United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Office of
Emergency and
Remedial Response
EPA/ROD/R09-91/059
June 1991
EPA Superfund
Record of Decision:
Synertek (Building #1), CA
-------
50272-101
REPORT DOCUMENTATION 11. REPORTNO. I~ 3. Recipients Acce8aion No.
PAGE EPA/ROD/R09-91/059
4. 11tIe IJId Subtitle s. Report Date
SUPERFUND RECORD OF DECISION 06/28/91
Synertek (Building U), CA
First Remedial Action - Final 6.
7. AuIhor(s) 8. Performing Orgeniz8tion Rept. No.
8. Perfonning Org8InI2a1Ion Name IJId AddI888 10. ProjectlT-*lWortI Unit No.
11. Contrect(C) or Granl{G) No.
(C)
(G)
1~ Sponsoring Organization Name IJId AdcIre88 13. Type of Report & Period Covered
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
401 M Street, S.W. 800/000
Washington, D.C. 20460 14.
15. Supplement8ry No1e8
16. Ab81r8ct (Umit: 200 words)
The 1.5-acre Synertek (Building #1) site is a former semiconductor products
manufacturing facility in Santa Clara, Santa Clara County, California. The major site
feature is a 24,000 square foot building (Building U). The site is comprised of both
onsite and offsite components. The on site component includes the area within the
Synertek property boundaries surrounding Building #1, and the offsite component includes
the area contaminated by a ground water plume that has migrated north past the property
boundaries and into the adjacent industrial park. The surrounding area is zoned for
light industrial manufacturing. The site overlies three shallow aquifer zones, and a
deep aquifer zone that provides up to 50% of the municipal drinking water for the Santa
Clara Valley residences. It is suspected that hydraulic separation among shallow
aquifers is imperfect owing to the discontinuous nature of sediment types. Municipal
water supply wells perforate the aquifer zones nearby. Historical ground water use in
the area includes private water-supply wells for homes and agriculture prior to the
construction of public water connections and municipal water supply wells. The location
of one agricultural well still remains unknown and is still under investigation. The
Synertek site manufactured semiconductor products from 1978 to 1985. During this period
(See Attached Page)
17. Documen1 AnaJy8i8 L Descriptora
Record of Decision - Synertek (Building U), CA
First Remedial Action - Final
Contaminated Medium: gw -.
Key Contaminants: VOCs (1, I-DCA, cis-1,2-DCE, 1,1-DCE, TCA, TCE, vinyl chloride)
b. 1dentifienI00000EncIed Terme
Co COSA 11 FicIdIGrIq)
18. AY8iI8bIity SteIement 19. Seamy Class (This Report) 21. No. of Pages
None --..... -_.. 128
.-
20. SecurIty Q... (This Page) ~ Price
f\lnn'"
2n (4-77)
(See AHSI-Z39.18)
See /II8trut:tJOII8 on Reverse
(Formerty NTlS-3S)
Department of Commerce
-------
EPA/ROD/R09-91/059
Synertek (Building #1), CA
First Remedial Action - Final
Abstract (Continued)
Synertek constructed and utilized two underground tank systems to store chemicals and
solvents used in semiconductor manufacturing processes, and an underground concrete vault
was constructed for process water neutralization. In 1982, after Synertek submitted a
Facility Questionnaire to the State describing their underground neutralization systems,
sumps, and tanks, the State initiated further site studies to characterize subsurface
pollution. The State determined that accidental release of chemicals leaking from the
two underground tank systems was a source of onsite ground water and soil contamination.
In 1985, the State required the excavation and offsite removal of the solvent and
neutralization tanks. In addition, onsite ground water pumping and treatment using an air
stripping tower began in 1987. A well search for abandoned potentially contaminated
agricultural wells was conducted in 1986 and one well is still unaccounted for. This
Record of Decision (ROD) addresses only contaminated ground water since the contaminated
soil and structures were removed previously. The primary contaminants of concern
affecting the ground water are VOCs including TCE, vinyl chloride, 1,1-DCE, cis-1,2-DCE
TCA, and 1,1-DCA.
The selected remedial action for this site includes continuing operation of the existing
ground water extraction and air stripping treatment system; discharging the treated
effluent to an onsite storm drain; controlling air emissions by carbon adsorption, if
emissions exceed levels currently permitted by the Bay Area Air Quality Management
District (BAAQMD); conducting a pilot injection study to evaluate if the reinjection of
treated water would enhance the removal of pollutants, speed ground water cleanup, and
reduce ground water discharge to the surface; conducting potential conduit investigations
to locate and seal the remaining abandoned agricultural well that is believed to exist
close to the plume; monitoring ground water; and implementing institutional controls
including deed and well use restrictions. The estimated present worth cost for this
remedial action is $895,000, which includes an annual O&M cost of $61,000.
PERFORMANCE STANDARDS OR GOALS: Chemical-specific ground water cleanup goals are based
on the more stringent of Federal MCLs, State MCLs, non-zero MCLG, or a Hazard Risk Index
(RISK), and include TCE 5 ug/l (State).
- ....... -_..
.. - 4 ~
-------
RECORD OF DECISION
SYNERTEK BUILDING #1
SUPERFUND SITE
SANTA CLARA, CALIFORNIA
JUNE 28, 1991
U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
REGION 9
_.. ..... ..... .
.. -"
-------
RECORD OF DECISION
PART I:
DECLARATION
PART II:
.DECISION SUMMARY
PART III:
RESPONSIVENESS SUMMARY
SYNERTEK BUILDING #1
SUPERFUND SITE
SANTA CLARA, CALIFORNIA
JUNE 28, 1991
U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
REGION 9
1
_H--.. .. .
J
-------
PART
I
I
I
I
II
II
II
II
II
SECTION
I
1.0
2.0
3.0
4.0
5.0
1.0
1.1
1.2
1.3
1.4
1.5
1.6
1.7
2.0
2.1
2.2
2.3
3.0
4.0
4.1
4.1.1
4.1.2
4.2
5.0
5.1
5.2
5.2.1
5.2.2
5.2.3
CONTEN'l'S
PAGE
PART I:
DECLARATION
Declaration
6
Statement of Basis and Purpose
Assessment of the site
6
6.
Description of the Remedy
6
Declaration
7
PART II:
DECISION SUMMARY
Site
Name, Location, and Description
Site Name and Location
Regional Topography
Adjacent Land Use
Historical Land Use
Hydrogeology
Water Use
Surface and Subsurface Structures
8
8
8
11
11
11
13
14
Site
History
History
History
History
14
14
16
16
and Enforcement Activities
of site Activities
of site Investigations
of Enforcement Actions
Community Relations
17
Scope and Role of the Response Action
Scope of the Response Action
Interim Remedial Measure
Selected Remedy
Role of the Response Action
Summary of Site Characteristics
Sources of Contamination
Description of contamination
Subsurface Structures/Soil
Groundwater Investigations
Air Investigations
18
18
18
20
20
21
21
21
21
22
25
2
-------
II
II
II
III
III
II
6.0
6.1
6.2
6.2.1
6.2.2
6.2.3
6.2.4
6.3
6.4
6.5
II
7.0
7.1
7.2
7.3
7.4
8.0
8.1
8.2
8.3
9.0
9.1
9.2
9.3
9.3.1
9.3.2
9.3.3
10.0
1.0
2.0
ATTACHMENT A:
ATTACHMENT B:
Summary of site Risks
Toxicity Assessment
Risk Characterization
Soil/Subsurface Structures
Air
Surface Water
Ground Water
Presence of Sensitive Human Populations
Presence of Sensitive Ecological Systems
Conclusion
Applicable or Relevant and Appropriate
Requirements (ARARs)
Types of ARARs
Contaminant-specific ARARs
Action Specific ARARs
Location-Specific ARARs
Description of Alternatives
Remedial Action Objectives
Groundwater Cleanup Standards
Remedial Action Alternatives
Comparative Analysis of Alternatives
criteria
Analysis of Alternatives
The Selected Remedy
Basis of Selection
Features of the Remedy
uncertainty in the Remedy
Statutory Determinations
PART III:
RESPONSIVENESS SUMMARY
Introduction
Regional Water Quality Control Board Responses
RWQCB Responsiveness Summary
Administrative Record Index
3
-.u..... -_. .
27
27
29
29
29
30
30
31
31
33
33
34
34
35
36
37
37
37
40
41
41
42
46
46
47
48
49
50
50
-------
TABLE
1
2
3
4
5
LIST OF TABLES
TITLE
Significant Groundwater contaminants, Synertek #1
Groundwater contaminants of Concern, Synertek #1
Maximum Health Risks for Groundwater Contaminants
of Concern, Synertek #1
Groundwater Cleanup Standards, Synertek #1
Extracted-Groundwater Cleanup Standards for
Discharge, synertek #1
4
_.< .... -. .
PAGE
26
28
32
38
39
.. .--
-------
1-
L:J:ST OP PIGURES
F:J:GURE
T:J:TLE
1
site Location, synertek #1
site Plan - Well Locations, Synertek #1
2
3
Generalized Hydrogeologic Profile,
Synertek #1
4
Location of Tank and Soil Removals and
Soil Gas Sampling Locations, Synertek #1
5
Remediation System Layout, Synertek #1
Total VOC Plume Contours in A Aquifer,
Synertek #1
6
7
Total VOC Plume Contours in B Aquifer,
Synertek #1
5
PAGE
9
10
12'
15
19
23
24
-------
PART I.
DECLARATION
1.0
SITE NAME AND LOCATION
Synertek, Building #1
3050 Coronado Drive
Santa Clara, California
2.0
STATEMENT OP BASIS AND PURPOSE
This Record of Decision ("ROD") presents the selected remedial
actions for the Synertek Building #1 (Synertek #1) Superfund site
in Santa Clara, California. This document was developed in ac-
cordance with the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensa-
tion, and Liability Act of 1980 (CERCLA) as amended by the Super-
fund Amendments and Reauthorization Act of 1986 (SARA), 42 U.S.C.
Section 9601 et. sea.. and in accordance with the National Oil
and Hazardous Substances Pollution Contingency Plan, 40 C.F.R.
section 300 et. sea.. ("NCP"). The attached administrative
record index (Attachment B) identifies the documents upon which
the selection of the remedial action is based.
3.0
ASSESSMENT OP THE SITE
Actual or threatened release of hazardous substances from this
site, if not addressed by implementing the response action
selected in this ROD, may present an imminent and substantial en-
dangerment to pub~ic health~ welfare, or the environment.
4.0
DESCRIPTION OP THE REMEDY
.
The selected remedy for synertek #1 consists of continuing to
operate the current groundwater extraction system, treating con-
taminated water with the existing air stripper, and discharging
treated effluent to a storm drain under an NPDES permit. The air
stripper will include air emissions control if emissions exceed
levels currently permitted by the Bay Area Air Quality Management
District (BAAQMD). In addition, the selected remedy involves a
pilot injection study to evaluate whether injection of treated
6
-.-.......... .
-. -.u
-------
water back to the subsurface would enhance the removal of pol-
lutants, speed the cleanup, and reduce the amount of ground water
discharged to the surface. Finally, attempts to locate and seal
the remaining abandoned agricultural well that is believed to ex-
ist in the vicinity of the plume will continue. Contaminated
soils and structures were removed during the interim remedial ac-
tion and no further removals are necessary.
These remedial actions address the principal risks at the Syner-
tek site by removing the contaminated soils and structures and
removing the contaminated ground water, thereby significantly
reducing the the toxicity, mobility or volume of hazardous sub-
stances in both media. These response actions will greatly
reduce the possibility of contamination of existing potable water
supplies and potential future water supplies.
5.0
DECLARAT:ION
The selected remedy is protective of human health and the en-
vironment, complies with federal and state requirements that are
legally applicable or relevant and appropriate to the remedial
action, and is cost-effective. This remedy utilizes permanent
solutions and alternative treatment (or resource recovery) tech-
nologies to the maximum extent practicable and satisfies the
statutory preference for remedies that employ treatment that
reduces toxicity, mobility, or volume as a principal element.
Because the remedy will result in hazardous substances remaining
on-site above health-based levels, a five-year review, pursuant
to CERCLA section 121, 42 U.S.C. Section 9621, will be conducted
at least once every five years after initiation of the remedial
action to ensure that the remedy continues to provide adequate
protection of human health and the environment.
J~~.I111~
Daniel W. McGovern
Regional Administrator
~.2g'91
Date
7
_n >'".- -....
-------
PART II. DECISION SUMMARY
This Decision Summary provides an overview of the problems posed
by the Synertek Building #1 (Synertek #1) Superfund site, the
remedial alternatives, and the analysis of the remedial alterna-
tives. This Decision Summary explains the rationale for the
remedy selection and how the selected remedy satisfies the
statutory requirements.
1.0
SITE HAME, LOCATION, AND DESCRIPTION
1.1
SITE NAKE AND LOCATION
Synertek, Building #1
3050 Coronado Drive
Santa Clara, California
The former Synertek #1 facility is located in Santa Clara County
about 6 miles south of the southern tip of San Francisco Bay near
San Jose, California (Figure 1). The Synertek #1 Superfund site
has an on-site and an off-site component within the Superfund
site boundaries. The on-site component consists of the area
within the Synertek property boundaries surrounding Building #1 .
(Figure 2). The off-site component includes the area located
above the portion of the contaminated groundwater plume that has
migrated north past the property boundaries and into the adjacent
industrial park area.
1.2
REGIONAL ~OPOGRAPBY
The Study Area is located in the Santa Clara Valley which is a
gently sloping alluvial plain, flanked by the Diablo Range to the
east-southeast and the Santa Cruz Mountains to the west-
southwest. The Study Area is located toward the center of the
valley. The Santa Cruz Mountains are located several miles
southwest of the Study Area. San Francisco Bay is located ap-
proximately 6 miles north of the Study Area.
8
.. ---
-------
~
- -- -.... ~_. .
SCALE1''': 2000'
( ...
o 10'D 2.ooc f~cd
SITE
t::''''/:J ,1&1 V
fjgure I
LOCAT!ON
RIIlIrfinn I
-------
G. E./IHTERSIL
~
SITE
figure 2
PLAN - WELL LOCATIONS
Synerfek - Building I
o tOO'
h-...J
- -
'2:00'
!
~
""'J 0
~
~
.,
"IRCO
I
L
~
-8
6>0 ';2:9
LEGEND
~
. EXISTING MONITORING WELL
. EXISTING EXTRACTION WELL
. DEEP SOIL BORING
-9- FORMER AGRICULTURAL WELL
CJ
o
:jj
~
c:;:) c::::::;I c::::::;I
~
----@-
~
~
8I~4
S~ERTEK
~ c::::::;I ~
ELECTROCLAS
c::::::;I c:::» <::::)
2582$.1.
r0
(::I'
\i
UA
VACANT
e
~j
3111 C...--
c::~
TEMPRf:SS
1:
~1
108
~A f.-;-)~
~ ,..,~--'-
-------
1.3
ADJACENT LAND tJSE
Synertek #1 is located in the City of Santa Clara in a relatively
flat lying portion of the Santa Clara Valley. Ground surface
elevations are generally between 27 feet and 35 feet above mean
sea level. Synertek is in an industrial park setting, dominated
by the electronics industry, particularly semiconductor manufac-
turing. As such, the majority of the area is developed, with
large paved areas for streets and parking lots (Figure 2). Sur-
face water is controlled by the storm sewer system which directs
run-off to San Tomas Aquino Creek. The nearest residential areas
are located 3600 feet south of the site. other residential areas
are located 6000 feet north-northeast of the site. None of these
residential areas are within the area affected by the past chemi-
cal releases from Synertek.
1.4
HISTORICAL LAND USE
The land in the area occupied by Synertek #1 was in agricultural
use until 1974 when Synertek, Inc. began operation as a semicon-
ductor manufacturing firm. Honeywell Inc. acquired Synertek as a
wholly owned subsidiary in 1979. Synertek manufactured semicon-
ductor products in Synertek Building #1 from March 1978 to
February 1985. The RREEF Funds is the current owner of the
property and leases it to two tenants (Media Publications, Inc.
and Westmar Printing Company).
1.5
HYDROGEOLOGY
Three shallow aquifer zones have been identified beneath the
site. These zones are designated as the A, B, and B1 Aquifer
Zones (Figure 3). The A, B, and B1 Aquifer Zones are subdivi-
sions of the regional Upper Aquifer Zone. The Lower Aquifer Zone
occurs beneath a regional aquitard that occurs at depths ranging
from about 100 feet to about 150 to 250 feet. Thickness of this
regional aquitard varies from about 20 feet to over 100 feet.
Numerous individual aquifers occur within this predominantly
aquitard zone and all ground water in this zone occurs confined.
Within the regional aquifer zones, the A Aquifer Zone is the
shallowest and has its upper boundary at about 10 feet below
ground surface (BGS), and the lower boundary about 20 feet BGS.
The B Aquifer Zone lies between about 30 and 40 feet BGS. The
two zones are separated by a 2 to 10 feet thick aquitard composed
of clay to silty sand. It is suspected that hydraulic separation
between the two zones is imperfect owing to the discontinuous na-
ture of sediment types. The deeper B1 Aquifer Zone lies between
100 and 108 feet BGS. The stratigraphy below 108 feet consists
11
_.--..---._- .
-------
~
600
Figure 3: Generalized Hydrogeologic Profile, Synertek #1
-
-
CD
J!2
-
I GROUND SURFACE
o
clay and sandy silt
1 0
A - AQUIFER ZONE silty sand
20
aqultard clay to silty sand
,.
30
8 - AQUIFER ZONE sands, silts and clays
with gravel lenses
40
50 -
60 -
70 - aquttard clay to silty sand
80 -
90 -
w
(,)
<
LL
a:
::J
en
C
Z
::J
o
a:
~
~
9
w
CD
::I:
t-
a..
W
C
100
course sands, gravels
81 - AQUIFER ZONE cobbles with silt and clav lenses
110-
120-
regional aquitard
clay to silty sand
160-
170
180-
190- C - AQUIFER ZONE
(current drinking water)
clay, sand
and gravel
I
Generalized
Lithology
+35
,
--.:::....:.. . ..
. .
, .,.,~:~
-' .
~ , . .. ... I .
" -
+25
.. .'" . I
, ,
+15
'-.
'"
o~ . 0"';
'0 O'~' 0
. ' . .' 41 ' -I
.~.'D.O
w
~
N
a:
w. .
u.
5_. -
a . , --20
c .
a:
w
C1.
C1.
::»
-
-
10)
CD
-
-
-
-
.
..J
W
- , '""""-40 Gj
..J
<
W
en
z
- -~ -«) ~
~
W
>
o
CD
-80<
,
Z
o
~
~ W
..J
W
- -130
-
-
,
-
.
. ,
.
-
-'-
-
. e " 0 ' : ~ .' c "
,,-
r ..' ,. " .
'~It.'. I.
.
, - ""
, .
-,-
.-.
, -
w ---:- " '-
z - . .;:,
o 0 ,
N 11,'-
a: '.0 o'
W . -
II. '--
5 - O'
a . . to
C . '- -
a: - , -
w '
~: _: . :-'-."F
-150
-560
. '.-
-------
of clay to 171 feet. Below 171 feet is a sequence of sands,
clays and gravels that are believed to make up the lower aquifer
zone below the site. Shallow groundwater flow in the A and B
Aquifer Zones beneath the site is generally to the north. This
flow regime is consistent with the northerly regional flow
towards San Franciso Bay.
1.6
WATER USE
Prior to the construction of public water connections and
municipal water supply wells, groundwater use in the area of the
Synertek site included private water-supply wells for homes and
agriculture. Two well searches for abandoned agricultural wells
located within 1 mile of the site identified 56 wells. Of the
identified wells, 23 are shallow groundwater extraction wells and
31 are deep former agricultural wells that are located at least
800 feet laterally beyond the contaminated ground water at the
site. The remaining 2 deep agricultural wells are near the
Synertek site; one has been located and sealed and the other is
still under investigation.
The site overlies the Santa Clara Valley groundwater basin.
Ground water from this basin provides up to 50% of the municipal
drinking water for the 1.4 million residents of the Santa Clara
Valley. In 1989, ground water accounted for approximately
128,000 of the 315,000 acre feet of drinking water delivered to
Santa Clara Valley Water District customers. Synertek #1 was
listed on the National Priorities List (NPL) primarily because of
the potential threat from past chemical releases to the quality
of this valuable resource. The major concern at the site stems
from the potential migration of contaminants in the Upper Aquifer
Zone down to the Lower Aquifer Zone through abandoned or poorly
sealed wells or natural conduits through aquitard material.
Municipal water supply wells are generally perforated in the
Lower Aquifer Zone. Perforated intervals in City of Santa Clara
water supply wells located within 2 miles of synertek #1 begin
from 250 to 320 feet below ground surface. Currently, the
nearest municipal drinking water supply well downgradient of the
site is the City of Santa Clara's Well No. 33, which is located
1.6 miles north of the site. No pollutants have been found in
this well to date.
CUrrently, there are no known users of ground water from the Up-
per Aquifer Zone. The Regional Water Quality Control Board
(RWQCB) has identified potential beneficial uses of the shallow
ground water underlying and adjacent to the Synertek site. These
beneficial uses include industrial process water supply, in-
dustrial service water supply, municipal and domestic water
supply and agricultural water supply. These are the same as the
existing and potential beneficial uses of the ground water in the
Lower Aquifer Zone.
13
--. -. ." .-..
-------
1.7
SURFACB AND StJBSURFACB STRUCTURES
Synertek Building #1 is approximately 24,000 square feet in size
and the property covers approximately 1.5 acres. The site. and
surrounding area is zoned for light industrial manufacturing
operations and, with the exception of minor landscaping, the site
consists of streets, paved areas, and buildings. Figure 2 shows
the location of existing monitoring and extraction wells at the
site.
,.
Prior to 1985, synertek constructed and operated two underground
tank systems east of the building (Figure 4). Solvent Tank [A]
had a capacity of 200 gallons and was used for storing solvents
between 1976 and 1982. .Three former neutralization system tanks
[B] were used between 1974 and 1982 as holding tanks. These
tanks stored a variety of chemicals including solvents. The
quantity of contaminants released by these tanks and the dates of
the releases are unknown. These tanks along with affected soils
were removed in the Spring of 1985.
An underground concrete vault was constructed in the summer of
1982 to be used for process water neutralization. The ap-
proximate depth of the vault was 14 feet BGS. Neutralization
operations continued until 1985 when manufacturing operations at
Synertek ceased. In April 1990, demolition and excavation of the
neutralization system was completed. There were no clear indica-
tions that this newer neutralization system was a source of
groundwater or soil contaminants.
2.0
SITE HISTORY AND ENFORCEMENT ACTIVITIES
2.1
HISTORY OF SITE ACTIVITIES
The land in the area occupied by Synertek #1 was in agricultural
use until 1974 when Synertek, Inc. began operation as a semicon-
ductor manufacturing firm. Honeywell Inc. acquired Synertek as a
wholly owned subsidiary in 1979. Synertek manufactured semicon-
ductor products in Synertek Building #1 from March 1978 to
February 1~85. A variety of solvents were used in the manufac-
turing process and some were stored with other chemicals in un-
derground tanks or vaults (see section 1.7). Wastewater from the
underground neutralization system was discharged to the sanitary
sewer. Two of the three tank systems were removed in 1985. The
building was vacant from 1985 until 1989, when it was leased to
Media PUblications, Inc. and Westmar Printing Company.
14
-.. _H. -~..
.. --
-------
I
I
I
1
J
1
I
..----
-- --. !;~:'!!!_~____a!jG"9
"
L;..,
. '.a.SG-'J
LEGEND
. 5G-S
50,1 QQ' \omphnQ locohon and dniQnohon
5011 90' 'q'OI>ndwottl lompltnq Io(ollon
o,,1j des tqRCJhon
Ground-wollf mona'orlne; well 10c"lion and
dntqf\Olto,.
E.',O(ho" .ell locafton and dt'lql'lOlion
J
J
.)
1
J
I
J
]
I
I
J)
I
-- .5(HB-----;-,,::,~! (!_-'.~G"4
,- .. I j'
"L..J--
L~ :5G'fI f..5IG.'2
.'NITICS
~ 17 5G'22l . I I
Q ! I ji nWPft[ss ~SG-8 ~ ......SG-g SG-ro
I ~~-' c~ I' ! C- \, r~ tr"
. 'l~'- -qT" ~~. r~]ir :r~
\ ~,U - ':-M~~
-------
2.2
HXSTORY OF SXTE XNVESTXGATXONS
In 1982, Synertek submitted a Facility Questionnaire to RWQCB
staff describing Synertek #l's underground neutralization sys-
tems, sumps, and tanks. Based on these submittals, RWQCB staff
required initiation of subsurface pollution characterization at
Synertek #1 in 1982. This remedial investigation (RI) type work
has been ongoing for the last eight years. Sampling results from
these investigations are described in section 5.2. Interim
remedial actions began at Synertek #1 in 1985 with the excavation
and removal of the solvent tank and the neutralization tanks.
The additional interim remedial actions of groundwater extraction
and treatment began at Synertek #1 in 1987. These interim ac-
tions were performed at RWQCB request and are described in Sec-
tion 4. 1.
In 1985, Conestoga-Rovers and Associates were retained by
Honeywell to assist in the investigation. Studies continued to
define the horizontal and vertical extent of solvent plumes in
the shallow ground water at the site. Soil contamination was
studied near the excavation sites. A well search for abandoned
agricultural wells within 1/2 mile of the site was conducted in
February 1986. The search was extended to one mile north of the
site in November 1989. A formal RI workplan was approved in June
1989. The final version of the RI was submitted in October 1990.
The feasibility study (FS) evaluated the interim remedial actions
that have been ongoing for the last three years and alternatives
for the final remedial action. The RI/FS reports summarize the
last eight years of the RI and the last five years of the interim
remedial actions. The final version of the FS was submitted in
January 1991.
2.3
HXSTORY OF ENFORCEMENT ACTXONS
Synertek #1 has been under RWQCB orders since 1987. Honeywell
and The RREEF Funds are the only identified responsible parties
associated with the release of pollutants at this site.
Honeywell has accepted responsibility for the site cleanup. The
summary of the enforcement history for the site is as follows:
*
Oct. 6, 1982
synertek submitted completed RWQCB Facility
Questionnaire
*
May 20, 1987
RWQCB adopted National Pollution Discharge
Elimination System (NPDES) Permit No.
CA0029211 (Order No. 87-050) for the
discharge of extracted ground water
*
July 15, 1987
RWQCB adopted Order No. 87-084 issuing Site
Cleanup Requirements
*
June 1988
EPA proposed Synertek #1 for the NPL
16
_.u.... .,- .
-------
*
Sept. 1989
RWQCB adopted Order No. 89-134 amending Site
Cleanup Requirements and approving the
RIfFS workplan
EPA listed synertek #1 on the NPL
*
June 21, 1989
*
March 1991
RWQCB adopted Order No. 91-051 issuing the
Final Remedial Action Plan
3.0
COMMUNITY RELATIONS
An aggressive community relations program has been ongoing for
all Santa Clara Valley Superfund sites, including Synertek #1.
The RWQCB published a notice in the Santa Clara Valley Weekly on
January 9, 1991 and January 16, 1991, announcing the Proposed
Plan and the opportunity for public comment at the Board Hearing
of January 16, 1991 in Oakland. The notice also announced the
opportunity for public comment at an evening pUblic meeting held
at the Bracher Elementary School in the City of Santa Clara on
January 17, 1991. A presentation of the proposed final cleanup
plan was made at both meetings. The 30-day comment period was
from January 16, 1991 to February 18, 1991.
Fact Sheets were mailed to interested residents, local government
officials, and media representatives. Fact Sheet 1, mailed in
January 1990, summarized the pollution problem, the results of
investigations to date, and the interim remedial actions. Fact
Sheet 2, mailed in January 1991, described the cleanup alterna-
tives that were evaluated and explained the Proposed Plan. Fact
Sheet 2 also announced the opportunity for public comment at the
Board Hearing in Oakland on January 16, 1991 and at the Public
Meeting in Santa Clara on January 17, 1991. In addition, this
fact sheet described the availability of further information at
the Information Repository at the City of Santa Clara Public
Library. A Responsiveness Summary was prepared to address sig-
nificant comments received during the public comment period and
appears in Part III of this ROD. A future fact sheet will ex-
plain the Final Cleanup and Abatement Order adopted by the RWQCB.
17
- --..... ~-. .
-------
4.0
SCOPE AND ROLE OF THE RESPONSE ACTION
4.1
SCOPE OF THE RESPONSE ACTION
The remedy selected and described in this ROD includes existing
interim remedial actions as well as additional remedial actions
selected for the Synertek #1 site. The interim remedial actions
include the removal of all leaking underground structures and as-
sociated contaminated soils, and operation of the current extrac-
tion and treatment systems in the A and B Aquifer Zones. The ad-
ditional remedial actions require Honeywell to conduct a pilot
injection study to evaluate whether injection of treated water
back into the subsurface would enhance the removal of pollutants,
speed the cleanup, and reduce the amount of ground water dis-
charged to the surface.
4.1.1
current Interim Remedial Heasure (IRK)
Honeywell began operating an on-site groundwater extraction and
treatment system in June 1987. The current system (Figure 5)
consists of two groundwater extraction wells in the A Aquifer
Zone (PW1 and 12A) which remove water at a combined rate of 6
gallons per minute (gpm), and one well in the B Aquifer Zone
(PW3) which extracts groundwater at approximately 4 gpm. Ex-
tracted water is treated using an air stripping tower. Treated
water is then discharged under an NPDES permit to the storm sewer
which flows to the San Tomas Aquino Creek.
The off-site IRM consists of two A Aquifer Zone extraction wells
(PW4 and PW5) which were installed in the fall of 1988. These
extraction wells pump at a combined rate of approximately 6 gpm
and are connected by a forcemain to the on-site air stripping
facility. After treatment in the air stripper, the ground water
is discharged to San Tomas Aquino Creek under an existing NPDES
permit. Figure 5 shows the layout of the off-site and on-site
remediation system.
An attempt was made to convert monitoring well 4B into a B
Aquifer Zone extr~ction well. However, well 4B was not effec-
tively preventing fine grained formation materials from entering
the well under pumping conditions and was shut down. A replace-
ment well (PW3) was installed in December 1987, approximately 18
feet north of 4B. Well 4B continues to be used as a monitoring
well.
The treatment system is a versatile two-tower air stripping
facility which is connected-in-series mode. Under this type of
operation, influent volatile organic compound (VOC) concentra-
tions were reduced 99.9 percent prior to discharge to comply with
the NPDES permit requirements. Scaling problems in the towers
18
--*... '" .
-. ---
-------
I
I
I
I
I
.)
J
I
I
1
I
I
J)
I
~
o
~
ood
....I
-
I
00
~
~
~
IUCNOCt..,.
r:;
I:>,
~
o
~~
<9
""U. -'1'1-"-'"
o
G:>0<>,,(S>
,
@,
o
q,
1) !'
I ~-
".
~
~
.
[XISTING MONITORING WELL
. EXISTING EXTRACTION WtLL
& DEEP SOIL BORING
- ON-SITE IRII,
--- OFF. SITE lilli,
figure 5"
REMEDIATION SYSTEM LAYOUT
Synerle/r - ing I
eRA
'.4,.I).to/ll~
-------
required the installation of a pH control system in December
1988. The influent ground water was reduced to a pH of 6.0 using
hydrochloric acid.
At the request of the current tenants at the Synertek facility,
the treatment system was shut down from July to December 1989 for
reinstallation at a new location. Prior to starting the system
back up, the treatment system was modified to allow single tower
treatment of water with the other tower in a standby mode. This
action was prompted by the decreasing VOC concentrations from on-
going remediation. In the event that influent concentrations in-
crease, the standby tower may be used for two tower operation.
4.1.2
Selected Remedy
The selected remedy for Synertek #1 consists of continuing to
operate the current groundwater extraction system, treating con-
taminated water with the existing air stripper, and discharging
treated effluent to a storm drain under an NPDES permit. The air
stripper will include air emissions control if emissions exceed
levels permitted by the BAAQMD.
In addition, the selected remedy involves a pilot injection study
to evaluate whether injection of treated water back to the sub-
surface would enhance the removal of pollutants, speed the
cleanup, and reduce the amount of ground water discharged to the
surface. If the injection study shows that injecting water into
the B Aquifer Zone is feasible, then additional extraction wells
may be necessary to capture the injected water. If the injection
study shows that reinjection into the B Aquifer Zone is not
feasible, then an additional B Aquifer Zone extraction well or
wells will be required to ensure complete containment and capture
of the plume.
Finally, Honeywell will continue its attempts to locate and seal
the remaining abandoned agricultural well that is believed to ex-
ist in the vicinity of the plume.
4.2
ROLE OF THE RESPONSE ACTION
The selected remedy addresses ground water in the Upper Aquifer
Zone and the principal threats posed by the contamination in
soils. The principle risks are: further lateral migration of the
plume emanating from the SYnertek site; potential vertical migra-
tion of contaminated ground water into the Lower Aqui£er Zone;
ingestion and inhalation of contaminants in the ground water from
the Upper Aquifer Zone; ingestion and inhalation of contaminants
in the contaminated soil; and inhalation of chemicals volatilized
from contaminated ground water.
The objective' of the selected remedy is to remove and permanently
destroy the contaminants from both soils and ground water or to
significantly reduce the toxicity, mobility or volume of hazard-
20
-------
ous substances in both media. These response actions will
greatly reduce the possibility of contamination of current and
potential water supplies.
5.0
SUMMARY OF SXTB CBARACTERXSTXCS
5.1
SOURCES OF CONTAMINATION
soil and shallow groundwater contamination are attributed to the
accidental release of chemicals stored in two underground tank
systems located east of Synertek #1 (Figure 4). Unknown quan-
tities of solvents and a variety of other chemicals leaked from
these systems sometime during their operational period of 1974 to
1982. These tanks along with adjacent contaminated soils were
removed in 1985.
An underground concrete vault was constructed in 1982 near the
earlier-constructed underground tank systems (Figure 4) and was
used for process water neutralization until 1985. During removal
of this newer system in 1990, there were no indications that it
acted as a source of groundwater or soil contamination.
5.2
DESCRIPTION OF CONTAKINATXON
5.2.1
Subsurface Structures/Soil xnvestigations
Subsurface structures that acted as sources of groundwater and
soil contaminants consisted of a solvent tank [A] and the former
neutralization system tanks [B] as shown in Figure 4. The 200-
gallon-capacity solvent tank was used for storing
trichloroethylene (TCE) and 1,1,1-trichloroethane (TCA) between
1976 and 1982. During the period of 1974 to 1982, the former
neutralization system c~Qtained three tanks that held xylene,
N-butyl acetate, Burmar 712D (containing 1,2,4-trichlorobenzene
and phenol), methyl alcohol, isopropanol,. Freon, TCE, TCA, and
ethylene glycol monoethylether acetate.
Solvent tank [A] and associated soils were excavated in 1985 from
an area approximately 6 feet long by 3-1/2 feet wide by 5 feet
deep. The excavated area was free of ground water. Soil samples
were then collected from the north, south and middle of the ex-
cavation base and analyzed for volatile and semi-volatile
priority pollutants. The highest priority VOC concentration was
94 parts per billion (ppb) TCA. Most samples were less than 20
ppb for individual contaminants. Based on these low concentra-
tions, no further soil removal was performed.
21
-------
The former neutralization system [B] and associated soils were
excavated in 1985 from an area approximately 20 feet long by
9-1/2 feet wide by 10 feet deep. Soil samples were collected
from the walls of the excavation and analyzed for VOCs. TCA was
present at about 20 to 40 ppb and TCE was present in two samples
at about 20 ppb. All other VOCs were detected at less than 3 ppb
each. Based on these low concentrations, no further soil removal
was performed.
Metals were considered to be unlikely contaminants based on
manufacturing practices. Any metals ,-that might have leaked from
the tank or neutralization system would not have migrated as far
as the solvents and would have been removed in the excavated
soils.
The newer neutralization system was excavated in 1990 and was
found to be intact and water-tight. Ground water had not accumu-
lated in the vault until after the sides were damaged during
removal. Analysis of the adjacent ground water for heavy metals
and VOCs supported the conclusion that this system had not
released contaminants to the surrounding ground water or soil.
Abandoned agricultural wells could act as conduits from the Upper
Aquifer Zone down to deeper aquifers. Based on available records
and results of a well survey, only one such well remains unac-
counted for within close proximity to the plume; well No.
6S1W28J01, located approximately 1,100 feet North of synertek
Building #1, is listed as destroyed with no record of sealing.
Attempts to locate it have thus far been unsuccessful. Honeywell
has used both a metal-pipe locating company and a proton-
precession magnetometer survey in attempts to locate this well,
and currently plans on extending the magnetometer survey.
5.2.2
Groundwater Investigations
The A Aquifer Zone contains a contaminant plume that extends
north 1,400 feet downgradient from ~he site (Figure 6) as deter-
mined by 24 monitoring wells. Ground water in this zone is
moving at a rate of 150 to 254 feet per year. The actual dis-
tance traveled by the leading edge of the VOC plume (10 ppb con-
tour) is consistent with the distance predictable from the
groundwater flow rate and likely contaminant release dates.
The B Aquifer Zone contains a smaller contaminant plume (Figure
7) believed to be caused by vertical migration from the A Aquifer
Zone through borehole 4A starting in 1982. The borehole was
properly sealed in 1988. The plume is moving north at a rate of
about 20 feet per year and extends 250 feet downqradient from the
site as determined by 7 monitoring wells. Both the A and B
Aquifer Zones eventually discharge to wetlands located 13,000
feet north of the site.
22
-.- -... 0.- .
-------
tl
o
to-,
'ocj
...J
zoo.
'.
-:-:-; 0 (2
'--' 0
I
=~~ {J >
---'- - :J>
- -
lJ
----@-
0:::::::> '8
:1
)oC
,-~
~
== <=>
~)
~..
S'n«"1"("
n
r
... Z
~T
'W8C£S
== <=.>
E~ECT"()O;I.."S
I ..£)
'=f
""CA" T
<::)
~.
'. -:;:: ...,-
G> c:>
I t
;)
"
e 00
fW'.'
o
I ~_o
~
':.
LEGEND
.
.
EXISTING MONITORING WELL
EXISTING EXTRACTION WELL
DEEP SOIL BORING
TOTAL. we CONCENTRATtOtf
(v9/LJ 9-89
figure
-- ---TVOC CONTOl5
IN A. AQUIFER
Synertek - Building I
.
sse
-?-
FORMER AGRICULTURAL WELL
...< . --- .. --.. ._~. .
.----------......... . . --------.---------.....,. -.--.------..-.....-------------
-------
CORONADO
~
LEGEND
. MON.ITORING WELL LOCATION.
-<}- ABANDONED AGRICULTURAL WELL
106.3 TVOC CONCENTRATION IN u0/1 (9-89)
o
,
So
.
'DO
I
eRA
1&4"10-5/11/89-'"
eHYO.
DRIVE'
lOA. .'OB
NO
o
.8A
Ie
..
L_.~
,
,
.208
5.48
.14
C)
~ C::)
~
~
~
~
~
(,.,)
~
~
.......
~
C::)
..I~B
I~A 013
TVOC
figure 7
CONTOURS IN B AQUIFER
Synertek Building I
-------
The B1 Aquifer Zone has not been contaminated as determined by
non-detectable levels of VOCs in all samples from the one
monitoring well that extends down into this zone. The presence
of a 60-foot-thick aquitard (Figure 3) effectively prohibits
migration from the B Aquifer Zone down to the B1 Aquifer Zone,
although old abandoned agricultural wells (see section 5.2.1)
could penetrate this aquitard and provide a conduit to the B1
Aquifer Zone and deeper aquifers.
Significant qroundwater contaminants that have been found in the
contaminant plumes are listed in two "qroups in Table 1. The top
group consists mainly of those VOCs that are major indicators of
the extent of groundwater contamination. TCE and 1,1,1-TCA are
the two most prevalent solvents based on their high frequencies
of detection and high concentrations; their average detected con-
centrations are 709 ppb and 389 ppb respectively. Despite a cur-
rently lower prevalence and concentration, vinyl chloride is in-
cluded in this group because of its high toxicity and likely
presence as a degradation product of TCE and DCE.
The bottom group of groundwater contaminants listed in Table 1
consists of chemicals that were known to be stored in Synertek's
underground storage tanks, are relatively toxic, or exceed a max-
imum contaminant level (MCL). They have relatively low
freqencies of detection and much lower concentrations than chemi-
cals in the top group.
5.2.3
Air Investiqations
Volatilization of qroundwater contaminants from the subsurface
has not been investigated in a detailed manner because concerns
for the significance of this transport pathway arose after
completion of the RI, and widely accepted methodology for study-
ing this problem are still being developed. The affects of this
volatilization on air quality at the Synertek #1 site are ex-
pected to be minimal based on the following preliminary findings.
Emission of the volatilized contaminants from the soil to surface
air or dwellings might be significantly retarded since ten feet
of low permeability clay soil overlay the ground water. Cur-
rently, no residences exist above or adjacent to the plume.
Soil gas and soil gas/groundwater data were collected from
various locations (Figure 4). The elevated concentrations tend
to correlate in area with the contaminant plumes. This suggests
that VOCs volatilize from the ground water in the soils pore.
space, as would be expected. Reported concentrations were quite
variable, but the average concentration detected for TCE was 0.05
micrograms per liter.
Emissions from the air stripper that is currently used as part of
the interim remedial action are regulated under a permit issued
by the BAAQMD.. Because the site is located in an "ozone non-
attainment area," an evaluation of treatment system emissions was
conducted. The system emitted a maximum of 0.56 pounds of VOCs
25
------ -- -_..
-------
Table 1
Significant Groundwater Contaminants, Synertek #1
Contaminal1t Freauencv of Detection Concentration Innb\
Average of 1989
Chemical Name Abbreviation No. Detects/No. Samnles Percent Detections Maximum
trichloroethylene TCE 211/306 69 709 33,000
1, 1, l-trichloroethane TCA 252/308 82 389 25,000
1, 1, 1-trichloro-l,2,2-
trifluoroethane Freon 113 141/254 56 131 1,900
l,l-dichloroethane l,l-DCA 245/308 80 67 1,400
l,l-dichloroethylene l,l-DCE 230/308 75 49 800
cis 1,2-dichloroethylene cis 1,2-DCE 32/97 33 10 55
vinyl chloride VC 23/300 8 15 40
--------------------------- ----------------- --------------------------- ----------- ------------- --------
xylenes 15/92 16 74 84
ethylbenzene 11/89 12 15 54
1, 2, 4-trichlorobenzene 10/61 16 21 39
~
Bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate 14/104 14 7 16
benzene 5/83 6 3 4
phenol 5/61 8 2 3
-------
per day in June 1987 during system start-up after initial permit-
ting by BAAQMD. At present, approximately 0.05 pounds of VOCs
are emitted daily, which is typical of emissions since January
1989.
6.0
SUMMARY OF SITE RISKS
6.1
TOXICITY ASSESSMENT
Chemicals of potential concern are listed in Table 2 along with
their toxicological classification, concentration in ground
water, and frequency of detection. These 33 chemicals were used
in the baseline public health evaluation because they were
detected with a frequency of greater than 5% or, in the case of
vinyl chloride, are a known human carcinogen. Metals and 10
other VOCs were considered unlikely chemicals of concern and were
not further evaluated for risk.
Indicator chemicals were identified from approximately 43 chemi-
cals detected at the site. The 7 indicator chemicals are as fol-
lows:
trichloroethylene (TCE)
1,1,1-trichloroethane (l,l,l-TCA)
1,1,2-trichloro-l,2,2-trifluoroethane
1,1-dichloroethane (l,l-DCA)
1,1-dichloroethylene (l,l-DCE)
cis 1,2-dichloroethylene (1,2-DCE)
vinyl chloride (VC)
(Freon 113)
The reasons for selecting the listed chemicals as indicator
chemicals are as follows:
1.
Except for vinyl chloride, each of the indicator chemicals
was consistently detected in at least 33% of the samples
throughout the plume area in both the A and B Aquifer Zones.
Table 1 lists detection freqencies for these compounds.
3.
Each of the indicator chemicals possesses physiochemical
properties (relatively high water solubility and ~~latively
low soil sorption) which tend to promote their dispersion in
ground water. In addition, they are all quite volatile and
can easily escape into soil gas or the atmosphere.
Most of the indicator chemicals are potential carcinogens.
Vinyl chloride is a known human carcinogen and TCE is a
probable human carcinogen. Both 1,1-DCE and 1,1,1-DCA are
2.
27
_-0__.. -....
-------
Table 2. Grountwater Contaminants of Concern. Synertek #1
C~tration (1.Jgfl..>
Toricol. Melln 95th Melln
OIl$S (1) All Vlll'lles (3) Percentile of Detects(4)
Chemicill
Acetone
Benzene
Bis(2-ethylhexyI)ph thala te
I-Butanol
3-Buten-2-one
Butylbenzyl phthalate
Carbon disulfide'
1,I-Dichloroethane
1,I-Dichloroethylene
cis-l,2-Dichloroethylene
Di-n-butyl phthalate
Ethanol
Ethylbenzene
2-Methyl-2-Hexanol
Hexanoic Acid
.~ethyl ethyl ketone (MEI<)
Methyl pentenone
Oxiranemethanol
4-OH-2-Methyl Pentanone
4-OH-4-Methyl-2-Pentanone
Phenol
2-Propanol
I-Propylamine
Styrene
Toluene
1,2,4- Trichlorobenzene
1,1,1- Trichloroethane
Trichloroethylene
1,1,2 - Trichlcro-l ,2,2 -trifl uoroethane
1,1,2- Trifl uoro-l ,2-dichloroethane
2,2,4- Trimethylpentane
Vinyl Chloride
Xylenes
NC
PeA
PeB2
NC
NC
PCC
NC
PCC
r-cc
NC
PCD
NC
PCD
NC
NC
PCD
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
NC
PCB2
PCD
PCD
PCD
PC B2 (2)
NC
NC
NC
PC A (2)
PCD
124
1
2
3
1
2
1
38
32
10
1
22
3
8
38
2
8
3
29
6
1
9
5
3
2
4
224
360
58
15
2
19
4
268
1
3
5
2
2
1
63
56
17
1
SO
5
17
.66
3
22
8
52
10
2
19
13
6
3
6
469
699
92
25
3
42
8
Number 91
Anillyses
Number 01
Detects (5)
311
3
7
10
3
1
2
29
25
10
2
59
15
66
38
10
140
13
113
20
2
51
23
7
6
22
281
6()7
84
48
8
3
17
60
54
98
11
11
52
18
211
211
99
52
11
81
29
11
34
20
6
20
20
52
20
8
9
60
52
211
209
204
52
11
212
89
24
5
14
2
1
3
2
159
147
32
7
4
11
3
11
4
1
1
5
5
5
3
1
4
19
7
188
124
106
16
1
2
15
(1)
NC = Noncarcinogen
PC = Potential C.arcinogen
EPA Weight of Evidence Rating:
A = Known Hwnan Carcinogen
B1 = Probable Human Carcinogen (limited evidence in humans)
B2 = Probable Human Carcinogen (sufficient evidence in animal studies)
C = Possible Human Carcinogen (limited evidence in animal studies)
D = Not Oassified (Inadequate evidence of carcinogenicity in animal studies)
E = No Evidence of Carcinogenicity in J:lumans (~o evidence for carcinogenicity in at least two adequate
animal studies) ..
From the USEP A Integrated Risk and Information System Database ORlSs); April 1990, and
USEPA Superfund Public Health Evaluation Manual (SPHEM), EPA/54011-861060; October 1986.
- Values from this document are only included where no IRIS value has been confinned.
A veragc concentrations calculated by including positively detected results -together with the non~etccted ...
results. Samples that were not detected were 3ssumed to be equivalent to the detection limit.
A verag~ ronct'ntrations calculated by including only positively det~;cd results.
Number (If Df!tCC"ts = Nunlber of field samples which showed detectable concc:ntrations (If that parameter
.
(2)
(3)
(4 )
(5)
-------
possible human carcinogens based on limited evidence in
animal studies. TCA remains unclassified as a potential
carcinogen because there is inadequate evidence of its car-
cinogenicity in animal studies. Freon 113 and cis 1,2-DCE
are non carcinogens.
4.
TCE, 1,1,1-TCA, and Freon 113 were among the chemicals
stored in leaking underground tanks at Synertek Building #1.
The 1,1-DCA is a potential breakdown product of the major
plume contaminant, 1,1,1-TCA. The most common plume con-
taminant, TCE, breaks down into "DCE and ultimately vinyl
chloride.
6.2
RISK CHARACTERIZATION
synertek contaminants could reach humans through a variety of ex-
posure pathways. Soil, subsurface structures, air, surface
water, and ground water were all considered as potential sources,
transport media, and human exposure points. Risks were charac-
terized for pathways involving these media in the following sub-
sections. As described in the National Contingency Plan, the EPA
acceptable cancer risk range is 1 X 10-4 to 1 X 10-6 for exposure
to known or suspected carcinogens at concentration levels that
represent an excess upper bound lifetime cancer risk to an in-
dividual. For noncarcinogenic effects; the Hazard Index (HI)
provides a useful reference point for gauging the potential sig-
nificance of multiple contaminant exposures within a single
medium or across media. EPA considers an HI less than 1.0 to be
acceptable.
6.2.1
soil/Subsurface Structures
The original sources of environmental contamination were leaking
underground storage tanks and adjacent soils. These sources have
been removed as part of the interim remedial action. The soil
sampling results in the excavations, after removal of the tanks
and contaminated adjacent soils, indicate concentrations were in
the low ppb range. Hence, soil concentrations are considered
negligible and of no environmental or health concern. Because
the source of contamination was subsurface tanks, surface soils
were not affected and are not a source of chemical exposure.
Soil at a depth which was adjacent to the buried tanks and poten-
tially contaminated soil was removed at the time of the tank
removal. The excavations were then back-filled and repaved with
asphalt.
6.2.2
Air
The only remaining source of contamina~ion at the Synertek #1
site is the shallow groundwater plume. Groundwater contaminants
are released to the air by volatilization during air stripping
29
--..'.'.¥....
-------
and through migration to the surface via soil gas. Both of these
air exposure pathways are currently considered unlikely health
risks.
The risks from the emission of contaminants from the subsurface
are currently difficult to quantify and a formal risk assessment
of this pathway for a worst case future residence was not con-
ducted during the RI (see section 5.2.3). There are currently no
residences above or in the immediate vicinity of the plume. It
is unlikely that future residences will be built above the plume
since this area is not currently zoned for residential develop-
ment. Deed restrictions on the Synertek #1 property will prevent
residential development above the highest VOC concentrations.
Emission dispersion 20 feet from the air stripper tower was cal-
culated to evaluate potential health risk to workers. This dis-
tance corresponds approximately with the distance to the parking
lot. Maximum observed influent concentrations and liquid flow
rates were used as a worst case scenario for air quality. Es-
timated VOC concentrations were then compared to Threshold Limit
Values (TLVs). Under this worst case scenario, the greatest risk
from the current treatment system to on-site workers is from
1,1-DCE at 0.04 percent of the TLV.
Risk from air stripper VOC emissions to a hypothetical resident
at the nearest property line from the stripper tower (100 ~eet)
was also assessed. An upperbound cancer risk of 4.6 X 10- was
calculated; an HI value of 0.035 was also obtained. Both of
these values are within EPA's acceptable risk range.
6.2.3
Surface Water
San Tomas Aquino Creek is the nearest body of surface water to
the Synertek site and is located 7,000 feet downgradient.
Groundwater modeling for the A Aquifer Zone predicted that the
contaminant plume, if uncontrolled, would discharge into the
creek in the year 2049. Maximum levels of contamination at the
point of exposure were estimated to be 66% of initial plume con-
centrations. Potential human exposure at this exposure point
could occur through dermal contact with the discharged ground
water by an older. child or adolescent wading through the creek.
A w9rst case cancer risk of 4.6 X 10-9 and an HI value of 4.9 X
10- were calculated for an individual who was exposed for 20
minutes four times a year for 8 years.
6.2.4
Ground Water
Since there is no current use of contaminated ground water, only
a future use was considered in the risk analysis. The two ex-
posure pathways from residential use are inhalation exposure to
compounds during showering or bathing and drinking water inges-
tion of 2 liters every day for 30 years. Dermal exposure to
chemicals in household water was considered to be minimal in com-
parison to inhalation and ingestion, and was not evaluated as a
30
-...... _. .
-------
significant route of exposure. The average exposure to each
chemical contaminant was based on the mean of all values reported
and used the detection limit for non-detects. The upper 95th
percentile of this mean was determined and was considered the
concentration for the evaluation of the reasonably maximally ex-
posed individual.
Table 3 lists the results of risk calculations for the major con-
taminants of concern (7 indicator chemicals) and compares the to-
tal risk from all 33 chemicals evaluated (Table 2) with the sum
of the risks from the 7 indicator chemicals. 3Virtually all of
the cancer risk for the worst case (5.0 X 10- ) is due to the
plume indicator chemicals. These chemicals also account for over
75% of the non-cancer risk (HI = 3.3 for all 33 chemicals).
Vinyl chloride and 1,1-DCE account for most of the cancer risk,
while 1,1-DCE accounts for almost half of the non-cancer risk.
The average case cancjr and non-cancer risks were still sig-
nificant at 1.1 X 10- and an HI of 1.3. The contribution of
risk from the drinking pathway and the shower/bathing pathway
were roughly equal. The risk values in Table 3 represent the sum
of these two pathways.
6.3
PRESENCE OF SENSITIVE HUMAN POPULATIONS
Synertek #1 is located in an industrial area and there are no
residences lying over the contaminant plume. There are also.no
public parks, schools, hospitals, or convalescent homes within or
near the plume boundaries. The nearest residences are 3,600 feet
south of the site and 6,000 feet north-northeast of the site.
6.4
PRESENCE OF SENSITIVE ECOLOGICAL SYSTEMS
Two endangered species are reported to use South San Francisco
Bay. The California clapper rail and the salt marsh harvest
mouse are reported to exist in the tidal marshes of the bay and
bay shore, located approximately 5 miles north of the Synertek
site. The endangered California brown pelican is occasionally
seen in the Bay Area, but does not nest in the South Bay. Ranges
of the endangered American peregrine falcon and southern bald
eagle include the Bay Area. The southern bald eagle does not use
bay and bayshore habitats, but the peregrine falcon has started
to make a comeback at some northern locations in San Franciso
Bay.
The Synertek site does not constitute critical habitat for end an- '
gered species nor does it include or affect any "wetlands." The
closest wetlands are located 13,000 feet north of the site.
31
_u -.-. ~...
-------
Table 3.
Maximum Health Risks from Groundwater Contaminants of Concern, Synertek #1
Chemical Concentration (ppb) Type of Carcinogen Rbk( 1)
mean all 95th Cancer Non-Cancer
values Percentile Hazard Index,(2)
Vinyl Chloride . 19 42 Known Human 2.24 X 10-3 0
1,1-DCE 32 56 Possible Human 2.06 X 10-3 lo55
TCE 360 699 Probable Human 4.02 X 10-4 0
1,1,1-TCA 224 469 Not Classified 0 0.85
1, I-DCA 38 63 Possible Human 2.34 X 10-4 0.12
Freon 113 58 92 Noncarcinogen 0 0.0008
cis 1,2-DCE 10 17 Noncarcinogen 0 0.00004
.
ABOVE INDICATOR CHEMICALS: Subtotal 4.9 X 10-3 2.5
ALL EVALUATED CHEMICALS: Total 5.0 X 10-3 3.3
,
(1)
Sum of two exposure pathways:
inhalation during shower/bathing and ingestion of drinking water
(2 )
Hazard Index - ratio of the chronic daily intake to the refernce dose (CDI/RfD)
Values> 1.0 indicate a potential health risk
-------
6.5
CONCLUSXON
If not addressed by implementing the response action selected in
this ROD, the actual or threatened releases of hazardous sub-
stances from the SYnertek #1 Superfund site may present an im-
minent and substantial endangerment to the pUblic health, wel-
fare, or environment. Given that a variety of the VOCs detected
at the site pose significant health risks as carcinogens or as
noncarcinogens and that complete exposure pathways exist, EPA has
determined that remediation is warranted.
7.0
APPLXCABLE OR RELEVANT AND APPROPRXATE REQUIREMENTS CARARS)
Under Section 121(d) (1) of CERCLA, S 9621, remedial actions must
attain a degree of cleanup which assures protection of human
health and the environment. Additionally, remedial actions that
leave any hazardous substance, pollutant, or contaminant on-site
must meet a level or standard of control that at least attains
standards, requirements, limitations, or criteria that are
"applicable or relevant and appropriate" under the circumstances
of the release. These requirements, known as "ARARs", may be
waived in certain instances, as stated in Section 121(d) (4) of
CERCLA, 42 U.S.C. S 9621(d) (4).
"Applicable" requirements are those cleanup standards, standards
of control and other substantive environmental protection re-
quirements, criteria, or limitations promulgated under federal or
state law that specifically address a hazardous substance, pol-
lutant or contaminant, remedial action, location, or other cir-
cumstance at a CERCLA site. "Relevant and appropriate" require-
ments are cleanup standards, standards of control and other sub-
stantive environmental protection requirements, criteria, or
limitations promulgated under federal or state law that, while
not "applicable" to a hazardous substance, pollutant, con-
taminant, remedial action, location, or other circumstance at a
CERCLA site, address problems or situations sufficiently similar
to those encountered at the CERCLA site that their use is well-
suited to the particular site. For example, requirements may be
relevant and appropriate if they would be "applicable" but for
jurisdictional restrictions associated with the requirement. See
the National Contingency Plan, 40 C.F.R. Section 300.6, 1986).
The determination of which requirements are "relevant and ap-
propriate" is-somewhat flexible. EPA and the State may look to
the type of remedial actions contemplated, the hazardous sub-
stances present, the waste characteristics, the physical charac-
33
- -.-.... _. .
-------
teristics of the site, and other appropriate factors. It is pos-
sible for only part of a requirement to be considered relevant
and appropriate. Additionally, only substantive requirements
need be followed. If no ARAR covers a particular situation, or
if an ARAR is not sufficient to protect human health or the en-
vironment, then non-promulgated standards, criteria, guidance,
and advisories must be used to provide a protective remedy.
7.1
TYPES OF ARARS
There are three types of ARARs. The first type includes
"contaminant specific" requirements. These ARARs set limits on
concentrations of specific hazardous substance, pollutants, and
contaminants in the environment. Examples of this type of ARAR
are ambient water quality criteria and drinking water standards.
The second type of ARAR includes location-specific requirements
that set restrictions on certain types of activities based on
site characteristics. These include restriction on activities in
wetlands, floodplains, and historic sites. The third type of
ARAR includes action-specific requirements. These are
technology-based restrictions which are triggered by the type of
action under consideration. Examples of action-specific ARARs
are Resource Conservation and Recovery Act ("RCRAn) regulations
for waste treatment, storage, and disposal.
ARARs must be identified on a site-specific basis from informa-
tion about specific chemicals at the site, specific features of
the site location, and actions that are being considered as
remedies.
7.2
CONTAMINANT-SPECIFIC ARARS AND TBCS
section 1412 of the Safe Drinkina Water Act. 42 V.S.C. Section
300a-1
Under the authority of Section 1412 of the Safe Drinking Water
Act, Maximum contaminant Levels Goals (MCLGs) that are set at
levels above zero, shall be attained by remedial actions for
ground or surface water that are current or potential sources of
drinking water, where the MCLGs are relevant and appropriate un-
der the circumstances of the release based on the factors in
S300.400 (g) (2).
The appropriate remedial goal for each indicator chemical (except
toluene and 1,2,4-TCB) in ground water is the MCLG (if not equal
to zero), the federal MCL, or the State MCL, whichever is most
stringent.
34
~......, ~. . .
-------
California DeDartment of Health Services Drinkina Water Action
Levels (DWALs)
California Department of Health Services (DHS) DWALs are health-
based concentration limits set by the DHS to limit public ex-
posure to substances not yet regulated by promulgated standards.
They are advisory standards that apply at the tap for public
water supplies. The DWAL for toluene is 100 ppb. These DWALs
are not ARARs, but are "To Be Considereds" or TBCs. ARARs with
more stringent requirements take precedence over these DWALs.
California's Resolution 68-16
California's "Statement of Policy with Respect to Maintaining
High Quality of Waters in California," Resolution 68-16, affects
remedial standards. The policy requires maintenance of existing
water quality unless it is demonstrated that a change will
benefit the people of the State, will not unreasonably affect
present or potential uses, and will not result in water quality
less than that prescribed by other State pOlicies.
7.3
ACTION SPECIFIC ABARS AND TBCS
National Pollutant Discharae Elimination System (NPDES)
NPDES substantive permit requirements and/or RWQCB Waste Dis-
charge Requirements (WDRs) are potential ARARs for effluent dis-
charges. The effluent limitations and monitoring requirements of
an NPDES permit or WDRs legally apply to point source discharges
such as those from a treatment system with an outfall to surface
water or storm drains. The RWQCB established effluent discharge
limitations and permit requirements based on Water Quality Stan-
dards set forth in the San Francisco Bay Regional Basin Plan.
EPA Office of Solid Waste and Emeraencv Response (OSWER) Direc-
tive 9355.0-28
OSWER Directive 9355.0-28 "Control of Air Emissions from Super-
fund Groundwater Air Strippers at Superfund Groundwater Sites"
applies to future remedial decisions at Superfund sites in ozone
non-attainment areas. Future remedial decisions include Records
of Decisions (RODs), Significant Differences to a ROD and Consent
Decrees. Synertek Building #1 is in an ozone non-attainment
area. This directive requires such sites to control total
volatile organic compound emissions from air strippers and soil
vapor extractors to fifteen pounds per day per facility. This
directive is not an ARAR, but is a TBC. ARARs with more strin-
gent requirements take precedence over the directive.
35
-------
Bav Area Air Oualitv Manaqement District (BAAOMD) Requlation 8.
Rule 47
Bay Area Air Quality Management District Board of Directors
adopted Regulation 8, Rule 47. This rule is entitled "Air Strip-
ping and Soil Vapor Extraction Operations" and applies to new and
modified operations. The rule consists of two standards:
o
Individual air stripping and soil vapor extraction opera-
tions emitting benzene, vinyl chloride, perch10roethy1ene,
methylene chloride and/or trichloroethylene are required to
control emissions by at least ninety percent by weight.
Operations emitting less than one pound per day of these
compounds are exempt from this requirement if they pass a
District risk screen.
Individual air stripping and soil vapor extraction opera-
tions emitting greater than fifteen pounds per day of or-
ganic compounds other than those listed above are required
to control emissions by at least ninety percent by weight.
Regulation 8, Rule 47 is an ARAR for the implementation of the
remedy at Synertek #1.
o
Safe Drinkina Water Act. Underqround In;ection Control (UIC)
If treated ground water is injected, it must be done in com-
pliance with regulations for a Class V underground injection
well. These regulations are found in the 40 CFR 144, especially
144.13 (4) (c).
Resource Conservation Recoverv Act (RCRA) Land Disposal
Restrictions
The contaminated ground water contains two spent solvents that
are RCRA listed wastes. TCE is a~ FOOl listed waste, and TCA is
an F002 listed waste. Adsorbents and other materials used for
remediation of groundwater VOCs, such as activated carbon,
chemical-adsorbing resins, or other materials used in the treat-
ment of ground water or air will contain the chemicals after use.
RCRA land disposal restrictions are not applicable but are
relevant and appropriate to disposal of treatment media due to
the presence of constituents which are sufficiently similar to
RCM wastes.
7.4
LOCATION-SPECIFIC ARARS
Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act
The Fish and Wildlife Coordination Act is an applicable require-
ment for the locations adjacent to San Tomas Aquino Creek and
other tributary streams and marshes.
36
-...... .... .
. --.
-------
8.0
DESCRIPTION OF ALTERNATIVES
8.1
REMEDIAL ACTION OBJECTrvES
Cleanup of groundwater contamination at the Synertek #1 Superfund
site focuses on the following remedial action objectives:
1.
Prevention of the near-term and future exposure of human
receptors to contaminated ground water;
Restoration of. the contaminated ground water for future use
as potential drinking water;
2.
3.
Control of contaminant migration;
4.
Monitoring of contaminant concentrations in the ground
water.
8.2
GROUNDWATER CLEANUP STANDARDS
The cleanup standards for contaminated ground water at the Syner-
tek #1 Superfund site are based on chemical specific ARARs for 14
of the 33 contaminants of concern. Table 4 lists the cleanup
standards and the corresponding health risks of leaving these 14
targeted chemicals in the ground water at their particular
cleanup standard. cleangp to these levels will result in a final
cancer risk of 2.7 X 10- and a non-cancer risk of an HI equal to
0.72. This represents a 95% reduction in cancer risk and a 78%
reduction in non-cancer risks. Cleanup standards were assigned
to only 14 of the 33 chemicals of concern because there are cur-
rently no cleanup criteria established for the other 19 chemi-
cals. In addition, the concentrations of the other 19 chemicals,
which were all detected infrequently at relatively low concentra-
tions, will be reduced in the process of achieving the cleanup
standards for the 14 targeted chemicals.
Cleanup standards for extracted ground water that will be dis-
charged to San Tomas Aquino creek are listed in the current NPDES
permit for Synertek's interim remedial measure. These standards
(Table 5) apply at the point of discharge and are protective of
human health and the surface water environment.
The compliance boundary includes all ground water within the
plume boundaries indicated in Figures 6 and 7, all ground water
monitored in existing wells used in the quarterly monitoring
program, and any contaminated groundwater defined by additional
monitoring wells installed upon RWQCB or EPA request for the pur-
pose of monitoring potential vertical or horizontal migration of
the plumes currently located in the A and B Aquifer Zones.
37
- -. -.... _.. .
-------
Table 4.
Groundwater Cleanup Standards, Synertek
#1
Cleanup standards for all onsite and offsite wells shall not be greater than the levels as provide in this
table. The numerical final cleanup standards, therefore, shall not exceed the below listed levels in any
well used for monitoring the plume in any aquifer zone.
Chemical Cleanup Standard Reference EPA HCL Goal Risks at Cleanup Stds
Innb\ (ccb' Cancer non-Cancer
acetone 350 RISK NA 7.1xlO-7 0.10
benzene 1 CA HCL 0 6.9xlO-7, 0.04
bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate 4 CA HCL NA 5.6xl0-6 0.006
1,1-dichloroethane 5 CA HCL NA 0.002
1,1-dichloroethene 6 CA HCL 7 0.02
cis-l,2,-dichloroethene 6 CA HCL 70 (proposed) 0
ethylbenzene 680 CA HCL 700 (proposed) 0.37
Freon-113 1200 CA HCL NA 0.001
styrene 5 EPA HCL PR 0 (proposed) 2xlO-6 0.0007
toluene 100 CA AL 2000 (proposed) 0.01 ~
1, 1, I-trichloroethane 200 CA HCL 200 0.08
trichloroethene 5 CA HCL 0 1.7xI0-6 0.02
vinyl chloride O.~ CA HCL 0 1. 6xlO-S 0
xylenes 175 RISK 10,000 0.06
TOTAL 2.7xlO-5 0.72
CA HCL - C~lifornia State Haximum Contaminant Level (HCL) for Drinking Water (adopted).
EPA HCL PR'- proposed EPA Haximum Contaminant Level (HCL) for Drinking Water
CA AL - California DUS Action Level
NA - Not Available "
RISK - Cleanup standard for acetone set an order of magnitude lower than the level that would contribute a
value of 1.0 to the cumulative non-carcinogenic risk (total Hazard Index)
- Cleanup standard for xylenes set an order of magnitude below CA HCL of 1750 ug/l to reduce its
contribution to the cumulative non-carcinogenic risk from 0.6 to 0.06
-------
Table s.
Extracted - Groundwater Cleanup Standards for Discharge
contaminant NPDES Discharge Limit (ppb)
1,1 DCE 5
trans 1 2-DCE 5
VC 5
Freon 113 5
1,1,1-TCA 5
TCE 5
1, I-DCA 5
-------
8.3
REMEDIAL ACTION ALTERNATIVES
Alternatives addressing the groundwater contamination and
remedial action objectives were developed from a list of tech-
nologies that survived an initial screening of technologies and
response actions. This list includes groundwater monitoring,
restrictions on deeds and well permits, groundwater extraction
wells, air stripping, carbon adsorption, injection of treated
water, and discharge of treated water to surface water.
Alternative 1 - No Action
The no action alternative assumes that the interim remedial ac-
tion operated since 1985 is an adequate response. The
groundwater extraction and treatment system currently in opera-
tion would be shut down. contaminant concentrations would be
reduced by natural attenuation as the plume continued to migrate
towards San Francisco Bay. Groundwater monitoring would not be
continued.
No action alternatives at Superfund groundwater sites typically
include groundwater monitoring to help establish a baseline for
comparison of costs. This is not the case for Synertek #1 be-
cause the closely-related Alternative 2 includes groundwater
monitoring as its only cost.
Alternative 2 - Institution Controls and Groundwater Monitorinq
Alternative 2 consists of implementing long-term groundwater
monitoring and institutional controls. These controls would con-
sist of deed restrictions and well permit restrictions prohibit-
ing the use of the A and B Aquifers for drinking water supply.
As in the No Action alternative, the groundwater extraction and
treatment system would be shut down, allowing the further migra-
tion of contaminants. Natural attenuation would reduce con-
taminant concentrations in the ground water. Continued
groundwater monitoring would delineate the advancing plume bound-
aries, and the fate and transport behavior of the chemical con-
taminants. .
Alternative 3 - Maintain Existinq Groundwater Extraction System
with Existinq Air strippinq
Alternative 3 consists of maintaining the existing groundwater
extraction and treatment system which uses on-site and off-site
extraction wells and air stripping treatment prior to discharge
to San Tomas Aquino Creek under an NPDES permit. Air emissions
would continue to be regulated under a BAAQMD permit that cur-
rently does not require emissions control.
40
---...., _. -
-------
Deed restrictions and well permit restrictions would be imple-
mented to prevent the use of ground water in the A and B Aquifers
while remediation is in effect. Well cleaning and a pilot injec-
tion study would be conducted to potentially enhance the removal
of contaminants, speed the cleanup, and reduce the amount of
ground water discharged to the surface. Attempts would be made
to locate and seal abandoned wells located within the plume
boundaries.
Alternative 4 - Existinq Groundwater Extraction System with
Carbon AdsorDtion
Alternative 4 utilizes the existing on-site and off-site
groundwater extraction systems with liquid-phase carbon adsorp-
tion treatment prior to discharge into San Tomas Aquino Creek un-
der an NPDES permit. The existing air stripping system would not
be used.
As in Alternative 3, deed restrictions and well permit restric-
tions would be implemented to prevent the use of ground water in
the A and B Aquifers while remediation is in effect. Well clean-
ing and a pilot injection study would be conducted to potentially
enhance the removal of contaminants, speed the cleanup, and
reduce the amount of ground water discharge to the surface. At-
tempts would be made to locate and seal abandoned wells located
within the plume boundaries.
9.0
COMPARATIVE ANALYSIS OF ALTERNATIVES
This section provides an explanation of the criteria used to
select the remedy, and an analysis of the remedial action alter-
natives in light of those criteria, highlighting the advantages
and disadvantages of each alternative.
9.1 CRITERIA
The alternatives were evaluated using nine component cri~eria.
These criteria, which are listed below, are derived from require-
ments contained in the National contingency Plan (NCP) and CERCLA
Sections 121(b) and 121(c).
1.
Overall protection of human health and the
environment.
41
- h.... _...
-------
9.2
2.
Short term effectiveness in protecting human
health and the environment.
3.
Long-term effectiveness and permanence in
protecting human health and the environment.
4.
Compliance with ARARs (ARARs are detailed in Section
7.0) .
5.
Use of treatment to achieve '.a reduction in the
toxicity, mobility, or volume of the contaminants.
6.
Implementability.
7.
State acceptance/support agency acceptance.
Community acceptance.
8.
9.
Cost.
PROTECTION OF HUMAN HEALTH AND THE ENVIRONMENT
ANALYSIS OP ALTERNATIVES
Alternatives 3 and 4 basically provide equal protection of human
health and the environment because they both extract ground water
that contains contaminants at concentrations above drinking water
standards. Extraction prevents further migration of the plume.
Deed restrictions protect against use of the aquifers before
cleanup is completed. After cleanup, both A~ternatives 3 and 4
are estimated to result in a reduced cancer risk of 2.7 X 10-5
and a reduced HI of 0.72. Water discharged or reinjected follow-
ing treatment would meet NPDES requirements which are protective
of human health and the environment.
Alternative 4 could be considered slightly more protective than
Alternative 3 since it would not involve the transfer of
groundwater contaminants to the air and might involve the
destruction of the contaminants by regeneration of the granular
activated carbon.' Air emissions from Alternative 3 are con-
sidered sufficiently protective, however, since they meet BAAQMD
permit requi~ements, while the calculated worst case cancer risk
i$. 4.6 X 10- and the HI is less than 1.
Alternative 2 is less protective than Alternatives 3 and 4 be-
cause it would allow the contaminated ground water to continue
migrating. Deed restrictions and well permit restrictions would
need to be imposed for a significantly greater amount of time
than those of Alternatives 3 and 4, since natural attenuation of
groundwater contaminant concentrations could require more than
100 years compared to the approximately 25 year cleanup time for
Alternatives 3 and 4.
42
--..... -- .
-------
Both Alternatives 1 and 2 provide no reduction in risk. While
future use of the contaminated ground water may be unlikely, a
future user of the contamiqated ground water would be exposed to
a cancer risk of 5.0 X 10- and an HI of 3.3. Alternative 1 is
least protective of human health and the environment. Because it
does not include deed restrictions or groundwater monitoring, Al-
ternative 1 greatly increases the chances that an individual will
install a well into a migrating plume.
COMPLIANCE WITH ARARS
Both Alternatives 3 and 4 would attain all pertinent ARARS iden-
tified in Section 7. The Safe Drinking Water Act MCLs and
California Department of Health Services DWALs would be achieved
by extracting ground water contaminated above these levels.
NPDES permit requirements would be met by proper design and
operation of either treatment system. The Fish and Wildlife
Coordination Act would not be an ARAR for Alternatives 3 and 4
because the groundwater extraction system would prevent the plume
from reaching surface waters or wet lands and the treatment sys-
tem would ensure that discharged water was protective of human
health and the environment. In the event that the treated ground
water is injected, the UIC regulation would apply and be at-
tained.
The RCRA land disposal restrictions would apply to the spent car-
bon from Alternative 4 and would also apply to Alternative 3 in
the event that it became necessary to implement air stripper
emissions control involving gas-phase activated carbon. The
spent carbon could be treated before reuse or disposal by an in-
cineration process.
Only Alternative 3 would need to comply with OSWER Directive
9355.0-28 and BAAQMD Regulation 8, Rule 47 because of the air
stripper emissions. These ARARs are addressed by the BAAQMD per-
mitting process. If permit modifications become necessary, emis-
sions could be captured and destroyed by available technology.
The drinking water ARARS would not be attained by either Alterna-
tives 1 or 2, since contamination would be left in place. The
Fish and wildlife Coordination Act would become an ARAR if the
plume migrated to San Tomas Aquino Creek and other tributary
streams and marshes. California's resolution 68-16 would not be
achieved since the groundwater contaminants would unreasonably
affect the present and potential uses of the upper aquifers.
RCRA land disposal restrictions, NPDES requirements, BAAQMD
Regulation 8, and OSWER Directive 9355.0-28 would not apply to
Alternatives 1 or 2 since neither one uses treatment.
43
- u.... _....
-------
REDUCTION OF TOXICITY. MOBILITY. OR VOLUME THROUGH
TREATMENT
Both Alternatives 3 and 4 reduce the toxicity, mobility, and
volume of groundwater contaminants by removing greater than 99%
of the contaminants from the extracted ground water. Alternative
4 concentrates the contaminants' onto granular activated carbon,
which would then be regenerated or properly disposed at a
landfill. Contaminants could potentially be destroyed during
carbon regeneration, making any future release of the removed
contaminants impossible.
Alternative 3 transfers the groundwater contaminants to the air
where their toxicity, m9bility, and volume as air contaminants
actually increases. In addition, some of the VOCs are ozone
precursors. The current air stripper is operating under a BAAQMD
permit that does not require emissions control.
Neither Alternative 1 or 2 reduces toxicity, mobility, or volume.
LONG-TERM EFFECTIVENESS AND PERMANENCE
Alternatives 3 and 4 include groundwater extraction which is in-
tended to reduce the level of contamination in the A and B
Aquifer Zones to the cleanup standards indicated in section 8.2.
Thus, potential risks to the community currently posed by the
site in its present condition are minimized. To ensure that the
magnitude of residual risks are minimized, the performance of the
groundwater extraction system will be carefully monitored on a
regular basis and adjusted as warranted by the performance data
collected during operation.
The potential future risk from long-term exposure to volatilized
contaminants that are emitted from the soil and accumulate inside
residences is addressed by the groundwater extraction system in
Alternatives 3 and 4. Groundwater extraction reduces the amounts
of contaminants that could volatilize into the soil gas and even-
tually into surface air. Furthermore, deed restrictions will
prevent the building of residences above the on-site portion of
the plume until it is cleaned up. Due to current zoning, there
are no residences above or in close proximity to the overall
plume. Finally, this newly recognized potential problem will be
much better understood by the time the first five-year review oc-
curs. If necessary, more refined air sampling could be conducted
at that time, and fans or other ventilation aids could be
provided to any affected buildings.
Treatment by air stripping provided by Alternative 3 is reliable
for the long-term removal of VOCs from the ground water. Treat-
ment residuals are expected to be negligible based on the high
volatility of the compounds present in the ground water.
44
---.". _.'"
'. -..
-------
Treatment by aqueous phase granular activated carbon provided by
Alternative 4 is reliable for the removal of VOCs from the ground
water. Treatment residuals are expected to be negligible since
they will be concentrated on a relatively small amount of carbon
that will either be properly disposed in a landfill or
regenerated by a destructive technology.
Alternatives 1 and 2 provide no long-term effectiveness.
SHORT-TERM EFFECTIVENESS
The short-term impact to the health of workers and the community
will be very minimal for Alternatives 3 and 4 because the
groundwater extraction system is already in place as the interim
remedial action at the site. There would be no current addi-
tional risks since the plume is already contained and the treat-
ments are protective. Groundwater cleanup time is estimated to
require about 25 years. Uncontrolled air emissions from Alterna-
tive 3 make it slightly less effective in protecting health and
the environment than Alternative 4 in the short-term.
Alternatives 1 and 2 do not include the implementation of treat-
ment remedies; therefore, there are no additional risks to the
community. Risks associated with the contaminant plume would
remain at the site for over 100 years until natural attenuation
reduces the contaminant concentrations down to the cleanup stan-
dards. Alternative 2 reduces future risk of groundwater inges-
tion if shallow groundwater is considered for use as a drinking
water source.
IMPLEMENTABILITY
Alternatives 3 and 4 include the same extraction system which is
already in place. Both alternatives provide groundwater treat-
ment with either an air stripper or carbon adsorption. Both
methods are proven technologies and there are no technical con-
siderations that prohibit the use of either of these tech-
nologies. In addition, both alternatives are administratively
feasible using existing permits for discharge or air emissions.
Approval of possible injection of treated water is considered
likely.
There are no technical concerns regarding the implementability of
Alternatives 1 and 2. Institutional controls required in Alter-
natives 2, 3, and 4 are administratively feasible.
COST
Alternatives 3 and 4 have roughly similar costs. The present
worth cost of Alternative 4 is $1,053,000 compared to $895,000
for Alternative 3. Annual operation and maintenance (O&M) costs
45
- --.... --..
-------
are $68,400 and $61,000 respectively. The $89,000 capital costs
for Alternative 4 are significantly greater than the $36,000
capital costs for Alternative 3. Present worth costs were based
on a 25-year operation period and a 5% discount rate.
The $217,000 present worth cost for Alternative 2 is based on a
30-year time period using a 5% discount rate. The capital costs
and annual O&M costs for Alternative 2 are $5,000 and $13,800
respectively.
Of the $217,000 present worth cost f&r Alternative 2, $212,000 is
due to groundwater monitoring. Normally, groundwater monitoring
costs would apply to the no action alternative and would be used
for a baseline comparison with the other alternatives. For the
Synertek #1 site, Alternative 1 was used as the no action alter-
native and does not involve any actions, including groundwater
monitoring. Thus Alternative 1 has no cost.
SUPPORT AGENCY ACCEPTANCE
The Feasibility Study and the Proposed Plan Fact Sheet were
reviewed by the RWQCB and they concur with EPA's preferred alter-
native.
COMMUNITY ACCEPTANCE
The Proposed Plan was presented to the community of Santa clara
in a fact sheet and at a public meeting. No technical comments
were submitted regarding the alternatives. Other comments
received are addressed in the Responsiveness Summary.
9.3
THE SELECTED REMEDY
9.3.1
Basis of Selection
Maintaining the existing groundwater extraction system with the
existing air stripper (Alternative 3) is the selected remedy for
the Synertek #1 Superfund site. This remedy addresses only the
contaminated ground water since all contaminated soils and struc-
tures were removed during the interim remedial action.
Alternatives 3 and 4 were the only alternatives that met all of
the nine criteria and adequately addressed the remedial action
objectives. The only difference between the two alternatives is
the type of treatment. Air stripping and carbon adsorption are
equally effective at treating the groundwater contaminants, and
only differ in the area of treatment residuals. Under a current
BAAQMD permit, residual contaminants from the air stripper are
relea~ed directly to the air. Risk from these contaminants (4.6
X 10- ) is within the acceptable EPA risk range. Residual con-
46
--*..... --..
-------
taminants adsorbed to the liquid-phase granular activated carbon
would be destroyed during regeneration or confined to a small
concentrated volume in a proper landfill.
Despite slight advantages of carbon adsorption in dealing with
treatment residuals resulting in better reduction of toxicity,
mObility, and volume, the existing air stripper provides several
advantages. These advantages include the fact that the air
stripper costs less than carbon adsorption and is already in-
stalled and operating in accordance with current permits. In ad-
dition, residuals from the air stripper could potentially be cap-
tured and destroyed by available emissions control technology if
permit modifications become necessary. Therefore, Alternative 3
was selected as the groundwater remedy for Synertek #1.
9.3.2
Features of the Remedy
Alternative 3 maintains the existing groundwater extraction sys-
tem with the existing air stripper for a present worth cost of
0.9 million dollars. It is already implemented and operating
with acceptance from the community and federal, state, and local
agencies. Alternative 3 consists of the following features:
*
Groundwater extraction from two on-site and two off-site
wells in the A Aquifer and one on-site well in the B Aquifer
sends a combined flow of approximately 15 gpm to the air
stripper. The well locations and pumping rate contain the
plume and prevent further migration of th~ VOC-contaminated
ground water. The cancer risk of 5 X 10- for a future use
of drinking water contaminated with vinyl chloride, 1,1-DCE,
and TCE will be continually reduceg over an estimated 25-
year period to a risk of 2.7 X 10-. Thus, groundwater ex-
traction until drinking water standards are achieved will
attain ARARs and permanently restore the contaminated
aquifers to their maximum beneficial uses.
*
Air stripping will remove more than 99% of the VOCs from the
extracted ground water allowing the treated effluent to be
discharged under an existing NPDES permit to San Tomas
Aquino Creek without degrading this surface water or
presenting a significant risk to human health and the en-
vironment. The stripped VOCs are emitted directly to the
air under an existing BAAQMD permit ~nd they exert a
theoretical cancer risk of 4.6 X 10-. The air stripper
will include air emissions control if emissions exceed
levels permitted by the BAAQMD.
*
Periodic groundwater monitoring will verify plume contain-
ment, determine current plume boundaries, and follow the
decrease in VOC concentrations as the cleanup progresses.
47
_n..... -.. .
-------
*
A pilot injection study will evaluate whether injection of
the treated water back to the subsurface would enhance the
removal of pollutants, speed the cleanup, and reduce the
amount of ground water discharged to the surface.
Institutional controls consisting of deed and well-permit
restrictions will protect humans from exposure to the con-
taminated ground water during the estimated 25-year cleanup
period.
*
*
Potential conduit investigations will attempt to locate and
seal the remaining abandoned agricultural well that is
believed to exist very close to the plume. This will help
prevent vertical migration of the plume and contamination of
deeper aquifers currently used for drinking water~
9.3.3
Uncertainty in the Remedy
The goal of this remedial action is to restore the ground water
to its beneficial use, which is, at this site, a potential source
of drinking water. Based on information obtained during the RI
and on a careful analysis of all remedial alternatives, EPA and
the RWQCB believe that the selected remedy will achieve this
goal. It may become apparent, during implementation or operation
of the groundwater extraction system and its modifications, that
contaminant levels have ceased to decline and are remaining con-
stant at levels higher than the cleanup standards over some por-
tion of the plume. In such a case, the system performance stan-
dards and/or the remedy may be reevaluated by EPA.
The selected remedy will include groundwater extraction for an
estimated period of 25 years, during which the system's perfor-
mance will be carefully monitored on a regular basis and adjusted
as warranted by the performance data collected during operation.
Modifications may include any or all of the following:
a)
b)
c)
d) ..
at individual wells where cleanup goals have been attained,
pumping may be discontinuedj"
alternating pumping at wells to eliminate stagnation points;
pulse pumping to allow aquifer equilibration and to allow
adsorbed contaminants to partition into ground water; and
installation of additional extraction wells to facilitate or
accelerate cleanup of the contaminant plume.
To ensure that cleanup goals continue to be maintained, the
aquifer will be monitored at those wells where pumping has ceased
on an occurrence of every 5 years following discontinuation of
groundwater extraction.
48
-.. -.'. -. .
-------
10.0
STATtrl'ORY DETERHINATIONS
The selected remedy will comply with Section 121 of CERCLA. The
selected remedy protects human health and the environment through
extraction and treatment of the VOC-contaminated ground water.
This remedy addresses only the contaminated ground water since
all contaminated soils and structures were removed during the in-
terim remedial action. The reductions in risk are summarized for
groundwater extraction and air stripping in Section 9.3.2 of this
ROD. There are no short-term or long-term threats associated
with the selected remedy that cannot be readily controlled. In
addition, no adverse cross-media affects are expected from the
remedy.
The selected remedy will comply with all of the identified chemi-
cal, action, and location specific ARARs that are described in
Section 7 of this ROD. In the event that it becomes apparent
that the drinking water ARARs may not be achievable as described
in Section 9.3.3 of this ROD, the system performance standards
and/or the remedy may be reevaluated.
The present worth cost of the selected remedy is $895,000. It is
the least costly of the two alternatives which are equally
protective of human health and the environment. The selected
remedy is already installed and operating in accordance with cur-
rent permits for water discharge and air emissions.
The selected remedy uses permanent solutions and alternative
treatment (or resource recovery) technologies to the maximum ex-
tent practicable and satisfies the statutory preference for
remedies that employ treatment that reduces toxicity, mobility,
or volume as a principal element. Section 9.3.2 of this ROD sum-
marizes the key features of the selected remedy. If successful,
injection of treated groundwater will constitute a recovery of a
valuable resource. In addition, the remaining toxicity,
mobility, and volume of contaminants emitted from the air strip-
per could be potentially captured and destroyed by available
emissions control technology if permit modifications become
necessary.
Because the remedy will result in hazardous substances remaining
on-site above health-based levels, a five-year review, pursuant
to CERCLA section 121, 42 U.S.C. section 9621, will be conducted
at least once every five years after initiation of the remedial
action to ensure that the remedy continues to provide adequate
protection of human health and the environment.
49
-------
PART :I:I:I.
RESPONS:IVENESS SUMMARY
1.0
:INTRODUCT:ION
This section of the Record of Decision contains agency responses
to all significant verbal and written comments submitted to RWQCB
or EPA staff during the.30-day public comment period and at the
Community Meeting held January 17, 1991. This ROD does not con-
tain any significant changes to the remedy that was made avail-
able for public comment and described in the Proposed Plan Fact
Sheet and the RWQCB orders.
The public comment period began with a public meeting of the ex-
ecutive board of the RWQCB on January 16, 1991 and ended 30 days
later on February 15, 1991. Additional time for public comment
was available up until and during the second public meeting of
the executive board of RWQCB held on March 20, 1991. EPA staff
did not receive any comments during these time periods.
2.0
REG:IONAL WATER QUAL:ITY CONTROL BOARD RESPONSES
Since RWQCB is the lead agency for Synertek #1 and received all
of the comments, RWQCB prepared the Responsiveness Summary
(Attachment A). EPA, as the support agency, has reviewed and
concurs with the RWQCB responses.
50
-""'" -- .
-. .
-------
ATTACBHENT A
RWQCB RESPONSIVENESS SUMMARY
-.. -... _....
-------
RESPONSIVENESS SUMMARY
Former Synertek #1 Facility
3050 Coronado Drive
Santa Cua
1.0 Introduction
This Responsiveness Summary is a compilation of comments received and responses made by
Regional Board staff regarding the proposed Remedial Action Plan (RAP) for the Former
Synertek #1 Facility.
Written comments (attached) have been received from Shih-In and David Shirley, the Santa
Oara Valley Water District (SCVWD), the California Department of Health Services' Office of
Drinking Water (ODW), the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), Honeywell Inc., and the
RREEF Funds regarding the Revised Tentative Order.
Shih-In and David Shirley and the SCVWD both commented in support of the proposed RAP.
Thus no further response to their comments is necessalY.
2.0 ODW Comments
ODW commented that they did not support the use of drinking water standards as the target
cleanup standards for contaminated groundwaters, especially at sites involving multiple
chemicals. ODW recommends the use of the 104 carcinogenic risk levels as cleanup levels
whenever this level of protection is feasible, instead of EPA's 104 to 104 Carcinogenic Risk
Range as acceptable health risk levels for carcinogens in the drinking water. At a minimum,
the proposed remediation alternatives should evaluate the cleanup levels necessary to achieve
an aggregate carcinogenic risk of 104 as well as estimates of cost and time needed to reach this
acceptable health risk level for drinking water. .
~esponse to ODW Comments
The aggregate carcinogenic risk associated with the cleanup standards in the proposed RAP is
2j x 10". Honeywell estimated that it will take 2S years and cost approximately $895,000 to
reach these cleanup standuds. .
ODW recommends that the Board evaluate the cleanup levels, cost and time neceSSll)' to
achieve an aggregate carcinogenic risk of 104. Honeywell estimated that the cleanup
standard for TCE would need to be set at 1 ppb to reach an aggregate carcinogenic risk of 1~.
Honeywell also estimated that it would take approximately SO years and cost approximately
$1,149,000 to reach a cleanup standard of 1 ppb TeE.
However, it should be noted that at the point in the cleanup when the remedial action has
reduced TCE to the cleanup standard of 5.0 ppb, the remedial action should have reduced the
other chemicals far below detection limits. Note that TCE, the pollu~~ .~e~.ected at the
A -,
-------
Responsiveness Summary
Page 2
highest concentration onsite, is currently detected at a maximum concentration of 3400 ppb,
compared to Freon-113, the pollutant detected at the second highest concentration onsite, at
810 ppb (based on December 1990 sampling). At this point when the remedial action reduces
TCE to the cleanup standard of 5.0 ppb, the residual risk will approximate the estimated risk
related to the concentration of TCE alone, or Ij x 1()4. Thus the residual risk is likely to be
10" when cleanup is completed as ODW requested.
3.0 EPA Comments
EP A commented on the language used in the Order regarding future changes to cleanup
standards - particularly if those standards were found in the future to be infeasible (see
attached letter dated February 26, 1991).
3.1 Response to BPA Comments .
Based on EPA's comments the following changes have been made:
Finding 22.a. Replace the word "feasible" with the phrase "technically practjcable from an
engineering perspective". Replace the word "infeasible" with the phrase
"technically impracticable from an engineering perspective".
Finding 23.
Replace the word "infeasible" with the phrase "technically impracticable from an
engineering perspective".
Add the following sentence to the end of the first paragraph: "However, any
change to the cleanup standards or remedy will require Board and EP A
approval".
Finding 26.
Finding '0.
Delete the following words from the fust sentence: "cannot reasonably be
attained at".
4.0 Local Community Issues
.
This section of the Responsiveness Summary is generally a summary of major issues and .
concerns raised by the local community. However, no major issues or concerns were raised by
the local community. Therefore this section summarizes the public meeting which took place
on January 11, 1991 to present and receive comments on the proposed RAP held in the City of
Santa Clara. .
Despite an aggressive community relations program, which included publishing two quarter-
page newspaper advertisements and mailing over four hundred notices to local residents, only
two members of the public attended the meeting. The transaipt of the public meeting is
included as an attachment to this Responsiveness Summary.
During the public meeting questions were asked by the two members of the public on the
following general topics: 1) background on the Superfund process, 2) background on the
groundwater reinjection test, 3) whether the pollutant plume is commingled with plumes
---....---..
;,,;,:.::,""'.,: """:'-'.'~-":~':L~.::"2~,~..r:-$f.~~~~~~~~"'~i~';~~~~:':~~~~~;r:~?f~:7~~l::~~t~~~S~.Z" ~~~~~~~~
A-l
-------
Responsiveness 51lmmllTY
Page 3
from any other pollution sites, and 4) what type of enforcement activities have been directed
at Honeywell.
No member of the public has requested modification of the proposed RAP for the site.
Therefore, no changes were made to the RAP as a result of public comment.
5.0 Discharger Comments
This section addresses the specific written comments submitted by Honeywell and the RREEF
Fun~ .
5.1 HoneywelJ Comments
Provision 2.a.2) requires that implez:nentation of a full scale groundwater injection system be
completed within 90 days from approval of a proposal submitted in the report regarding the
injection test results. We believe that 120 days would be more appropriate to assure that the
following subtasks are completed in an appropriate fashion:
o
o
o
o
o
finalize design of full scale injection system
solicit, receive and evaluate bids from contractors
obtain necessary pennits or access agreements
construct system
start.up
5.2 Response to Honeywel1 Comments
The completion date for Provision 2.&.2) has been changed from 90 to 120 days.
5.3 RREEF Funds Comments
The RREEF Funds requested clarification of the intended meaning of Provision C.12.
However, the RREEF Funds does not object to the provision as drafted, and the RREEF Funds
will comply with the provision.
5.4 Response to RREEF Funds Comments
Board staff explained to the RREEF Funds that Provision C.12 requires the RREEF Funds to
file a letter report informing the Regional Board that a change in site occupancy or ownership
had occurred and provide the name of the new occupant or owner and the person(s) who
would act as . contact person for that occupant or owner.
6.0 Responsiveness Summa:ty Conclusion and Changes to the Proposed RAP
All verbal and written comments regarding changes to the proposed RAP have been
addressed. Board staff are not aware of any outstanding comments on the proposed RAP.
Based on this Responsiveness Summ8!Y, staff has not significantly changed the Tentative
Order.
-'. '..-- _. .
~
.-' . -,"
.' '. _.~-..
A -3
-------
Responsiveness Summary
Page 4
Attachments:
Shih-In and David Shirley comments dated January 12, 1991
SCVWD comments dated February 5, 1991
ODW comments dated January 28, 1991
EP A comments dated February 26, 1991
Honeywell comments dated February 12, 1991
Craham & James (The RREEF Funds) comments dated January 14, 1991
January 17, 1991 Community Meeting Transcripts (available upon request)
_u --.. --- .
A-4
-------
., -
, .
. -.
I /I')..! '11
'lHM /Ytr. 8114~
1}14t1t- ~-lm -flU- //I{rrll<;;t"
h. 7VLL ry tfJr kJI!. at 1M ~ 1-
67-~ ..1U '+(k~ 11A: iG- .
~ ld:tu, ~ -kVY1ah~s ~ « 4
~ -/r; ~ t/LtU£f~6~.
IfI-krn.AJh~ I ~ '2- ~~
IMA. ~cup f:-h u- "p"rtY1 ~ S~ ctlUt;.
M41~ ~ (1)//1 f ~ V) 4<' . 1f.L
ft'CU1 (tMitVY U4M 9- I ~ II,#!;
~(d M. h'Le {- U4 . .
.
. Jliill.'n t!r 'IJ,r..;J .~;nr,
2517 ~"mriJgt "I~
. JimJ,tl efln, ~ 9505J-I24_~
_.. .... ... .
~~.;.~~,. ': " '---':13 ,'.",...
. -, ~~J.:"~' ~~t.\~,,~~n~!Jl~~~.L~+:4~~,~1I\,~C:.~.,1t.t~f';;;W:~~~"'A. . .
. - ,...'" .-.....~".::1'"",:;,:""
.4 - s-
-------
1-
'"
~.
.
Santa Oara Valley 'Nder District
5750 AlMADEN EXPRESSWAY
SAN JOSE. CALIFORNIA 95118
TELEPHONE ('08) 265-2600
fACSIMILE ('08) 266-0271
AN AFfiRMATM ACTION EMPlOnR
,.,.,~,. ~.". t... ,t.::.,: ~
:"'''''.;~''' -:L.. ,('-.,.. ,.. .'".. .. .~. .....
r-::~ r .
~;:1
('~P' ff'J "r''','''~ '-.1 '-'. ~.
...... I \w_I.'..- 1.,;..,.......-
February S. 1991
Mr. Gregory BJ
Regional Water Quality Control Board
1800 Harrison Street. Suite 700
Oakland. CA 94612
.
Dear Mr. Banow:
Subject: Comments on Synertek Buildinl No.1. Final RAP
We are in general concurrence with your final clean-up plan for the Synenek Building No.1 site I~\~alai
at 3050 Coronado Drive. Santa Clara.
~
. -
We aJso concur with the requirement of I pilot study io assess the feasibility of a controlled program of
reinjection of treated waters into the affected sbaJlow aquifers. If successful. we would expect it to lead
to I more expeditious cleanup and I conservatioD of Ifoundwater.
Please call Tom Iwamura or myself sbould you bave any questions.
'/
ineer
rotectioD Division
_u -.... ~-.,
-'~,';;';,"' ..- ;~-~-"".'-'~~b-$~~.r.i~-~:r~:it~;:).. ~;:....i:o;~.~""!"i-:::;:";"'::r-:",". -.
.;-S!!~~..':.-;';~,~~'~';'r...-.;;~~ :-~. ," ~'.. .".. .. .' _:~ ~-, -~"'- ,,~,-,,"'''._''' ,..-..........
A-6
-------
.
~
-------
steven Ritchie
Page 2
January 28, 1991
Superfund Cleanup Program. For further question on this matter,
please contact Gregory Eager at (415) 540-3188.
~~
Catherine S. Ling, P.E.
District Engineer
Monterey District
cc:
City of Santa Clar~
_u --.. -.-..
. .
.~-":'>':'-~"-".~'~~!5;~~~~.~..A:.s"=1o!---~~-"'~'~'-"~~:'=-:~ ~:~'.;~~
A-g
-------
,f-,,(f' 514',,,..
.;ft\
~~a
6 ~
\, :!
+'41 ~c.
UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY
REGION IX
75 Hawthorne Street
San Francisco. Ca. 94105
/ February 26, 1991
Greg Bartow
Regional Water Quality Control Board
1800 Harrison st., Suite 700
Oakland, CA 94612
..~f!,_. -.
._. ".": . !. '. .',
. "."""",v':L, \ '.
.~-~ .;~ .--
-..- ~~ .
!1: :.. .
...~, - '.' ."'~f' .
... \.. ,- . ;...
Dear Greg:
Enclosed are comments on the Revised Tentative Order for
Honeywell's former Synertek #1 facility. These comments clarify
EPA's position from an enforcement point of view. If you have
any questions, please do not hesitate to call.
Sincerely,
J~ . ,.:,;, . I
)f--~t~. I~..:;....:,' <. ~'. J'
:/~~seph B. Healy; Jr.
. Remedial Project Manager
JBH/jbh
Encl:
Comments on Synertek Tentative Order
cc:
Jim Hanson (EPA)
Ron Gervason (RWQCB)
";" ,....
..;:,. ",,:.'
-. . ~ ~
,'. . ,":'.'.-. .';; ~.<:''':',,'~::j'~'',i;.:. ",.-:..~:, ":-"":'," ;"'.:,'
~ ;. -:-:;."'" ,...~~''';- .",: : .-.; .,,' . .
.. ..-." :--~.......... . "...-
" ... . ~-"-."'-
-4-9
-------
I
EPA REGION IX COMMENTS ON REVISED TENTATIVE ORDER FOR HONEYWELL'S
FORMER SYNERTEK #1 FACILITY
1. sections 22 and 23 of the Tentative Order provide that the
groundwater cleanup standards will be achieved in all Synertek
monitoring wells unless the Board determines that meeting these
standards is "infeasible", in which case groundwater extraction
shall continue as long as significant quantities of chemicals are
being removed through groundwater extraction. As drafted, these
provisions arguably violate section 121 of CERCLA. Under CERCLA
section 121, the remedial alternative selected must attain ARARs
unless EPA finds that a waiver is warranted under 121(d)(4).
CERCLA section 121(d) (4) does not provide for a waiver based on a
finding that attaining ARARs is "infeasible". section 121(d) (4)
allows for a waiver only where compliance with ARARs is
"technically impracticable from an engineering perspective".
Therefore, these sections of the Order should be changed to
reflect that the Board will only allow a waiver of ARARs where
compliance would be "technically impracticable from an engineer-
ing perspective". In addition, section 22 of the Order should
acknowledge that EPA must approve any waiver of ARARs.
2. section 26 of the Tentative Order states: "If it becomes ap-
parent, during operation of the system, that contaminant levels
have ceased to decline and are remaining constant at levels
higher than the cleanup standards, that standard and the remedy
may be reevaluated." This section should acknowledge that any
change in the cleanup standards or remedy will require EPA ap-
proval.
3. section 27 of the Tentative Order should be revised to
reflect that the EPA must approve any future changes to cleanup
standards. In addition, the first sentence of section 27 of the
Tentative Order should be revised so that it doe~ not imply that
ARARs can be waived if they cannot be "reasonably attained". As
stated in comment one above, section 121 of CERCLA allows EPA to
waive ARARs only in the narrower situation where compliance wi~h
the cleanup standards would be "technically impracticable from "an
engineering perspective".
-.'..... _....
A-to
-------
Honeywell
February.12, 1991
(!.-:.. !'-..".
""'-." .- ..,
. . ." :J.8.. ,.,,:,
...... ,.., ..:~."~,,,, :"'''''. .
. . "..'. .
Hr. Steven R. Ritchie
Ca1ifornia Regiona1 Water
Quality Control Board
1800 Harrison Street, Suite 700
Oak1and CA 94612
,..-
r.::F? . , ....
'f . ~'(JJ
(:Jt\.... .w....
...,..f '-n.
- if CO:ji-n~L Jr ,"-
W"''''.'...
Re: Honeywell Inc. - Synertek Building .,
Dear Hr. Ritchie:
The following conment pertains to the "Tentative Order, Proposed
Remedial Action Plan and Site Cleanup Requirements For: Honeywell
Inc. and The RREEF Funds, former Synertek ., Facility, 3050 Coronado
Drive, Santa Clara, Santa Clara County", dated December 27, 1990:
Provision 2(a)(2) on page 16, requires that the implementation of
a full scale groundwater injection system be completed within 90
days from approval of a proposal submitted in the report
regarding the injection test results. We believe that 120 days
would be more appropriate to assure that the following sub-tasks
are completed in an appropriate fashion:
o
o
o
o
o
finalize design of full scale injection system
solicit, receive and evaluate bids from contractors
obtain necessary permits or access agreements
construct system
start-up
Therefore, we respectfully request that the above indicated provision
be modiffed in order that a suitable time table be avaflab1. to
complete the required tasks. '
Sincerely,
~Cl~
Steve G. Conn
Corporate Project Engine.r
cc: c.o. Geadelmann
-.. -... -""
~~;;.; ;;,;.d~:~:k.:;...~. - ~. .. ...... MJHNfNIOUS MINNESOTA ~08. TELEPHONE 'W'7~ '. .,
~~.a...~-~... ~~. '-'4:,,,,,~,,,,,~~~;I"~""~ '. a. .-:...,. ,'. ...~.~:...:..'..
A-II
--'
-------
. ~." .
.. ,i.
! ,.~. ..\; ~ .". -'.
.. - ------.
GRAHAM & .JAMES
ClTNEIII Or"CQ
LOS ANOELes
LONG SltAc.... CA
NEWPORT 8ItACH. CA
IOALO ALTO. CA
NEW TORK
WASMINOTO... DC
IIIALoEIO.... NC
NILAN
LONOO"
8£",INO
TO"'TO
ONE "'."ITIME ~L.AZA
THIRD "'~OO"
IN A..OCIATIO... WIT'"
{1) DE.CONS
(\ , SOLICITO-S AND NOTAIII'C
\() HONG KONG
.... ,.RANCI5CD, CALI"ORNIA "III
TtLt~140Nt '4181 ..4-0200
""'C8IMILE '4181 '.1-24.'
TELEX M. Col. e78~. 001 .rc . w. u. :14014' CHALOIII...,. ."0
~ITE"" DIRECT FoU NUWBER
Arr'&.'A-rco ornc:a
8111USSltL8
I'UWAIT
.I EO OAI4
""TADM
8A...fllAl..
.,AIlAJllTA
January 14, 1991
(415) 362-6031
.JUTeR.. DIReCT DIAL NUNseR
(415) 954-0374
VIA FACSIMILE
Mr. Gregory Bartow
California Regional Water
San Francisco Bay Region
1800 Harrison Street'
Suite 700
Oakland, California 94612
'. ,
Quality Cont~ol Board
Re:
Tentative Order Concerning The Proposed
Remedial Action Plan And Site Cleanup
Requirements For Honeywell Inc. and The
RREEF Funds
Former Synertek '1 Facility, 3050 Coronado
Drive. Santa Clara. Santa Clara county
Dear Greg:
We represent The RREEF Funds ("RREEF") with respect
to the above-referenced Tentative Order.
As you and I discussed by telephone ,last Friday,
January 11, 1991, I have reviewed the Tentative Order and have
requested a clarification of one of its provisions. Paragraph
C.12 of the Order Cat page 22) requires RREEF to ftfile a -
report with the Board prior to any changes in site occupancy -.
and ownership associated with its facilities described in this
Order.ft I asked you to describe what such a report is to
contain. You advised me that the report simply should inform
the Board that a change in site occupancy or ownership had
occurred and should provide the name of the new occupant or
owner and of the person(s) who W9uld act as the contact person
for that occupant or owner.
With this clarification .of the intended meaning of
paragraph C.12, we do not object to the provision as drafted,
and RREEF will comply in this fashion with the provision.
CAL02V.P50
_... -.... .---.
~~~..~;~~.:~~~~:.=:~~~~~~~~:::::;~~~~~~::-;;.~:.,=~~~~~.~~~:;~-z.~_:~~:;:"7:' '..' .
()
A - /..2
-------
Mr. Gregory Bartow
January 14, 1991
Page 2
If my understanding of the clarification is
incorre9t, please advise me.
Thank you for your cooperation in this.
Very truly y~)
ca~~
of
GRAHAM , JAMES
CAL:
cc:
Ms. Sherie L. Dunn
Robert C. Thompson, Esq.
Our File: REEF 1.71
..
..
:
CAlG2V . PSG
- '. --.., -. .
i.J
A-/J
-------
ATTACHHENT B
ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD INDEX
-------
April
15 l'iq,
)
SYNERTEK BUILDING 1
ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD
Introduction
Honeywell Inc. (Honeywell) acquired Synertek Inc. (S~ertek) as a wholly-owned
subsidiary in 1979. Synertek leased a 1.5 acre property located at 3050 Coronado Drive
in Santa Clara, California (Building #1) and began operations in 1974 for
semiconductor manufacturing. Figure 1 shows the location of this facility. This
property and surrounding area is zoned for light industrial manufacturing o~rations
and is located in a 10o-year shallow flooding area where water depths of one foot may
occur. Synertek manufacturing operations ceased in 1985 and the 24,000 square foot
building was subsequently vacant until 1989 when it was leased to two tenants. With
the exception of the boulevards, the Site consists of paved areas and buildings.
In 1982 the State of California conducted a survey of underground storage tanks in
Santa Clara Valley which identified two underground solvent storage tanks at the
Building #1 facility (the Site). Honeywell conducted soil borings in tne vicinity of the
underground tanks and found evidence of leakage from the tanks. .
Since 1983, Hone~ell has conducted on-going study and remediation efforts at the
Site. These studies have proceeded to derme the horizontal and vertical extent of .
Volatile Organic Compound (VOC) plumes in groundwater at the Site. Interim
Remedial Measures (lRMs) have included the removal of under~ound tanks and
contaminated soils, and the installation and operation of an on-sIte 8I'0undwater
extraction and treatment facility: (on-site IRMS). Continuing efforts mvolved the
installation of an off-site groundwater extraction treatment system (off-site IRMs).
On July 15, 1987, the California Regional Water Quali!y Control Board (CRWQCB)
issued an order, Number 87-0B4, concerning the Building #1 Site. The Order was a
formalization of ongoing studies conducted voluntarily DY Honeywell and included
provisions to characterize the groundwater contamination, to complete horizontal and
vertical plume definition, to locate and seal abandoned agricultural wells, to evaluate
interim remedial activities and modifications, to initiate and complete on-site and off-
site interim remedial actions, to establish on-going monitorinK and pro~ess reporting
at the Site, and to establish a Quality Assurance Project Plan (QAPP) and Healt"b and
Safety Plan.
In 1988, the SJ!1~rtek Building #1 site was nominated for inclusion on the National
Priority list (NPL) with a proposed Hazard Ranking System (HRS) score of 31.94.
Hone.f\:Vell subsequently filed comments with the EnVlronmental Protection Agency
(EP A) describing why the Site was improperly scored and, therefore, improperly
proposed to be fisted. Regardless, the Synertek site was placed on the NPL list m
September 1989.
On June 21,1989, Order Number 87-084 was replaced by Order Number 89-113. The
order was revised to incorporate the requirements associated with the EP A ranking of
the Site. This order included provisions to develop an Administrative Record for the
Site, updated quarterly progress reporting requirements and RI/BPHE and FS/RAP
requirements.
-"".'. -~. .
-. .._-
1
-------
This Administrative Record provides documents pertaining to the Syt!ertek site through
April 15, 1991. Updates to tfiis record will be provided penodica1ly. To assist in
location of particUlar document, an index is provided.
How to Use the Index
The index is chronologically arranged within four separate categories. These are:
1. Correspondence,
2. Progress Reports,
3. NPDES Reports,
4. Investigation Reports.
To locate a particular document, go to the appropriate category within the index. Each
record in the index contains the following information:
1. Document Number,
2. Title of Document,
3. Author,
4. Recipient,
5. Date of Document,
6. Location of Document
7. Subjects Addressed,
8. Brief Description of Document.
The document number relates to the category and the date of the document.
Correspondence is denoted with a "C" in the first position of the document number.
Progress reports are signified with a ''P'', NPDES reports with an ''N'' and investigation
reports with an "R" in the first position. Tabs separate documents by year. A tab
numbered with a "7" marks 1987 documents, etc.
Once the particular document is found in the index, the entire document can be easily
found in the Administrative Record as the Record is arranged in the same order as the
index.
__n n- -- -.-..
2
-------
CORRESPONDENCE
_.-.-.- .""
0. -.-
-------
DOCUMENT NUMBER: C820827-1
TITLE: MANDATORY FACILITY QUESTIONNAIRE
AUTHOR: CRWQCB, F. DIERKER
RECIPIENT: SYNERTEK
DATE: 820827
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: CORRESPONDENCE VOL. 1
SUBJECTS: QUESTIONNAIRE
DESCRIPTION: FACILITY QUESTIONNAIRE
DOCUMENT NUMBER: C821115-1
TITLE:
AUTHOR: CRWQCB, F. DIERKER
RECIPIENT: SYNERTEK, W. SANBORN
DATE: 821115
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: CORRESPONDENCE VOL. 1
SUBJECTS: FACILITY QUESTIONNAIRE
DESCRIPTION: ORDER TO INVESTIGATE TANK LEAKAGE
*
DOCUMENT NUMBER: C830404-1
TITLE: RESULTS OF LEAK DETECTION INVESTIGATION
AUTHOR: CRWQCB, H. SINGER
RECIPIENT: SYNERTEK, W. SANBORN
DATE: 830404
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: CORRESPONDENCE VOL. 1
SUBJECTS: SUBSURFACE INVESTIGATION
DESCRIPTION: CONCLUDES CONTAMINATION OF SOIL AND GROUNDWATER
: REQUESTS ADDITIONAL SAMPLING
*
DOCUMENT NUMBER: C830701-1
TITLE: ADDITIONAL SUBSURFACE INVESTIGATIONS AT
AUTHOR: ENGINEERING SCIENCE,G.MAGNUSON
RECIPIENT: SYNERTEK, R. DREIER
DATE: 830701
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: CORRESPONDENCE VOL. 1
SUBJECTS: SUBSURFACE INVESTIGATION
DESCRIPTION: ATTACHMENT TO C830825-1, WORK PLAN
SYNERTEK
*
DOCUMENT NUMBER: C830825-1
TITLE:
AUTHOR: SYNERTEK, R. DREIER
RECIPIENT: CRWQCB, R. CONDIT
DATE: 830825
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: CORRESPONDENCE VOL. 1
SUBJECTS: SUBSURFACE INVESTIGATION --.. _. .
DESCRIPTION: WORK PLAN AND SCHEDUEL FOR ADDITIONAL INVESTIGATION
*
-------
DOCUMENT NUMBER: C830830-1
TITLE:
AUTHOR: CR\JQCB, H. SINGER
RECIPIENT: SYNERTEK, R. DREIER
DATE: 830830
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: CORRESPONDENCE VOL. 1
SUBJECTS: SUBSURFACE INVESTIGATION
DESCRIPTION: APPROVAL OF C830825-1 \JORK PLAN
*
DOCUMENT NUMBER: C840305-1
TITLE:
AUTHOR: CDOH, L. FELDMAN
RECIPIENT: SYNERTEK, J. PRICE
DATE: 840305
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: CORRESPONDENCE VOL. 1
SUBJECTS: SUBSURFACE INVESTIGATION
DESCRIPTION: REQUEST ADDITIONAL \JORK
*
DOCUMENT NUMBER: C840926-1
TITLE:
AUTHOR: CR\JQCB
RECIPIENT: SYNERTEK, J. PRICE
DATE: 840926
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: CORRESPONDENCE VOL. 1
SUBJECTS: SUBSURFACE INVESTIGATION
DESCRIPTION: COMMENTS ON AUGUST 1984 REVISIONS TO JULY 1984 \JORK PLAN
DOCUMENT NUMBER: C841109-1
TITLE:
AUTHOR: CR\JQCB, L. FELDMAN
RECIPIENT: SYNERTEK, J. PRICE
DATE: 841109
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: CORRESPONDENCE VOL. 1
SUBJECTS: PLUME DEFINITION
DESCRIPTION: CONFIMRING CONVERSATION. CONCERN ABOUT TIME TO DETERMINE
: EXTENT OF CONTAMINATION
DOCUMENT NUMBER: C850228-1
TITLE:
AUTHOR: SYNERTEK, J. PRICE
RECIPIENT: CDOH, D. HOENIG
DATE: 850228
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: CORRESPONDENCE VOL. 1
SUBJECTS: TANK REMOVAL
DESCRIPTION: SOLVENT TANK REMOVED ON 02/06/85
_u..... -_..
-------
DOCUMENT NUMBER: C850307-1
TITLE:
AUTHOR: CITY OF SANTA CLARA, D. PARKER
RECIPIENT: SYNERTEK, B. RAUSCHHUBER
DATE: 850307
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: CORRESPONDENCE VOL. 1
SUBJECTS: TANK REMOVAL
DESCRIPTION: DISCUSSION OF TANK CONDITION
DOCUMENT NUMBER: C850408-l
TITLE:
AUTHOR: SYNERTEK, J. PRICE
RECIPIENT: CDOH
DATE: 850408
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: CORRESPONDENCE VOL. 1
SUBJECTS: TANK REMOVAL
DESCRIPTION: INFORMED OF TANK REMOVAL
DOCUMENT NUMBER: C850723-l
TITLE:
AUTHOR: HONEYWELL, K. FORD
RECIPIENT: CRYQCB, R. BREUER
DATE: 850723
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: CORRESPONDENCE VOL. 1
SUBJECTS: SUBSURFACE INVESTIGATION
DESCRIPTION: LETTER FOR SUBSURFACE INVESTIGATION REPORTS
DOCUMENT NUMBER: C850729-l
TITLE:
AUTHOR: HONE'NELL, K. FORD
RECIPIENT: CRYQCB, R. BREUER
DATE: 850729
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: CORRESPONDENCE VOL. 1
SUBJECTS: YORK PLAN
DESCRIPTION: LETTER: SUPPLEMENTAL SITE INVESTIGATION AND IRM YORK
: PLAN
DOCUMENT NUMBER: C8S073l-l
TITLE: NOTICE OF PERMIT VIOLATION
AUTHOR: SCVYD, N. LYN
RECIPIENT: SYNERTEK
DATE: 850731
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: CORRESPONDENCE VOL. 1
SUBJECTS: YELL INSTALLATION
DESCRIPTION: YATER YELL DRILLERS REPORT NEEDED
_.- -.... -_..
-------
DOCUMENT NUMBER: C850827-1
TITLE:
AUTHOR: HONEY\t1ELL, K. FORD
RECIPIENT: CRWQCB, R. BREUER
DATE: 850827
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: CORRESPONDENCE VOL. 1
SUBJECTS: WORK PLAN
DESCRIPTION: WORK PLAN AMENDMENTS
DOCUMENT NUMBER: C850917-1
TITLE:
AUTHOR: HONEYWELL, K. FORD
RECIPIENT: CDOH, H. HATAYAMA
DATE: 850917
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: CORRESPONDENCE VOL. 1
SUBJECTS: TANK REMOVAL
DESCRIPTION: LETTER: TANK REMOVAL REPORTS
DOCUMENT NUMBER: C850927-1
TITLE: AMENDMENTS TO WORK PLANS FOR BUILDINGS 1 ADN 3 AT SYNERTEK
AUTHOR: CRYQCB, R. JAMES
RECIPIENT: HONEYWELL, K. FORD
DATE: 850927
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: CORRESPONDENCE VOL. 1
SUBJECTS: WORK PLAN
DESCRIPTION: NO OBJECTIONS TO PROPOSED WORK PLANS DATED 09/11/85
DOCUMENT NUMBER: C851007-1
TITLE:
AUTHOR: CDOH, D. HOENIG
RECIPIENT: HONEYWELL, K. FORD
DATE: 851007
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: CORRESPONDENCE VOL. 1
SUBJECTS: TANK REMOVAL
DESCRIPTION: ACCEPTANCE OF TANK REMOVAL REPORTS
DOCUMENT NUMBER: C851009-1
TITLE: UNBUNDLING WORK PLANS FOR BUILDINGS 1 AND 3
AUTHOR: SCVWD, T. IW~
RECIPIENT: HONEYWELL, K. FORD
DATE: 851009
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: CORRESPONDENCE VOL. 1
SUBJECTS: WORK PLAN
DESCRIPTION: AGREE WITH DECISION OF CRWQCB IN 09/27/85 LETTER
-...... '.'_u..
-. ---
-------
1-
DOCUMENT NUMBER: C85l0l0-1
TITLE: SYNERTEK STUDY
AUTHOR: CRA, R. FREHNER
RECIPI ENT: YFCP, R, K\JOLK
DATE: 851010
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: CORRESPONDENCE VOL. 1
SUBJECTS: TREATED WATER DISCHARGE
DESCRIPTION: REQUEST TO DISCHARGE TO SANITARY SEWER
DOCUMENT NUMBER: C8S1021-l
TITLE: SYNERTEK STUDY - TEMPORARY DISCHARGE
AUTHOR: CRA, R. FREHNER
RECIPIENT: YFCP, P. K\JOK
DATE: 851021
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: CORRESPONDENCE VOL. 1
SUBJECTS: TREATMENT SYSTEM
DESCRIPTION: PROPOSAL TO DISCHARGE TREATED GROUNDWATER TO SANITARY SEWER
DOCUMENT NUMBER: C851031-1
TITLE: SYNERTEK STUDY
AUTHOR: CRA, G. KESTLE
RECIPIENT: WPCP, P. K\JOK
DATE: 851031
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: CORRESPONDENCE VOL. 1
SUBJECTS: TREATMENT SYSTEM
DESCRIPTION: CONFIRMATION OF DISCHARGE TO SANITARY SEWER
DOCUMENT NUMBER: C851118-l
TITLE:
AUTHOR: SCVWD, D. ZOZAYA
RECIPIENT: HONEYWELL
DATE: 851118
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: CORRESPONDENCE VOL. 1
SUBJECTS: WELL INSTALLATION
DESCRIPTION: PERMIT VIOlATION: WATER WELL DRILLERS
REPORT NEEDED
DOCUMENT NUMBER: C851122-1
TITLE: APPLICATION NUMBER 31218
AUTHOR: BAAQMC, M. FELDSTEIN
RECIPIENT: GROUNDWATER TECHNOLOGY
DATE: 851122
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: CORRESPONDENCE VOL. 1
SUBJECTS: TREATMENT SYSTEM
DESCRIPTION: APPROVAL TO CONSTRUCT AIR STRIPPING TOWER WITH FLOW RATE OF
: 600 GAL/HR MAXIMUM
-------
DOCUMENT NUMBER: C860122-1
TITLE:
AUTHOR: HONEYWEli., K. FORD
RECIPIENT: CRWQCB, R. BREUER
DATE: 860122
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: CORRESPONDENCE VOL. 1
SUBJECTS: PROGRESS REPORT
DESCRIPTION: SAMPLING, PERMEABILITY TESTING
DOCUMENT NUMBER: C860303-1
TITLE:
AUTHOR: HONEYWEli., K. FORD
RECIPIENT: CRWQCB, R. BRUEER
DATE: 860303
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: CORRESPONDENCE VOL. 1
SUBJECTS: DELIVERABLE
DESCRIPTION: COVER LETTER FOR GROUNDWATER INVESTIGATION REPORT AND
: LEAKAGE TO DEEP AQUIFER REPORT
DOCUMENT NUMBER: C860613-1
TITLE:
AUTHOR: CRWQCB, R. MCMURTRY
RECIPIENT: HONEYWEli., K. FORD
DATE: 860613
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: CORRESPONDENCE VOL. 1
SUBJECTS: GROUNDWATER INVESTIGATION
DESCRIPTION: COMMENTS ON GROUNDWATER INVESTIGATION REPORT
DOCUMENT NUMBER: C860718-1
TITLE:
AUTHOR: CRWQCB, S. INN
RECIPIENT: HONEYWEli., K. FORD
DATE: 860718
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: CORRESPONDENCE VOL. 1
SUBJECTS: GROUNDWATER INVESTIGATION
DESCRIPTION: WORK PLAN AND SCHEDULE
DOCUMENT NUMBER: C860904-1
TITLE: SYNERTEK GROUNDWATER DISCHARGE
AUTHOR: WPCP. CITY OF SAN JOSE
RECIPIENT: CRA, R. FREHNER
DATE: 860904
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: CORRESPONDENCE VOL. 1
SUBJECTS: TREATMENT SYSTEM
DESCRIPTION: DENIAL OF REQUEST FOR SANITARY SEWER DISCHARGE
-------
DOCUMENT NUMBER: C860908-1
TITLE: SYNERTEK
AUTHOR: CRA, R. FREHNER
RECIPIENT: CRWQCB, S. INN
DATE: 860908
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: CORRESPONDENCE VOL. 1
SUBJECTS: SOIL-GAS
DESCRIPTION: SOIL-GAS SURVEY STATUS
DOCUMENT NUMBER: C860914-1
TITLE: SHALLOW SOIL GAS & GROUNDWATER SURVEY, SYNERTEK FACILITY
AUTHOR: TRACER RESEARCH CORPORATION
RECIPIENT: EMCON, B. HUSK
DATE: 860914
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: CORRESPONDENCE VOL. 1
SUBJECTS: SOIL-GAS
DESCRIPTION: ATTACHMENT TO C861217-2: DEFINITION OF LATERIAL EXTENT
: OF VOC PLUME
DOCUMENT NUMBER: C861030-1
TITLE: PROGRESS REPORT SYNERTEK BLDG. 1 GROUNDWATER REMEDIATION PROJECT
AUTHOR: HONEYWELL, K. FORD
RECIPIENT: CRWQCB, S. INN
DATE: 861030
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: CORRESPONDENCE VOL. 1
SUBJECTS: PROJECT PROGRESS
DESCRIPTION: SUMMARY OF PROJECT PROGRESS BETWEEN JULY 1986 AND OCTOBER
: 1986
DOCUMENT NUMBER: C861114-1
TITLE: SYNERTEK BUILDINGS 1 AND 3
AUTHOR: CRA, R. FREHNER
RECIPIENT: CRWQCB, S. INN
DATE: 861114
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: CORRESPONDENCE VOL. 1
SUBJECTS: TREATMENT SYSTEM
DESCRIPTION: REQUEST FOR PERMISSION TO CONSTRUCT AND OPERATE TREATMENT
: SYSTEM
DOCUMENT NUMBER: C861217-1
TITLE: EVALUATION OF ABONDONED WATER-SUPPLY WELL (6S1W28K04), SYNERTEK
AUTHOR: £MCON, J. BAT<:HELDER
RECIPIENT: CRA, R. FREHNER
DATE: 861217
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: CORRESPONDENCE VOL. 1
SUBJECTS: YELL SEARCH
DESCRIPTION: LOCATED WELL, RECOMMENDED ABANDONMENT
-.. -.... _.-..
-------
DOCUMENT NUMBER: C861217-2
TITLE: SOIL - GAS INVESTIGATION
AUTHOR: EMCON, J. BATCHELDER
RECIPIENT: CRA, R. FREHNER
DATE: 861217
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: CORRESPONDENCE VOL. 1
SUBJECTS: SOIL-GAS
DESCRIPTION: LETTER REPORT:
DEFINITION OF LATERAL EXTENT OF VOC PLUME
DOCUMENT NUMBER: C861219-1
TITLE:
AUTHOR: HONETIlELL, K. FORD
RECIPIENT: CRWQCB, S. INN
DATE: 861219
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: CORRESPONDENCE VOL. 1
SUBJECTS: CRWQCB DELIVERABLES
DESCRIPTION: LETTER TO CRWQCB FOR SOIL GAS REPORT, ABANDON WELL
: REPORTS, TREATMENT SYSTEM DESIGN AND NPDES APPLICATIONS
DOCUMENT NUMBER: C861222-1
TITLE: APPLICATION: AUTHORITY TO CONSTRUCT, OPERATE INDUSTRIAL SOURCE
AUTHOR: HONEYWELL, K. FORD
RECIPIENT: BAAQMD, J. SWANSON
DATE: 861222
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: CORRESPONDENCE VOL. 1
SUBJECTS: TREATMENT SYSTEM
DESCRIPTION: TREATMENT SYSTEM CONSTRUCTION AND OPERATION APPLICATIONS
DOCUMENT NUMBER: C861230-1
TITLE: APPLICATION NUMBER 32219
AUTHOR: BAAQMD, S. LOPEX
RECIPIENT: HONETIlELL, K. FORD
DATE: 861230
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: CORRESPONDENCE VOL. 1
SUBJECTS: AIR PERMIT
DESCRIPTION: REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION TO PROCESS AIR PERMIT
DOCUMENT NUMBER: C870100-1
TITLE: TENTATIVE SELF-MONITORING PROGRAM FOR HONETIlELL INC. & RREEF FUND
AUTHOR: CRWQCB .
RECIPIENT: HONEWELL AND RREEF FUNDS
DATE: 870100
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: CORRESPONDENCE VOL. 1
SUBJ ECTS: TREATMENT SYSTEM
DESCRIPTION: PROVISIONS AND MONITORING REQUIREMENTS FOR TREATMEl-i'f"SYSTEM
-. ..--
-------
DOCUMENT NUMBER: C870113-1
TITLE: BAY AREA AIR QUALITY MANAGEMENT DISTRICT APPLICATION
AUTHOR: HONEYWELL, K. FORD
RECIPIENT: BMQMD, S. LOPEZ
DATE: 870113
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: CORRESPONDENCE VOL. 1
SUBJECTS; TREATMENT SYSTEM
DESCRIPTION: CHECK OF $765.00 FOR PERMIT FOR AIR STRIPPER, AIR STRIPPER
: INFORMATION
DOCUMENT NUMBER: C870114-1
TITLE: YOUR APPLICATION FOR WASTE DISCHARGE PERMIT
AUTHOR: CRWQCB, R. MCMURTRY
RECIPIENT: HONEYWELL, K. FORD
DATE: 870114
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: CORRESPONDENCE VOL. 1
SUBJECTS: TREATMENT SYSTEM
DESCRIPTION: REQUEST FOR CHECK OF $500.00 FOR PERMIT
DOCUMENT NUMBER: C870123-1
TITLE: FILE 2189.8135 (SDl)
AUTHOR: HONEYWELL, K. FORD
RECIPIENT: CRWQCB, S. INN
DATE: 870123
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: CORRESPONDENCE VOL. 1
SUBJECTS: TREATMENT SYSTEM
DESCRIPTION: CHECK OF $1,000.00 FOR BLDGS.
: PERMIT APPLICATIONS
1 AND 3 WATER DISCHARGE
DOCUMENT NUMBER: C870223-1
TITLE: APPLICATION NUMBER: 32219
AUTHOR: BMQMD, M. FELDSTEIN
RECIPIENT: HONEYWELL, K. FORD
DATE: 870223
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: CORRESPONDENCE VOL. 1
SUBJECTS: TREATMENT SYSTEM
DESCRIPTION: AUTHORITY TO CONSTRUCT TREATMENT SYSTEM
DOCUMENT NUMBER: C870303-1
TITLE: FILE 2198.8135
AUTHOR: HONEYWELL, K.. FORD
RECIPIENT: CRWQCB, S. INN
DATE: 870303
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: CORRESPONDENCE VOL. 1
SUBJECTS: GROUNDWATER CHEMISTRY
DESCRIPTION: ANALYTICAL. REPORTS FOR ROUND 9
--- -.." _.-..
SAMPLING
-------
DOCUMENT NUMBER: C870317-1
TITLE:
AUTHOR: CRYQCB, R. MCMURTRY
RECIPIENT: HONEYWELL, K. FORD
DATE: 870317
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: CORRESPONDENCE VOL. 1
SUBJECTS: NPDES
DESCRIPTION: REQUEST COMPLETION OF REQUIRED NPDES FORM
DOCUMENT NUMBER: C870406-1
TITLE: TENTATIVE ORDER
AUTHOR: CRYQCB
RECIPIENT: HONEYWELL AND RREEF FUNDS
DATE: 870406
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: CORRESPONDENCE VOL. 1
SUBJECTS: TREATMENT SYSTEM
DESCRIPTION: YASTE DISCHARGE REQUIREMENTS FOR STATE YATERS
DOCUMENT NUMBER: C870508-1
TITLE:
AUTHOR: HONEYWELL, K. FORD
RECIPIENT: CRYQCB, S. INN
DATE: 870508
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: CORRESPONDENCE VOL. 1
SUBJECTS: GROUNDYATER CHEMISTRY
DESCRIPTION: LETTER REPORT PRESENTING ANALYTICAL
: RESULTS FOR 24A, 25A AND 26A
DOCUMENT NUMBER: C870520-1
TITLE: YASTE DISCHARGE REQUIREMENTS
AUTHOR: CRYQCB, R. JAMES
RECIPIENT: HONEYWELL, K. FORD
DATE: 870520
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: CORRESPONDENCE VOL. 1
SUBJECTS: TREATMENT SYSTEM
DESCRIPTION: ORDER 87-050 DISCHARGE CRITERIA
DOCUMENT NUMBER: C870527-1
TITLE: APPLICATION NUMBER 32219
AUTHOR: CRA, G. KESTLE
RECIPIENT: BAAQMD, J."SYANSON
DATE: 870527
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: CORRESPONDENCE VOL. 1
SUBJECTS: TREATMENT SYSTEM
DESCRIPTION: NOTIFICATION OF EQUIPMENT TESTING
-.. -... -~ .
-------
1-
DOCUMENT NUMBER: C870529-1
TITLE: SYNERTEK - NPDES MONITORING
AUTHOR: CRA, R. FREHNER
RECIPIENT: CRWQCB, S. INN
DATE: 870529
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: CORRESPONDENCE VOL. 1
SUBJECTS: TREATMENT SYSTEM
DESCRIPTION: CONFIRMING SPECIFIC SAMPLING PLAN NOT REQUIRED
DOCUMENT NUMBER: C870602-1
TITLE: APPLICATION NUMBER 32219
AUTHOR: BAAQMD, S. LOPEZ
RECIPIENT: HONEYWELL, K. FORD
DATE: 870602
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: CORRESPONDENCE VOL. 1
SUBJECTS:
DESCRIPTION:
DOCUMENT NUMBER: C870616-1
TITLE:
AUTHOR: HONEYWELL, K. FORD
RECIPIENT: BAAQMD, S. LOPEZ
DATE: 870616
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: CORRESPONDENCE VOL. 1
SUBJECTS: TREATMENT SYSTEM
DESCRIPTION: AIR PERMIT CHECK
DOCUMENT NUMBER: C870619-1
TITLE: TENTATIVE ORDERS
AUTHOR: HONEYWELL, K. FORD
RECIPIENT: CRWQCB, S. MORSE
DATE: 870619
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: CORRESPONDENCE VOL. 1
SUBJECTS: CLEANUP ORDERS
DESCRIPTION: HONEYWELL COMMENT TO TENTATIVE CLEANUP ORDERS
: AND BUILDING 3
FOR BUILDING 1
DOCUMENT NUMBER: C870622-1
TITLE:
AUTHOR: CRWQCB, S. INN
RECIPIENT: HONEYWELL, K. FORD
DATE: 870622
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: CORRESPONDENCE VOL. 1
SUBJECTS: MAPS
DESCRIPTION: GROUNDWATER MAP FOR AREA NEAR SITE AND SCOTT BLVD.
--- -.-. -.. .
-------
DOCUMENT NUMBER: C870626-1
TITLE:
AUTHOR: HONEYWELL, K. FORD
RECIPIENT: CRWQCB, S. INN
DATE: 870626
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: CORRESPONDENCE VOL. 1
SUBJECTS: PLUME DEFINITION
DESCRIPTION: SAMPLING RESULTS FROM MAY 1987
DOCUMENT NUMBER: C870715-1
TITLE: SITE CLEANUP REQUIREMENTS
AUTHOR: CRWQCB, R. JAMES
RECIPIENT: HONEYWELL, K. FORD
DATE: 870715
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: CORRESPONDENCE VOL. 1
SUBJECTS: CLEANUP ORDER
DESCRIPTION: CLEANUP ORDER 87-084
DOCUMENT NUMBER: C870716-1
TITLE:
AUTHOR: HONEYWELL, K. FORD
RECIPIENT: CRWQCB, R. JAMES
DATE: 870716
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: CORRESPONDENCE VOL. 1
SUBJECTS: DELIVERABLES
DESCRIPTION: LETTER PROVIDING DELIVERABLES AND
: GROUNDWATER CHARACTERIZATION
DOCUMENT NUMBER: C870729-1
TITLE:
AUTHOR: CRWQCB, S. MORSE
RECIPIENT: HONEYWELL, K. FORD
DATE: 870729
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: CORRESPONDENCE VOL. 1
SUBJ ECTS: QAPP
DESCRIPTION: COMMENTS ON QAPP
DOCUMENT NUMBER: C870806-1
TITLE: AVANTEK
AUTHOR: CRA, R. FREHNER
RECIPIENT: CRWQCB, S. "INN
DATE: 870806
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: CORRESPONDENCE VOL. 1
SUBJECTS: AVANTEK
DESCRIPTION: REQUEST FOR AVANTEK WELL LOCATIONS,
PROPOSAL FOR
GROUNDWATER TABLE"" MAP
-------
DOCUMENT NUMBER: C870806-2
TITLE: DISCHARGE FLOW RATES AT SYNERTEK
AUTHOR: CRA, R. FREHNER
RECIPIENT: CRWQCB, S. INN
DATE: 870806
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: CORRESPONDENCE VOL. 1
SUBJECTS: TREATMENT SYSTEM
DESCRIPTION: INCREASE OF PUMPING RATES
DOCUMENT NUMBER: C870807-1
TITLE: SCOPE OF YORK FOR ADDITIONAL VOC PLUME DEFINITION
AUTHOR: CRA, D. SOLA
RECIPIENT: HONEYVEIJ., K. FORD
DATE: 870807
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: CORRESPONDENCE VOL. 1
SUBJECTS: PLUME DEFINITION
DESCRIPTION: YORK PLAN FOR ADDITIONAL STUDY
DOCUMENT NUMBER: C870814-1
TITLE: AGRICULTURAL WELLS 28K04 AND 28R01
AUTHOR: HONEYt.1EIJ., K. FORD
RECIPIENT: SCVWD, T. IYAMURA
DATE: 870814
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: CORRESPONDENCE VOL. 1
SUBJECTS: YEIJ. LOCATION
DESCRIPTION: LETTER ON AGRICULTURAL YELL REPORT
DOCUMENT NUMBER: C870819-1
TITLE: SUMMARY OF MEETING ON ABANDON YELL SEALING
AUTHOR: CRA, R. FREHNER
RECIPIENT: SCVWD, T. IWAMURA
DATE: 870819
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: CORRESPONDENCE VOL. 1
SUBJECTS: WEIJ. ABANDONMENT
DESCRIPTION: SUMMARY OF AUGUST 18, 1987, MEETING
DOCUMENT NUMBER: C870819-2
TITLE:
AUTHOR: CRWQCB, S. MORSE
RECIPIENT: HONEYVEIJ., K. FORD
DATE: 870819 .
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: CORRESPONDENCE VOL. 1
SUBJECTS: PLUME DEFINITION
-.. -.p- ---.
DESCRIPTION: ACCEPTANCE OF PLUME DEFINITION PROPOSAL WITH COMMENTS
-------
DOCUMENT NUMBER: C870824-1
TITLE: SYNERTEK
AUTHOR: CRA, R. FREHNER
RECIPIENT: CRYQCB, S. INN
DATE: 870824
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: CORRESPONDENCE VOL. 1
SUBJECTS: DELIVERABLES
DESCRIPTION: REQUEST CONFIRMATION OF LIST OF CRYQCB DELIVERABLES
DOCUMENT NUMBER: C870917-1
TITLE:
AUTHOR: CRYQCB, S. MORSE
RECIPIENT: HONEWELL, K. FORD
DATE: 870917
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: CORRESPONDENCE VOL. 1
SUBJECTS: QAPP
DESCRIPTION: QAPP APPROVAL
DOCUMENT NUMBER: C870924-1
TITLE: APPLICATION NUMBER: 32219
AUTHOR: CRA, G. KESTLE
RECIPIENT: BAAQMD, S. LOPEZ
DATE: 870924
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: CORRESPONDENCE VOL. 1
SUBJECTS: TREATMENT SYSTEM
DESCRIPTION: SUBMISSION FOR REVIEW OF TREATMENT
SYSTEM MONITORING RECORDS
DOCUMENT NUMBER: C871006-1
TITLE:
AUTHOR: HONEWELL, K. FORD
RECIPIENT: CRYQCB, S. MORSE
DATE: 871006
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: CORRESPONDENCE VOL. 1
SUBJECTS: QAPP, SAFETY PLAN, MONITORING PLAN
DESCRIPTION: RESPONSES TO CRYQCB COMMENTS IN QAPP,
: MONITORING PLAN
*
SAFETY PLAN AND
DOCUMENT NUMBER: C871006-2
TITLE: STATUS OF PLUME DEFINITION STUDY
AUTHOR: HONEWELL, K. . FORD
RECIPIENT: CRYQCB, S. INN
DATE: 871006
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: CORRESPONDENCE VOL. 1
SUBJECTS: PLUME DEFINITION
DESCRIPTION: STATUS OF STUDY
-.-..-.. ¥- .
-------
DOCUMENT NUMBER: C871030-1
TITLE: LOCATION OF ABANDONED AGRICULTURAL YELLS
AUTHOR: EMCON, R. HUSK
RECIPIENT: SCVWD, T. IYAMURA
DATE: 871030
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: CORRESPONDENCE VOL. 1
SUBJECTS: YELL SEARCH
DESCRIPTION: INFORMATION ON ABANDONED AGRICULTURAL YELLS
: 6S1Y28Rl
6S1Y28Kl AND
DOCUMENT NUMBER: C871103-1
TITLE:
AUTHOR: CRYQCB, S. MORSE
RECIPIENT: HONEWELL, K. FORD
DATE: 871103
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: CORRESPONDENCE VOL. 1
SUBJECTS: QAPP, MONITORING PLAN, HEALTH AND SAFETY
DESCRIPTION: COMMENTS ON DRAFT QAPP, MONITORING PLAN,
: SAFETY PLAN
AND HEALTH AND
DOCUMENT NUMBER: C871111-1
TITLE:
AUTHOR: HONEWELL, K. FORD
RECIPIENT: CRYQCB, R. JAMES
DATE: 871111
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: CORRESPONDENCE VOL. 1
SUBJECTS: QAPP, PROGRESS REPORTS
DESCRIPTION: LETTER FOR QAPP, PROGRESS REPORTS
DOCUMENT NUMBER: C871112-1
TITLE: SYNERTEK-ADDENDUMS TO QAPP ,MONITORING PLAN & HEALTH & SAFETY PLAN
AUTHOR: CRA, R. FREHNER
RECIPIENT: HONEWELL, K. FORD
DATE: 871112
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: CORRESPONDENCE VOL. 1
SUBJECTS: QAPP, MONITORING PLAN, HEALTH AND SAFETY
DESCRIPTION: LETTER FOR ADDENDUMS ADDRESSING CRYQCB COMMENTS
DOCUMENT NUMBER: C871112-2
TITLE: SYNERTEK BUILDING #1 PLUME DEFINITION
AUTHOR: CRA, R. FREHNER
RECIPIENT: HONEWELL, K. FORD
DATE: 871112
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: CORRESPONDENCE VOL. 1
SUBJECTS: ANALYTICAL RESULTS FROM WELL 28A AND 29A -".q..
DESCRIPTION: PROPOSED WELL 31A IS NOT REQUIRED PURSUANT TO YORK PLAN
-------
DOCUMENT NUMBER: C871117-1
TITLE:
AUTHOR: CRWQCB, S. MORSE
RECIPIENT: HONEYWELL, K. FORD
DATE: 871117
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: CORRESPONDENCE VOL. 1
SUBJECTS: QAPP, MONITORING PLAN & HEALTH & SAFETY
DESCRIPTION: APPROVAL OF THE QAPP AND SITE SAMPLING PLANS.
: COMMENTS FOR THE HEALTH AND SAFETY PLAN
NO ADDITIONAL
DOCUMENT NUMBER: C871210-1
TITLE:
AUTHOR: HONEYWELL, K. FORD
RECIPIENT: CRWQCB, S. INN
DATE: 871210
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: CORRESPONDENCE VOL. 1
SUBJECTS: QAPP, MONITORING PLAN
DESCRIPTION: BOARD APPROVAL.LETTER OF QAPP,
: DELIVERABLES
MONITORING PLAN, SUMMARY OF
DOCUMENT NUMBER: C880113-1
TITLE: RESULTS OF GROUNDWATER INVESTIGATION
AUTHOR: EMCON
RECIPIENT: CRA
DATE: 880113
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: CORRESPONDENCE VOL. 2
SUBJECTS: PLUME DEFINITION INVESTIGATION
DESCRIPTION: RESULTS OF GROUNDWATER INVESTIGATIONS AT BUILDING
1 SYNERTEK
DOCUMENT NUMBER: C880114-1
TITLE:
AUTHOR: CRWQCB, S. MORSE
RECIPIENT: HONEYWELL, K. FORD
DATE: 880114
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: CORRESPONDENCE VOL. 2
SUBJECTS: DELIVERABLES
DESCRIPTION: CONFIRMS DELIVERABLES WERE SUBMITTED PRIOR TO
DUE DATE
DOCUMENT NUMBER: C880325-1
TITLE: APPLICATION NUMBER: 32219
AUTHOR: BAAQMD, M. FELDSTEIN
RECIPIENT: HONEYtJELL, K. FORD
DATE: 880325
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: CORRESPONDENCE VOL. 2
SUBJECTS: TREATMENT SYSTEM
DESCRIPTION: AIR PERMIT
_.-.... ~" .
-------
DOCUMENT NUMBER: C880414-1
TITLE: DEFINITION OF VOC PLUME BEYOND 12B
AUTHOR: CRA, R. FREHNER
RECIPIENT: CRWQCB, S. INN
DATE: 880414
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: CORRESPONDENCE VOL. 2
SUBJECTS: PLUME DEFINITION
DESCRIPTION: RESPONSE TO REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL DOWNGRADIENT WELL.
: NOT NECESSARY
DOCUMENT NUMBER: C880502-1
TITLE: SYNERTEK BUILDING #1 OFF-SITE REMEDIAL ALTERNATIVE
AUTHOR: CRA, R. FREHNER
RECIPIENT: HONEYWELL, 1<. FORD
DATE: 880502
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: CORRESPONDENCE VOL. 2
SUBJECTS: OFF-SITE IRM
DESCRIPTION: ADDENDUM TO PLUME DEFINITION REPORT
DOCUMENT NUMBER: C880510-1
TITLE: SYNERTEK BUILDING #1 VERTICAL PLUME DEFINITION
AUTHOR: CRA, R. FREHNER
RECIPIENT: HONEYWELL, 1<. FORD
DATE: 880510
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: CORRESPONDENCE VOL. 2
SUBJECTS: PLUME DEFINITION
DESCRIPTION: ADDENDUM TO PLUME DEFINITION REPORT
DOCUMENT NUMBER: C880606-1
TITLE:
AUTHOR: CRWQCB, S. MORSE
RECIPIENT: HONEYWELL, K. FORD
DATE: 880606
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: CORRESPONDENCE VOL. 2
SUBJECTS: OFF-SITE IRM .
DESCRIPTION: COMMENTS ON PLUME DEFINITION WORK,
WELL LOCATIONS
DOCUMENT NUMBER: C880630-1
TITLE: DEEP WELL INSTALLATION AND B AQUIFER WELL INSTALLATION
AUTHOR: CRA, D. SOLA
RECIPIENT: CRWQCB, S. INN
DATE: 880630
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: CORRESPONDENCE VOL. 2
SUBJECTS: PLUME DEFINITION
DESCRIPTION: WORK PLAN FOR PLUME DEFINITION OF B AQUIFER
WELL
_u..... --..
-------
DOCUMENT NUMBER: C880803-l
TITLE :
AUTHOR: CRWQCB, S. MORSE
RECIPIENT: HONEYWELL, K. FORD
DATE: 880803
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: CORRESPONDENCE VOL. 2
SUBJECTS: OFF-SITE IRM
DESCRIPTION: ACCEPTANCE OF PROPOSAL FOR WELL 25B,
REQUEST SAMPLING
DOCUMENT NUMBER: C880805-1
TITLE: REVIEW OF HRS SCORE
AUTHOR: CRA, R. FREHNER
RECIPIENT: HONEYWELL, K. FORD
DATE: 880805
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: CORRESPONDENCE VOL. 2
SUBJECTS: NATIONAL PRIORITY LIST
DESCRIPTION: REVIEW OF HRS SHOULD BE 1.45 VERSUS 31.94
DOCUMENT NUMBER: C880819-l
TITLE: SYNERTEK INC., SANTA CLARA (BUILDING 1)
AUTHOR: HONEYWELL, K. FORD
RECIPIENT: EPA, S. LINGLE
DATE: 880819
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: CORRESPONDENCE VOL. 2
SUBJECTS: NATIONAL PRIORITY LIST
DESCRIPTION: COMMENTS ON NPL. EPA HAS INCORRECTLY SCORED THE
SITE.
DOCUMENT NUMBER: C880825-1
TITLE:
AUTHOR: HONEYWELL, K. FORD
RECIPIENT: CRWQCB, S. RITCHIE
DATE: 880825
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: CORRESPONDENCE VOL. 2
SUBJECTS: OFF-SITE IRM
DESCRIPTION: REQUESTS CHANGES TO OFF-SITE INTERIM REMEDIATION PLAN
DOCUMENT NUMBER: C880826-1
TITLE:
AUTHOR: EPA, S. LINGLE;
RECIPIENT: HONEYWELL, K. FORD
DATE: 880826
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: CORRESPONDENCE VOL. 2
SUBJECTS: NATIONAL PRIORITY LIST
-....-..--.
DESCRIPTION: ACKNOWLEDGE RECEIPT OF COMMENT TO PROPOSED AMENDMENT
-------
DOCUMENT NUMBER: C880907-1
TITLE: APPLICATION 32219
AUTHOR: BAAQMD, V. MORALIS-LAIMON
RECIPIENT: HONEYWELL, K. FORD
DATE: 880907
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: CORRESPONDENCE VOL. 2
SUBJECTS: TREATMENT SYSTEM
DESCRIPTION: NOTICE THAT AUTHORITY CONSTRUCT EXPIRES
: ISSUANCE
'NO YEARS AFTER
DOCUMENT NUMBER: C880913-1
TITLE:
AUTHOR: CRWQCB, S. MORSE
RECIPIENT: HONEYWELL, K. FORD
DATE: 880913
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: CORRESPONDENCE VOL. 2
SUBJECTS: OFF-SITE IRM
DESCRIPTION: STATE RECOMMENDATION OF SCHEDULE CHANGES TO BOARD
DOCUMENT NUMBER: C88091S-1
TITLE:
AUTHOR: EPA, H. HADLOCK
RECIPIENT: HONEYWELL, K. FORD
DATE: 880915
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: CORRESPONDENCE VOL. 2
SUBJECTS: NATIONAL PRIORITY LIST
DESCRIPTION: CONSIDERING COMMENTS FROM HONEYWELL
DOCUMENT NUMBER: C881027-1
TITLE: REQUEST FOR PROPOSED WORK PLAN FOR SYNERTEK BLDG. 1
AUTHOR: CRWQCB, S. MORSE
RECIPIENT: HONEYWELL, K. FORD
DATE: 881027
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: CORRESPONDENCE VOL. 2
SUBJECTS: RI, FS, RAP
DESCRIPTION: REQUEST FOR RI/FS/RAP YORK PLAN
DOCUMENT NUMBER: C881028-1
TITLE:
AUTHOR: CDOH .
RECIPIENT: HONEYWELL, K. FORD
DATE: 881028
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: CORRESPONDENCE VOL. 2
SUBJECTS: NATIONAL PRIORITY LIST
DESCRIPTION: EXPENDITURE PLAN
-..-.... --.-.
-------
DOCUMENT NUMBER: C881219-1
TITLE:
AUTHOR: HONEYWELL, K. FORD
RECIPIENT: CRWQCB, S. RITCHIE
DATE: 881219
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: CORRESPONDENCE VOL. 2
SUBJECTS: RI, FS, RAP
DESCRIPTION: LETTER, RI/FS/RAP WORK PLAN, DISPUTE HRS SCORE
DOCUMENT NUMBER: C881221-1
TITLE: DEEP WELL AND B AQUIFER INSTALLATION AND SAMPLING
AUTHOR: CRA, D. SOLA
RECIPIENT: HONEYWELL, K. FORD
DATE: 881221
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: CORRESPONDENCE VOL. 2
SUBJECTS: PLUME DEFINITION
DESCRIPTION: ATTACHMENT TO C881229-1, WELL 2SB AND 3B1 SAMPLING AND
: ANALYSIS
DOCUMENT NUMBER: C881227-1
TITLE: TRANSMITTAL OF COMPLIANCE MONITORING REPORTS
AUTHOR: CRWQCB, S. MORSE
RECIPIENT: HONEYWELL, K. FORD
DATE: 881227
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: CORRESPONDENCE VOL. 2
SUBJECTS: CRWQCB INSPECTION
DESCRIPTION: NO VIOLATION IN COMPLIANCE
DOCUMENT NUMBER: C881228-1
TITLE: COMPLETION OF OFF-SITE INTERIM REMEDIAL ACTIONS
AUTHOR: CRA, J. MELBY
RECIPIENT: HONEYWELL, K. FORD
DATE: 881228 .
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: CORRESPONDENCE VOL. 2
SUBJECTS: TREATMENT SYSTEM
DESCRIPTION: ATTACHMENT TO C881229-1
DOCUMENT NUMBER: C881229-1
TITLE:
AUTHOR: HONEYWELL, K. FORD
RECIPIENT: CRWQCB, S. RITCHIE
DATE: 881229
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: CORRESPONDENCE VOL. 2
SUBJECTS: TREATMENT SYSTEM --..on -_..
DESCRIPTION: LETTER: SUBSTANTIAL COMPLETION OF OFF-SITE REMEDIATION
-------
DOCUMENT NUMBER: C890103-1
TITLE: REVIEW' OF DRAFT COMMUNITY RELATIONS PLAN
AUTHOR: CRW'QCB, J. THOMPSON
RECIPIENT: HONEYWELL, K. FORD
DATE: 890103
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: CORRESPONDENCE VOL. 2
SUBJECTS: COMMUNITY RELATIONS PLAN
DESCRIPTION: COVER LETTER TO DRAFT PLAN
DOCUMENT NUMBER: C890118-1
TITLE: UPDATE ON STATUS OF REMEDIATION SYSTEM - PERMITS
AUTHOR: CRA, J. MELBY
RECIPIENT: HONEYWELL, K. FORD
DATE: 890118
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: CORRESPONDENCE VOL. 2
SUBJECTS: TREATMENT SYSTEM
DESCRIPTION: EFFECT OF ADDITIONAL W'ELLS ON AIR PERMIT ATTACHMENT TO
: C890131-1
DOCUMENT NUMBER: C890125-1
TITLE: DRAFT COMMUNITY RELATIONS PLAN, SYNERTEK
AUTHOR: HONEYWELL, K. FORD
RECIPIENT: CRW'QCB, J. THOMPSON
DATE: 890125
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: CORRESPONDENCE VOL. 2
SUBJECTS: COMMUNITY RELATIONS
DESCRIPTION: COMMENTS ON DRAFT COMMUNITY RELATIONS PLAN
DOCUMENT NUMBER: C890131-1
TITLE: PERMIT NO 32214
AUTHOR: HONEYWELL, K . FORD
RECIPIENT: BAAQMD, S. LOPEZ
DATE: 890131
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: CORRESPONDENCE VOL. 2
SUBJECTS: TREATMENT SYSTEM
DESCRIPTION: NOTICE OF ADDITIONAL W'ELLS TO TREATMENT SYSTEM INCREASING
: FlDW' RATE TO 25 GPM
DOCUMENT NUMBER: C890228-1
TITLE: REGIONAL BOARD AND EPA COMMENTS ON RI/FSjRAP WORK PLAN
AUTHOR: CRWQCB, S. MORSE
RECIPIENT: HONEYWELL, K. FORD
DATE: 890228
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: CORRESPONDENCE VOL. 2
SUBJECTS: RI/FSjRAP
DESCRIPTION: COMMENTS ON RI/FSjRAP WORK PLAN
-.."."-- .
-------
DOCUMENT NUMBER: C890303-1
TITLE: REQUEST FOR A DATA VALIDATION PACKAGE
AUTHOR: CRYQCB, S. MORSE
RECIPIENT: HONEYWELL, K. FORD
DATE: 890303
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: CORRESPONDENCE VOL. 2
SUBJECTS: DATA VALIDATION
DESCRIPTION: REQUEST FOR DATA VALIDATION FOR DECEMBER 1988
SAMPLING
DOCUMENT NUMBER: C890303-2
TITLE: SYNERTEK REPORTS
AUTHOR: CRA, R. FREHNER
RECIPIENT: EPA, J. HEALY
DATE: 890303
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: CORRESPONDENCE VOL. 2
SUBJECTS: BACKGROUND INFORMATION
DESCRIPTION: LETTER SUPPLYING EPA WITH 7 REPORTS INCLUDING QAPP,
: INVESTIGATION AND MONITORING REPORTS
DOCUMENT NUMBER: C890314-1
TITLE: SYNERTEK #1, 3050 CORONADO BLVD., SANTA ClARA, CA
AUTHOR: CRYQCB, S. MORSE
RECIPIENT: HONEYWELL, K. FORD
DATE: 890314
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: CORRESPONDENCE VOL. 2
SUBJECTS: BPHE, RI, FS, RAP
DESCRIPTION: ACCEPTANCE FOR HONEYWELL TO CONDUCT BPHE FOR SITE,
: WORK PLAN EXTENSION
RI/FS/RAP
DOCUMENT NUMBER: C890331-1
TITLE:
AUTHOR: CRWQCB, J. THOMPSON
RECIPIENT: HONEYWELL, K. FORD
DATE: 890331
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: CORRESPONDENCE VOL. 2
SUBJECTS: HAILING LIST
DESCRIPTION: HAILING LIST FOR SUPERFUND SITES TO RECEIVE ALL FACT SHEETS
: AND MEETING NOTICES
*
DOCUMENT NUMBER: C890331-2
TITLE: SUPERFUND BASELINE PUBLIC HEALTH EVALUATIONS
AUTHOR: CRYQCB, S. MORSE
RECIPIENT: HONEYWELL .
DATE: 890331
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: CORRESPONDENCE VOL. 2
SUBJECTS: BPHE
DESCRIPTION: BPHE WORKSHOP NOTICE
-.-.....--.
-------
DOCUMENT NUMBER: C890404-1
TITLE: SYNERTEK DATA VALIDATION (DV) PACKAGE
AUTHOR: CRA, D. SOLA
RECIPIENT: CRWQCB, G.BARTOW
DATE: 890404
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: CORRESPONDENCE VOL. 2
SUBJECTS: DATA VALIDATION
DESCRIPTION: CONFIRMATION OF 03/23/89 CONVERSATION
DOCUMENT NUMBER: C890504-1
TITLE: APPLICATION NUMBER: 32214
AUTHOR: BAAQMD, M. FELDSTEIN
RECIPIENT: HONEYWELL, K. FORD
DATE: 890504
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: CORRESPONDENCE VOL. 2
SUBJECTS: TREATMENT SYSTEM
DESCRIPTION: TREATMENT SYSTEM AIR PERMIT 60 GPM MAX
DOCUMENT NUMBER: C890518-1
TITLE: NOTICE OF TENTATIVE ORDER
AUTHOR: CRWQCB, S. MORSE
RECIPIENT: HONEYWELL, K. FORD
DATE: 890518
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: CORRESPONDENCE VOL. 2
SUBJECTS: CLEANUP ORDER
DESCRIPTION: TENTATIVE ORDER, COMMENTS DUE 06/08/89
DOCUMENT NUMBER: C890601-1.
TITLE: NEW ORDER REQUIREMENTS
AUTHOR: CRA, D. SOLA
RECIPIENT: CRWQCB, G.BARTOW
DATE: 890601
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: CORRESPONDENCE VOL. 2
SUBJECTS: CLEANUP ORDER .
DESCRIPTION: CONFIRMING TENTATIVE ORDER SUPERCEDES
ORDER 87 -084
DOCUMENT NUMBER: C890606-1
TITLE: FILE #2189.8135 TENTATIVE SITE CLEANUP ORDER
AUTHOR: HONEYWELL, K.. FORD
RECIPIENT: CRWQCB, S. MORSE
DATE: 890606
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: CORRESPONDENCE VOL. 2
SUBJECTS: CLEANUP ORDER
DESCRIPTION: COMMENTS ON TENTATIVE ORDER
--_... --_..
-------
DOCUMENT NUMBER: C890621-1
TITLE: SITE CLEANUP REQUIREMENTS
AUTHOR: CRWQCB, S. RITCHIE
RECIPIENT: HONEYWELL
DATE: 890621
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: CORRESPONDENCE VOL. 2
SUBJECTS: CLEAN UP ORDER
DESCRIPTION: CLEAN UP ORDER 89-113, RESCINDING
87-084
DOCUMENT NUMBER: C890626-1
TITLE: SYNERTEK #1
AUTHOR: CRWQCB, S. MORSE
RECIPIENT: HONEYWELL, K. FORD
DATE: 890626
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: CORRESPONDENCE VOL. 2
SUBJECTS: DELIVERABLES
DESCRIPTION: REQUEST FOR SAP, ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
DOCUMENT NUMBER: C890724-1
TITLE: TRANSMITTAL OF COMPLIANCE MONITORING
AUTHOR: CRWQCB, S. MORSE
RECIPIENT: HONEYWELL, K. FORD
DATE: 890724
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: CORRESPONDENCE VOL. 2
SUBJECTS: TREATMENT SYSTEM
DESCRIPTION: SITE IN COMPLIANCE, INSPECTION ON
03/30/89
DOCUMENT NUMBER: C890726-1
TITLE: INTEGRITY OF MONITORING WELLS 3B, 4B AND 12B
AUTHOR: CRA, D. SOLA
RECIPIENT: HONEYWELL, K. FORD
DATE: 890726
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: CORRESPONDENCE VOL. 2
SUBJECTS: DELIVERABLES
DESCRIPTION: ATTACHMENT TO C890727-1, WELL ABANDONMENTS FOR 3B, 4B
: AND 12B NOT REQUIRED
DOCUMENT NUMBER: C890727-1
TITLE: SYNERTEK BUILDING #1
AUTHOR: HONEYWELL, K. FORD
RECIPIENT: CRWQCB, S. MORSE
DATE: 890727
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: CORRESPONDENCE VOL. 2
SUBJECTS: DELIVERABLES
DESCRIPTION: LETTER: CROSS SECTIONS, WELL INTEGRITY REPORT
_......--- .
-------
DOCUMENT NUMBER: C890727-2
TITLE: PLAN AND CROSS SECTIONS
AUTHOR: CRA, D. SOLA
RECIPIENT: HONEYWELL, K. FORD
DATE: 890727
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: CORRESPONDENCE VOL. 2
SUBJECTS: DELIVERABLES
DESCRIPTION: ATTACHMENT TO C890727-1, CROSS
SECTIONS
DOCUMENT NUMBER: C890803-1
TITLE: SYNERTEK BUILDING 1
AUTHOR: CRWQCB, S. MORSE
RECIPIENT: HONE'NELL, K. FORD
DATE: 890803
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: CORRESPONDENCE VOL. 2
SUBJECTS: ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD
DESCRIPTION: APPROVAL OF ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD
: COMMENTS
PROPOSAL SUBJECT TO
DOCUMENT NUMBER: C890907-1
TITLE: BASELINE PUBLIC HEALTH EVALUATION FOR SYNERTEK
AUTHOR: CRWQCB, S. MORSE
RECIPIENT: HONEYWELL, K. FORD
DATE: 890907
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: CORRESPONDENCE VOL. 2
SUBJECTS: BPHE
DESCRIPTION: NO ACTION SCENARIO
DOCUMENT NUMBER: C890912-1
TITLE:
AUTHOR: USEPA, J. CLIFFORD
RECIPIENT: HONEYWELL, K. FORD
DATE: 890912
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: CORRESPONDENCE VOL. 2
SUBJECTS: NPL LISTING
DESCRIPTION: NOTIFICATION OF NPL LISTING
DOCUMENT NUMBER: C891129-1
TITLE:
AUTHOR: HONEYWELL, K. FORD
RECIPIENT: CRWQCB, S. RITCHIE
DATE: 891129
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: CORRESPONDENCE VOL. 2
SUBJECTS: RI/BPHE
DESCRIPTION: COVER TO DRAFT RI/BPHE
--.... --..
-------
DOCUMENT NUMBER: C891219-1
TITLE: SAMPLING AND ANALYSIS PLAN
AUTHOR: CRWQCB, S. MORSE
RECIPIENT: HONEYWELL, K. FORD
DATE: 891219
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: CORRESPONDENCE VOL. 2
SUBJECTS: SAP
DESCRIPTION: APPROVAL OF SAP WITH COMMENTS
DOCUMENT NUMBER: C900103-1
TITLE: SAP APPROVAL LETTER
AUTHOR: CRA, S. HORN
RECIPIENT: CRWQCB, G. BARTOW
DATE: 900103
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: CORRESPONDENCE VOL. 2
SUBJECTS:
DESCRIPTION: CONFIRMATION LETTER OF DISCUSSION OF 01/02/90
DOCUMENT NUMBER: C900104-1
TITLE: ADDENDUM TO SAP
AUTHOR: CRA, S. HORN
RECIPIENT: HONEYWELL, K. FORD
DATE: 900104
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: CORRESPONDENCE VOL. 2
SUBJECTS:
DESCRIPTION: INTERNAL QUALITY CONTROL CHECKS AND FREQUENCY;
: PROTOCOLS; AND TABLE 2.1 CORRECTIONS
FIELD
DOCUMENT NUMBER: C900119-1
TITLE: FINAL VALIDATION REPORT FOR SITE #0124
AUTHOR: CRWQCB, S. MORSE
RECIPIENT: DOH, R. STEVENS
DATE: 900119
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: CORRESPONDENCE VOL. 2
SUBJECTS: DATA VALIDATION
DESCRIPTION: REVIEW OF DATA VALIDATION FOR DECEMBER 1988
EVENT
DOCUMENT NUMBER: C900205-1
TITLE: SAP APPROVAL FORMS
AUTHOR: CRA, S. HORN
RECIPIENT: CRWQCB, S. MORSE
DATE: 900205
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: CORRESPONDENCE VOL. 2
SUBJECTS:
DESCRIPTION: REQUESTS SIGNATURE ON SAP APPROVAL FORMS
- -..... -- .
.. . ~
-------
DOCUMENT NUMBER: C900207-1
TITLE: REQUEST FOR A SECOND DATA VALIDATION PACKAGE
AUTHOR: CRWQCB, S. MORSE
RECIPIENT: HONEYWELL, K. FORD
DATE: 900207
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: CORRESPONDENCE VOL. 2
SUBJECTS: DATA VALIDATION
DESCRIPTION: DATA VALIDATION PACKAGE REQUEST FOR MARCH EVENT
DOCUMENT NUMBER: C900213-1
TITLE: PLANT 2525
AUTHOR: BAAQMD, S. LOPEZ
RECIPIENT: HONEYWELL, K. FORD
DATE: 900213
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: CORRESPONDENCE VOL. 2
SUBJECTS: AIR PERMIT
DESCRIPTION: REQUEST FOR ADDITIONAL INFORMATION
DOCUMENT NUMBER: C900214-1
TITLE: EXCAVATION OF FORMER NEUTRALIZATION SYSTEM (FNS)
AUTHOR: CRWQCB, S. MORSE
RECIPIENT: HONEYWELL, K. FORD
DATE: 900214
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: CORRESPONDENCE VOL. 2
SUBJECTS: FNS
DESCRIPTION: DELIVERABLE PRIOR TO EXCAVATION
DOCUMENT NUMBER: C900219-1
TITLE: SYNERTEK-COMMENTS TO PROCON LETTER DATED FEB. 6,1990
AUTHOR: CRA, S. HORN
RECIPIENT: PRO CON , T. HEALY
DATE: 900219
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: CORRESPONDENCE VOL. 2
SUBJECTS: FNS EXCAVATION
DESCRIPTION: CRA NOT TO RESPONSIBLE FOR HEALTH + SAFETY OF PROCON
: DEMOLITION OF FNS SYSTEM.
DOCUMENT NUMBER: C900221-1
TITLE: SYNERTEK #1 SAP APPROVAL FORMS
AUTHOR: CRWQCB, S. MORSE
RECIPIENT: CRA, S. HORN
DATE: 900221
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: CORRESPONDENCE VOL. 2
SUBJECTS:
DESCRIPTION: TRANSMITTAL FOR SIX SIGNED SAP APPROVAL FORMS
-- -.-_. -""
-------
DOCUMENT NUMBER: C900227-1
TITLE: REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION/BPHE
AUTHOR: CRYQCB. S. MORSE
RECIPIENT: HONEYWEU-. K. FORD
DATE: 900227
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: CORRESPONDENCE VOL. 2
SUBJ ECTS: RI
DESCRIPTION: CRYQCB COMMENTS ON RI/BPHE
DOCUMENT NUMBER: C900322-1
TITLE:
AUTHOR: CRA. S. HORN
RECIPIENT: CRYQCB. G. BARTOY
DATE: 900322
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: CORRESPONDENCE VOL. 2
SUBJECTS: SAP APPROVAL FORMS
DESCRIPTION: COVER LETTER TO APPROVAL FORMS
DOCUMENT NUMBER: C900327-1
TITLE:
AUTHOR: HONEYWELL, C. GEADELMANN
RECIPIENT: CRYQCB, S. RITCHIE
DATE: 900327
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: CORRESPONDENCE VOL. 2
SUBJECTS: FSjRAP
DESCRIPTION: COVER LETTER FOR SUBMITTAL OF DRAFT FS/RAP REPORT
DOCUMENT NUMBER: C900330-1
TITLE:
AUTHOR: CRYQCB. S. MORSE
RECIPIENT: HONEWELL; K. FORD
DATE: 900303
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: CORRESPONDENCE VOL. 2
SUBJECTS: SYNERTEK #1
DESCRIPTION: EXTENSION OF SUBMITTAL DATE FOR RI/BPHE AND EXCAVATION OF
: THE FORMER NEUTRALIZATION SYSTEM
DOCUMENT NUMBER: C900419-1
TITLE: COMPLETION OF THE FORMER NEUTRALIZATION SYSTEM DEMOLITION
AUTHOR: CRA. S. HORN
RECIPIENT: CRYQCB. S. MORSE
DATE: 900419
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: CORRESPONDENCE VOL. 2
SUBJECTS: FORMER NEUTRALIZATION SYSTEM
DESCRIPTION: APRIL 14, 1990 DEMOLITION AND REMOVAL OF FORMER
: NEUTRALIZATION SYSTEM
-.. ....- w_..
-------
DOCUMENT NUMBER: C900S04-1
TITLE: APPLICATION NUMBER 32219
AUTHOR: BAAQMD
RECIPIENT: HONEYWELL, K. FORD
DATE: 900504
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: CORRESPONDENCE VOL. 2
SUBJECTS: AIR PERMIT
DESCRIPTION: BUILDING 1 AIR PERMIT
DOCUMENT NUMBER: C900518-1
TITLE:
AUTHOR: HONEYWELL, W. BOWEN
RECIPIENT: CRWQCB, S. RITCHIE
DATE: 900518
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: CORRESPONDENCE VOL. 2
SUBJECTS:
DESCRIPTION: HONEYWELL REPRESENTATIVES FOR NPDES, STEVE CONN AND
: CHUCK GEADELMANN
DOCUMENT NUMBER: C900604-1
TITLE: RESPONSE TO COMMENTS - RI/BPHE
AUTHOR: CRA, S. HORN
RECIPIENT: CRWQCB, S. RITCHIE
DATE: 900604
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: CORRESPONDENCE VOL. 2
SUBJECTS: RI/BPHE
DESCRIPTION: CRA RESPONSE TO CRWQCB COMMENTS
: PRESENTED IN FEBRUARY 27, 1990,
ON DRAFT RI/BPHE REPORT
CRWQCB LETTER
,.
DOCUMENT NUMBER: C900606-1
TITLE: DRAFT FEASIBILITY STUDY/REMEDIAL ACTION PLAN
AUTHOR: CRWQCB, S. MORSE
RECIPIENT: HONEYWELL, C. GEADELMANN
DATE: 900606
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: CORRESPONDENCE VOL. 2
SUBJECTS: FSjRAP
DESCRIPTION: COMMENTS ON DRAFT FSjRAP REPORT
DOCUMENT NUMBER: C900611-1
TITLE: SUBMITTAL OF THE SYNERTEK BUILDING 1 RI/BPHE AND FSjRAP REPORTS
AUTHOR: HONEYWELL, S. CONN
RECIPIENT: CRWQCB, G. BARTOW
DATE: 900611
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: CORRESPONDENCE VOL. 2
SUBJECTS: RI/BPHE, FSjRAP
DESCRIPTION: CONFIRMATION OF SUBMITTAL EXTENSION TO JULY 5, 1990, FOR
: RI/BPHE AND FSjRAP REPORTS
_.-..... --..
-------
DOCUMENT NUMBER: C900717-1
TITLE: SYNERTEK RI/BPHE CORRECTION
AUTHOR: CRA, S. HORN
RECIPIENT: CRWQCB, S. RITCHIE
DATE: 900717
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: CORRESPONDENCE VOL. 2
SUBJECTS: RI/BPHE
DESCRIPTION: CORRECTIONS TO RI/BPHE REPORT
DOCUMENT NUMBER: C900725-1
TITLE: SYNERTEK #1, 3050 CORONADO BOULEVARD
AUTHOR: CRWQ~B, S. RITCHIE
RECIPIENT: HONEYWELL, C. GEADELMANN
DATE: 900725
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: CORRESPONDENCE VOL. 2
SUBJECTS: ADMIN. RECORD. SMR, PROGRESS REPORTS
DESCRIPTION: MODIFICATIONS TO NPDES REPORTS, QUARTERLY REPORTS AND
: ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD
DOCUMENT NUMBER: C900822-1
TITLE: SYNERTEK BASELINE RISK ASSESSMENT
AUTHOR: EPA, S. SEIDEL
RECIPIENT: EPA, J. HEALY
DATE: 900822
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: CORRESPONDENCE VOL. 3
SUBJECTS: RI/BPHE
DESCRIPTION: COMMENTS ON JULY VERSION OF RI/BPHE REPORT
DOCUMENT NUMBER: C900824-1
TITLE:
AUTHOR: EPA, J. HEALY
RECIPIENT: CRWQCB, G. BARTOW
DATE: 900824
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: CORRESPONDENCE VOL. 3
SUBJECTS: RI/BPHE
DESCRIPTION: COVER LETTER TO SHARON SEIDEL MEMO ON RI/BPHE
DOCUMENT NUMBER: C900828-1
TITLE: ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD FOR SYNERTEK BUILDING 1
AUTHOR: CRA, S. HORN .
RECIPIENT: CRWQCB, S. RITCHIE
DATE: 900828
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: CORRESPONDENCE VOL 3
SUBJECTS: ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD
DESCRIPTION: COVER LETTER FOR ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD AND INDEX
: (INDEX NOT INCLUDED)
-.... .-- -_..
-------
DOCUMENT NUMBER: C900829-1
TITLE: SYNERTEK #1 AND #3 - CRWQCB LETTER OF JULY 25,1990
AUTHOR: HONEYWELL, S. CONN
RECIPIENT: CRWQCB, S. RITCHIE
DATE: 900829
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: CORRESPONDENCE VOL. 3
SUBJECTS: FIELD ACTIVITIES
DESCRIPTION: CONFIRMS CRWQCB ALLOWANCE FOR DELAYING REQUESTED MONITORING
: WELL DEVELOPMENT ACTIVITIES UNTIL FORTH QUARTER 1990
DOCUMENT NUMBER: C90090S-1
TITLE: COMMENTS ON SYNERTEK'S AUGUST DRAFT 1990 FS/RAP
AUTHOR: EPA, J. HEALY
RECIPIENT: CRWQCB
DATE: 900905
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: CORRESPONDENCE VOL. 3
SUBJECTS: FS/RAP
DESCRIPTION: EPA COMMENTS ON AUGUST VERSION OF FS REPORT
DOCUMENT NUMBER: C900906-1
TITLE: RI/BPHE CONFERENCE CALL
AUTHOR: CRA, S. HORN
RECIPIENT: CONFEREES
DATE: 900906
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: CORRESPONDENCE VOL. 3
SUBJECTS: RI/BPHE
DESCRIPTION: MEMO ON SEPTEMBER 6, 1990 CONFERENCE CALL WITH HONEYWELL,CRA
: CRWQCB AND EPA REGARDING RI/BPHE COMMENT LETTERS
DOCUMENT NUMBER: C900906-1
TITLE: RI/BPHE CONFERENCE CALL
AUTHOR: CRA, S. HORN
RECIPIENT: CONFEREES
DATE: 900906
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: CORRESPONDENCE VOL. 3
SUBJECTS: RI/BPHE
DESCRIPTION: MEMO ON SEPTEMBER 6, 1990 CONFERENCE CALL WITH HONEYWELL,CRA
: CRWQCB AND EPA REGARDING RI/BPHE COMMENT LETTERS
DOCUMENT NUMBER: C900910-1
TITLE: CHROMATOGRAPHS OF FIELD AND TRIP BLANK SAMPLES
AUTHOR: CRA, D. DEMPSEY
RECIPIENT: GAL DOH, L." GARCIA
DATE: 900910
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: CORRESPONDENCE VOL. 3
SUBJECTS: DATA VALIDATION
DESCRIPTION: CHROMATOGRAPHS OF FIELD AND TRIP BLANK SAMPLES
: DURING MARCH 1990 AT SYNERTEK BUILDING 1
COLLECTED "
-------
DOCUMENT NUMBER: C900911-1
TITLE: SYNERTEK #1, 3050 CORONADO BLVD., SANTA CLARA
AUTHOR: CRWQCB, S. RITCHIE
RECIPIENT: HONEYWELL, C. GEADELMANN
DATE: 900911
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: CORRESPONDENCE VOL. 3
SUBJECTS: RI/BPHE
DESCRIPTION: EPA AND CRWQCB COMMENTS ON JULY VERSION OF RI/BPHE REPORT
: INCLUDES MEMO BY MS. SHARON SIDEL ON BPHE TO J. HEALY (EPA)
DOCUMENT NUMBER: C900912-1
TITLE: ~VVISED FEASIBILTIY STUDY / REMEDIAL ACTION PLAN
AUTHOR: CRWQCB, S. RITCHIE
RECIPIENT: HONEYWELL, C. GEADELMANN
DATE: 900912
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: CORRESPONDENCE VOL. 3
SUBJECTS: FSjRAP
DESCRIPTION: CRWQCB AND EPA COMMENTS ON AUGUST VERSION OF FS REPORT
: INCLUDES SEPTEMBER 5,1990 MEMO BY J. HEALY (EPA)
DOCUMENT NUMBER: C900921-1
TITLE: STAGNATION POINT CALCULATION FOR PW3
AUTHOR: CRA, D. SOLA
RECIPIENT: CRWQCB, G. BARTOW
DATE: 900921
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: CORRESPONDENCE VOL. 3
SUBJECTS: FSjRAP
DESCRIPTION: CALCULATION OF PW3 STAGNATION POINT IN RESPONCE TO REQUEST
: FOR ADDITIONAL B-AQUIFER EXTRACTION WELL EVALUATION IN FS
DOCUMENT NUMBER: C900921-2
TITLE: CONFERENCE CALL ON FS/RAP REPORT
AUTHOR: CRA, S. HORN
RECIPIENT: CONFEREES
DATE: 900921
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: CORRESPONDENCE VOL. 3
SUBJ ECTS: FS /RAP
DESCRIPTION: MEMO DICUSSING SEPT. 18, 1990 CONFERENCE CALL ON FS REPORT
: AND COMMENTS FROM THE CRWQCB LETTER OF SEPT. 12, 1990
DOCUMENT NUMBER: C900926-1
TITLE: DRAFT FACT SHEET, SYNERTEK BUILDING 1
AUTHOR: CRA, S. HORN
RECIPIENT: CRWQCB, G. BARTOW
DATE: 900926
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: CORRESPONDENCE VOL. 3
SUBJECTS: FACT SHEET
DESCRIPTION: DRAFT FACT SHEET SUMMARIZING ACTIVITIES
: SYNERTEK BUILDING 1
CONDUCTED AT-".'. ...
-------
DOCUMENT NUMBER: C900927-1
TITLE: REVISION TO THE FS/RAP REPORT
AUTHOR: CRA, S. HORN
RECIPIENT: CRWQCB, G. BARTOW
DATE: 900927
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: CORRESPONDENCE VOL. 3
SUBJECTS: FS/RAP
DESCRIPTION: CONFIRMATION THAT EVALUATION OF ADDITIONAL B-AQUIFER
: EXTRACTION WELLS IS NOT REQUIRED
DOCUMENT NUMBER: C901019-1
TITLE: WORK PLoW, GROUNDWATER INJECTION TEST
AUTHOR: CRA, S. HORN
RECIPIENT: CRWQCB, S. RITCHIE
DATE: 901019
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: CORRESPONDENCE VOL. 3
SUBJECTS: INJECTION TEST
DESCRIPTION: COVER LETTER FOR WORK PLoW AS REQUESTED IN THE CRWQCB LETTER
: TO HONEYWELL DATED SEPT. 12, 1990
DOCUMENT NUMBER: C901025-1
TITLE: REQUESTED INFORMATION
AUTHOR: CRA, S. HORN
RECIPIENT: CRWQCB, G. BARTOW
DATE: 901025
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: CORRESPONDENCE VOL. 3
SUBJECTS: FS
DESCRIPTION: DRAFT RISK CALCULATION TABLES
: IN FS
FOR PROPOSED CLEANUP GOALS
DOCUMENT NUMBER: C901030-1
. TITLE: EPA REGION IX COMMENTS ON DRAFT FEASIBILITY STUDY
AUTHOR: EPA, REGION IX
RECIPIENT: CRWQCB
DATE: 901030
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: CORRESPONDENCE VOL. 3
SUBJECTS: FSjRAP
DESCRIPTION: ADDITIONAL EPA COMMENTS ON AUGUST 7,1990 VERSION OF FS/RAP
: REPORT
DOCUMENT NUMBER: C901102-1
TITLE: REVISED FEASIBILITY STUDY / REMEDIAL ACTION PLoW
AUTHOR: CRWQCB, S. RITCHIE
RECIPIENT: HONEYWEU., C. GEADElMANN
DATE: 901102
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: CORRESPONDENCE VOL. 3
SUBJECTS: FSjRAP _n.... --..
DESCRIPTION: CRWQCB AND EPA COMMENTS ON OCTOBER VERSION OF FS/RAP REPORT
: EPA COMMENTS PROVIDED IN MEMO DATED OCT. 30, 1990
-------
DOCUMENT NUMBER: C901116-1
TITLE: CONFERENCE CALL DISCUSSING EPA COMMENTS ON FS/RAP
AUTHOR: CRA, S. HORN
RECIPIENT: HONEYWELL, S. CONN
DATE: 901116
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: CORRESPONDENCE VOL. 3
SUBJECTS: FSjRAP
DESCRIPTION: MEMO ON NOV 8, 1990 CONF CALL BETWEEN CRA, CRWQCB AND
: HONEYWELL REGARDING EPA COMMENTS ON FSjRAP
DOCUMENT NUMBER: C901227-1
TITLE: TENTATIVE ORDER: PROPOSED REMEDIAL ACTION PLAN
AUTHOR: CRWQCB, S. RITCHIE
RECIPIENT: HONEYWELL, C. GEADELMANN
DATE: 901227
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: CORRESPONDENCE VOL. 3
SUBJECTS: RAP
DESCRIPTION: REVISED TENTATIVE ORDER SERVING AS THE PROPOSED REMEDIAL
: ACTION PLAN AND SITE CLEANUP REQUIREMENTS.
DOCUMENT NUMBER: C901227-2
TITLE: WORK PLAN, GROUNDWATER INJECTION TEST: SYNERTEK #1
AUTHOR: CRWQCB, S. RITCHIE
RECIPIENT: HONEYWELL, C. GEADELMANN
DATE: 901227
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: CORRESPONDENCE VOL. 3
SUBJECTS: INJECTION TEST
DESCRIPTION: LETTER APPROVES OCTOBER 1990 WORK PLAN FOR A GROUNDWATER
: INJECTION TEST AS AMMENDED WITH COMMENTS.
DOCUMENT NUMBER: C901228-1
TITLE: REVISED FEASIBILTIY STUDY / REMEDIAL ACTION PLAN - SYNERTEK #1
AUTHOR: CRWQCB, S. RITCHIE
RECIPIENT: HONEYWELL, C. GEADELMANN
DATE: 901228
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: CORRESPONDENCE VOL. 3
SUBJECTS: FS
DESCRIPTION: CRWQCB AND EPA COMMENTS ON NOVEMBER VERSION ON FS REPORT.
: REPORT WILL BE APPROVED ONCE REVISED TO ADDRESS 2 COMMENTS.
",
DOCUMENT NUMBER: C910108-1
TITLE: RESPONSE TO COMMENTS - FEASIBILITY STUDY, SYNERTEK BUILDING 1
AUTHOR: CRA, S. HORN
RECIPIENT: HONEYWELL, S.CONN
DATE: 910108
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: CORRESPONDENCE VOL. 3
SUBJECTS: FS ...
DESCRIPTION: CRA RESPONSE TO CRWQCB AND EPA COMMENTS ON FS. CORRECTED
: PAGES WILL BE SUPPLIED TO CRWQCB BY JANUARY 11, 1991.
-------
DOCUMENT NUMBER: C910108-1
TITLE: WELL DEVELOPMENT RESULTS
AUTHOR: GROUNDWATER TECHNOLOGY INC.
RECIPIENT: HONEYWELL
DATE: 910108
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: CORRESPONDENCE VOL. 3
SUBJECTS: ACTIVITIES CONDUCTED BY GROUNDWATER TECH
DESCRIPTION: YELL DEVELOPMENT RESULTS FOR SYNERTEK BUILDINGS
lAND 3
DOCUMENT NUMBER: C910109-1
TITLE: CORRECTION TO SYNERTEK BUILDING 1 FEASIBILITY STUDY REPORT
AUTHOR: CRA, S. HORN
RECIPIENT: CRWQCB, S. RITCHIE
DATE: 910109
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: CORRESPONDENCE VOL. 3
SUBJECTS: FS
DESCRIPTION: CORRECTED PAGES TO THE FS AS REQUESTED BY THE CRWQCB IN
: DECEMBER 28, 1990 LETTER.
DOCUMENT NUMBER: C910110-1
TITLE: ADMINISTATIVE RECORD FOR SYNERTEK BUILDING 1
AUTHOR: CRA, S. HORN
RECIPIENT: CRWQCB, S. RITCHIE
DATE: 910110
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: CORRESPONDENCE VOL. 3
SUBJECTS: ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD
DESCRIPTION: COVER SHEET FOR UPDATE OF ADMIN RECORD TO JAN
10, 1991
DOCUMENT NUMBER: C910301-1
TITLE: RESPONSIVENESS SUMMARY, SYNERTEK BUILDING 1
AUTHOR: CRA, S. HORN
RECIPIENT: CRWQCB, G. BARTOW
DATE: 910301
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: CORRESPONDENCE VOL. 3
SUBJECTS: OFFICE OF DRINKING WATER CONCERN
DESCRIPTION: FEASIBILITY STUDY ESTIMATED CLEANUP OF TCE TO A
: CONCENTRATION OF <1 PPB IN SITE GROUNDWATER AT LEAST
50 YRS.
DOCUMENT NUMBER: C910308-1
TITLE: NOTICE OF REVISED TENTATIVE ORDER
AUTHOR: CRWQCB, S. MORSE
RECIPIENT: HONEYWELL, C. GEADELMANN
DATE: 910308
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: CORRESPONDENCE VOL. 3
SUBJECTS: REVISED TENTATIVE ORDER FOR BUILDING
DESCRIPTION: PROPOSED REMEDIAL ACTION PLAN AND
1 .
SITE CLEANUP REQUIRMENTS
-------
DOCUMENT NUMBER: C910312-1
TITLE: RESULTS OF SEARCH FOR ABANDONED AGRICULTURAL WELLS
AUTHOR: CRA, D. SOLA
RECIPIENT: HONEYWELL, S. CONN
DATE: 910312
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: CORRESPONDENCE VOL. 3
SUBJECTS: WELL SEARCH PROGRAM
DESCRIPTION: REPORT ON SEARCH FOR AGRICULTURAL WELL 28J01
DOCUMENT NUMBER: C910318-1
TITLE: SYNERTEK BUILDING 1 GROUNDWATER REMEDIAL SITE
AUTHOR: HONEYWELL, S. CONN
RECIPIENT: CRWQCB, S. RITCHIE
DATE: 910318
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: CORRESPONDENCE VOL. 3
SUBJ ECTS: WELL SEARCH PROGRAM
DESCRIPTION: PHASE 3 WELL SEARCH REPORT COVER LETTER
DOCUMENT NUMBER: C910321-1
TITLE: REMEDIAL ACTION PLAN AND SITE CLEANUP REQUIREMENTS
AUTHOR: HONEYWELL, S. CONN
RECIPIENT: CRWQCB, S. RITCHIE
DATE: 910321
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: CORRESPONDENCE VOL. 3
SUBJECTS: DEED RESTRICTION
DESCRIPTION: HONEYWELL'S INTENTION TO FILE A DEED RESTRICTION
DOCUMENT NUMBER: C910410-1
TITLE: TRANSMITTAL OF DRAFT FACT SHEET
AUTHOR: CRWQCB, J. JOHNSON
RECIPIENT: HONEYWELL, S. CONN
DATE: 910410
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: CORRESPONDENCE VOL. 3
SUBJECTS: FINAL CLEANUP PLAN
DESCRIPTION: DRAFT FACT SHEET ANNOUNCING APPROVAL OF FINAL CLEANUP PLAN
-------
PROGRESS REPORTS
- ----.. "....
-------
DOCUMENT NUMBER: P870813-1
TITLE: SYNERTEK BUILDING NO.1 PROGRESS REPORT, JULY 1987
AUTHOR: CRA
RECIPIENT: HONEYWELL
DATE: 870813
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: PROGRESS REPORTS VOL. 1
SUBJECTS: PROGRESS REPORT
DESCRIPTION: PLUME DEFINITION, WORK PLAN SUBMITTED, START-UP OF
: TREATMENT SYSTEM
DOCUMENT NUMBER: P870909-1
TITLE: SYNERTEK BUILDING NO.1
AUTHOR: CRA
RECIPIENT: HONEYWELL
DATE: 870909
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: PROGRESS
SUBJECTS: PROGRESS REPORT
DESCRIPTION: QUARTERLY REPORT
PROGRESS REPORT, AUGUST 1987
REPORTS VOL. 1
DOCUMENT NUMBER: P87100S-1
TITLE: SYNERTEK BUILDING NO.1 PROGRESS REPORT, SEPTEMBER 1987
AUTHOR: CRA
RECIPIENT: HONEYWELL
DATE: 871005
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: PROGRESS REPORTS VOL. 1
SUBJECTS: PROGRESS REPORT
DESCRIPTION: SYSTEM DOWN TWICE
DOCUMENT NUMBER: P871111-1
TITLE: SYNERTEK BUILDING NO.1 PROGRESS REPORT, OCTOBER 1987
AUTHOR: CRA
RECIPIENT: HONEYWELL
DATE: 871111
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: PROGRESS REPORTS VOL. 1
SUBJECTS: PROGRESS REPORT
DESCRIPTION: REVISED QAPP, MONITORING PLAN AND SAFETY PLAN
: REPORT ON WELL 28K04
SUBMITTED,
DOCUMENT NUMBER: P871210-1
TITLE: SYNERTEK BUILDING #1 PROGRESS REPORT, NOVEMBER 1987
AUTHOR: CRA, R. FREHN.ER
RECIPIENT: HONEYWELL, K. FORD
DATE: 871210
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: PROGRESS REPORTS VOL. 1
SUBJECTS: PROGRESS REPORT
DESCRIPTION: QUARTERLY REPORT, INSTALLATION OF PLUME DEFINITION
: MONITORING WELLS
--..-.--- .
-------
DOCUMENT NUMBER: P880106-1
TITLE: SYNERTEK BUILDING #1 PROGRESS REPORT, DECEMBER 1987
AUTHOR: CRA, R. FREHNER
RECIPIENT: HONEYWELL, K. FORD
DATE: 880106
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: PROGRESS REPORTS VOL. 1
SUBJECTS: PROGRESS REPORT
DESCRIPTION: WELL PY-3 INSTALLED TO REPLACE WELL 4B AND SAMPLED
DOCUMENT NUMBER: P880209-1
TITLE: SYNERTEK BUILDING #1 PROGRESS REPORT, JANUARY 1988
AUTHOR: CRA, R. FREHNER
RECIPIENT: HONEYWELL, K. FORD
DATE: 880209
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: PROGRESS REPORTS VOL. 1
SUBJECTS: PROGRESS REPORT
DESCRIPTION: INSTALLATION OF B AQUIFER EXTRACTION WELL PW-3
DOCUMENT NUMBER: P880309-1
TITLE: SYNERTEK BUILDING #1 PROGRESS REPORT. FEBRUARY 1988
AUTHOR: CRA, R. FREHNER
RECIPIENT: HONEYWELL, K. FORD
DATE: 880309
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: PROGRESS REPORTS VOL. 1
SUBJECTS: PROGRESS REPORT
DESCRIPTION: QUARTERLY REPORT, REPOSITIONED WATER LEVEL SENSOR PROBES AT
: 12A TO IMPROVE PUMPING RATE
DOCUMENT NUMBER: P880405-1
TITLE: SYNERTEK BUILDING #1 PROGRESS REPORT, MARCH 1988
AUTHOR: CRA, R. FREHNER
RECIPIENT: HONEYWELL, K. FORD
DATE: 880405
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: PROGRESS REPORTS VOL. 1
SUBJECTS: PROGRESS REPORT
DESCRIPTION: INSTALLATION OF ACID FEED SYSTEM AUTHORIZED
DOCUMENT NUMBER: P880509-1
TITLE: SENERTEK BUILDING #1 PROGRESS REPORT, APRIL 1988
AUTHOR: CRA, R. FREHNER
RECIPIENT: HONEY\JELL,K. FORD
DATE: 880509
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: PROGRESS REPORTS VOL. 1
SUBJECTS: PROGRESS REPORT
DESCRIPTION: TESTING OF DRUMMED MATERIALS FROM THE PLUME DEFINITION-StuDY
: MEETING ON 4/11/88
-------
DOCUMENT NUMBER: P880609-1
TITLE: SYNERTEK BUILDING #1 PROGRESS REPORT, MAY 1988
AUTHOR: CRA, R. FREHNER
RECIPIENT: HONEYWELL, K. FORD
DATE: 880609
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: PROGRESS REPORTS VOL. 1
SUBJECTS: PROGRESS REPORT
DESCRIPTION: QUARTERLY REPORT, TANK PERMIT TO STORE ACID AT THE TREATMENT
: SYSTEM
DOCUMENT NUMBER: P880712-1
TITLE: SYNERTEK BUILDING #1 PROGRESS REPORT, JUNE 1988
AUTHOR: CRA, R. FREHNER
RECIPIENT: HONEYWELL, K. FORD
DATE: 880712
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: PROGRESS REPORTS VOL. 1
SUBJECTS: PROGRESS REPORT
DESCRIPTION: INSTALLATION OF ACID FEED SYSTEM, CLEANING AIR STIPPING
: TO~ERS ACCESS AGREEMENTS SENT, ENCROACHMENT PERMITS
DOCUMENT NUMBER: P880810-1
TITLE: SYNERTEK BUILDING 1 PROGRESS REPORT, JULY 1988
AUTHOR: CRA, R. FREHNER
RECIPIENT: HONEYWELL, K. FORD
DATE: 880810
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: PROGRESS REPORTS VOL. 1
SUBJECTS: PROGRESS REPORT
DESCRIPTION: ACCESS NEGOTIATIONS FOR FORCEMAIN UNSUCCESSFUL
DOCUMENT NUMBER: P880908-1
TITLE: SYNERTEK BUILDING 1 PROGRESS REPORT, SEPTEMBER 1988
AUTHOR: CRA, R. FREHNER
RECIPIENT: HONEYWELL, K. FORD
DATE: 880908
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: PROGRESS REPORTS VOL. 1
SUBJECTS: PROGRESS REPORT
DESCRIPTION: QUARTERLY REPORT, EXTRACTION YELL NEGOTIATIONS
: WITH GEjINTERSIL, ACID STORAGE
DOCUMENT NUMBER: P881011-1
TITLE: SYNERTEK BUILDING 1 PROGRESS REPORT, SEPTEMBER 1988
AUTHOR: CRA, R. FREHNER
RECIPIENT: HONEYYELL, K. FORD
DATE: 881011
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: PROGRESS REPORTS VOL. 1
SUBJECTS: PROGRESS REPORT --.....--
DESCRIPTION: YELL 6S1W28J1 LOCATION STARTS, INSTALLATION OF FORCEMAIN,
: GRANTED EXTENSION FOR IRA TO DECEMBER 31, 1988
-------
DOCUMENT NUMBER: P881104-1
TITLE: SYNERTEK BUILDING #1 PROGRESS REPORT, OCTOBER 1988
AUTHOR: CRA, R. FREHNER
RECIPIENT: HONEYWELL, K. FORD
DATE: 881104
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: PROGRESS REPORTS VOL. 1
SUBJECTS: PROGRESS REPORT
DESCRIPTION: ACCESS TO LOCATE WELL 28J01, AIR STRIPPING TOWER INSPECTED,
: INSTALLATION OF MONITORING AND PURGE WELLS
DOCUMENT NUMBER: P881212-1
TITLE: SYNERTEK BUILDING NO.1 PROGRESS REPORT, NOVEMBER 1988
AUTHOR: CRA
RECIPIENT: HONEYWELL
DATE: 881212
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: PROGRESS REPORTS VOL. 1
SUBJECTS: PROGRESS REPORT
DESCRIPTION: QUARTERLY REPORT, IRM WORK COMMENCES
DOCUMENT NUMBER: P890111-1
TITLE: SYNERTEK BUILDING #1 PROGRESS REPORT, DECEMBER 1988
AUTHOR: CRA, J. MELBY
RECIPIENT: HONEYWELL, K. FORD
DATE: 890111
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: PROGRESS REPORTS VOL. 1
SUBJECTS: PROGRESS REPORT
DESCRIPTION: RI/FSjRAP WORK PLAN SUBMITTED, WELL 28J01 LOCATION OFF SITE
: IRMS NEARLY COMPLETE
DOCUMENT NUMBER: P890213-1
TITLE: SYNERTEK BUILDING NO.1 PROGRESS REPORT, JANUARY 1989
AUTHOR: CRA, D. SOlA
RECIPIENT: HONEYWELL, K. FORD
DATE: 890213 .
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: PROGRESS REPORTS VOL. 1
SUBJECTS: PROGRESS REPORT
DESCRIPTION: OFF SITE IRMS NEARLY COMPLETE, ACCESS FOR WELL 28J01, SYSTEM
: RESTARTED 1/5/89
DOCUMENT NUMBER: P890309-1
TITLE: SYNERTEK BUILDING NO.1, PROGRESS REPORT, FEBRUARY 1989
AUTHOR: CRA, D. SOlA
RECIPIENT: HONEYWELL, K. FORD
DATE: 890309
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: PROGRESS REPORTS VOL. 1
SUBJECTS: PROGRESS REPORT
DESCRIPTION: QUARTERLY REPORT, GROUNDWATER CONTOURS, DATA VALIDATION,
: SAMPLING PROGRAM SENT OUT FOR BIDS
-'- h .~~ .---.
-------
DOCUMENT NUMBER: P890407-1
TITLE: SYNERTEK BUILDING NO.1 PROGRESS REPORT, MARCH 1989
AUTHOR: CRA, D. SOIA
RECIPIENT: HONEYYELL, K. FORD
DATE: 890407
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: PROGRESS REPORTS VOL. 1
SUBJECTS: PROGRESS REPORT
DESCRIPTION: PACE LABS SELECTED FOR QUARTERLY MONITORING,
: COMMENTS
RI/FS WORK PIAN
DOCUMENT NUMBER: P890510-1
TITLE: SYNERTEK BUILDING NO. .1 PROGRESS REPORT, APRIL 1989
AUTHOR: CRA, D. SOIA
RECIPIENT: HONEYWELL, K. FORD
DATE: 890510
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: PROGRESS REPORTS VOL. 1
SUBJECTS: PROGRESS REPORT
DESCRIPTION: RI/FS WORK PIAN RESUBMITTAL, NEED FOR TREATMENT SYSTEM
: RELOCATION
DOCUMENT NUMBER: P890609-1
TITLE: SYNERTEK BUILDING #1 QUARTERLY PROGRESS REPORT, JUNE 1989
AUTHOR: CRA, D. SOIA
RECIPIENT: HONEYYELL, K. FORD
DATE: 890609
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: PROGRESS REPORTS VOL. 1
SUBJECTS: PROGRESS REPORT
DESCRIPTION: QUARTERLY REPORT: MARCH QUARTERLY DATA, BIDS FOR TREATMENT
: SYSTEM RELOCATION RECEIVED
*
DOCUMENT NUMBER: P891108-1
TITLE: SYNERTEK BUILDING 1 PROGRESS REPORT, SEPTEMBER 1989
AUTHOR: CRA, S. HORN
RECIPIENT: HONEYWELL, K. FORD
DATE: 891108
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: PROGRESS REPORTS VOL. 1
SUBJECTS: PROGRESS REPORT
DESCRIPTION: WELLS 3B, 4B, 12B SUITABLE FOR MONITORING WELL USE. SAP
: SUBMITTED. TREATMENT SYSTEM DOWN FOR RELOCATION
DOCUMENT NUMBER: P900130-1
TITLE: SYNERTEK BUILDING 1 PROGRESS REPORT, DECEMBER 1989
AUTHOR: CRA, S. HORN .
RECIPIENT: HONEYWELL, K. FORD
DATE: 900130
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: PROGRESS REPORTS VOL. 2
SUBJECTS: PROGRESS REPORT
DESCRIPTION: TREATMENT SYSTEM RELOCATION COMPLETED, ADMIN RECORD
: SUBMITTED, DRAFT RI/BPHE SUBMITTED
---.... ... .
-------
DOCUMENT NUMBER: P900424-1
TITLE: SYNERTEK BUILDING 1 PROGRESS PREPORT. MARCH 1990
AUTHOR: CRA, S. HORN
RECIPIENT: HONEYWELL, K. FORD
DATE: 900424
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: PROGRESS REPORTS VOL. 2
SUBJECTS: PROGRESS REPORT
DESCRIPTION: FSjRAP SUBMITTED, TWO MONITORING YELLS INSTALLED NEAR PY-S,
: MARCH SAMPLING DATA VALIDATION PACKAGE
DOCUMENT NUMBER: P900728-1
TITLE: SYNERTEK BUILDING 1 PROGRESS REPORT, JUNE 1990
AUTHOR: CRA, S. HORN
RECIPIENT: HONEYWELL, S. CONN
DATE: 900728
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: PROGRESS REPORTS VOL. 2
SUBJECTS: PROGRESS REPORT
DESCRIPTION: RI/BPHE SUBMITTED, ADDITIONAL SAMPLING FOR LEAD CONFIRMS
: THAT LEAD IS NOT A PROBLEM AT SITE.
DOCUMENT NUMBER: P901106-1
TITLE: SYNERTEK BUILDING NO.1 THIRD QUARTER PROGRESS REPORT FOR 1990
AUTHOR: CRA, S. HORN
RECIPIENT: HONEYWELL S. CONN
DATE: 901106
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: P~OGRESS REPORTS VOL. 3
SUBJECTS: PROGRESS REPORT
DESCRIPTION: ADDRESSES MODIFICATIONS IN AUG 29 CRYQCB LETTER,RIjBPHE AND
: FSjRAP AND ADMINISTRATIVE RECORD SUBMISSIONS.
DOCUMENT NUMBER: P910129-1
TITLE: SYNERTEK BUILDING NO.1 FOURTH QUARTER PROGRESS REPORT FOR 1990
AUTHOR: CRA, S. HORN
RECIPIENT: HONEYWELL, S. CONN
DATE: 910129
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: PROGRESS REPORTS VOL. 4
SUBJECTS: PROGRESS REPORT
DESCRIPTION: INJECTION TEST YORK PLAN, FS REPORT, YELL REDEVELOPMENT,
: YELL 28J01 SEARCH.
_....... _....
-------
NPDES REPORTS
_.- ..... .......
-------
DOCUMENT NUMBER: N870711-1
TITLE: SELF-MONITORING REPORT, JUNE 1987
AUTHOR: CRA
RECIPIENT: HONEYWELL AND RREEF FUNDS
DATE: 8706
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: NPDES REPORTS VOL. 1
SUBJECTS: TREATMENT SYSTEM, NPDES
DESCRIPTION: SAMPLING AND FLOW RATE VIOLATIONS
: NO EFFLUENT STANDARD EXCEEDENCES
DUE TO START-UP
DOCUMENT NUMBER: N870812-1
TITLE: SELF-MONITORING REPORT, JULY 1987
AUTHOR: CRA
RECIPIENT: HONEYWELL AND RREEF FUNDS
DATE: 870812
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: NPDES REPORTS VOL. 1
SUBJECTS: TREATMENT SYSTEM, NPDES
DESCRIPTION: SAMPLING AND MEASUREMENT VIOLATIONS
: NO EFFLUENT STANDARD EXCEEDENCES
DOCUMENT NUMBER: N870908-1
TITLE: SELF MONITORING REPORT, AUGUST 1987
AUTHOR: CRA
RECIPIENT: HONEYWELL AND RREFF FUNDS
DATE: 870908
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: NPDES REPORTS VOL. 1
SUBJECTS: TREATMENT SYSTEM, NPDES
DESCRIPTION: NO VIOLATIONS
DOCUMENT NUMBER: N8710p9-1
TITLE: SELF MONITORING REPORT, SEPTEMBER 1987
AUTHOR: CRA
RECIPIENT: HONEYWELL AND RREFF FUNDS
DATE: 871009
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: NPDES REPORTS VOL. 1
SUBJECTS: TREATMENT SYSTEM, NPDES
DESCRIPTION: NO VIOLATIONS
DOCUMENT NUMBER: N871111-1
TITLE: SELF MONITORING REPORT, OCTOBER 1987
AUTHOR: CRA
RECIPIENT: HONEYWELL AND RREFF FUNDS
DATE: 871111 .
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: NPDES REPORTS VOL. 1
SUBJECTS: TREATMENT SYSTEM, NPDES
DESCRIPTION: NO VIOLATIONS
-------
DOCUMENT NUMBER: N871210-1
TITLE: SELF MONITORING REPORT, NOVEMBER 1987
AUTHOR: CRA
RECIPIENT: HONEYWELL AND RREFF FUNDS
DATE: 871210
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: NPDES REPORTS VOL. 1
SUBJECTS: TREATMENT SYSTEM, NPDES
DESCRIPTION: NO VIOLATIONS
DOCUMENT NUMBER: N880127-1
TITLE: SELF MONITORING REPORT, DECEMBER 1987
AUTHOR: CRA
RECIPIENT: HONEYWELL AND RREFF FUNDS
DATE: 880127
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: NPDES REPORTS VOL. 1
SUBJECTS: TREATMENT SYSTEM, NPDES
DESCRIPTION: ANNUAL REPORT FOR BUILDING #1,
: DECEMBER 1987
NO VIOLATIONS FOR
DOCUMENT NUMBER: N880209-1
TITLE: SELF MONITORING REPORT, JANUARY 1988
AUTHOR: CRA
RECIPIENT: HONEYWELL AND RREFF
DATE: 880209
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: NPDES REPORTS VOL. 1
SUBJECTS: TREATMENT SYSTEM, NPDES
DESCRIPTION: NO VIOLATIONS
DOCUMENT NUMBER: N880309-1
TITLE: SELF MONITORING REPORT, FEBRUARY 1988
AUTHOR: CRA
RECIPIENT: HONEYWELL AND RREFF FUNDS
DATE: 880309
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: NPDES REPORTS VOL. 1
SUBJECTS: TREATMENT SYSTEM, NPDES
DESCRIPTION: NO VIOLATIONS
DOCUMENT NUMBER: N880406-1
TITLE: SELF MONITORING REPORT, MARCH 1988
AUTIiOR: CRA
RECIPIENT: HONEYWELL AND RREFF FUNDS
DATE: 880406
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: NPDES REPORTS VOL. 1
SUBJECTS: TREATMENT SYSTEM, NPDES
DESCRIPTION: NO VIOLATIONS
--F_'____-. .
-------
DOCUMENT NUMBER: N880509-1
TITLE: SELF MONITORING REPORT, APRIL 1988
AUTHOR: CRA
RECIPIENT: HONEYWELL AND RREFF FUNDS
DATE: 880509
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: NPDES REPORTS VOL. 1
SUBJECTS: TREATMENT SYSTEM, NPDES
DESCRIPTION: NO VIOLATIONS
DOCUMENT NUMBER: N880609-1
TITLE: SELF MONITORING REPORT, MAY 1988
AUTHOR: CRA
RECIPIENT: HONEYWELL AND RREFF FUNDS
DATE: 880609
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: NPDES REPORTS VOL. 1
SUBJECTS: TREATMENT SYSTEM, NPDES
DESCRIPTION: NO VIOLATIONS
DOCUMENT NUMBER: N880708-1
TITLE: SELF MONITORING REPORT, JUNE 1988
AUTHOR: CRA
RECIPIENT: HONEYWELL AND RREFF FUNDS
DATE: 880708
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: NPDES REPORTS VOL. 1
SUBJECTS: TREATMENT SYSTEM, NPDES
DESCRIPTION: NO VIOLATIONS
DOCUMENT NUMBER: N880810-1
TITLE: SELF MONITORING REPORT, JULY 1988
AUTHOR: CRA
RECIPIENT: HONEYWELL AND RREFF
DATE: 880810
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: NPDES REPORTS VOL. 1
SUBJECTS: TREATMENT SYSTEM, NPDES
DESCRIPTION: NO VIOLATIONS
DOCUMENT NUMBER: N880908-1
TITLE: SELF MONITORING REPORT, AUGUST 1988
AUTHOR: CRA
RECIPIENT: HONEYWELL AND RREFF
DATE: 880908
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: NPDES REPORTS VOL. 1
SUBJECTS: TREATMENT SYSTEM, NPDES
DESCRIPTION: NO VIOLATIONS
_...... _.h.
-------
DOCUMENT NUMBER: N88l0ll-l
TITLE: SELF MONITORING REPORT, SEPTEMBER 1988
AUTHOR: CRA
RECIPIENT: HONEYWELL AND RREFF
DATE: 881011
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: NPDES REPORTS VOL. 1
SUBJECTS: TREATMENT SYSTEM, NPDES
DESCRIPTION: NO VIOLATIONS
DOCUMENT NUMBER: N881104-1
TITLE: SELF MONITORING REPORT, OCTOBER 1988
AUTHOR: CRA
RECIPIENT: HONEYWELL AND RREFF
DATE: 881104
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: NPDES REPORTS VOL. 1
SUBJECTS: TREATMENT SYSTEM, NPDES
DESCRIPTION: NO VIOLATIONS
DOCUMENT NUMBER: N88l209-1
TITLE: SELF MONITORING REPORT, NOVEMBER 1988
AUTHOR: CRA
RECIPIENT: HONEYWELL AND RREFF
DATE: 881209
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: NPDES REPORTS VOL. 1
SUBJECTS: TREATMENT SYSTEM, NPDES
DESCRIPTION: NO VIOLATIONS
DOCUMENT NUMBER: N890113-1
TITLE: SELF MONITORING REPORT, JANUARY 1989
AUTHOR: CRA
RECIPIENT: HONEYWELL AND RREFF
DATE: 890113
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: NPDES REPORTS VOL. 2
SUBJECTS: TREATMENT SYSTEM, NPDES
DESCRIPTION: NO VIOLATIONS
DOCUMENT NUMBER: N890125-1
TITLE: SELF MONITORING REPORT, DECEMBER 1988
AUTHOR: CRA
RECIPIENT: HONEYWELL AND RREFF
DATE: 890125
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: NPDES REPORTS VOL. 2
SUBJECTS: TREATMENT SYSTEM, NPDES
DESCRIPTION: ANNUAL REPORT FOR BUILDING #1,
: WATER STATION
pH EXCEEDANCE AT RECRIVING
-------
DOCUMENT NUMBER: N890309-1
TITLE: SELF MONITORING REPORT, FEBRUARY 1989
AUTHOR: CRA
RECIPIENT: HONEYWELL AND RREFF
DATE: 890309
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: NPDES REPORTS VOL. 2
SUBJECTS: TREATMENT SYSTEM, NPDES
DESCRIPTION: NO VIOLATIONS
DOCUMENT NUMBER: N890410-1
TITLE: SELF MONITORING REPORT, MARCH 1989
AUTHOR: CRA
RECIPIENT: HONEYWELL AND RREFF
DATE: 890410
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: NPDES REPORTS VOL. 2
SUBJECTS: TREATMENT SYSTEM, NPDES
DESCRIPTION: NO VIOLATIONS
DOCUMENT NUMBER: N890510-1
TITLE: SELF MONITORING REPORT, APRIL 1989
AUTHOR: CRA
RECIPIENT: HONEYWELL AND RREFF
DATE: 890510
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: NPDES REPORTS VOL. 2
SUBJECTS: TREATMENT SYSTEM, NPDES
DESCRIPTION: NO VIOLATIONS
DOCUMENT NUMBER: N890609-1
TITLE: SELF MONITORING REPORT, MAY 1989
AUTHOR: CRA
RECIPIENT: HONEYWELL AND RREFF
DATE: 890609
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: NPDES REPORTS VOL. 2
SUBJECTS: TREATMENT SYSTEM, NPDES
DESCRIPTION: NO VIOLATIONS
.'
DOCUMENT NUMBER: N890710-1
TITLE: SELF MONITORING REPORT, JUNE 1989
AUTHOR: CRA
RECIPIENT: HONEYWELL AND RREFF
DATE: 890710
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: NPDES REPORTS VOL. 2
SUBJECTS: TREATMENT SYSTEM, NPDES
DESCRIPTION: NO VIOLATIONS
-...... ~. .
-------
DOCUMENT NUMBER: N890810-1
TITLE: SELF MONITORING REPORT, JULY 1989
AUTHOR: CRA
RECIPIENr: HONEWEU. AND RREFF
DATE: 890810
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: NPDES REPORTS VOL. 2
SUBJECTS: TREATMENT SYSTEM, NPDES
DESCRIPTION: NO VIOLATIONS
DOCUMENT NUMBER: N890913-1
TITLE: SELF MONITORING REPORT, AUGUST 1989
AUTHOR: CRA
RECIPIENT: HONEYWELL AND RREFF
DATE: 890913
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: NPDES REPORTS VOL. 2
SUBJECTS: TREATMENT SYSTEM, NPDES
DESCRIPTION: SYSTEM BEING RELOCATED
DOCUMENT NUMBER: N891011-1
TITLE: SELF MONITORING REPORT, SEPTEMBER 1989
AUTHOR: CRA
RECIPIENT: HONEWELL AND RREFF
DATE: 891011
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: NPDES REPORTS VOL. 2
SUBJECTS: TREATMENT SYSTEM, NPDES
DESCRIPTION: SYSTEM DO\JN FOR RELOCATION
DOCUMENT NUMBER: N891100-1
TITLE: SELF MONITORING REPORT, OCTOBER 1989
AUTHOR: CRA
RECIPIENT: HONEYWELL AND RREFF
DATE: 891100
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: NPDES REPORTS VOL. 2
SUBJECTS: TREATMENT SYSTEM, NPDES
DESCRIPTION: SYSTEM DO\JN FOR RELOCATION
*
DOCUMENT NUMBER: N891200-1
TITLE: SELF MONITORING REPORT, NOVEMBER 1989
AUTHOR: CRA
RECIPIENT: HONEYWELL AND RREFF
DATE: 891200
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: NPDES REPORTS VOL. 2
SUBJECTS: TREATMENT SYSTE, NPDES
DESCRIPTION: SYSTEM DO\JN FOR RELOCATION
*
#"".' -- .
-------
DOCUMENT NUMBER: N900129-1
TITLE: SELF MONITORING REPORT, DECEMBER 1989, ANNUAL
AUTHOR: CRA
RECIPIENT: HONEYWELL AND RREFF
DATE: 900129
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: NPDES REPORTS VOL. 2
SUBJECTS: TREATMENT SYSTEM, NPDES
DESCRIPTION: SYSTEM RESTARTED, NO VIOLATIONS
DOCUMENT NUMBER: N900208-1
TITLE: SELF MONITORING REPORT, JANUARY 1990
AUTHOR: CRA
RECIPIENT: HONEYWELL AND RREFF
DATE: 900208
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: NPDES REPORTS VOL. 2
SUBJECTS: TREATMENT SYSTEM, NPDES
DESCRIPTION: NO VIOLATIONS
DOCUMENT NUMBER: N900308-1
TITLE: SELF MONITORING REPORT, FEBRUARY 1990
AUTHOR: CRA
RECIPIENT: HONEYWELL AND RREFF
DATE: 900308
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: NPDES REPORTS VOL. 2
SUBJECTS: TREATMENT SYSTEM, NPDES
DESCRIPTION: NO VIOLATIONS
DOCUMENT NUMBER: N900411-1
TITLE: SELF MONITORING REPORT; MARCH 1990
AUTHOR: CRA
RECIPIENT: HONEYWELL AND RREFF
DATE: 900411
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: NPDES REPORTS VOL. 2
SUBJECTS: TREATMENT SYSTEM, NPDES
DESCRIPTION: pH EXCEEDANCE AT RECEIVING WATER STATION,
: CAUSED BY TREATMENT SYSTEM
DOCUMENT NUMBER: N900510-1
TITLE: SELF MONITORING REPORT, APRIL 1990
AUTHOR: CRA
RECIPIENT: HONEYWELL AND RREFF
DATE: 900510
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: NPDES REPORTS VOL. 2
SUBJECTS: TREATMENT SYSTEM, NPDES
DESCRIPTION: NO VIOLATIONS
UNLIKELY TO BE
_.*.... ~. .
-------
DOCUMENT NUMBER: N900611-1
TITLE: SELF MONITORING REPORT, MAY 1990
AUTHOR: CRA
RECIPIENT: HONEYWELL AND RREFF
DATE: 900611
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: NPDES REPORTS VOL. 2
SUBJECTS: TREATMENT SYSTEM, NPDES
DESCRIPTION: NO VIOLATIONS
DOCUMENT NUMBER: N900709-1
TITLE: SELF MONITORING REPORT, JUNE 1990
AUTHOR: CRA
RECIPIENT: HONEYWELL AND RREFF
DATE: 900709
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: NPDES REPORTS VOL. 2
SUBJECTS: TREATMENT SYSTEM, NPDES
DESCRIPTION: pH EXCEEDENCE AT RECEIVING YATER STATION,
: CAUSED BY TREATMENT SYSTEM
UNLIKELY TO BE
DOCUMENT NUMBER: N901026-1
TITLE: SELF MONITORING REPORT, 3RD QUARTER 1990
AUTHOR: HONEYYELL, S. CONN
RECIPIENT: CRYQCB, S. RITCHIE
DATE: 901026
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: NPDES REPORTS VOL. 3
SUBJECTS: TREATMENT SYSTEM, NPDES
DESCRIPTION: INCLUDES MODIFICATIONS REQUESTED IN AUG
: pH EXCEEDANCE IN EFFLUENT IN SEPT.
29 CRYQCB LETTER
DOCUMENT NUMBER: N910128-1
TITLE: SELF MONITORING ANNUAL REPORT 1990
AUTHOR: HONEYWELL, S. CONN
RECIPIENT: CRYQCB, S. RITCHIE
DATE: 910128
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: NPDES REPORTS VOL. 3
SUBJECTS: TREATMENT SYSTEM, NPDES
DESCRIPTION: NO VIOLATIONS IN OCTOBER, NOVEMBER OR DECEMBER.
-------
, L
INVESTIGATION REPORTS
-...... ~. .
-------
DOCUMENT NUMBER: R830217-1
TITLE: REPORT OF SUBSURFACE INVESTIGATION AT SYNERTEK
AUTHOR: ENGINEERING SCIENCE
RECIPIENT: HONEYWELL
DATE: 830217
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: INVESTIGATION REPORTS VOL. 1
SUBJECTS: SOIL, GROUNDYATER
DESCRIPTION: DRAFT: IDENTIFICATION OF POTENTIAL LEAKAGE
: BLDG 1 AND 3
FROM UST AT
DOCUMENT NUMBER: R840117-1
TITLE: RESULTS OF SUBSURFACE.INVESTIGATION AT SYNERTEK SEPTEMBER 1983
AUTHOR: ENGINEERING SCIENCE
RECIPIENT: HONEWELL
DATE: 840117
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: INVESTIGATION REPORTS VOL. 1
SUBJECTS: SOIL, GROUNDYATER
DESCRIPTION: STACP: RESULTS FROM SEPTEMBER 1983 SOIL AND GROUNDYATER
: FIELD PROGRAM AT BLDGS. 1 AND 3
DOCUMENT NUMBER: R840800-1
TITLE: WORK PLAN FOR SUBSURFACE INVESTIGATION AT SYNERTEK
AUTHOR: EARTH TECHNOLOGY
RECIPIENT: CRWQCB
DATE: 840800
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: INVESTIGATION REPORTS VOL. 1
SUBJECTS: SUBSURFACE INVESTIGATION
DESCRIPTION: WORK PLAN
*
DOCUMENT NUMBER: R850200-1
TITLE: RESULTS OF SUBSURFACE INVESTIGATIONS AT SYNERTEK FACILITIES
AUTHOR: EARTH TECHNOLOGY
RECIPIENT: HONEWELL, INC.
DATE: 850200
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: INVESTIGATION REPORTS VOL. 1
SUBJECTS: SOILS. GROUNDWATER
DESCRIPTION: RESULTS OF SOIL AND GROUNDYATER INVESTIGATION FROM JANUARY
: 1984 TO FEBRUARY 1985
DOCUMENT NUMBER: R850700-1
TITLE: SECOND PROGRESS REPORT: RESULTS OF SUBSURFACE INVESTIGATIONS
AUTHOR: EARTH TECHNOLOGY
RECIPIENT: HONEWELL
DATE: 850700
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: INVESTIGATION REPORTS VOL. 1
SUBJECTS: GROUNDWATER INVESTIGATION
.... --. .
DESCRIPTION: SUPPLEMENTAL WORK TO FEBRUARY 19, 1985, REPORT (R-850200-1)
-------
DOCUMENT NUMBER: R850800-1
TITLE: WORKPLAN FOR SUPPLEMENTAL SITE INVESTIGATIONS AND IRA AT BLDG. 1
AUTHOR: HONEYWELL/EARTH TECHNOLOGY
RECIPIENT: CRWQCB
DATE: 850800
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: INVESTIGATION REPORTS VOL. 2
SUBJECTS: GROUNDWATER INVESTIGATION
DESCRIPTION: WORKPLAN AND SCHEDULE FOR INVESTIGATION AND IRA
DOCUMENT NUMBER: R850911-1
TITLE: UNDERGROUND TANK REMOVAL AT BUILDING 1
AUTHOR: EARTH TECHNOLOGY
RECIPIENT: HONEYWELL
DATE: 850911
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: INVESTIGATION REPORTS VOL. 2
SUBJECTS: TANK REMOVAL, SOIL REMEDIATION
DESCRIPTION: TANKS AND AFFECTED SOILS REMOVED AT BUILDING 1
DOCUMENT NUMBER: R860200-1
TITLE: POTENTIAL FOR LEAKAGE TO DEEP AQUIFERS, REPORT ON WATER WELLS
AUTHOR: EMCON
RECIPIENT: CRA
DATE: 860200
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: INVESTIGATION REPORTS VOL. 2
SUBJECTS: WELL SEARCH
DESCRIPTION: STACP: IDENTIFIED POTENTIAL AREAS FOR LEAKAGE TO DEEP
: AQUIFER
DOCUMENT NUMBER: R860200-2
TITLE: GROUNDWATER INVESTIGATION SYNERTEK BUILDING #1
AUTHOR: CRA/EMCON
RECIPIENT: HONEYWELL
DATE: 860200
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: INVESTIGATION REPORTS VOL. 2
SUBJECTS: GROUNDWATER INVESTIGATION
DESCRIPTION: DATABASE, REMEDIAL ACTION, CONCLUDES VOC IN GROUNDWATER,
: RECOMMENDS PUMPING, TREATING AND DISCHARGE
DOCUMENT NUMBER: R870820-1
TITLE: QUALITY ASSURANCE PROJECT PLAN (QAPP)
AUTHOR: CRA
RECIPIENT: HONEYWELL
DATE: 870820
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: INVESTIGATION REPORTS VOL. 3
SUBJECTS: QAPP
DESCRIPTION: QAPP
-.. "--- ~.'"
-------
DOCUMENT NUMBER: R871008-1
TITLE: HEALTH AND SAFETY PLAN
AUTHOR: CRA
RECIPIENT: HONEYWELL
DATE: 871008
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: INVESTIGATION REPORTS VOL. 3
SUBJECTS: HEALTH AND SAFETY
DESCRIPTION: HEALTH AND SAFETY PLAN
DOCUMENT NUMBER: R871008-2
TITLE: MONITORING PLAN
AUTHOR: CRA
RECIPIENT: HONEYWELL
DATE: 871008
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: INVESTIGATION REPORTS VOL. 3
SUBJECTS: GROUNDWATER
DESCRIPTION: GROUNDWATER MONITORING PLAN FOR BUILDINGS #1 AND #3
: WITH ADDENDUM
DOCUMENT NUMBER: R880200-1
TITLE: PLUME DEFINITION REPORT AND OFF SITE REMEDIAL PLAN
AUTHOR: CRA
RECIPIENT: HONEYWELL
DATE: 880200
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: INVESTIGATION REPORTS VOL. 3
SUBJECTS: GROUNDWATER, VOC PLUME .
DESCRIPTION: PLUME DEFINITION AND RECOMMENDATION FOR OFF-SITE REMEDIATION
DOCUMENT NUMBER: R881200-1
TITLE: GROUNDWATER VOC DATA BASE
AUTHOR: CRA
RECIPIENT: HONEYWELL
DATE: 881200
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: INVESTIGATION REPORTS VOL. 3
SUBJECTS: DATABASE
DESCRIPTION: DATABASE FOR SYNERTEK BUILDING #1 AND #3
THROUGH SEPT. 1988
DOCUMENT NUMBER: R890400-1
TITLE: RI/FS/RAP WORKPLAN
AUTHOR: CRA
RECIPIENT: HONEYWELL
DATE: 890400
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: INVESTIGATION REPORTS VOL. 4
SUBJECTS: RI, FS, RAP
DESCRIPTION: RI/FSjRAP SCHEDULE AND TASKS
. -..
-------
1-
DOCUMENT NUMBER: R890600-1
TITLE: COMMUNITY RELATIONS PLAN FOR SUPERFUND SITES IN SANTA CLARA
AUTHOR: CWQCB
RECIPIENT: HONEYWELL
DATE: 890600
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: INVESTIGATION REPORTS VOL. 4
SUBJECTS: IDENTIFIES ISSUES OF CONCERN
DESCRIPTION: COMMUNITY RELATIONS PLAN
DOCUMENT NUMBER: R890613-1
TITLE: DATA VALIDATION PACKAGE FOR SYNERTEK BUILDINGS #1 AND #3
AUTHOR: CRA, D. SOLA
RECIPIENT: CRtJQCB, G.BARTOtJ
DATE: 890613
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: INVESTIGATION REPORTS VOL. 4
SUBJECTS: DATA VALIDATION
DESCRIPTION: LETTER FOR ACUREX LABS DATA VALIDATION
DOCUMENT NUMBER: R890800-1
TITLE: SAMPING AND ANALYSIS PLAN (SAP)
AUTHOR: CRA
RECIPIENT: HONEYWELL
DATE: 890811
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: INVESTIGATION REPORTS VOL. 4
SUBJECTS: SAP
DESCRIPTION: SPECIFICATIONS ON FIELD AND ANALYTICAL PROTCOLS
DOCUMENT NUMBER: R900426-1
TITLE: DATA VALIDATION PACKAGE FOR SYNERTEK BUILDING 1
AUTHOR: CRA, S. HORN
RECIPIENT: CRtJQCB, G. BARTOtJ
DATE: 900426
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: INVESTIGATION REPORTS VOL. 5
SUBJECTS:
DESCRIPTION: DATA VALIDATION PACKAGE FOR MARCH 1990 SAMPLING EVENT
DOCUMENT NUMBER: R900706-1
TITLE: REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION/BASELINE PUBLIC HEALTH EVALUATION
AUTHOR: CRA
RECIPIENT: HONEYWELL
DATE: 900706
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: INVESTIGATION REPORTS VOL. 6
SUBJECTS: RI/BPHE
DESCRIPTION: RI/BPHE
_.. -... .,.. .
-------
DOCUMENT NUMBER: R900808-1
TITLE: FEASIBILITY STUDYjREMEDIAL ACTION PLAN, SYNERTEK BUILDING 1
AUTHOR: CRA
RECIPIENT: HONEYWELL
DATE: 900808
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: INVESTIGATION REPORTS VOL. 7
SUBJECTS: FEASIBILITY AND REMEDIAL ACTION
DESCRIPTION: FEASIBILITY STUDY AND REMEDIAL ACTION PLAN
DOCUMENT NUMBER: R900928-1
TITLE: REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION / BASELINE PUBLIC HEALTH EVALUATION
AUTHOR: CRA
RECIPIENT: HONEYWELL
DATE: 900928
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: INVESTIGATION REPORTS VOL. 8
SUBJECTS: RI/BPHE
DESCRIPTION: REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION AND BASELINE PUBLIC HEALTH EVALUATION
: (RI/BPHE)
DOCUMENT NUMBER: R901009-1
TITLE: FEASIBILITY STUDY/REMEDIAL ACTION PLAN, SYNERTEK BUILDING 1
AUTHOR: CRA
RECIPIENT: HONEYWELL
DATE: 901009
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: INVESTIGATION REPORTS VOL. 9
SUBJECTS: FSjRAP
DESCRIPTION: FEASIBILITY STUDY AND REMEDIAL ACTION PLAN
: (COVER LETTER ONLY)
DOCUMENT NUMBER: R901019-1
TITLE: WORK PLAN, GROUNDWATER INJECTION TEST, SYNERTEK BUILDING 1
AUTHOR: CRA .
RECIPIENT: HONEYWELL
DATE: 901019
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: INVESTIGATION REPORTS VOL. 9
SUBJECTS: INJECTION TEST
DESCRIPTION: WORK PLAN AS REQUESTED IN THE CRWQCB LETTER
: TO HONEYWELL DATED SEPT. 12, 1990
DOCUMENT NUMBER: R901130-1
TITLE: FEASIBILITY STUDYjREMEDIAL ACTION PLAN, SYNERTEK BUILDING 1
AUTHOR: CRA
RECIPIENT: HONEYWELL
DATE: 901130
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: INVESTIGATION REPORTS VOL. 9
SUBJECTS: FSjRAP
DESCRIPTION: FEASIBILITY STUDY AND REMEDIAL ACTION PLAN
: CORRECTED PAGES SUBMITTED IN LETTER DATED 1-9-91.(C910109-1)
. ...... _. .
-------
DOCUMENT NUMBER: R910109-1
TITLE: CORRECTION TO SYNERTEK BUILDING 1 FEASIBILITY STUDY REPORT
AUTHOR: CRA IS. HORN
RECIPIENT: CRWQCB, S. RITCHIE
DATE: 910109
LOCATION OF DOCUMENT: INVESTIGATION REPORTS VOL. 9
SUBJECTS: FS
DESCRIPTION: CORRECTED PAGES TO THE FS AS REQUESTED BY THE CRWQCB IN
: DECEMBER 28, 1990 LETTER.
------- |