longer monitored were non-detect or wellbelow water quality objectives for all contaminantsfor at least one year, with many wells none-detectfor much longer. The five remaining wells weremonitored into 1999, with two sentry wells andone tank complex well showing continued none-detect of all contaminants. The two remainingwells at the tank complex continued to show adeclining trend of all contaminants, with one wellachieving compliance with water quality objectivesin 1997, and the other in 1999. With attainment ofwater quality objectives, including MTBE,monitoring was ceased and Staff proceeded withclosure. A Case Closure Summary was approvedand Staff will formally close this case upon properdestruction of the monitoring wells.

Depth to ground water has varied from 40 to 65feet below ground surface. The landowner wasinformed of the leaking underground tank case andcase closure.

Crosetti Lands, 225 Salinas Road, Pajaro(Watsonville), Monterey County, [Matt Keeling805/549-3685]

A 250-gallon UST was removed from the site inJune of 1992, along with approximately 35 cubicyards of contaminated soil. Soil sampling at thetime of UST removal and additional soil andground water investigation conducted betweenAugust 1992 and January 1993 indicated thatground water was potentially impacted withpetroleum hydrocarbons. Three dedicatedmonitoring wells were subsequently installed inNovember of 1993 and a quarterly monitoringprogram was implemented to assess potentialimpacts to ground water as a result of the formerUST. Four consecutive quarters of ground watermonitoring determined that no significant impactsto ground water existed at the site and the site wasrecommended for case closure. In response torecent real estate transaction inquiries, RegionalBoard staff determined that the subject case wasnever formally closed and that the three sitemonitoring wells were still in place. Review ofRegional Board files also indicated that neither soil

nor ground water samples collected from the sitewere ever analyzed for methyl tertiary-butyl ether(MTBE). Additional ground water sampling fromall three site monitoring wells for MTBE analysiswas requested by Regional Board staff prior toproceeding with case closure. Subsequently, allthree ground water samples collected on August10, 2000, were non detect for MTBE as well asBTEX and TPHg.

Based on the above information, no further groundwater investigation or action is necessary and thesite poses an insignificant threat to human healthor ground water quality. Therefore, staff isproceeding to close this case. The property ownerhas been notified of the case closure and has beendirected to implement and document theabandonment of certain monitoring wells. Staffwill issue a final case closure letter upon receipt ofthe well abandonment report documenting theproper destruction of the monitoring wells.

Cases Recommended for Closure

Southland Site No. 17296, 261 East Lake Avenue,Watsonville, Santa Cruz County [Matt Keeling805/549-3685]

Pursuant to Santa Cruz County Health ServicesAgency tank relining requirements, four soilborings were advanced to assess soil and groundwater quality at the site on October 30, 1997. Soilsamples collected from the four borings were non-detect for total petroleum hydrocarbons as gasoline(TPHg), benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene, andxylenes (BTEX), and methyl tertiary-butyl ether(MTBE). However, grab ground water samplescollected from the borings contained TPHg,BTEX, and MTBE at levels of up to 29,000 partsper million (ppm), 100 ppm, 3,500 ppm, 1,500ppm, 8,000 ppm, and 6,200 ppm, respectively.Three dedicated monitoring wells weresubsequently installed in February 1998, and aquarterly monitoring program was implementedfor the assessment of potential impacts to groundwater as a result of the former USTs and dispenserpiping. The two 10,000 gallon USTs andassociated piping were later removed from the siteon October 1, 1998, along with approximately 250cubic yards of excavated soil. Two new doublewalled 10,000 gallon USTs and associated pipingwere installed within the former UST location, and


16

the site is currently an operating gasoline servicestation. Although the tanks were observed to besound, soil and grab ground water sampling at thetime of UST removal confirmed that petroleumhydrocarbons leaked to soil and ground water inthe former UST vicinity. However, eightconsecutive quarters of ground water monitoringconducted since February 1998 indicate nosignificant impacts to ground water at the site.Dissolved levels of TPHg and BTEX in groundwater have been consistently below detectionlimits. Decreasing concentrations of MTBE havebeen observed sporadically in one of the down-gradient wells with a maximum detection of 110ppm being observed during the May 11, 1998sampling event. The most recent March 9, 2000sampling event detected 12 ppm MTBE. Highdissolved oxygen concentrations in ground waterand the infrequent and decreasing trend in MTBEindicate that the attainment of water qualityobjectives is imminent for this site.

Based on the above information, no further groundwater investigation or action is necessary and thesite poses an insignificant threat to human healthor ground water quality. Eight quarters of groundwater monitoring from the three on-site monitoringwells has sufficiently characterized ground waterbeneath the site and indicates that no significantimpacts of petroleum hydrocarbons exists beneaththe site. Therefore, staff is recommending closureof this case. The responsible party has beennotified of staff’s recommendation. Staff willproceed with case closure and direct theresponsible party to abandon certain sitemonitoring wells, provided the Board has noobjections to this recommendation. Staff will issuea final case closure letter upon receipt of the wellabandonment report documenting the properdestruction of selected monitoring wells.

Ken and Jennifer Soni, Former Service Station,1402 Spring St., Paso Robles, San Luis ObispoCounty [Sheila Soderberg 805/549-3592]

In June 1993, Mission Federal Savings and Loan(Mission) ordered an environmental record reviewfor the property at 1402 Spring Street, Paso Roblesas part of a sales transaction. The review revealedthat a former service station occupied the propertyfrom 1926 to 1973. In 1973, Mission acquired theproperty and constructed a bank building on the

property. As follow-up to the review and in orderto determine environmental effects on the property,Mission conducted environmental investigationsfrom 1993 to1996, which included: 1) ageophysical survey to locate onsite UGTs, 2)drilling and sampling thirteen soil borings, 3)conversion of five borings into ground watermonitoring wells, and 4) ground water sampling.The geophysical survey did not confirm thepresence of UGTs at the site; it is presumed thatthe UGTs were either removed without localagency permits or abandoned in-place beneath thebuilding’s existing footprint. Soil and groundwater sampling confirmed the presence of totalpetroleum hydrocarbon constituents in soil andground water beneath the site.

Initially, maximum ground water concentrations ofTPHg and benzene were detected in one groundwater grab sample at 20,000 ppb and 1,010 ppb,respectively. In October 1996, a quarterly groundwater monitoring and reporting program wasinstated; this program was later reduced to semi-annual and then to annual monitoring to documentintrinsic biodegradation of the contaminant plume.Depth to ground water ranged from 15 to 18 feetbelow ground surface with the ground water flowdirection consistently to the northeast atapproximately 0.025 feet/feet.

Because water quality objectives were nearlyattained, in March 2000, the monitoring programwas modified so that only two down gradientwells, MW-1 and MW-5, would be sampled: MW-1 historically contained the maximumconcentration of petroleum hydrocarbonconstituents. During the most recent (April 14,2000) sampling event only TPHg and benzenewere detected in MW-1 at 190 ppb and 3.3 ppb,respectively. MTBE has not been detected at thesite since 1998. Water quality objectives havebeen attained for all constituents except benzene,which has an objective of 1.0 ppb.After considering the fact that the tanks have notbeen in service since 1973, the reduction ofcontaminant concentrations in groundwater, andthat the water quality objectives for benzene areimminent and attainable: staff recommends closingthis UGT case. The responsible party/propertyowner has been notified of Staff’srecommendation. Unless the Regional Boardobjects, staff will request proper ground water welldestruction prior to issuance of the UGT case


17

closure letter.

Tosco (formerly Unocal) Service Station #5876,201 Sea Ridge Road, Aptos, Santa Cruz County[Bob Hurford 805/542-4776] (Carried over fromJuly 14, 2000 Board meeting)

This site is an operating gasoline service station.A due diligence soil gas survey was performed atthe site in September 1997, during the transfer ofthe facility from Unocal Corporation to Tosco. Tofollow-up the findings of the soil gas survey, threeexploratory borings were drilled on December 14,1998. No significant soil contamination wasdiscovered. A grab ground water sample obtainedfrom one of the borings reportedly containedMTBE at a concentration of 950 micrograms perliter (µg/L) using EPA Test Method 8020. Toconfirm ground water quality in this shallowperched zone, three monitoring wells wereinstalled down to bedrock (28 feet maximumdepth) in September 1999. The monitoring wellsare screened between 5 and 25 feet below groundsurface. Ground water was only encountered inone monitoring well (MW-1) during the firstsampling event. A ground water sample takenfrom MW-1 did not contain detectable levels ofpetroleum hydrocarbons or MTBE. EPA TestMethod 8260 was used for MTBE analysis.Method 8260 is a more accurate analyticalprocedure over 8020 and is used to confirm thepresence or absence of MTBE when found usingMethod 8020. Method 8020 may show falsepositive results for MTBE in the presence ofgasoline range petroleum hydrocarbons. Aconfirmation wet weather sampling event wasperformed on February 26, 2000. Ground waterwas found in all three wells. Sampling resultsindicated all ground water samples were at or belowthis Board’s water quality action levels forpetroleum hydrocarbons and MTBE. Anotherround of ground water monitoring was performedon May 8, 2000, and all constituents were at orbelow water quality objectives. Depth to shallowperched ground water at the site ranged from 6.4feet below ground surface to greater than thebottom of the well screens, approximately 25 feet(well dry). The direction of ground water flowbeneath the site varies with the season from northto east and southeast. The site is approximately1,100 feet north of the Pacific Ocean and 2,500feet west of Aptos Creek. No public water supply

wells are located within one mile of the site. Dueto insignificant soil contamination found in the soilborings, the confirmation of ground water quality

in the unused shallow perched zone at the site, andthe proximity of the ocean, the site does not appearto pose a significant threat to ground water orsurface water beneficial uses. Staff recommendsclosing this case. Tosco Marketing Company isthe property owner and has been notified of thisrecommendation for case closure. (See AttachedVicinity and Site Maps 1A, 1B, 1C, 1D).

Approval of Corrective Action

Mobil Oil Corp., Station 318-L3C, 911 Morro BayBlvd., Morro Bay, San Luis Obispo County [SheilaSoderberg 805/549-3592]

Mobil Oil Corporation (Mobil) proposesimplementation of a Corrective Action Plan (Plan)for a service station located at 911 Morro BayBoulevard, Morro Bay. During the 1997underground storage tank (UGT) removalactivities, Mobil over-excavated contaminated soilfrom the former tank pit prior to installation of newUGTs in the same area, however somecontaminated soil could not be removed. Mobil’sPlan proposes implementation of an air diffusionsystem (ADS) to promote natural biodegradationfor removing hydrocarbons remaining in soil at thecapillary fringe. The Plan also involves installationof three new ground water monitoring wells.Compressed air will be injected into these threenew wells and three existing wells. Mobil willinstall the ADS system this summer during theproperty owner’s construction of a new car wash atthe service station. During remediation, quarterlyprogress reports will be provided to determine thesystem’s effectiveness and ground water samplescollected and analyzed prior to and duringremediation for concentrations of dissolved oxygenand nitrate/nitrite, and measured for pH andoxidation-reduction potential. In addition, theground water monitoring program will continue ona quarterly basis to further evaluate the removal ofpetroleum hydrocarbon constituents remaining inground water. The property owner, Staurt’sPetroleum Company, has been notified about thePlan.


18

STATUS REPORTS

Casmalia Resources, Santa Barbara County [DanNiles 805/549-3355]

This status report provides the Regional Board ageneral overview of the history of the CasmaliaSite similar to the July 14, 2000 status report. Thesummary below describes some of the moreimportant regulatory history of the site and alsoprovides a detailed description of the currentlayout of the site. A series of figures is included tohelp get a better understanding of the site’sevolving configuration. On-site water managementissues are also emphasized towards the end of thesummary.

The second part of this status report provides theRegional Board with a summary of staff’s currentregulatory involvement at the site as it relates tokey aspects of work performed pursuant to theUnited States Environmental Protection Agency’s(U. S. EPA) and Casmalia Resources Site SteeringCommittee’s (CSC) consent decree.

Historic SummaryThe Casmalia Site, known as the CasmaliaResources Hazardous Waste Management Facility,was an active hazardous waste disposal facilityfrom 1973 to 1989. The Casmalia Site is locatedin northern Santa Barbara County immediatelynorth and east of Vandenberg Air Force Base, andapproximately eight miles southwest of SantaMaria (Attachment 2A). The site is 252 acres, allof which are part of current remedial efforts.

The Regional Board and California Department ofToxic Substances Control regulated the facilityuntil U. S. EPA assumed lead authority on-site in1992. Pre-existing Regional Board Orders remainin place, but have not been implemented orenforced since U. S. EPA became the lead agency.

During active facility operations, liquid and solidwastes disposed at the site included heavy metals,to organic solvents, pesticides, polychlorinatedbiphenyls, petroleum hydrocarbon and oil fieldwastes, and minor quantities of miscellaneouswastes. Historically, the site contained numeroussurface impoundments that were subsequentlyexcavated under Regional Board orders and placed

into four of six on-site landfills based on wastecategory (Attachment 2B). Five of the six landfillsexist today (the sixth was excavated and placedinto one of the remaining landfills), and are theprimary focus of recent remedial efforts includingplans for installing cover systems over the landfills(Attachment 2C). Contractors for the CSCconstructed a cover system over thePesticides/Solvents landfill in 1999.

Groundwater contamination containment,identification of waste sources, and landfillleachate collection and control are also key long-term remedial action measures for the site. U. S.EPA leads a multi-agency coordinated remedialaction involving the United States Fish andWildlife Service, California Regional WaterQuality Control Board, California Department ofToxic Substances Control, California Departmentof Fish and Game (collectively, “the State”), andCounty of Santa Barbara.

Waste is no longer accepted and the Casmalia Sitecurrently consists of the following: (Attachment2C)

a) Five hazardous waste landfills;

b) Seven burial cells;

c) Eleven injection wells;

d) A groundwater treatment plant;

e) A series of ponds to collect storm waterrunoff and groundwater treatment plantdischarges; and

f) Various groundwater collection trenches,a leachate collection well and sump,monitoring wells, and associatedappurtenances.

In 1992, the U. S. EPA made an emergencyresponse to stabilize deteriorating site conditions.One problem was high water levels in the RCFPond and A-Series Pond (the two largest stormwater ponds (Attachment 2C). These ponds areremnants of past surface impoundment excavationactivities and are now used as default storm waterrunoff collection ponds. Prior to the winter of1995/1996, the two ponds filled to near capacityand nearly overflowed. To mitigate the situation,the U. S. EPA began discharging storm water


19

runoff to Casmalia Creek under the State WaterResources Control Board’s General Permit forIndustrial Storm Water Discharges. The dischargewas not treated and monitoring indicated tracelevels of chlorinated organic constituents and thepresence of elevated minerals and salts in pondwater discharged to Casmalia Creek. Thedischarge was a one-time event to manage anemergency situation resulting from high waterlevels in the storm water ponds.

Currently, short-term and long-term watermanagement is needed for the on-site pondsystems to ensure their structural integrity. Toavoid future emergency situations where pondvolumes approach capacity, the Regional Boardadopted a National Pollutant DischargeElimination System (NPDES) permit in November1999, which allows for a controlled discharge thatis treated to meet water quality standardsprotective of beneficial uses of Casmalia Creek.The NPDES permit has not been used to date;however, it has the potential to be an integral partof effective site water management, both short andlong-term.

The discharge location to Casmalia Creek is alsodepicted on Attachments 2A and 2D. Anydischarges would be intermittent to maintaincapacity of the on-site ponds during successive wetwinter years with higher than average rainfall.

Status UpdateThe key status update items include the following:

• Interim Liquids Element of Work

• Pesticides/Solvents Landfill Corrective ActionWorkplan

• Pond Capacities

• NPDES Permit Revision

Interim Liquids Element of WorkU. S. EPA and the CSC continue negotiating onthe requirements for the Interim Liquids Elementof Work at the site. Negotiations revolve arounddifferences in interpretation of requirements in theconsent decree between U. S. EPA and the CSC.Many aspects of these requirements have yet to beworked out. As part of the negotiations, U. S.EPA has drafted several revisions to a technicalmemorandum to obtain agreement with the CSC

for implementing an Interim Liquids program atthe site. The final details of the technicalmemorandum are still being negotiated betweenthe State, U. S. EPA, and the CSC. Although theState continues to work with U. S. EPA and theCSC regarding resolution of the outstandingissues, there are aspects of the negotiations wheredifferences remain between the parties. Staff willreport on the progress of this important aspect ofsite activities in the next Regional Board update.

Pesticides/Solvents Landfill Corrective ActionWorkplanIn 1999, contractors for the CSC constructed acover system over the Pesticides/Solvents Landfill.U. S. EPA’s on-site contractor noted deficienciesduring construction as well problems afterconstruction including erosion of the vegetativelayer, ponding of water on the top part of thelandfill cover (counter to design objectives),surface water drainage system problems, andextensive creep of the final cover in certain areas.U. S. EPA sent the CSC a letter describing thenoted deficiencies and requested the CSC to draft a“corrective action workplan.” To date, the CSChas not produced a corrective action workplan thatis fully acceptable to U. S. EPA. U. S. EPA hasindicated that if the CSC does not submit anacceptable plan in August 2000, then U. S. EPAwould direct the CSC to correct those deficienciesthat will help mitigate damage to the cover systemduring the coming winter season.

The reason for the mid-August timeframe is toallow adequate time for the CSC to completeconstruction prior to next winter. During wetweather conditions, the Pesticides/Solvents landfillis inaccessible to construction equipment becauseof slippery road conditions. Staff will provide thelatest progress to this element of work in the nextRegional Board update.

Pond CapacitiesPonds have adequate capacities in preparation forthe next winter season. Given the volumesavailable to store runoff and groundwaterinfiltration, a discharge via the NPDES permitduring the upcoming winter season appearsunlikely. Should there be an unusually wet winterseason and/or if groundwater extraction rates


20

increase, a discharge might be needed if theadditional water cannot be fully managed on-site.

For the past two years, State has encouraged U. S.EPA to direct the CSC to implement a moreaggressive water management plan at the site. Inthe latest continuation of these efforts, staff, incoordination with the Department of ToxicSubstances Control, wrote a letter to U. S. EPAdetailing the State’s recommendations for bothshort and long-term water management at theCasmalia Site. The State has recommended a highlevel of on-site water treatment that would allowwater uses for many applications such as irrigationover covered landfill areas and other areas of thesite. Untreated water has been used throughout thesite, which may lead to a build up of salts andcontaminants such as metals and organicchemicals. Ideally, the State would like to see on-site water treated to meet the standards in theNPDES permit. The NPDES permit containswater quality standards protective of surface waterand groundwater. Meeting these water qualitystandards would be compatible with short andlong-term remedial goals for the Casmalia Site.On-site water management issues remain an areaof on-going discussion between the State, U. S.EPA and the CSC.

NPDES Permit RevisionLastly, the NPDES permit contains a reopenerprovision to incorporate revised water qualitystandards promulgated by U. S. EPA. Staffanticipated certain water quality standards wouldbe revised by new U. S. EPA regulations in what isknown as the “California Toxics Rule (CTR).”The CTR was recently approved for California andis applicable to surface water discharges regulatedunder NPDES permits. Accordingly, staff will berevising the Casmalia NPDES permit for theRegional Board’s consideration. The target forpermit revision is the first 2001 Board meeting.

Unocal Avila Beach Cleanup [John M. Robertson805/542-4630]

Avila Beach ReconstructionUtility installation and road and sidewalkreconstruction are nearing completion in theexcavation area. Nearly all portions of the FrontStreet enhancement project are scheduled for

completion prior to a September 16 re-openingcelebration. The Avila Beach pier, restrooms,lifeguard office, yacht club, seawall, and the Avilagrocery are all completed. The majority of thebeach is available to recreational use. Large-scaleredevelopment of individual properties within theexcavation area will begin following the reopeningof the Front Street corridor (See Attachment 3,Plume Locations Map).

Avila Main Plume Ground WaterPost-excavation ground water monitoring wellshave been installed and sampled in Cells 1A and1B. Results from the first monitoring eventindicate hydrocarbon concentrations in groundwater have rapidly decreased relative to pre-excavation concentrations, reflecting the removalof contaminated soil and the associatedoxygenation of the ground water. Thisoxygenation has enhanced the natural degradationprocesses. Results from the second and thirdmonitoring events confirm the initial results andindicate that hydrocarbon concentrations havedropped below the 1 part per million cleanup goalspecified in Cleanup and Abatement Order (CAO)No. 94-85. Based on this ground water data, Cells1A and 1B are at concentrations appropriate forclosure. Regional Board staff has reviewed andcommented on the draft closure report for the MainPlume excavation. Following finalization of thisdocument, closure letters will be issued for thesecells.

Existing down-gradient monitoring wells andhydropunch locations will be used to evaluateground water quality in the vicinity of the BeachCells (Cells 2A-2E). Concentrations in the vicinityof these cells hover at, or slightly below 1 part permillion. Hydrocarbon concentrations in the down-gradient portion of the beach will likely not declineas rapidly as Cells 1A and 1B, as this area was notdirectly oxygenated through excavation. Howeverthese areas have shown a steady downwardconcentration trend since the excavation projectstarted.

Hydropunch samples for locations within Cell 3indicate hydrocarbon concentrations have droppedbelow the 1 part per million cleanup goal. Verylittle ground water was encountered during theexcavation of Cell 3, and the bottom confirmationsamples from this cell indicate it is the cleanest ofthe major cells. Formal closure for the main


21

excavation may be appropriate as soon as thefall/winter of this year, following submittal of afinal closure report.

Adjacent PlumesNumerous additional smaller plumes are locatedthroughout Avila Beach, but were not coveredunder the original scope of work specified in CAONo. 98-37. The cleanup requirements defined inthe CAO have been carried forward for use oneach of the adjacent plume excavations. Two ofthese additional plumes, Cell2E/west end and theformer Cummings property plume (SeeAttachment 3, Plume Locations Map), wereremoved at the same time as the main plumeexcavation. Excavation of plumes on the formerLyon/Tognazzini and Farris/Bachino propertieswere completed this April.

Backfilling and compaction operations arecomplete at the former Cummings,Lyon/Tognazzini, and Farris/Bachino properties.Regional Board staff has reviewed and commentedon draft closure reports for each of these sites.Closure letters for each of these sites will followsubmittal and approval of the final closure reports,and should be appropriate as soon as the fall of thisyear.

Mitigation Project Review ProcessThis spring, Regional Board staff completed apreliminary ranking of 40 mitigation proposals.The mitigation project proposals were submittedlast December and some may be funded withsettlement money set aside for damages to waterquality associated with the Avila Beach oilcontamination. Regional Board-adoptedevaluation criteria were used to screen eachproposal and develop the preliminary ranking.Both the Department of Fish and Game (DFG) andthe San Luis Obispo County Air Pollution ControlDistrict (APCD) also received mitigation fundingfrom the Avila Beach cleanup project and haveconducted concurrent proposal review processes.Regional Board staff continues to work with bothDFG and APCD by sharing proposals that crossagency jurisdictions to ensure full consideration ofproject proposals that might benefit water quality.

Following completion of this initial ranking,Regional Board staff joined DFG and APCDrepresentatives in sponsoring a public office hourson July 17, 2000, and a public meeting on July 18,2000, both in the Avila Beach area. A combinedpublication of each agency’s preliminary grouping

of proposals was mailed out to interested parties inadvance of the public meeting. The meeting wasused to collect preferences and opinions frominterested parties for the various submittedmitigation projects. Residents from Avila Beach,Avila Valley, and San Luis Obispo Countyattended the meeting and their preferences forvarious projects were recorded. Regional Boardstaff will review all proposals and develop a draftmitigation project list that will be available forcomment at a second Avila area public meetingtentatively scheduled for September. This draft listalong with the results and information collectedfrom all of the Avila public outreach efforts will bebrought before the Regional Board at a meetingthis fall.

Intertidal PlumeUnocal further characterized the intertidalhydrocarbon plume in early May. Theinvestigation, which included near-shore andmarine sediment sampling in the vicinity of theAvila Pier, seemed to adequately characterize thenature and extent of hydrocarbon contamination inthe pier’s vicinity. After incorporating input fromthe Regional Board, Department of Fish andGame, and the Port San Luis Harbor District,Unocal wrote a report detailing the investigationand results in July. Unocal and the agencies arecontinuing to meet to discuss additional issues thatneed to be addressed to take this plume to closure.Additional issues include evaluation of theapplicability of the Avila Beach human health riskassessment to the intertidal area, conducting afocused ecological risk assessment, assessing themobility of the hydrocarbon and the overlyingsand/sediments, and continued funding.

Avila Tank Farm Staff from the Regional Board, Unocal, and theRemediation Test Panel (RTP) finalized the RTP’sdata gap recommendations report in March. Afinal work plan to address the majority of data gapsis expected by mid-August. Characterizationactivities should begin soon thereafter.

Unocal Guadalupe Oil Field, San Luis ObispoCounty – Status Report[Katie Anderson – 805/549-3690]

Summary


22

The following is a status report on the majordevelopments since the July 14, 2000 Boardmeeting concerning the Unocal Guadalupe OilField, San Luis Obispo County.

Site CharacterizationUnocal has begun a series of bioassays to supportthe ecological risk assessment currently underway.The bioassays are being performed with variousmedia from the site (e.g., surface water,groundwater, and clean and contaminated soils).We expect results from the bioassays in lateSeptember 2000.

CAO ComplianceUnocal has removed approximately 30,000 cubicyards of contaminated soil from the C8 Southexcavation, with no detections of TPH in bottomsamples (detection limit of 10 milligrams perkilogram). The C8 area will be recontoured and aphytoremediation system will be installed bySeptember 2000, to control diluent dissolved ingroundwater.

Unocal is currently in the process of obtaining thefinal agency permits for the remainder of the beacharea excavations, specifically 5X East, LeRoy 6,A2A North, A2A sump, 5X Road layers, andA1/2X. Pending approvals, the excavations shouldstart in early October 2000, with 5X East. Unocalwill be using the excavation dewatering system,which proved very effective at C8 North and South,at 5X East. (See Attachment 4, Plume LocationsMap).

Ballard Canyon Landfill, Santa Barbara County[Hector Hernandez 805/542-4641]

Site Investigation StatusSanta Barbara County has completed its landfill wastecharacterization activities. Ground penetrating radarand confirmatory trenching effectively delineated thelandfill’s waste boundaries and characterized thecontact zone between the Careaga and SisquocFormations along the landfill’s southern edge.Remaining site assessment activities include installingfive additional ground water monitoring wells. TheCounty’s consultants (Dames & Moore) arescheduled to begin drilling operations on August 21,2000. A final site assessment report must besubmitted no later than October 1, 2000.

Site CleanupThe County provided an implementation schedulefor the installation and startup of an interimcleanup system (gas recovery system). TheCounty is required to construct and operate thesystem by April 1, 2001. The extended scheduleis due to contracting requirements.

Pursuant to Cleanup or Abatement Order No. 99-12, within three months of Executive Officerapproval of the final site assessment report, theCounty is required to submit a feasibility study forcorrective action. However, the Countyrecommended and Regional Board staff agreed itis appropriate to evaluate the effectiveness of thegas extraction system prior to studying thefeasibility of the various alternatives for groundwater corrective action.

Nevertheless, there is no need to delay other partsof the feasibility study that are not dependent onthe gas collection system. Staff believes it isreasonable and appropriate to separate thefeasibility study into two parts. Therefore, theCounty is now required to perform two separatefeasibility studies for corrective action and submittwo separate feasibility study documents forExecutive Officer approval: 1) a feasibility studyreport addressing closure alternatives and 2) afeasibility study report addressing existing groundwater pollution. This procedure will expediteimplementation of a landfill closure alternativewhile also providing the County sufficient time toinstall the gas recovery system and evaluate itseffectiveness prior to performing afeasibility study addressing ground waterpollution.

Air Quality Issues and Outside Agency SupportTo ensure all health and safety concerns areadequately evaluated and addressed, the County isrequired to provide a written response addressingcomments received from the Office ofEnvironmental Health Hazard Assessment(OEHHA) and the Integrated Waste ManagementBoard (Waste Board) concerning landfill gasmonitoring. The County must also propose a gas-monitoring network for the entire landfill.Regional Board staff intends to work closely withOEHHA, the Waste Board and the localenforcement agency to establish an effective gas-monitoring system.


23

Off-Site PumpingIn response to a Regional Board directive, theCounty is studying off-site groundwater pumpingin the immediate landfill vicinity. Based oninformation provided by Mr. Greg Erickson andLarry Robertson, the Chase/Erickson well ispumped at approximately 1000-2000 gallons perweek. The pump is operated daily and the water isused for landscape irrigation, dust control on theroad, and washing of decks, vehicles, anddriveways. The Robertson well is pumped at50,000 gallons per week. The pump is operated ona bi-weekly basis and the water is used forirrigation of all types of landscape, oak trees, lawn,nursery operations, and dust mitigation. Water isalso used for livestock (i.e., horse, dogs, cats, andbirds). The County intends to utilize theinformation provided to evaluate the affects ofpotential migration.

The County has provided trucked-in water to theErickson and Robertson homes to replace thedomestic uses of the wells in question. TheCounty is also pursuing a permanent alternativewater supply to replace all domestic and irrigationuses of these wells. Recently, the County hasreached agreement with a property owner toprovide an alternative water source. The County isnow designing the infrastructure to deliver thewater to the Erickson and Robertson properties aswell as the two parcels the County obtainedthrough settlement negotiations with the Brantnerand Chase Property owners. Assuming that Mr.Erickson grants permission, the County also plansto repair and/or replace the storage tank and add ameter to monitor water usage. Currently, theCounty’s consultant is preparing a letter to addressthe questions the County was unable to answerwithout the assistance of the property owners.Based on the information provided by the wellowners, additional corrective measures may beplanned.

Larner Domestic/Irrigation WellIn accordance with a Regional Board directive, theCounty installed a replacement water supply wellon Mr. Larner’s property. The well isapproximately 140 feet deep. When the well wasfirst drilled County consultants believed it wouldadequately replace Mr. Larner’s existing well thatis threatened with landfill contamination.

However, a recent report prepare by the driller(Hoffman Associates) indicates that due to loss ofefficiency, the well may only be pumped atapproximately 30% capacity (30 GPM). Since Mr.Larner’s existing well is pumped at up to 90 GPM,the replacement well may not adequately replace it.The County indicated it would pursue this matterfurther by contacting its consultants and willensure that the short and long-term water needsconcerning Mr. Larner’s water supply areadequately addressed. (See Attachments 5A, SiteLocation Map, and 5B, Well Location Map)

Underground Tanks Summary Report dated July20, 2000 [Jay Cano 805/549-3699]

See Attachment 6.

List of Underground Storage Tank Sites withMTBE in Groundwater (revised) [Bob Hurford805/542-4776]

At the June 2, 2000 meeting, the Board requested alist of underground storage tank (UST) sites whereMTBE has been found in ground water. A first-cut list was provided to the Board at the July 14,2000 meeting. Attachment 7 is a revised list thatnow includes information from Santa BarbaraCounty as well as other updated information.Santa Barbara County sites were not included inthe first list because that County administers theUST program under the local oversight programand collects MTBE information separate from theRegional Board. Nonetheless, the updated listshows by County (among other information) thesite name, address, date of latest MTBE analysis,MTBE concentration, distance to nearest well, andits ranking. The distance to nearest well is basedon newly created GIS data information so it needsto be field verified. As such, the actual distancemay be off approximately 100 feet according to theaccuracy of GIS data. Rankings A, B, and C arebased on recent State Board developed guidelinesthat establish priority of response timing. Forexample, Priority A is the highest priority,meaning that cleanup is to be initiated no later thanone year after determining its priority. While theseare intended to help staff prioritize its resources,some cases may require different timing forvarious reasons. Some cases posing an immediatethreat to a supply well will require cleanup soonerthan a year; therefore the Boards have discretion toaccelerate the schedule. Such cases may be


24

required to initiate interim cleanup action whileinvestigation continues.

Former Ft. Ord Base Cleanup, Monterey County[Grant Himebaugh 805-542-4636]

The Executive Officer is scheduled to sign aFinding of Suitability for Early Transfer (FOSET)this September or October. Formally known asFOSET 2, this document transfers numerousparcels in the housing and garrison areas at theformer Ft. Ord. Unlike most transfer documents, itcontains a covenant to restrict the use and accessof ground water beneath the transferred parcels.The covenant is necessary due to the presence oftrichloroethene (TCE) contaminated ground waterfrom the Operable Unit 2 and Sites 2/12 plumes.The Executive Officer does not normally signparcel transfer documents, although inclusion ofthe ground water covenant suggests that in thiscase his signature would be appropriate. A parceltransfer document containing a similar groundwater covenant has been signed by the CentralValley Region Executive Officer.

Regional Monitoring [Karen Worcester 805/549-3333]

We have completed a preliminary report on Salinasregional monitoring results and submitted it to theU.S. Environmental Protection Agency. It iscurrently being converted into web accessibleformat and will be on the Central Coast AmbientMonitoring Program (CCAMP) website soon.Monitoring of the Santa Maria watershed formonthly conventional water quality continues, andwe sampled sediment for organic chemicals andmetals just prior to the end of the fiscal year,making good use of the remaining funds in theregional laboratory contract.

We have merged data collected in the Salinaswatershed into the CCAMP master database andconducted quality control work on the entiredataset to prepare it for uploading to STORET,U.S. EPA’s data management system.

Staff participated in meetings with the State Board,Regional Boards, and the Department of PesticideRegulation (DPR) to discuss how DPR funds($800,000) will be allocated for various pesticidemonitoring projects in the state in FY 2000-01.

Funds will not be allotted to our Region this year;ongoing statewide projects and urban pesticideTMDL development have priority. We held ameeting s in Moss Landing to work with StateBoard staff and scientists from the MarinePollution Studies Laboratory on toxicity studies forFY 2001-02. Staff is working on ways to utilizeDPR’s Pesticide Use Database as a tool forassessing pesticide loading for TMDLdevelopment. We are interested in determiningwhat, if any, correlation exists between instreamwater column chemical concentrations andtoxicity, with application rates in associatedwatersheds.

We gave a presentation on CCAMP monitoringactivities to a diverse group of Monterey areaagencies, organizations, and individuals interestedin monitoring. This meeting was done inconjunction with presentation and review of theMonterey Bay Area Dischargers proposed oceanmonitoring plan, presented by Dane Hardin ofApplied Marine Sciences.

The Statewide Monitoring and AssessmentRoundtable is currently discussing how to best usenew monitoring dollars (approximately $310,000for our region). Portions of the money will bespent through a Master Contract with Fish andGame, other portions will be contracted out at theRegional level. Major issues that need to beresolved include how data will be managed on astatewide basis, how quality control will beensured, and to what extent protocols will bestandardized between Regions. At this point, eachRegion is proceeding with its own study design;with no overriding statewide approach. TheCentral Coast Ambient Monitoring Program willcontinue monitoring major watershed areas on afive-year rotation, and will add monthly coastalconfluence monitoring beginning this fiscal year.We will also continue to work towards acoordinated statewide approach.

Proposition 13 Funding Update [Lisa McCann805/549-3132]

The Proposition includes approximately 28 newstaff positions in addition to the various funds forprojects. The positions will be distributed amongstthe State and Regional Boards. No decisions havebeen made yet on this distribution. The


25

distribution of staff resources depends, in part, onwhether the State Board manages the project fundsand associated contracts, or these functions aredistributed out to each Regional Board. State

Board staff has not specified the time frame formaking these decisions, but we anticipate they willwithin the next few months

ATTACHMENTS

1A - Tosco Vicinity Map 3 - Avila Beach Plume Locations Map1B - Tosco Potentiometric Map dtd 5/8/00 4 - Guadalupe Plume Locations Map1C - Tosco Potentiometric Map dtd 2/26/00 5A - Ballard Canyon Landfill Site Location Map1D - Tosco Dissolved Hydrocarbon Concentration Map 5B - Ballard Canyon Landfill Well Location Map2A - Casmalia Site Location Map 6 - Underground Tanks Summary Report2B - Casmalia Historic Waste Disposal Map 7 - List of Underground Storage Tank Sites2C - Casmalia Current Site Configuration Map with MTBE in Groundwater (revised)2D - Casmalia Current Site Features Map

state of california...notice to comply (ntc) 2 storm water (nov) 1 unregulated (fts’s – tanks) 0...

Documents