01-21-1997 - Status of Groundwater Contamination at the BKK LandfillCity of West Covina
Memorandum
To: City Manager
City Council
From: Environmental Services
Director
Subject: Status of Groundwater
Contamination at the
BKK Landfill
AGENDA
ITEM NO. F 1
DATE JANUARY 21, 1997
® PRINTED ON RECYCLED PAPER
January 20, 1997
Summary: This is a report on the off -site groundwater contamination and other
matters at the BKK Landfill. This report summarizes the oral report
given to the Waste Management and Environmental Quality
Commission at their January 16, 1997, meeting.
On January 16 t le -Waste Management and Environmental Quality Commission
9 ty
received an oral report on the current activities at the BKK Landfill. The purpose
was to:
A. Provide an o ierview of the current status of activities at the BKK Landfill.
B. Prepare the Commission for the report from the BKK Landfill Interagency
Steering Committee report due to be given to the Commission February 20.
An outline of the presentation is attached. Among other issues, the off -site
groundwater conditions were reviewed. The conditions are detailed in the
attachment. The conditions can be summarized as follows:
1. Groundwater contamination from the Landfill exists on four sides and off -site
or outside the permit boundary.
2. BKK is required by the USEPA to characterize the extent of the contaminat
ion and develop and implement remediation or cleanup of the contamination.
3. In 1989 the USEPA issued the enforcement order to have BKK do this work.
4. To date there have been no cleanup plans proposed by BKK.
5.. The .contaminated groundwater plumes on the north and south side of the
landfill are sufficiently identified to call for a cleanup plan according to DTSC.
6. The plume on the southwest side of the Landfill appears to be more
extensive than originally thought and extends into the County area.
7. The plume on''the southeast side of the Landfill appears to be expanding
resulting in BKK's proposal to drill wells in the City of Walnut.
The Commission 'received public comments that suggested Congressmen Dreier
and Torres be advised of the situation and to seek their assistance. The
Commission unanimously voted to recommend to the City Council that the City
Council brief Congressmen Dreier and Torres and other legislators on the
current status of critical environmental issues regarding the BKK Landfill and
requesting their assistance to see that this site is cleaned up.
This motion suppc
discussed later in
recommended for
is considered.
rts the recommendation of Councilmember Herfert to be
:he agenda. For this reason this informational report is
consideration when Councilmember Herfert's recommendation
1
i
Recommendation i
i
It is recommended that the City Council receive and file this report.
{
Michael L. Miller I'
Environmental Services Director
Attachment
I
b:bkk3/ccprtl/20/97 i
mlm
2
OUTLINE OF PRESENTATION
TO THE
WASTE MANAGEMENT AND ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY
COMMISSION
January 16, 1997
1. Provide an overview of the current status of activities at the BKK Landfill.
2. Prepare the Ciommission for the report from the BKK Landfill Interagency Steering
Committee report due to be given to the Commission February 20.
1. Written report on the STATUS OF PLANS FOR BKK LANDFILL CLOSURE dated
January 8, 1997
A. Final Cover continues to be installed
1.) Location is southwest segments of the lowest slopes of the Class III
nonhazardous waste disposal unit
2) Disconnection of gas collection pipes leading to some odors
) . Gas collection header pipe.and wells need to be disconnected to
install final cover
B. Awaiti
we ms
1)
2)
C. LEA h
instea
waste
1)
2)
Landfill gas will continue to move to slope after gas collection
header pipe is disconnected and gas collection wells are capped
LEA responding to complaints
♦ BKK to remove header as late as: possible
♦ BKK to appropriately cap wells
♦ BKK to take other steps deemed appropriate
Bottom line - there will be some odors and City and LEA still want
to hear about them when they occur.
g responses.from agencies regarding the Public Records Act request
le in the OEHHA destruction of records issue I
nce responses are received, City will have to review.
Intent is to review and critique risk assessment.
b: bkkNcomm 1 /16/97rpt
mlm
1 /21 /97
s asked DTSC for more information on the issuance of an order
of a permit for the post closure maintenance of the Class I hazardous
isposal unit
e believe, at this time, there will be no public review or input, no
iblic meeting, no environmental document except a Categorical
cemption, and no agency consultation.
e are not sure how the financial assurances will be addressed.
Prior to landfill closure, BKK had an insurance policy that relied
on five years of annual premiums. We assume this was attached
to five more years of landfill operation.
1
4)
b) Landfill closed in about one year: We are not sure, if more than
one annual payment was made and what arrangements were
made for the balance.
D. Clarification of groundwater contamination found at Amber Valley spring in
Walnut. .
1) Spring located at Amber Valley and Amar Road.
2) Will cover this issues in the ground water report that follows.
2. Groundwater contamination
A. The subject of a consent olyder issued by the USEPA in 1989.
1) BKK required to characterize extent of contamination (define the
plume).
2) BKK required to develop and implement plan to remediate
contamination (correct or cleanup or contain).
B. To date BKK continues to study There areno plans for remediation or
cleanup.
C. Plume locations and status
1) Previous reports from the DTSC geologist and reports to the
Commission in last several months were summarized.
2) Our report based on information reported by DTSC geologist and
agency reports.
3) North Saddle Plume
i
a) Saddle area is located about 600 feet west of the
communications/cable tower on top of the hill at north boundary
of landfill. i
b) Contamination was found about 300-400 feet outside landfill
permit boundary, but on BKK property.
f
c) Geology drops iat a steep angle from the top of the ridge north of
the landfill i
d) DTSC geologist does not believe further drilling is warranted to -
find the limit of the plume. Plan for cleanup or remediation is
best option.
i
e) No remediation plan has been presented to date.
j
Plumes at east and southeast boundaries of Landfill
a) Three to four plumes are emanating from the Landfill:
One or twolplumes are above the "M". streets in the Miranda.
Seep area (canyon area north of Miranda).
♦ Two plumes are under the "M" streets
i
b) Condition of plumes was characterized by DTSC geologist late
last year as appearing to getting worse rather than better.
I
b:bkk3/comm1/16/97rpt 2
mlm
1/21/97
C
:) Contamination found and reported in well EP-14. at north curb line
of Amar Road, west of Manu Lane.
♦ Well was previously reported as clean.
♦ As a result of the latest report, BKK has proposed to drill
hydropunch. wells south of Amar in Walnut.
♦ Walnut has been contacted.
Contamination found in 1 of 4 samples taken at Amber Valley
Spring (Amber Valley at Amar Road).
♦ Contamination is low, but the detected compound should not
be present.
♦ Compound is cis- 1 -2-dichloroethylene.
♦ BKK alleges contamination is from debris in and around the
spring surface. Debris includes a shopping cart and what
appears to be a computer hard drive.
♦ BKK proposing more tests.
♦ Walnut has been contacted.
Nearest drinking water well is about 1.5 miles south of Landfill.
5) Plume south of Landfill under streets around Lynn Court and Nanette.
Plume is approximately south of Barrier No. 2 located inside the
Landfill's south boundary.
Limits of plume appear to be known.
No plan for remediation or cleanup has been presented.
6) Plume at northerly confluence for Class I hazardous waste disposal
unit and the Class III non -hazardous waste disposal unit.
I) DTSC geologist had previously reported that leachate from the
hazardous waste disposal unit was probably going under the
non -hazardous waste disposal unit.
b: W/comm1/16/97rpt
mlm
1 /21 /97
Monitoring wells between -the disposal unit are a point of
compliance according the Regional Water Quality Control Board.
♦ Northern -most wells (MW 50AR & MW 50BR) are
contaminated,
♦ BKK wants to address leachate plume when it passes under
and appears south of the Class III non -hazardous waste
disposal unit.
♦ Contaminated wells are west of the drum disposal area of the
hazardous waste disposal unit.
♦ Given installation of the Class II disposal unit liner, how do we
know where the plume will reappear?
♦ If plume travels under the non -hazardous waste disposal unit,
does it become a hazardous waste site?
What are implications for future development?
3
I
9
I
♦ Plume limits appear to be under the proposed golf course
clubhouse and fairways:
I
7) Plume southwest of tlhe landfill, south of the entrance of the Landfill
property.
I
a) Contamination !has been detected in all but one of the 6 or more
hydropunch wells along the south curb line of Amar Road from
west of McDonalds to east of the Bank of America.
b) Concentrations of volatile organic" compounds range from 20 to
60 parts per million.
c) These wells are the latest in a series of wells drilled over the last
several years from locations interior of the entrance to the Landfill
to Amar Road.
r
d) BKK proposinglto drill hydropunch wells along Wing Lane, west
of Azusa Avenue in the County. .
e) Open trapezoidal storm drain trends from the intersection of
Amar and Azusa Avenues to the south west toward Puente
Creek (Rimgrove at Wing Lane).
f) Nearest drinking water well is 1.5 miles to the west of Landfill
i,
D. BKK making statements they have limited funds and blaming USEPA for
delays in groundwater cleanup.
F.
1) USEPA has commented on BKK`s delays.
For example: BKk blamed City for lack of permits to drill wells on
south side of Amar Road at Azusa Avenue. BKK
requested a permit in October 1995. City approved
permit with conditions in November 1995. BKK
drilled wells in September 1996.
2) Closure of Landfill to waste disposal has certainly reduced cash flow.
I
3) Delays were probably caused by both sides.
Note: I
LEA: Local Enforcement Agency or City Waste Management Enforcement
Manager
OEHHA: California Environmental Protection Agency - Office of Environmental Health"
Hazard Assessment
DTSC: California Environmental Protection Agency -Department of Toxic
Substances Control
USEPA: United State Environmental Protection Agency
b: W/comm1/16/97rpt l 4
mlm i
1 /21 /97