CASE CLOSURE SUMMARY
LEAKING UNDERGROUND FUEL STORAGE TANK - LOCAL OVERSIGHT PROGRAM
I. AGENCY INFORMATION
Date:_______________
Agency Name: City of Berkeley, Toxics Division
Address: 2118 Milvia Street
City/State/Zip: Berkeley, CA 94704
Phone: (510) 981-74760
Responsible Staff Person: Geoff Fiedler
Title: Hazardous Materials Specialist
II. CASE INFORMATION
Site Facility Name:
Site Facility Address:
RB Case No.: ---
Local Case No.: STID#
LOP Case No.: ROxxxxxxx
URF Filing Date: ---
Geotracker ID:
APN:
Responsible Parties
Tank I.D. No
Addresses
Size in Gallons
Contents
Phone Numbers
Closed
In Place/Removed?
Piping
Page 1 of 7
ROxxxxxxx – Closure Summary
Date
III. RELEASE AND SITE CHARACTERIZATION INFORMATION
Cause and Type of Release:
Site characterization complete? Yes
Date Approved By Oversight Agency: -----
Monitoring wells installed? Yes No
Number:
Proper screened interval? Yes No
Highest GW Depth Below Ground Surface:
Lowest Depth:
Flow Direction:
Most Sensitive Current Use: Potential drinking water source.
Summary of Production Wells in Vicinity:
Are drinking water wells affected? Yes No
Aquifer Name:
Is surface water affected? Yes No
Nearest SW Name:
Off-Site Beneficial Use Impacts (Addresses/Locations): None
Reports on file? Yes
Where are reports filed? City of Berkeley, Toxics Management
TREATMENT AND DISPOSAL OF AFFECTED MATERIAL
Material
Amount (Include Units)
Action (Treatment or Disposal w/Destination)
Date
Tank
----
----
----
Piping
----
----
----
Free Product
----
----
----
Soil
----
----
----
Groundwater
----
----
----
Page 2 of 7
ROxxxxxxx – Closure Summary
MAXIMUM DOCUMENTED CONTAMINANT CONCENTRATIONS BEFORE AND AFTER CLEANUP
(Please see Attachments x – x for additional information on contaminant locations and concentrations)
Contaminant
Soil (mg/kg)
Water (ug/L)
Before
After
Before
After
Heavy Metals (Cd, Cr, Pb, Ni, Zn)
*
**
†
‡
MTBE
a
b
c
d
TPH (Gas)
TPH (Diesel)
Oil and Grease
Benzene
Toluene
Ethylbenzene
Xylenes
Other (8240/8270)
* ___ ppm Cd, ___ ppm Cr, ___ ppm Pb, ___ ppm Ni, ___ ppm Zn
** ___ ppm Cd, ___ ppm Cr, ___ ppm Pb, ___ ppm Ni, ___ ppm Zn
† ___ ppb Cd, ___ ppb Cr, ___ ppb Pb, ___ ppb Ni, ___ ppm Zn
‡ ___ ppb Cd, ___ ppb Cr, ___ ppb Pb, ___ ppb Ni, ___ ppm Zn
a ___ ppm MTBE, ___ ppm EtOH, ___ ppm TAME, ___ ppm ETBE, ___ ppm DIPE, ___ ppm TBA, ___ ppm EDB, and ___ ppm EDC
b ___ ppm MTBE, ___ ppm EtOH, ___ ppm TAME, ___ ppm ETBE, ___ ppm DIPE, ___ ppm TBA, ___ ppm EDB, and ___ ppm EDC
c ___ ppb MTBE, ___ ppb EtOH, ___ ppb TAME, ___ ppb ETBE, ___ ppb DIPE, ___ ppb TBA, ___ ppb EDB, and ___ ppb EDC
d ___ ppb MTBE, ___ ppb EtOH, ___ ppb TAME, ___ ppb ETBE, ___ ppb DIPE, ___ ppb TBA, ___ ppb EDB, and ___ ppb EDC
Page 3 of 7
ROxxxxxxx – Closure Summary
Site History and Description of Corrective Actions:
The Case Closure Summary should be clear and concise. Consider submitting a stand-alone closure report if the
summary attachments are substantial. Reference the closure report in the Closure Summary. Develop the rationale
that no health or environmental pathway of concern exists. Provide summary documentation of the investigation of
pathways of concern. Graphic representations of groundwater concentration trends are preferred to multiple pages
of reference data. Rather, provide the reasons the details are not available or applicable.
1.
INITIATION OF CORRECTIVE ACTION
1.1 BACKGROUND HISTORY
Provide a brief description of site, surrounding areas, and history of land use. Provide details of the release
discovery and source areas using brief narrative descriptions and graphic representations. Site figures
showing the historical layout and current layout are required. Present the number, size, construction, and
contents of each tank historically located at the site, with the dates of installation and removal. Description
of any corrective actions undertaken at the time of discovery, with reference to tank removal reports or other
documents.
a.
b.
c.
d.
e.
f.
g.
Dates of the tank removals;
Tank size, construction, and contents;
Condition of tanks upon removal, such as pitting or holes;
Evidence of release, such as soil discoloration or odors, product in the pit;
Soil and groundwater samples obtained during removal, their locations, depths and results
Number and location of piping run and dispenser island samples; and
Final disposition of tanks, piping, dispensers, tank rinsate, excavated soil, and groundwater pumped
from the excavation
1.2 SITE CHARACTERIZATION ACTIVITIES
This section should include a brief summary of investigations performed toward defining the extent of
impacts in soil and groundwater at the site. Each phase of work must be summarized chronologically, with
reference to the appropriate investigation report currently in the GeoTracker database or TMD files. The
summary should explain why the work was performed, impacted areas and plume boundaries delineated,
remedial actions implemented, and summarized confirmation sampling and monitoring results. The
summary should address any concerns affecting the validity of data, such as wells screened below the water
table, samples analyzed past recommended hold times, etc. Cumulative data tables for all soil, groundwater
samples, including grab samples, and soil vapor must be included. Site figures with sampling locations,
excavation limits, boring locations, wells, treatment systems, etc.) should be included.
Appropriate summary documents should indicate the limits of soil or groundwater impacts. These conditions
are typically represented with depth/concentration contouring, plume mapping, and cross-section depictions
of the subsurface.
1.3 INVESTIGATION METHODS
This section should evaluate the investigative methods used, and the validity of the data generated during
corrective action. This is an evaluation of the methodology, not an evaluation of the results. At a minimum
the following methods and procedures should be reviewed for appropriateness.
a.
b.
c.
d.
e.
f.
2.
Soil sampling methodology;
Groundwater monitoring well design, installation, development;
Method used to measure groundwater elevations and gradient determination;
Method used to measure free product thickness;
Groundwater sampling methodology; and
Certified laboratory soil and groundwater analyses, chain-of-custody procedures, sample preservation,
holding times, sample preparation methods, and detection limits
EXTENT OF SOIL AND GROUNDWATER POLLUTION
This section should address whether site characterization is complete. The vertical and lateral extent of soil and
groundwater contamination should be defined. Graphic presentations of this data should be included and
supported. An assessment should be made as to whether the location and number of soil and groundwater
samples are adequate to define vertical and lateral extent of impact.
Page 4 of 7
ROxxxxxxx – Closure Summary
Soil
Describe how lateral and vertical extent is bound and historical and current maximum concentrations.
Groundwater
Describe how lateral and vertical extent is bound and historic and current maximum concentrations.
Soil Vapor
Describe how lateral and vertical extent is bound and historical and current maximum concentrations.
Groundwater Occurrence
First encountered versus stabilized groundwater. Present all data used to evaluate groundwater flow conditions
such as hydraulic conductivity, velocity, or particular aquifer/water-bearing unit characteristics such as confined
unconfined, or semi confined conditions.
Hydraulic Gradient
General direction and comparison to regional groundwater gradient.
variations in flow direction.
3.
Include a rose diagram to illustrate
BENEFICIAL USES
An evaluation should be made of all existing and potential impacts on beneficial uses of groundwater and surface
water. The following information should be included.
a.
An evaluation of existing beneficial uses, as contained in the San Francisco Bay, Region 2, Regional Water
Quality Control Board (RWQCB) Basin Plan for the San Francisco Bay (2006), as well as all potential future
beneficial uses. The RWQCB Basin Plan for currently defines the aquifers in Alameda County to be suitable
for municipal supply, industrial supply and agricultural uses.
b.
Well surveys (municipal, agricultural, domestic) to include discussions on the well survey search radius and
methodology (i.e. which agencies were contacted, etc.).
c.
Summary of factors affecting long-term fate of contaminants
4.
REMEDIAL ACTIVITIES
Remedial activities performed at the site should be presented, including interim remedial actions, soil remedial
methods including rationale for method selection, groundwater remedial methods with rationale for method
selection, and the potential or actual impact of remedial actions relating to the beneficial use of groundwater,
surface water, or vapor intrusion.
5.
REMEDIATION EFFECTIVENESS
This section should provide the rationale for closure, consistent with SWRCB Resolution 68-16 "Statement of
Policy with Respect to Maintaining High Quality of Waters in California". The adequacy of the corrective
measures should supported by data including, groundwater verification monitoring, sampling protocols, and
types, frequency, and duration of treatment activities. The potential or existing impacts or areas of residual
contamination to beneficial uses should be documented.
Sites with residual soil contamination that are determined not to pose a significant risk to human health or the
environment in its current use, shall be clearly identified in the summary documentation. Isoconcentration
contouring on a scaled map and estimated volume impacted or residual should be noted. For example, 'An
estimate of ____ cubic yards of soil impacted at concentrations below ____ mg/kg TPH-gasoline (TPH-diesel,
TOG, etc.) remain in place at a depth of ____ feet, located in (at, beneath, etc.) the ____ area of the property
(building, boundary, etc.) as shown on attached Figure ____.'
6.
CONCLUSIONS
Conclusions should identify the case as “low risk” as described in the RWQCB “Supplemental Instructions to
State Water Board December 18, 1995 Interim Guidance on Required Cleanup at Low-Risk Fuel Sites”. The
criteria that must be under the low risk qualification are as follows.
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
The leak and ongoing sources, including free product, have been removed or remediated.
The site has been adequately characterized.
The dissolved hydrocarbon plume is not migrating (stable or decreasing).
No water wells, deeper drinking-water aquifers, surface water, or other sensitive receptors are likely to be
impacted.
The site presents no significant risk to human health (see Table 1)
6. The site presents no significant risk to the environment (see Table 2).
Page 5 of 7
ROxxxxxxx – Closure Summary
IV. CLOSURE
Does completed corrective action protect existing beneficial uses per the Regional Board Basin Plan? Yes
Does completed corrective action protect potential beneficial uses per the Regional Board Basin Plan? Yes
Does corrective action protect public health for current land use? The City of Berkeley does not make specific
determinations concerning public health risk. However, based upon the information available in our files to date, it
does not appear that the release would present a risk to human health based upon current land use and
conditions.
Site Management Requirements: All cases in Berkeley with residual impacts to soil or groundwater are entered
into the City of Berkeley land/parcel management database with a flag to indicate this condition. All building
permits or zoning applications for this property will be subject to enhanced review for environmental or health
concerns that may arise from future development. The TMD will review and comment on plans, typically requiring
construction management plans for significant underground work involving grading, underground utility work, and
dewatering activities. TMD’s time to review, comment, inspect, or otherwise be involved in the development of
these plans will be charged at the established hourly rate. ($150/hr in FY 2010).
Should corrective action be reviewed if land use changes? Yes
Was a deed restriction or deed notification filed? No
Date Recorded: N/A
Total Project Monitoring Wells:
Wells Retained:
Wells Decommissioned:
List Enforcement Actions Taken: None
List Enforcement Actions Rescinded: N/A
V. ADDITIONAL COMMENTS, DATA, ETC.
Considerations and/or Variances:
Conclusion:
City of Berkeley, Toxics Management staff believe that the levels of residual contamination do not pose a significant
threat to water resources, public health and safety, and the environment based upon the information available in
our files to date. No further investigation or cleanup is necessary. Toxics Management staff recommend case
closure for this site.
VI. LOCAL AGENCY REPRESENTATIVE DATA
Prepared by:
Title: Hazardous Materials Specialist
Signature:
Date:
Approved by: Nabil Al-Hadithy, Ph.D.
Title: Manager
Signature:
Date:
This closure approval is based upon the available information and with the provision that the information provided to
this agency was accurate and representative of site conditions.
Page 6 of 7
ROxxxxxxx – Closure Summary
VII. REGIONAL BOARD NOTIFICATION
Regional Board Staff Name: Cleet Carlton
Title: Geologist
RB Response: Concur, based solely upon information
contained in this case closure summary.
Date Submitted to RB:
Signature:
Date:
VIII. MONITORING WELL DECOMMISSIONING
Date Requested by Toxics Management:
Date of Well Decommissioning Report:
All Monitoring Wells Decommissioned: Yes
No
Number Decommissioned:
Number Retained:
Reason Wells Retained:
Additional requirements for submittal of groundwater data from retained wells:
Toxics Management Concurrence - Signature:
Date:
Attachments:
1.
Site Vicinity Map (x pp)
2.
Site Plan (x pp)
3.
Soil Analytical Data (x pp)
4.
Groundwater Analytical Data (x pp)
5.
Soil Vapor Data (x pp)
6.
Boring Logs (x pp)
7.
Cross Sections (x pp)
This document and the related CASE CLOSURE LETTER & REMEDIAL ACTION COMPLETION CERTIFICATE shall
be retained by the lead agency as part of the official site file.
Page 7 of 7
ROxxxxxxx – Closure Summary