|
<br />Chapter 4
<br />Environmental Setting, Impacts, and Mitigation Measures
<br />G. Hazards and Hazardous Materials
<br />
<br />the remediation effort, Since then, Kaiser requested that the DTSC determine whether the
<br />residual levels were acceptable for Kaiser's future anticipated rezoning of the project for
<br />residential use, DTSC reportedly determined that the levels approved in 1986 were not
<br />acceptable for residential use and required further investigation ofthe area,
<br />
<br />A removal action work plan was approved by DTSC in November, 1998 for the pond area,
<br />Additional PCB-contaminated soil was excavated, the area was backfilled with clean soil, and
<br />the contaminated material was disposed of offsite. The site was cleaned up to a level that
<br />allows for reSidential/unrestricted land uses, The excavation and off-site removal action was
<br />approved by DTSC in September 2000,18
<br />
<br />In addition, other activities outside the project area potentially resulting in groundwater
<br />contamination were identified in the Bernal Property Phase I Specific Plan EIR, Four
<br />underground fuel tanks were identified upgradient of the project site at the Proficient Food
<br />Company (Figure 15), containing diesel (two tanks), gasoline, and waste oil. No records of
<br />leakage were reported as of the date of the Phase I EIR, Since preparation of the Phase I
<br />EIR, MBM Corporation (parent company to Proficient Food Company) reportedly removed
<br />three of the underground tanks in May 2004, Groundwater monitoring and testing con-
<br />ducted by MBM reportedly confirmed that no contamination from the underground tanks
<br />had occurred (original data to support this claim were not available for review),19 The Pleas-
<br />anton Planning Commission approved a subsequent MBM request to replace the under-
<br />ground fuel storage system with an aboveground system.20
<br />
<br />In 1999, an issue was raised of possible contamination of a portion of the Western Area by
<br />radionuclides during the period when the Western Area was used in part for evaporation
<br />ponds and a sludge drying bed associated with the former Pleasanton Wastewater
<br />Treatment Plan (PWTP) , Such contamination could theoretically have occurred as a conse-
<br />quence of discharge of wastewater that might have subject to contamination with sub-
<br />stances originating from the Lawrence Livermore Laboratory, through the laundering of
<br />uniforms of employees,
<br />
<br />This issue was reviewed by City staff and referred to the California Department of Health
<br />Services (DOHS) for consideration, together with background studies and analyses docu-
<br />ments prepared by specialists in the field of health physics would had been retained by the
<br />San Francisco PUC, the owner of the Bernal Property in 1999, In a letter dated September
<br />20, 1999, DOHS concluded that, based on the sampling that had been done, "it appears
<br />that there is no immediate health hazard from radionuclides on the Bernal property,"21
<br />
<br />18 California Department of Toxic Substances Control, Site Cleanup-Site Mitigation and Brownfields Reuse
<br />Program Database (Calsites), Profile Report ID 01280050-Applied Biosystems (formerly Kaiser), reviewed on
<br />19 October 2005 at http://www.dtsc.ca.gov /database/Calsites,
<br />19 City of Pleasanton, Planning Commission Staff Report. Subject PAP-74 (Appeal of Case PDR-427), February
<br />9, 2005,
<br />20 City of Pleasant on, Planning Commission Minutes, February 9, 2005.
<br />21 California Department of Health Services, communication to Mee Ling Tung, Director, Environmental
<br />Health Services, Alameda County, from Tracy Barreau, Research Specialist, and Marilyn C. Underwood,
<br />Ph,D" Staff Toxicologist, September 20,1999, P, 1,
<br />
<br />79
<br />
|