SFUND RECORDS CTR 88112107

UKITEO STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AOeNCY BEOIONIX

75 Hawthorn* Streot San Francisco. OA 94105-3B01

March 28, 1996

mm

I.

Dear Mr. Anderson:

Study Is due April 25, 1996.

Cynthia Wetmore Remedial Project Manager

I cc: Mr. Yash Nyznyl<, CDM Mr. Frank Lopez, DTSC Mr. Ray Brunn. RWQCB Mr. Larry Allrod, Mr. Matthew Bullis. City of Fresno • Mr Martin Koczanowicr. Mr. George Slater, City of Fresno Jim Casagrande. Fresno Co, Health Department

Ptinud on Hecycl:J ftiptt

For examP»^.^^^ H«mical deleded alAhe s*!!( °J re,

- : . ,..t«nce in tVie section a . sec«2D-X.^^lh«r the

5 §e^ona:A. " ^ ^ °" *" ' ^ ^ K d in the comments on .

Statement is misleading. The CERCLA process is, first, to inquire whethe, . ere is an unacceptable risk (outside of the risk range) if no remedial action is taken at the site. Once a decision Is made that an action is necessary at the site, CERCI-A requires that the remedial action comply with ARARs. Clean-up levels can be established at levels lower than MCLs if the there Is cumulative risk based on the. risk assessment. This is not the case at FSL.

i.^.y.i.-jjv

8 - Section 3.5. third paraaraDh. The third sentence states that a waiver can be granted under Article 5. Chapter 15 for a non-attainment zone. Ttiere is no such a

- waiver under Chapter i5. Such a waiver Is being contemplated (or may have already been promulgated) under Resolution 92-49. Take out the third sentence that begins with "If data collected during operation......"

9 - Section 4-1 This section mentions a Superfund Report that encourages a phased approach, iF lease ipdude a reference or OSWER directive c' the report.

10 - Section 4.a. \ iAItemative 1 should be referred to as Limited Action, to Modified No Action should be changed.

Ail references

11 - Section 4.3 Alternative 2 talks about a "clean-up goal of background." Since alternative 2 is only containment of the Landfill groundwater perimeter and monitoring of the off-site plume, a; reference to "dean-up goai" is confusing. A dear statement would be "Off-site monitoring v/ells are sited at the edge of the plume where levels of contamlnants are at background levels."

12 - Section 5.4.2; 1 The second paragraph states that containment to background levels meets State and Federal ARARs while containment to MCLs does not. First, what ARARs are we talking about here? The relevant State ARAR for groundwater remediation is Res. 92 49 whicn requires dischargers to abate the effects of their discharge to attairi' ^ ^ or if this Is not technically or economicailyijfeaislbieii ^ ^ MCLs;. Thus, if it is tedinically and economically infeasible to deanup'to ^ ^ ^^ to MCLs would meet the ARAR. The discussion regarding'ARARs in this section which is entitled "Overall Protection of Human Health and the Environment" should also be moved to the following section ("Compliance with ARARs").:

13 - Section 5.4.2.2 In the discussipn in the section "Compliance with ARARs," it is not dear what the ARAR Is. The last sentence In this section states that complate ARAR compliance wiil npt be achieved. Which ARAR is being discussed here?

14 - Section 5.5.2.2 Complianco with ARARs section: See my comment on Section 5.4.2.1 above regarding background and MCLs.

16 - Section 6.2.2 Compliance with ARARs section: same comment. Also, pleaso note that the No action altemative does not have to comply with ARARs since ARARs are not triggered until a remedial action is taken.

16 ^ Section 6.2,7 |t Is a little confusing that the costs presented In the cost section are the same for 3a and 3b and for 4a and 4b. A few sentences need to be added explaining why. This comment also pertains to sections 5,5.2.7 and 5.4.2.7

17 - Section 6.3 The recommended remedy Is presented by EPA in the proposed plan. This section should be removed from the report.

18 - Table 6-2 The compliance with ARARs row should be.eitlier yes or no. The only alteniatlv© tha^ fully.complies is altemative 4. . •• <>X

19 - An eariier draft induded as an State ARAR, Section 255C.4(i) of Chapter 15 which requires that cleanup levels above background (MCLs) be evaluated at least

; every five years. At that time, if the actual concentration of a constituent Is lower than its cleanup level, e.g., below MCLs, the deanup level shall be lowered to reflect this existing level. The prpblem with this State Water Board requiremanl Is two-fold. First,

, ttio trigger for a five year review under CERCLA, which is in Section 3p0.430(f)(4)(ii) of the NCP states: "If a remedial action is selected that results in hazardous substances, pollutants or contaminants remaining at the site above levels that allow for unlimited use and unrestricted exposure, the lead agency shall review such action no less than every five y< ars after Initiation of the seiected remedial action." As you can see, this threshold for a five year review is not the same as the Water Board's threshold. Second, ARARs are frozen when the ROD is signed and newly promulgated or modified requirements are considered only to ensure that the remedy

, is still protective. See Section 3p0.430(f)(1)(ll)(B) of the NCP. Thus, under the NCP, I a deanup level needs to bo lowered only if there is information that shows that the j | >,i'de nupj sta^ no longer protective of human health and the environment,

t ' l i Therefqr^^tEM this ARAR from the state ARARs table.

. 'u .-','11- ijLm-A

i j - iy-bb ^r^i'iBi'M ' VKKOM; DTSC REGlOK 1 SACW TO:li.l4 157441:796 P002

STAreoFCAuroflNiA — ENViRONMerrrAL PROI !cno« AGIWCY . Mil I — n i l I II 1111 rr— . . im t i

DEPARTMENT OF TOXIC SUBSTANCES CONTROL I0?61 CROYDON WAV.SUfTE 3 SACH^trlTO, CA M827;j108 : •'• I

(916) 255-3695

M E MOH A N DUH

T O : * : Frank Lopez ! 'Hazardous Substanaos Specialist

FROM: •> Mary Scruggs, RG /^'*Yf/^**^,--Hazardous Suhetancos EnginoorIng Coolbgiot

RJIVIEWED S ^ ^ n C ^ i e i i i h g , CEG i. vBYr HaeardQuo Substances Engineering Geologist

DATS: February 28. 1996

SlJBJECrP:V. ;REVI]BW OF DRAFT FEASIBILITY STUDY REPORT ! ', : LANDFTT.r., FTlESNO, CALIFORNIA

. Act ' iy i ' t 'y . : RQs<q[ues t e d

In response to your request dated January 26, 1996, the 0«ologlc Sorvioes Unit (GSU) has ravieved tha prafi; Feaoibilltv Study fieport (Raport) for the Fresno Sanitai-y Landfill da tad Januaty 23, 1996. The Report was prepared for "the City of Fresno by Camp Dresser and McKee incorporated (CDM).

Roviev Activities

GSU reviewed the Report to provide conunents and reclpnunenditii^ the evaluation of the four remedial •alternatives!with^r technical adequacy and ground yater issues.; Oviarall, the Technical Memorandum is acceptable as siibmitted with respect to the scope of the review, with the asecoption pf a fow changes, including monitoring of the C zonet aquifer ^nd listi n g a l l of the organic compounds that exceed maximum cpntamihant levels (MCLs) as contaminants;of concern , (cocs), As written, tha Report only specifies trichloroethylene (TCE), tetrachloroethylene (PCE), and vinyl chloride.

fSKaSXAL CCMXSIIT3 AND RZCOMXZBDATIOMS

1. ' A l l Volati Tia Organic Compounds (VoC) that exceed MCLsmust ba included as a coc, not just TCE, PCE, and vinyl chloride.

, There;are' approximately eight other VOCs in addition to PCE, TCE,'and': vinyl clilorlde. A clean up goal for eech COC must:

iludsd.. i 'lal'aeq Illbe.V.inclu

'OD

• •••••viV,

•••-'it

U 19-96 r ViaPM fKU.M.UTbC REGIO.N 1 SACTO. TO 914 15744 1796 P003

Frank'LopsB February 28,. 1996 Page 2 /

2.

1

m

The current ground water monitoring program includes annual groxind water sampling at W6 (completed in the A 2one) . However, this well-is the nearest well to the recently; installed agricultural supply well and therefore, semi-annual ground water sampling i ^ raoommendwd.

Ground watttr monitoring roust address monitoring ground water in the C zonQ to evaluate lateral and vertical contuinment. of tho off eita contaminant plum«. Soctlon 5-1 (pagai 5-:2) states, "If no contaminants of concern are detected in the B oqtsifer, there wlil be no attempts to monitor the underlying C aquifer." Historical data shows that COCs are present in the, B aquifer Bone and in some oaseo the concentrations exceed MCLs, For example, PCE was reported in CDM-SB at a conaentration of 4.9 /xg/L in the July/August, 1992 sampling event. PCE was also reported in CDM-4B at a conoantration of 7.6 ftoi/L in tho M y 1994 sampling event. Historical results at CPM 4B also indicate an incre«oing trend in PCB concentrations. Additionally, historical sampling results have reported orqanio chemicals present in some C zone wells, including toluene and dichlorodifluoromethane in CDM''4C and toluene in CDM-7C. Although the concentrations do not exceed MCLs, tha presence of the che:..ical6 in C zone monitoring walls warrant monitoring of the C zone. Therefore, the statement th^t ho attempts to monitor tJae .underlying c acpaifer will be made is not'valid booauea thero is contamination in both the B and C zones. The ground water monitoring system must address both horizbritai and vertical migration of cocs, •II- MIII;; . • -J - , - , • •• . • . • Gr;o,und iwater, south of the landfill should be monitored in A, i B>ii';jand 'c zones to detejrmine i f the nowly installad a!gr!icultiiral production well (located southeast of the southeastern corner of the landfill) is influencing movement of tho contaminant plurae -to the south of the landfill- The new agricultural production well is reported to be pumping ground water from the C zone, however, the well is not sealed between the B and c zones. In addition, there Is conmunicatlon between the A, B, and c zones to the wast of the landf,ill.

1. •j'<' •

. "-.A

The' stratigraphy south and southeast of the landfill is not well , cSof inod.': The current »o>>itoring plan include* mohi'tpring only residential wells and MM-4 between the southern end of:the landfill and CDM-2. Historical samplingj ,at iWr-4, has reported high concentrations of several ' contaminants, including vinyl chloride, ."om limited sampling events. It is not known i f VOC contamination

TO 9141574,1796 P004

Frank Lopez Februeury 28, 1996 Page 3

extends to the B or c zonae in this vicinity because only the A zone is currently monitored. The contaminated ground 'water^'pluae' in this area ic not defined in the B and C sonee. The only wells completed in the B, and C zones are C0M-3B and CDM-2C. Although contamination has not been reported from this wall cluster, i t is located approximately 1500 feet due south of the southern end of the landfill and approximately midway between the eastern and western boiuidarioB. Therefore, aontattihation in the B and c Bonee between the aoutharn edge of the landfill and the CDK~2 well cluster: cannot be.ruled out without additional confirmation. This i s especially important because the new agricultural supply v a i l located to the southeast of the landfill could ba influencing the plume in the B and c zones to the south of the l a n d f i l l .

5.

6.

As stated in previous comments, monitoring and cictraction wall 'locations should be oonfirraod prior to installation. : Potential well locations can be confirmed by deipth sampling using a sampling tool such as BAT II or HydroPunch.

Well deoOBuniesioning of the agricultural wells and water supply wells within the landfill and on the western side of the i a n d f i l l must be inoluded as part of the romodial action. Hell decomiaissipning heeds to bo implemented prior to pumping, \the off-site plume to eliminate vortical conduits between aquifer Bonea that may exauerbate furth^l^ V< > tlcai migration of contamination. A work plan for decbnonissipning the wells needs to be submitted for review prior to implementing the plan.

The 'calculated capture zones for PW-1 ih several ground, watcri model inins in Appendix D show capture does not extend to MW-4 (due south of the landfill),. The exceptions are the 5- and lo-year capture zones for Alternative 3A and the 5-year capture zone", for Alternative 4A. The May 1994 sample results show MW-4 exceeds MCLs for 10 of the 13 VOCs detected, including vinyl chloride, benzene, TCE, PCE, and cis-1,2 DCE. The vinyl chloride concentration (ISO /ig/L) is l:he highest reported vinyl ehlorido concentratlpn of a l l of the historical monitoring data. Based on the high historical VOC concentrations at MW-4 and the lack of definition cut the contaminant plume in the B o.nd C zones, to the south of the la n d f i l l , the extraction Well system iaukt include capture beyond the southern edge of the landfill.

MJ.MI .MSM-Or.OMVJ

iA'TU. TU 914157441796 P005

ifrnnk Lopaz February 28, 1996 Page 4

a. several capture zone map:; presented in PP^^SintSr^fFtSSrel n« « «t«anant zone or outside the radius of capture (Figures, t^^'l;'l•,ts;ffi?•.?.-•*•^ -1.5,% nnt- wida the capture , b av-D 9; 'SherD-Aii,: : cm i "i ?f "?S„f TFtSS ?"'

,,.* Wto .w -8one Of extraction wells in some D-A3, D--A8, and D-A9) . The wall extraction »y»tea layout; should J3e reviewed because ground water monitoring aata shows several VOCs exceeding MCLs at C3M-4 and CDM-5, and-these l;wo ,wells rwported some of the highest OC conoohtrcttone among the Wells located away from the

• . ; landfill.;,-i;-^^ 9 . The F^isJiiiilityl St^W shb^^

of rimovai of Jinyl chloride with granular ' o i S ^ "* * *"'" (GAC)Vinyl chloride oan sometimes have early ureax through of CAC requiring more frequent replacewent of the aarbbn units; ;tp weot treatment istandards^ Operation and maintenance coats (including replacement^pf oonietim''e ba greater than capital costs for an additional Jrea^enl; Method such as Ultra Violet oxidation to remove :vinyl ckioride.;^ The^ o^ comparison for treatment of vinyl chloride ishould be' evaluated.

v.v

1)1:,I'll

,1 B l i i p K i m 'XV-

• t 'ii'i

•'.•.1! r-

'. '•V' ' •• -.-i C

,' '."'.vrcijf'

FROM : qaJOC - Central Ual ley Region TB.: 239 445 5910

'. WAT«<yOAUPOIWlA.Bnv|fonmw^Pro»>ettenA<^ , , ,

• p/*i.<F.ORK'IA REGIONAL WATER QUALITY CONTROL BOARD iittBNTRAL VALLEY REGION

I: (tifitl)4444116 f;'?A}(:(l08)*l6-M(0

t5qR.27.1996 3:47 PM P 1 : • • •• •• i . '}}: '.

V:

•; Ui.F okLopez : Department of Toxic Substancofi Control ^

DiUrFFEASlMUrySWDYKEPOk'tFOR GROVNJ) WAim CUSANVPATFREi SANITARY LANDFILL (JENSEN AVENUE), FRESNO COVNTY .; 1

Booed oh our review of the January 199( Drnfl PcasibiHiy Study Report (FS) for the Fresno Sanitary ••'•<•:. Landfill, we conclude tliat It appears sui{i.'>i«» for intendco u.sc, provid-jd the specific conimenls »ei forth in Ihe cnc)08ed staff mcmomndum ore addressed. Wc do, however di-sayree with the conclusion set forih in the that Attemative 3 (plume confalmnent) IH iho wimi viable ultomutivo for ground water teraedlatlon at tlio alio and consider Altomaiive 4(pIuineconi«inment and rcstoralion) to be the only ' alternative that meets State ARARs.

If you have any questions, please telephone Roy Bruun at (209) 488-4397,

1.. •

ip; SCOTT NEV1N8 : Slenlor Bnglneer RCB 14336

RB;rb

oc: Ms. Cynthia Wointore, United Stales Environmental ProiccHori Agency, Region IX, Ran Franciaob

—."••T ^ •- 1,,-

:(••'?!• ; ' •r,' :• .1 . • , . -" . • • * "'.

: i.l-'.

• ; •' ; 5;; : :•:

Pott-It

1»

FROM : CRIJOC - Central Ual ley Region TEL: 209 445 5910

MEMORANDUM

rW. 27.1996 3:4a PM P 2

CA LIFORNIA RHOIONAL WATBR QUALITY CONTROL BOARD • CENTRAL VALLEY RBOlblll 3614 But Aihlan Ave. rhooe: (209)445.5M6'>..;{•

CAf.NBT: 8«42l-3ri<>-< %^1t^

.•'••.5i'.

;•; "To: F. Scoli Nevins Senior Hnginoer

From: Raymond Bruun Sanitary Engineering Associate

....

Subject: 7)J?/4iT FEASIBIUTY STVIfY REPORT FOR GROUND WA TER CLEANUP - FRESi<i6 SANITARYLANDFILL(JENSENAVENUE), FRESNO COUNTY

. J . ;','••/. ! T-l,.

; Intrbdiuetiofi: i '•4

I have reviewed -the Draft Feasibility Study Report, dated 23 January 1996. My remarks are contained ih > tho Comn ents section below.

The City of Fresno municipal landfill on Jensen Avenue was shut down in J 987, aAcr operating for about 52 years. Soils and ground water al tho .site have been alTcclcd by organic chemical wa-sles. The site Is cumsntly ui dcrgfllnfi closure by direction of USEPA, with Cnl-liPA/DTSC and the CVRWCJCB OS aupportlng agencies. Ground water impacts by vinyl chloride, PCF., u3ul TCE appear the most severe, but numerous other chemicals have been found. USEPA, in 1994, declared llic Rl pha.sc of ground yimtcr work «)nVplcto, though even at this dulc, tlw AiiriatCM ' yet to be determined, "llic subject report evaluates Uip fcB.sJbility of implementing vjirJouiJ rcn alternatives.

V Overview of Report:

t • -Four remedial aJternaitivM are pr^

;:ilt

mi AUBtffBtiVflNBi

..-.1

^••,A-.,-':;2;-'v'

Ne.Actlca,

Uhdflllp«rimetcf containment and offklte plunto Inonltorlng

Landnii perimstn: plume conDiinment and ofl>i(c plume co»iebinicnt

Short ncBfl.

Source oontrel

Dump oonuilnmem

Aquifer restontlon

... .i^

••• j - i

, , 4 ^ .,

;, Ajtcmatlye 3 l | 5uW into two qatcgoribs, containment (o buckgmund (3a) and containment to V ( 3 b ) . I.ikewi.sc, Alternative 4 h;is (wo parts, cleanup to Ixickground (4«) 1' |!|r< ^ (4b). Tlic FS n?comnicnds that Altenmiivc 3b be jmplcmcntai at tho site bcoausfe •i:pt^n«|nt6^ long term it will achlcvo Siute ARAUN (n(|iil/br rcstonillon) bccauKC II would

* rckjuiro 'cohteinmcni unti tlic aquifer is clean imd, also, thai ii is lcs.s c6.slJy llian Altemative 4.

m r

I ••• FTOM :: a?UGt -^^^ ra.: 209 445 5910 . ^ MflR. 27.1996 3:48 PM P 3

,; r : . iJ!RKNO SANITARY LANDFILL -2- 27 Msroh 19%; •iL .;; ?

^ rnnipnri. Qn nf AltcmativM to ARARs - Section 5.3.2.2 (p. 5-9) implies that implementing a less demanding alternaliyc, e.g. no. 2 or 3, may eventually nccompli.sh cleanup of the off-site plume in

, keeping witli alternative no. 4. The section states that, "Peticral or Stale AR AR.-? governing ' / ' groundwater clean-up levels ... may not be achieved within a reasonable time frame under

Alternative 2.

Comment: Alternative no. 2, source control, by definition docs not meet Stale ARARs becaUse aquiferrcjrtoration is not its stated goal. It appears that the FS is uttempting to us.se.ss the ability of a oonoeptual extruolion well configuruilon, ihtil the VS \m nsKooiiited with Alternative 2, to achieve Fedeiol and State ARAR Jt is, however, the minimun) requirements of each alternative thatmuft be compajied against ARARs,^ n^^

4/ Cnpsdtuents of Concern- The FS ,lists .some, but not nil, constituents o c<mccrn (COCs). The COCs listed are: PCE, TX;]B, ajid v^ i. /

Jt':

:C<vninea$tt .• r'fiv.;p |

• 1. • Racnmmflnded Altemativg - The FS reawmcnda Alternative 3b, containment to MCLs, as the ' • ; remediation goal for ground water. > • ' • . li!, ... _ .''.•;'.'•':'<'!!.-

^^^•^Q^^i^i^^fiil^i^Q 3 does not have aquifer nsstoration as a goal, and for this reason, dOes nol ^ ...: viv. ;,; meet StateARARs. Alternative 4, aquifer nMrtoration, is tJie only altcnintive that will meet State ;,

] • r p f jng nf Ali«marives f p : 4 - 7 ^ • Tlio FS oroDosc? to phasc the task components' of the ?ho9en-v=''V' j 1 altiwAatlvc in sequential order, stopping between each phasc to ^ ,. •.. [ 1 next higher level of rpmediai activity." " • i;! V- 1

„ 5 i i • ' , '••'••'••''' • '' ;' i'.':H--' '« I ; I •• • Cpnvmw*; The pha.sing of task components i * ' V ^

j , assess whether a higher ' 1 :? asthe itwi got;i of remedial action, wil not change and must be attained. Forinstancc, if the chosen |

altema'dvc is JO. 4 (aquifer rt.sloration), than all of the task componenLs needed to achieve alternative ' |'

What can be implemented in phases and evaluated between each phase, however, is 6w.stom f ; configurfltlon. Forcxftmplo, iii ato^ objcclive is aquifer rcsiuration, which

rnay be accomplisliod by susta .V reasonable amount of time) and ma^

may be a Vwtc ofresourcc.sto increo.se the j • [ ' earlior-datc. . • •J;'• (

:n»tort(lon The ih*k cpmponentt identified In tiie I'S are monllorlin;. itourco comrol. coiiialnmpni, end aqulftir

FROM : CRUOC/-Central Ual ley Region TEL: 209 445 5910: M«R.27.,1996 3:<i9 PM

?RBSN6 SANITARY LANDFILL -3- 27 March

Comment: The PCE distribution shown in Figure l'2d<>cj? n6t matchground water quality data for eitltcr aquifer A (upper) or aquifer 13 (lower). In the inap legend, isoplcths are said to be for the A and the U aquifers, implying that the map gives averaged concentrations for the two aquifers. Since tlio concentrations in the aquifers differ by at least an order of inagiiitudc, it would be more appropriate to portray the A and B aquifer plumes on separate drawings.

IH;.: 6, J lifibflrgo tfl Iho Fresno Rcginnal Waste WaiafFagility (RWWI') • Under a section titled,

••Management of Treated .Groundwater" (p. 4-4), the FS prcs disposal/reclamntion of ireuied Kwund w^ Regional Waste'Water, Facility. .1.,' ,,

Comin«)t: It .should be noted tliat the Fresno RWWF is c^ treatment capacity. Tlic plant i.s h^ ' j iimltfljbf it* c(TIucntdisj)psflr f An expansion of llic plnnl should bo completed by mid-ycar; but even theii it will fall si'ghilicantly short of managing present flows. Beca\i3e of this situation, the City Syas recently issued a Cease and Desjst Order by the Qoarcl for violating its Waste Discharge Requirements. Implementing the proposed discharge to the RW Wl' in the foreseeable future would | exacd-batc the City's sewage treatment problems. ' li

7. Qround Watpr Monitorjng Sy.stem - On pngc 5-2 of the FS, two components of a remedial ground .water monitoring system are listed:

• V Conlment; Cleanup goals must bo developed for all clw^^ . . ' •. 1 ' , . . concem) that exist in ground woter. : • f ,} ' • • ' \ • ' • • ••:.:W>n

5. Map of Ground Water Plume --The pround water plume emanatintt from the site is conceptually . V. . depicted on,Figure lr2, and onpthcr drawings as well, llic plume is represented by concentration'

•• JsoplethsforPCE.;//::^ _

v.. "(I)' Monitoring.wells to asisess the effectiveness of the landfill perimeter extraction wells in * t

containing the source of contamination, . t

(2) Monitoring wells to asscjfs contaminant mii{ruii<w site plume." • •. • -v,: ?

Cotnmeat: At least two other components should bo addeid lo the list: (.3) Monitoring wells to assess ' • •' | the progress of aquifer rcs'.oratjon; and (4) Monitoring wells to complete delineation of the lateral and vortical extent of affected ground water.

•••• ih'/-

- Central Valley Reg 'on TB.: 203 445 5910

P 5-

V

'•0 ( ' ;<;» '.ft i

v.;.fi:..

'r'«iprttfli«Ji'h' 1

-X-. State A F ^ R ^ for Grdundvfater Rente > , : : . i . - * , . , j s . - v - 4 i . -

No. Sourc«

StaiMlard. R«qulr«mcat CrKtrlon, or Umtttitlon . Deccrlption

Po.-ter-Coteffn* Witer Qu«Ky Contool Ac* (CA Watw Code $ 13240. 13241,132<2.13243)

Wkter Quality Control I^n (Satin Plan) tor the RWQCB, CVR

Ett tbte i^ wata.' qusKy objectlvise, Inciiidlng narraCvfl and nucMrical i^ndardt, that v protaist tha b«n«Sctal U8»» and waiar quatty ab)eciiv«« of aurfice and ground watera In the raglOn. Oaacrtboa ^pSementation plane ami other eontoJ mesaurea dealgried to en»ut» compltenea;Y»ilh staievride plarw and poSdea and provide cotapreh^nilve water quaBy .plasin'ifig.

Rclavaht a .;. Appropriate, or To Be i CentUerad

AppScabte

Commania

Spedte appaeabia portio«is oflha BMki Plan Inciude benafctil ua«« ofafleclad water bodies and yvator q i n i ^ ob|ectty»« to protect thoee uaea. Any atir i^, Inciudino. but not Gcnaeu to, the dtscharg* of contamimted eoi* or watera or In-aSu ^atn>»r:i or. containment of contaminated aola or watera, nnict 'Dot reauK kl actual wattr quaKy exceeding water qusBy objecilma:

Impleinaitlation plana and other poiciee and raqidnKitenta may aiao

4

Ho. Sourct

PoiterTColofins Water : QuaBy ContocI Act (CA WatarCodef 13240-13147,13172, 13260;i32SX 13267. 13304)

SUrtdarri. RequU«rne<it Crlbirion,' orUmltatlon .

TWa 23. Divtelon 3, Chijifor 15, •Arttele'l . ' • ' 23 OCR 5510(g) 23CCR2511(c!)

Descriptioci'

23 OCR 2S11(d) etata* aeSona taicen' by or art the dbectior. orpkibiic agende* to etoaVi ui> or abate contRions of polluGon or nuiaanM . resulting from uiuiritentto'rurl or unautitbitafed' reieaaea of waate or ppjhjttnts to ti)e environment; propped tttatJMite8, p(>M or MrrtanyrMted Itoirn the lmrne'd'.ate>bceef discltarged accai^ing ito Arlic^ Chapter; and baSitT proViie titat rarrMcSal actona intended toj contain cudiArastes a! tf^ place of rebasat iriwl hiplMMntappBcabie ';; prQvlsioha orthto'wbchapter .to the extefit '.' teaabie. •• ' •

23 CCR 2510(s> -ciatea poaona roap<>ns£ii«i for ditcttargea at-Mtie tnanagement URAS which ate dpae< afaiandotwd, or inactiv* on the effective data of ttwse ngutationa insy.be' requtrad to develop and Implement a monlorihg prbgraim In accordance wiih Articia 5:of th!s chapter, if vrater qua :ity knpalnaent la found, auch p«f8onc may be requireil to' . develop artd bnpdsmeht a corrective adixi program baaed en the proviaiona of this aubchapter.

AppScable. Relevant fa Apprbpriatn, or To Be • :.-r; Considar^

23 CCR 2510(0) Relevant and 'Appfc riate

23 CCR 2511(d) AppCsablo or 'Reisyant.and Apprcpriate

Commente

T

• • •' -"yr.y .: . • >-

'•• - •\ • .• . Source ;

fitandard. Requiramisnt. Crttefioii, .or Limitation . Dea'crSpOon'.''

•• •'• ' .">"

Appilcabto. Relevant & Appropriate, or ' To Be . Cohsiderad - .

'* -

Commenta : :

I s : Porter Coiogne Water ' Qk aty Control Act (CA . Water Code 5 ,

~i3140,13240.132e0. 132e3.132e7;i3300.

.13304.13307)

ntate'Water Reaoureet Control . -. Ik>ard Retohition No. 92-49 III ' (3.(Aa amended-April 21,1994)'

EatibCshea requteaMnts ibr invectigation'and dearwp and abatement of ditct>ais«t.

. Amoiis othbr requira.'naRts, dischargera muat ' cie rt e 'itnd at>ata^^ ieia^ in a mnner that p»molM the ettakinvent of.,.; either backgrpund v^tetquaD^ or the beet water qiiatty that ia rMsombie If baei rou

• cannot bo reatored..- ... V ; •

AppScabio:

~ . . • i.

Apples to aH deaniips ^ of disehaises ttiiat may affect water qiiiUty

1 * Porter>Cologr»e Wa:ar Qua»y Control Act (CA Water Code; 1300O.13140.1324O>

State Water Resourcea Control 3oard Reaotution No. 88-63 l"Sour:*a of DrinWnfl Water Pofcy^ (aa contained In the RWQCB't Water Quality Control Plan)

8pec8i«a mat, wlih ce tefa excepHm ' groitfttf and aurbce watan.twve belileficiai use. cf municipal or dorneatie water aupply.

AppOc&b'ie

.• f

• AppHes in determining be.-Mncial usee for ,. watera that .nray be affected by discharges of waste.

•flbe 23. CCR. §2550.6 Re'qucea mortKorIng for oompBartoe with reme<iial actian objecttvea for three yean from the diale of achievhg de*nup ieveit.

•f ' . •

Appricsble 1 Ihrcogh 2511(d)

AppRea.toaH groundwater cleanup acavUes.

9 . Titie 23, CCR, §2550.7 Requfirea general sol, surface water, and . groundwater.montoting..

Af pUcabte thj cugh 2511(d) ;

Appees to aB areas st which waste has been discharged. -

7

'• • • •••• •' •• ' ' TOe 23. CCR, §2550 9 Reqiares an asceswnerrt of the ntture and

exterit of ttte'reiecse, kidudlng a detaRitinatlon of the apafial dislrftutlon and

. concentration of each cehstitiient.

Applicable . tiiroogh 2511(d)

Appfies to aiess at . Vftfkich monSorthg results show statisiicaDy significant evidence of releaae. r

• 1

^ * Strt^ter Rtsourees Conirol Board Resobfon 68-18 is mn ARAR for Nt ate; howevsr. the substsno. of ResokiBon No. 68-18 wC b« attained since « I- " ^ ^ ^ E * " * ^ *" Code of Regulations (Chapter 15) are included ki the ARARe. The Stale. a>ereioie, h^ agreed to delete

. nforenca to Resolution No. 6a-t6 in ttie tnble. . . .

x ^Ev W•y?'.w !.t ^ •v'•wv f.*''w^^ ';>''»?>g w

Na Source : Startdard. Requirement .Criterion, or Limitation .

Title 23. CCR. §2550.10

bcscriptiorr

AppHcsbiij, Relevant &i ' Appropriate, or To Be . ; Considered .

Requtes ImpiementaSoin of.conectlve action ineasurea that ensura'titatiCleafMjp isveis are. acMeved througltout flte.zone affected by the releafe t>y remcvina Ihe waste cohstSua.nts orbisstlng them in pkee. Source control may. b« required. AJso risqulrss monBortr>g to detennine ttie eiiecftfvrtess .of Sie convctive 'scSons.

AppBcaMs -; through 2511(d)

CoRimenta

.^pBes to al grc undwater cleanup. acUvties.

CA Sali* Drfcildns Water Act (CA HeaKh md Safely Coda §4010 et »eq.)

Title 22. CCR. Division 4, Clapter 15, Articles 4. 5.5. and 8

itequiremehta for pubfic water systems. Indudea Maxirnum.CiiantamlrKLnt Levels (MCLs) and Seco.ndary Maximum Contaminant Leveto CSMCLe).

(alevant and Bpprc>p.iate

Relevant ar>d approprtats for settlhg water qusHy objeeihres for groundwatera, to ttie extent the state MCU Slid SMCLs ara more, stitngent than federal. MCLs and SMCLs,

10 Safe DMdng Water and Toxics tnforberociit'Act of 1986; 'ProppelSbn 65" (CA HeaRh and Safety Code §25248.5 et seq.)

Health and Scfety Code §25249.5; Tltte 22, CCR. Plvtaiofi 2, . Subdivfelon 1, Chapter 3

Pnhlbes the dtoehaive or release to wate.- cr to tend of a algidlcant amount of .any ch*mical icnown to tt^ State of Califomia .to cause cancer or rapioductive foxiciy wlwn the chemical wM probably pass through a source of drinlong vrater.

Rois;v8ni and appropfiate

Refevant and approptiate Ibr discttarges to a SOUTM of drinldng water.

'.v.A;. .1 . i. •! .

•'1

'\:.

fit" i ' r . •

s E. I o I? : ? f I&8 g ?

• •••o •

.23

iff »

•1? '••.•! '(.i-ljiU , .;: :•. I•••

ICTfcIwfcpy•^-.• 'r^•*•

Fresno Sanitary Landfill - Federal ARAR Analysis

. i:

KeqiitnMMM, Cfiuitett-. gcWmOatfeR ,

1 RCRA, Subpart P 4PCI^ 2«4.ieO-2S4.181 Oroumtwaicr Piolaoiion

. r . • '• '

Relevflniand ' approprtala

Craatas iMoad groundwater: monlloring snd eompHanoe standanis, Includes oonoenlrations standards,

. ntonMoring lequbemanta end ' correciive action raqulrementa

RCRAiSubpaitO|

; , • l' -,. • "• • • • (jf'

CkMura & Post closure

• ••• : • If •

Rslsvant and v epprpprtala

. 8l*fe« lhal monHoring, malnlsnsnoi and rapoiilng rvqulrantanls inutt oonllnue for 30 yeart past dosuro

: R C R A ; Subpart i;-

• • . - v.- : 1;;.-'

, 40CFR,2M.170r2M.178 OonUlftiri• • .|V'. 'j ••'

ApplicaMe.» ^ . pontaln<in arai

needud to store, contamlnatad groundwator

' Requirements for faclTrlWs thai store . oonfelnera of hwardotis wesfe,

RCRA. Subpart J ' ^nCFR iM.iwi- :&'[•'.

Tsnks . ' VJlfjl ^ i -;:; •;

AppOeable for air ttrlpplno and

; GAC units ' •

OulHnss dwign and manapsmani tiandaids (or fenk*

Safe Oflnliing VybWrAd

'•<0CFR;1414i:WCI^'i'-

• •-'.•f,:-:ff::-. .!;•;; ; Rsisvsnt and

sppropiieU .Oiitiines rnaxlfnuni oontaminani levels )i»r diinklnfl wstef.

4OCPR'I44 : •?';:;' UndefgnMir.d inJ«otlati{i

• -^•.••:•.-: %. m--' Appiloabfe.ir rskijealion Is used ,

' as (iisposabfe msttmd for Irsaled wafer

Prpvlda* Requlremenls for Underground ln}ecllon Program

• for ralnjactkin wslta | would be cfessijfed as E Claas IV E

OlM^nVMi$«rAi;!( 33 Cl^,Part 30 1 i W S ' i :.'''Efnuent|'Jintetii|n8!fr;|

ADpHosble. ir ' Usaled Wafer is

discharged Into ; an brtgaliofl dh^

. Requlres establlshinenI of tochnologyrbased ditchargs PmKs for ppbil sources of pollution

93 Cro'Vsil »pr T«(lo

Standard* ' .iTMtod water la...

diachtrBad to tha ROTW

RaqulfMi Iha ••t«blt«hni)»()l of. pratraatmenl ctendards for lh« control of poihitants to POTVV

1 Ctnn Air.Ad 40 CFR 91 National EmIssJr;. o:ii.tdsids (or Ha'iardous Air PoKutanIs

. May t>e relsvani and oppropriafe (or airitrippino

IdentMes and estabflshes emission : standards for spedAo chemidalK

Beiaenefean .1 kSantined potutant |

••••• •• 'V *«^»iNf"ft<' ' ' "

mmmB

•41 • -i'-

',4

Chemical State MCL (Mg/1)

SDWA n MCL (M0/i)

Tetrachloroethylene (PCE) 5 5 j Pifl hloro'ethylene (TCE)* , /• • ••S' •• ^ 1 Tfans-1,2TDIchloroethene 10 100 ^

Vinyl Chloride . 0.5 2 j 1 ,i;irDlchloro9thane (1,1-DCA) 5

|,,1,2-Dichloroethane: (1,2-DGA) 0.5

i l ;2-Dichlorobenzene (1.2-DCB) 600

cis-l ,2-Dichloroethene (cis-1,2-DCE) 6 70

1t,2-Dlchloropropane ; . :• 5/- •••;•; ,'4rDichlorobenzene (1,4-DCB) . •• ;.-;5 ' : 60

rBenzene 1 ".5 •••''•;

1 Ghlorobsnzene • > v 70

•fii

./ • • • , • •••.•":?'EH! *^