FUGRO WEST, INC. - California Home Page

1000 Broadway, Suite 440Oakland, California 94607

Tel: (510) 268-0461Fax: (510) 268-0545

FUGRO WEST, INC.

A member of the Fugro group of companies with offices throughout the world.

December 11, 2007 Revised December 13, 2007 Project No. 1383.007

Caterpillar Inc. 100 N.E. Adams Street Peoria, Illinois 61629-3350

Attention: Mr. Brian Linne

Subject: Demolition of Caterpillar Groundwater Extraction and Treatment System No. 1 1027 Lucille Street, San Leandro, California

Dear Mr. Linne:

Introduction

Fugro West, Inc. (Fugro) presents this report to document the demolition of the Caterpillar Groundwater Extraction and Treatment System No. 1 (System 1) adjacent to 1027 Lucille Street in San Leandro, California. The treatment system removed volatile organic compounds (VOCs) from the groundwater between 1994 and 1999. System 1 was this first of three groundwater extraction and treatment systems that Caterpillar installed and operated to remove trichloroethene (TCE) emanating from their former facility in the vicinity of Davis and Alvarado Streets. Plate 1 shows the approximate size of the TCE Plume. Plate 2 shows the locations of the three systems.

Limitations

Fugro prepared this report at the direction of Caterpillar Inc. (Caterpillar) for the sole use of Caterpillar, the Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC), and the City of San Leandro. No other party should rely on the information contained herein without the prior written consent of Fugro or Caterpillar. This report and the interpretations, conclusions, and recommendations contained within are based in part on information provided to Fugro. Therefore, this report is subject to the limitations and qualifications presented in the referenced documents.

Background

Caterpillar owned and operated a manufacturing facility in the vicinity of Davis and Alvarado Streets in San Leandro, California from approximately 1910 until 1984 when Caterpillar sold the property to World Savings and Loan Association. During these years of operation, TCE was released from the former Caterpillar facility and migrated in the groundwater westward toward San Francisco Bay beneath residential housing (Plate 2). In 1987 World Savings and Loan Association constructed an office building and parking area over a

Caterpillar Inc. December 11, 2007 (Project No. 1383.007) Revised December 13, 2007

G:\JOBDOCS\1383\1383.007\FINAL DOCS\DEMOLITIONLTR11DEC07_REV1 DTSC.DOC 2

portion of the former facility after the DTSC approved the remediation of the contaminants in the soil.

Caterpillar then proposed the construction and operation of the three groundwater extraction and treatment systems and obtained National Priority Discharge Elimination Permits (NPDES) from the Regional Water Quality Control Board (RWQCB) to discharge the treated groundwater to the storm drain. System 1 was designed and operated with three vessels of granular activated carbon (GAC). Caterpillar added a fourth vessel of a proprietary resin product produced by Romic Inc. of East Palo Alto. The resin was useful in adsorbing vinyl chloride from the groundwater stream that the GAC did not remove cost effectively.

The DTSC authorized the shut down of System 1 in their approval of the Five-Year Remedial Action Plan Review dated August 26, 1999 and approved the demolition of the three treatment systems in their approval of the Remedial Action Plan Amendment dated December 16, 2005. System 1 was shut down in September 1999. On behalf of Caterpillar, Fugro requested and the RWQCB approve the rescission of the NPDES permit for System 1 in a letter dated September 10, 2002. In their letter dated December 13, 2005 the DTSC approved demolition of System 1. During the interval between September 10, 2002 and November 8, 2007, Fugro discharged the rainwater that accumulated in the treatment compound to the storm drain.

Demolition of System 1

The principle activities in the demolition of System 1 included:

• Removal and recycling of Romic’s resin vessel;

• Removal and recycling of the granular activated carbon (GAC) in the three treatment vessels of System 1;

• Abandonment of Extraction Well-1 (EX-1);

• Distribution of a work notice prepared by the DTSC within approximately 500 feet of System 1; and

• Demolition of System 1

These activities are further described below:

Fugro sampled the resin on September 31, 2005 and analyzed the sample for VOCs in accordance with EPA Test Method 8260. We present the results in Appendix A. These results indicated that the concentrations of the resin were not considered hazardous and that the resin could be re-cycled by Romic at their local facility. The resin vessel contained approximately 50 pounds of adsorption material. Fugro contracted with Romic to remove and recycle their resin vessel, and the resin vessel was removed in October 2005.

US Filter sampled the granular activated carbon (GAC) from the two vessels at System 1 and analyzed the sample for VOCs. We present the analytical report in Appendix B. On the



basis of this result, US Filter agreed to remove and recycle the GAC on December 28, 2005. The GAC was removed from System 1 in December 2005. Each of the three GAC vessels holds approximately 1,500 gallons of GAC.

We also contracted with HEW Drilling, a California licensed drilling contractor, to abandon the extraction well at System 1 (EX-1) in accordance with the requirements of Alameda County and the City of San Leandro in December 2005.

The DTSC prepared a work notice to inform the residents in the vicinity of System 1 of the demolition project. Fugro distributed the Work Notice to the residents within approximately 500 feet of System 1. A copy of the Work Notice is presented in Appendix C. The Work Notice lists some of the construction items that Fugro and Ferma will accomplish during the demolition, including:

• Remove or seal the underground pipes from the treatment system

• Demolish and offhaul the concrete, gravel and sand at the treatment compound

• Seal the extraction well within the treatment compound

• Plug the drain pipe leading to the storm drain in Lucille Street

• Grade the site to drain to Lucille Street

• Conduct airborne dust monitoring

In order to proceed with the demolition of System 1, Fugro prepared plans and specifications for the demolition of System 1 and the re-cycling of nearly all the building materials. We issued the plans and specifications to selected contractors for bid and contracted with Ferma Corporation to perform the demolition. Ferma began by submitting a permit to the City of San Leandro to demolish System 1 and then proceeded with the demolition project. Ferma completed the work between October 31, and November 5, 2007.

Ferma provided Fugro with a sample of the fill material that they intended to use to backfill the excavations. Fugro had a sample of the material analyzed at a state-certified laboratory for analysis by EPA Test Methods 8260, 8015, and 6010B for VOCs, Total Petroleum Hydrocarbons (TPH), and the 17 heavy metals. None of the compounds were detected in the VOC and TPH analyses, and therefore the VOC and TPH concentrations are not of concern to DTSC. DTSC has established the California Human Health Screening Levels (CHHSLs) and uses these screening levels to evaluate the risks posed by soil concentrations. Table 1 presents a comparison of the concentrations of the 17 heavy metals of the fill material with the CHHSLs and with background metals concentrations for Northern California. We present the results of these analyses in Appendix D. All test results have concentrations below their CHHSL except for Arsenic. The Arsenic concentration of 9.4 milligrams per kilogram (mg/kg) exceeds the CHHSL of 0.07 mg/kg; however, the background concentration of 19.1 mg/kg is greater than the detected concentration, indicating that typical native soils in the San Francisco Bay Area will have concentrations greater than the fill material imported to the site. On this basis, Fugro



believes that the Arsenic concentrations are not of concern at the site and that the fill material provided by Ferma was acceptable for use at the site.

Fugro’s geotechnical laboratory analyzed sample of the fill material for the Atterberg limits in accordance with ASTM D4318, i.e. the Liquid Limit and the Plastic Index. The Liquid Limit was 28.6% and the Plastic Index was 14.5%. On the basis of this test result, the fill material is classified as clay of low plasticity and suitable for fill material at this location. Fugro also analyzed a soil sample for the maximum dry density in accordance with ASTM 1557. The maximum dry density was 123.5 pounds per cubic foot at an optimum moisture content of 1%. We present the results of the plasticity and the compaction testing in Appendix E. Fugro then used a nuclear density gauge to measure the in-place density of the compacted fill material on November 5, 2007, and compared the measured densities with the maximum dry density. The measured densities in Appendix F show that the three initial tests had a relative compaction of less than 90%; however, Ferma applied additional compactive effort to the fill material, and Fugro retested the locations of the three initial tests. The subsequent tests indicated that the material was adequately compacted to a dry density of greater than 90%.

Prior to beginning demolition, Ferma obtained an encroachment permit to allow sealing of the conduit from the site to the storm drain in Lucille Street. Ferma proceeded to seal the storm drain connection to the manhole in Lucille Street in accordance with a City of San Leandro encroachment permit with the observation of a representative of the City.

During demolition of System 1, Fugro monitored the activities of Ferma and checked that Ferma applied sufficient water to the site to mitigate dust generation during the demolition activities. At the request of the DTSC, Fugro also monitored the demolition activities on November 1 and 5, 2007, with the RAM 1000 to measure the concentration of airborne particulates. Fugro compared the airborne particulate at the site with those both up and down wind of the site. We present the readings in Table 2. In addition, Ms. Jayantha Randeni of the DTSC visited the site on November 1, 2007 and observed that very little dust was generated. The results in Appendix G indicate the presence of dust at the site exceeded 0.050 milligrams per cubic meter (mg/m3) above the upwind monitoring on two occasions on November 5, 2007, when the contractor was placing and compacting fill materials at the site. Other than these instances, Fugro observed or measured no dust significant dust generation at the site and no measurement that exceeded 0.050 mg/m3 above the upwind monitoring. These exceedences occurred over a very short period of time, and Fugro believes that they had no impact on human health or the environment.

Fugro also collected noise measurements with a decibel monitor. We noted a wide range in the decibel measurements during the demolition, especially when the contractor was breaking the concrete. However, we observed no sustained decibel measurement greater than 80 decibels.

As a result of the discussions with Mr. Joe Bros of Ferma, Fugro estimates that Ferma removed and re-cycled 5 cubic yards of asphalt, and 35 cubic yards of concrete and Class II aggregate base gravel.



Fugro observed that Ferma performed their demolition activities in general conformance with Fugro’s project plans and specifications. The fill material met the plasticity and compaction requirements of the contract documents, and the chemical testing of the soil confirmed that soil was free of VOCs, TPH, and had acceptable concentrations of the 17 heavy metals. Fugro provided monitoring of the site of the dust and noise and found that the dust levels were generally less than 0.050 mg/m3 greater than the upwind monitoring. We also noted that the noise levels were generally less than 80 decibels, and therefore the demolition activities had no significant impact on the neighborhood. On the basis of these observations, monitoring and testing, Fugro concludes that Ferma restored the property adjacent to 1027 Lucille Street to its condition from before the treatment system was constructed. We further believe that Caterpillar has met its contractual obligation with Ms. Priscilla Gomez, the property owner, in restoring the property. We conclude that no further work is required at System 1.

Sincerely,

FUGRO WEST, INC.

Stephen J. Osborne, G.E. 656 Geotechnical Engineer

SJO:rh

Attachments: Table 1: Soil Analytical Results Table 2: Results of Air Monitoring with Data RAM 1000

Plate 1: Vicinity Map Plate 2: Site Plan Appendix A: Severn Trent Laboratories, Inc., Laboratory Report

dated September 12, 2005 Appendix B: U.S. Filter Analytical Report dated September 12, 2005 Appendix C: DTSC, Work Notice, Former Caterpillar Site,

San Leandro, California Appendix D: Severn Trent Laboratories, Inc., Laboratory Report dated October 15, 2007 Appendix E: Fugro’s Testing of Fill Material for Atterberg Limits and Compaction Curve Appendix F: Fugro’s Field Density Tests Results

Copies Submitted: (1) Addressee (1 + PDF) Ms Jayantha Randeni, DTSC (1) Ms. Tiffany Treece, City of San Leandro

Compound Sample of Fill Soil CHHSL+ Background++

TPHg ND (0.25) NE NETPHd* ND (0.99) NE NETPHmo* ND (49) NE NE

VOCs ND (varies) NE NE

Antimony ND (2.0) 3.0 5.5Arsenic 9.4 0.07 19.1Barium 90 5200 509Beryllium 0.78 150 1.0Cadmium ND (1.0) 17 2.7Chromium** 44 750 99.6Cobalt 11 40.0 14.9Copper 33 230 69.4Lead 7.0 200 16.1Molybdenum 1.1 40.0 1.3Nickel 40 150 119.8Selenium ND (1.0) 10 5.6Silver ND (1.0) 20 1.8Thallium ND (1.0) 1.2 27.1Vanadium 52 15 112Zinc 56 600 106.1Mercury ND (0.48) 1.0 0.4

Note. All units in mg/kgND (reporting limit) = not detected at the reporting limits of the analysesNE = Not Established* Laboratory analyses used Silica gel cleanup** Assumes Chromium IIIESL = Environmental Screening Level+ = California Human Health Screening Levels for Soil for Residential Land Use + + = Assumes Chromium III+++ = Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory Environmental Restoration Program, 1995 or Background Concentrations of Trace and Major Elements in California Soils, Kearney Foundation of Soil Science, 1996

Table 1

San Leandro, CaliforniaCaterpillar Treatment System 1

Backfill Soil- Adjacent to 1027 Lucille Street Soil Analytical Results

Table 2Results of Air Monitoring With Data RAM 1000

Demolition of System 1San Leandro, California

Day Time Upwind mg/m3

Onsite mg/m3

Difference mg/m3

Comments

11/1/2007 14:45 0.123 0.124 0.00111/5/2007 9:00 0.105 0.102 -0.003

9:05 0.308 0.299 -0.0099:10 0.246 0.260 0.0149:15 0.286 0.641 0.355 Recorded during soil placement9:20 0.290 0.311 0.0219:50 0.132 0.674 0.542 Recorded during offhaul of soil

10:00 0.100 0.106 0.006

FUGRO WEST, INC. - California Home Page

Documents

Transcript of FUGRO WEST, INC. - California Home Page