UNITED STATES ENVIRQNMlNtAL PROTECTION AGENCY

SFUND RfCOftDS CTR

2166-01666

1FEB27 1987

MEMORANDUM

SFUND RECORDS CTR

88131087

SUBJECT: Operable Unit Feasibility Study Reportfor the North Hollywood/Burbank Areain the San Fernando Valley Ground WaterBasin. 1". ."" ""

FROM: Jeffrey Zelikson, Acting DirectorToxics and Waste Management Division (T-l)

TO: Karl Morthole, Regional CounselOffice of Regional Counsel (RC-1)

Attached for your review and comment is the Operable UnitFeasibility Study (OUFS) Report for the San Fernando ValleySuperfund sites located in Los Angeles County. The OUFS reportis an evaluation of potential remedial action alternatives forthe roost contaminated well fiejd the North Hollywood/Burbankarea.

The OUFS report v^as released to the public in November,1986. EPA and the Los Angeles Department of $5ater and Power(LADWP) held a public meeting "on the project in December 1S86.After a review of comments received from the general public, theLADWP, and the EPA program offices, a draft Record of Decision(ROD) will be prepared that will recommend which remedial actionalternative EPA should select as the remedy for the NorthHollywood/Burbank area of the San Fernando Valley sites. Thedraft ROD document will also be provided to your office forreview and comment.

The final ROD document will be routed through the programoffices for concurrence and to the Regional Administrator forsignature. A ROD briefing to which heads of program offices willbe invited will be held for the Regional Administrator prior tosignature in inost cases.

CONCURRENCES

SYMBOL NT-H-.I T-4r T-fSURNAME

DATE

EPA Form 1320-1 (12-70) OFFICIAL FILE COPY

-2-I would like to highlight the following issues for your

consideration during your review of the OUPS report*

0 EPA has awarded a Cooperative Agreement for the OUFS tothe Los Angeles Department of Water and Power (LADWP), apolitical subdivision of the State of California. AlthoughCERCLA 104(d)(l) authorizes Cooperative Agreements withpolitical subdivisions, the language in Section 104(c){3)clearly requires assurances by the State. SARA does notalter this requirement {See Section 104(i>), Therefore,before EPA can amend 'the Cooperative Agreeaent to includefunding for the remedial action in the OOFS it will benecessary for LADWP to obtain the required assurancesfrom the State before the remedial action begins.

0 On earlier versions of the OUFS the alternatives presentedby LADWP did not include a treatment alternative thattreats down to the raaxiraum contaminant levels (MCL) fortrichloroethylene (TCB) and perchloroethylene <PCE).After extensive EPA comment and review, the LADWP agreedto present and cost but a treatment systeia that achievesMCL's without blending. The reconanended alternative isdesigned to meet thes$ standards without blending.

0 Citizens for a Better Environment (CBE) has requested thatEPA request the South^Coast Air Quality Management District(SCAQ.MD) to modify LAtiWP's permit for the aeration facilityto a 99% VOC removal efficiency. The original permitallowed a 90% VOC removal efficiency. CBE. feels that thepermit should be modified to reflect the actual designparameters of the proposed aeration facility.

In addition, I would like to remind you that in accordancewith EPA's policy regarding *CERCLA Compliance With Other Environ-mental Statutes" (50 FR47946, November 20, 1985}, it is EPA'spolicy to select a remedy that complies with all applicable orrelevant and appropriate federal environmental laws. Pleasereview the discussion of the different remedial action alternativesclosely with respect to their compliance with the applicable orrelevant and appropriate federal environmental laws administeredby your program office. ... ._....

Any questions regarding this site and the Superfund processcan be directed to Patti Cleary of my staff at 4-8015. Commentsconcerning the OUPS report should be submitted to Patti Clearywithin three weeks.

Attachments

T-4-1:CLEARY:DIANA:Faye:x8015:2/24/87:902C

TffilTEDSTAiES ENVIRdRMENTAL FROTECTIOtftGENCY

FEB 27 1987

MEMORANDUM

SUBJECT: Operable Unit -Feasibility Study Reportfor the North Holly wob'd/Burbank Areain the San Fernando Valley Ground WaterBasin.

FROM; Jeffrey Zelikson, Acting DirectorToxics and Waste Management Division (T-l)

TO: Richard Coddington, Acting DirectorWater Management Division (W-l)

Attached for your review and comment is the Operable UnitFeasibility Study {OUFS) Report for the San Fernando ValleySuperfund sites located in Los Angeles County. The OUFS reportis an evaluation of potential remedial action alternatives forthe most contaminated well field the North Hollywood/Burbankarea,

The OUFS report was released to the public in November,1986. EPA and the Los Angeles Department of Water and Power(LADWP) held a public meeting on the project in December 1986.After a review of comments received from the general public, theLADWP, and the EPA program offices, a draft Record of Decision(ROD) will be prepared that will recommend which remedial actionalternative EPA should select as the remedy for the NorthHollywood/Burbank area of the San Fernando Valley sites. Thedraft ROD document will also be provided to your office forreview and comment.

The final ROD document will be routed through the programoffices for concurrence and to the Regional Administrator forsignature. A ROD briefing to which heads of program offices willbe invited will be held for the Regional Administrator prior tosignature in most cases.

5YMBOL

DATE— 7

T5T M-J llrlCONCURRENCES

7-1JlferWY

EPA Form 1320-1 (12-70) OFFICIAL FILE COPY

I would like to highlight the following issues for yourconsideration during your review of the OOFS report.

0 EPA has awarded a Cooperative Agreement for the OUFS tothe Los Angeles &0p4r€iReht of Water and Power (LADWP), apolitical subdivision of the State of California. AlthoughCEKCLA 104{d)(l) authorizes Cooperative Agreements withpolitical subdivisions, the language in Section 104(c)(3)clearly requires assurances by the State. SARA does notalt^r this reguireiaent(See Section 104(1)). Therefore,bofor« EPA can atsend the Cooperative Agreement to includefunding for the remedial action in the OUFS it will benecessary for LADW3? to obtain the required assurancesfrom the State before the remedial action begins,

0 On earlier versions of the OUFS the alternatives presentedby LADWP did not include a treatment alternative thattreats down to the maximum contaminant levels (MCL-) fortriohloroethylene (TC£) and parchloroethylene (PCS).After extensive EPA comment and review, the LADKGP agreedto present and cost out a treatment system that achievesSCL's without blending. The recommended alternative isdesigned to meet these standards without blending.

* Citizens for a Better Environment (C8B) has requested thatEPA request the South Coast Air Quality Management District(SCAQMD) to saodify LADWP's permit for the aeration facilityto a 99% VOC rewoval efficiency. The original permitallowed a 90% VOC removal efficiency. CBB feels that thepermit should be modified to reflect the actual designparameters of the proposed aeration facility.

In addition, I would like to remind you that in accordancewith EPA's policy regarding "CE CLA Compliance With Oth«r Environ-mental Statutes" (50 FR47946, November 20, 1985), it is EPA'spolicy to select a resaedy that complies with all applicable orrelevant and appropriate federal environmental laws. Pleasereview the discussion of the different remedial action alternativesclosely with respect to their compliance with the applicable orrelevant and appropriate federal environmental laws administeredby your program office.

Any questions regarding this site and the Superfund processcan be directed to Patti deary of my staff at 4~8015. Commentsconcerning the OUFS report should be submitted to Patti Claarywithin three weeks.

/Attachments

T-4-1:CLEARY:DIANA:Faye:x8 015:2/2 4/8 7:9 02C

UNITE ESTATES ENSfi^^MENTAfe^PROTEGTION AGENCY -

T F E R 2 7

MEMORANDUM

SUBJECT: Operable Unit Feasibility Study Reportfor the North Hollywood/Burbank Areain the San Fernando Valley Ground WaterBasin.

FRQMi Jeffrey Zelikson, Acting DirectorToxics and Waste Management Division (T-l)

TO: David Howekamp, DirectorAir Management Division (A-l)

Attached for your review and comment is the Operable UnitFeasibility Study (OUFS) Report for the San Fernando ValleySuperfund sites located in Los Angeles County. The OUFS reportis an evaluation of potential remedial action alternatives forthe most contaminated well field the Nort.h Hollywood/Burbankarea.

The OUFS report was released to the public in November,1986. EPA and the Los Angeles Department of Water and Power(LADI7P) held a public meeting on the project in December 1986.After a review of comments received from the general public, theLADWP, and the EPA prograrc offices, a draft Record of Decision(ROD) will be prepared that will recommend which remedial actionalternative EPA should select as the remedy for the NorthHollywood/Burbank area of the San Fernando Valley sites. Thedraft ROD document will also be provided to your office forreview and comment.

The final ROD document will be routed through the programoffices for concurrence and to the Regional Administrator forsignature. A ROD briefing to which heads of prograra offices willbe invited will be held for the Regional Administrator prior tosignature in most cases.

CONCURRENCES

SYMBOL

SURNAME

DATE

.1-4 T-..±l

EPA Form 1320-1 (12-70) OFFICIAL FILE COPY

-2-

I would like to highlight the following issues for yourconsideration during your review of the OUFS report.

0 SPA has awarded a Cooperative Agreement for the OUFS tothe t,o» Angeles Department of $ater and Power (LADWP), apolitical subdivision of the State of California. AlthoughCiRCkA I04(d)(l) authorizes Cooperative Agreements withpolitical subdivisions, the language in Section 104{c)(3)clearly requires assurances by the State. SARA does notalter this requirement (See Section 104(1)), Therefore,before EPA can amend the Cooperative Agreement to includefunding for the remedial action in the OUFS it will benecessary for LADWP to obtain the required assurances

the State before the re»edial action begins.

0 On earlier versions of the OUFS the alternatives presentedby LADWP did not include a treatment alternative thattreats down to the maximum contaminant levels (MCL) fortrichloroethylene (TCE) and perchloroethylene (PCS).After extensive EPA cosaaent and review, the LADWP agreedto present and cost out a treatment system that achievesMCL'e without blending. The recoEtiaended alternative isdesigned to meet these standards without blending.

* Citizens for a Better Environment (CBS) has requested thatEPA request the South Coast Air Quality Jfanageraent District(SCACMD) to snodify LADWP 's permit for the aeration facilityto a 99% VOC removal efficiency. The original permitallowed a 90% VOC removal efficiency. CBB feels that theP«r»lt should be modified to reflect the actual designparameters of the proposed aeration facility,

In addition, I would like to rewind you that in accordancewith EPA's policy regarding "CERCLA Compliance With Other Environ-mental Statutes* (50 FR47946, November 20, 1983), it is EPA'spolicy to select a remedy that complies with all applicable orrelevant and appropriate federal enviroroaental^Faws. Pleasereview the discussion of the different remedial action alternativesclosely with respect to their compliance with the applicable orrelevant and appropriate federal environmental laws administeredby your program office.

Any questions regarding this site and the Superfund processcan be directed to Patti Cleary of my staff at 4-80$ 5. Commentsconcerning the OUJ?S report should be submitted to Patti Clearywithin three weeks.

Attachments

T-4-1:CLEARY:DIANA:Faye:x8015:2/24/87:902C

r.

FEB 27 1987

MEMORANDUM

SUBJECT? Operable U n i t F « a o i b i l i t y Study Reportfor the N o r t h riollywood/Burt-ank Ar^air, the Sen F®rnando~V"alley"Ground VJaterBasin.

FROM: Jeffrey ZeliJkBon, Acting DirectorToxics and Waste Mane^oraent Division (T-l)

TO i Karl Morthcle, R^ionsl CounselOffice of Regional Counsel (P.C-1)

Attached for your r«vi«v and cosiwcnt is the Operable UnitFeasibility Study (OUFS) lie-port Cor the S^n Fornsndo ValleySuper!iund sites located ir> Los? Ang<-its County. The OUFS reportIB an evaluation of p-otenti&l rorsedial action site-mat iv<?s forthe r>c^t cont ewi np.ted; we 13 fit*ld th& Kcrth Holly wood/'j r bankarea.

Tho GUFS report was re leased to the public in Movoisb^r,3.986. U?A e>no tf.'c Los Angeles Dep^rtr^.^nt of Water and Pov^r(LAD^P) held e public meeting on the project in Cec&nber 1SSG.After a review of coctraents received fro?;; the qonerfil public, theLADWP, end the EPA program offices, & draft Record of Decision(ROD) will be prepared that will recommend which reEsetJJal actionalternative EPA should select as the remedy for the NorthHollvwood/BurbsnH area of the San E'ernando Valley sites. Tnodraft BCD docuEi^nt will also be provicl-ou to your office forroviev and

The j C i o e » l P.C-D document w i l l b*? rcuteo through the progrstno f f i c e s for concurrence §nc? to the Region pi A d m i n i s t r a t o r for5*ionaturr? . A ROD b r i e f i n g to which hc-ac's of prograt? o f f i c e s v / i l lbe i n v i t o d w i l l be h«l<? for the Rcqic-na l A r f r a i r s 1st cat or i ' r i o r tos iqns tu re in rsost

-2-I would iiXfc to highlight th# col lowing issues for your

consideration during your review 'of' the OOFS report,

EPA has awarded a Cooperative Ayreisp^nt .tor the ours totht* Los Angelas Department of Hater an<3 Power {LADWP), apolitical subdivision of the State cf" California, AlthoughCSJsCLA 104(d)(l) authorizes Ccoporative Agra^is^ntr? withpolitical, subdivisions, th# language in section i04{c){3)clearly requires assurances fry th*; Stat*. SAHA floes notalter this requirement <Se« Section 104(1}), Therefore,before EPA can ascnd the Cooperative Agreement to includefunding tor the remedial action in the OUFS it will bonecessary tor LADWP to obtain tht required assurancesfrom th» State before ibo remedial action

0 On earlier versions of ""the OUFS the alternatives prsatnt^dDy LADH'P did not include fi tr©atK«rnt alternative thattreats down to the »a"&Inmia contasunant levols (MCL) fortrichloroothylane (T'Cfc) *nd perchlorcethyl^ne (PC£}»Att^r extensive £PA coiars^nt and i-^vit-w, the LADWP agreedto pr©s*snt and cost out a treatment systerf) that achievesMCL's without Jjiending. The rcccmme-ftUec'. alternative isdesigned to Ksest th«»sf_ standards without blending.

* Citixsns for a Bett«r""Ehvironckt'Ot (CBL) has requested thatEPA request the South Coast Air Quality Han«gem«?ht District(SCAQMD) to ssociify LASJKP"1 s permit rot the aeration facilityto e 99% VOC removel elftciency. The- original permit

& 90% VOC removal firtKici^ncy, CBE ±«els that theshould bs E4odified to reflect the ectu«»l

ot the proposed aeration facility,

In sedition, I would like to rssip.ioc you that in accordancewith gp&'s policy regarding "CERCLA Compliance Kith Other Envircn-raental Statutes" (50 FR47946, ficve-Bsbsr 20, 19S5), it is CPA ' spolicy to select a reswdy that coffiplitg with all afpi icable orreltivant and appropriate t*?c'erel cnvirorsi«i?ntal laws. Plessc-review the discussion o£ t^«^ dit£«.*rc-nt rensfecSiei action alternativesclosely with respect to their ccmpliancc with the applicable? orrelevant 3nd appropriate federal t?nvircn&ivntal laws *dminiby your proorearo office,

Any questions regarcUny this site anu fcht Supsrtuna processcan &e directed to F«tti Cloary c-f wy stst f afc 4-^015. Carsn*ent3conc'^rnirig thf* OUr'S report should &o submit tec to P*ttiwithin

T-4-l:CLEARY: DIANA: Paye:x8015: 2/24/87: 902

FER 2 7 1987

MEMORANDUM

SUBJECT* Operable Unit Feasibility Study Reportfor the North Hollywood/Bur&ank Areain the San Fernando Valley Groun<3 teaterBasin.

FROM: Jaflrey Zelikson, Acting DirectorToxics and Waste Management Division (T-l)

TO: Richard Coddington, Acting DirectorWa te r Ma n ag e»e n t D i v i s ion (VJ-1}

Attached for your review an<3 cowiaent is the? Operable UnitFeasibility Study (OUFS) Report for the San Fernando ValleySuperfund sites located in Los Angeles County. The OUFS reportis an evaluation of potential remedial action alternatives torthe most contaminated wall field the North ncllywood/Burbankarea.

The OUFS report was released to the public in November,1986. EPA and the Los Angelas Department of Water and Power(LADWP) held a public meeting on the project in December 19tf6.Aftor a review of coEHsents received from the general public, theLADWP, and the EPA program offices, a draft Record of Decision(ROD) will be prepared that will recommend which remedial actionalternative EPA should select as the remedy tor the NorthHollywood/Burbank area of the San Fernando V&il#y sites. Thedraft ROD document will also fee provided to your office forreview and coiaraent.

The final ROD document will be routed through the prograraoffices for concurrence ancj to the Regional Administrator forsignature, A KOD briefing to which heads of program offices willbe invited will be held for the Regional Administrator prior tosignature in most cases.

-2-

I would like to highlight the . following issues for yourconsideration during your review of the OOPS report,

0 BPA has awarded a Cooperative Agrcsftoent for the OUFS tothe Los Angelas Department of Wetcr and Pow*r (LADfy'P), <»political subdivision of the stat«? ot California. AlthoughCE-RCLA 104(d)(l) authorises. Cooperative- Agreeo«tvt$ withpolitical subdivisions, tho language in Section 104(c)(3)clearly requires assurances i>y Uu> stats. SARA Oo*ss notalter this requirement (S«?« Section 104(i)), Therefore,before EPA can attend the Cooperative Agreoisent to includefunding for the remedial action in th«* CUPS it will benecessary £or LADWP to obtain the required assurancesfroa> the State before the remedial action begins*

0 On earlier versions of. the OOFS the alternatives?by LADWP did not include a tr^atnisnt alternative thattreats down to tha ixasiwuK contarainant levels <KCL) fortrichloroethyi&ne (TCE) an^i perchloro&thylen« (PCE).Aftesr «xtsn*iivo EPA comme-nt and review, the LADWP agreedto present and cost out s. treetfiient aystoia that achi&vosMCL's without bl0n<ling. Th« ri:coi?im*snd<?d alternative isdesigned tc moot these standards without blending,

* Citizens for a Better Environment (CBE) has requeBted that^PA request the South Coast Air Cwality MsnaQfcRent District(SCAQMD) to modify LADWP's p^rrsit for the ae-ration facilitytc a 99% VOC removal efficiency. The original permitallowed a 90% VOC removal efficiency. CBS feels that thepermit should be modifiec! to n; fleet thf» actual designparameters of the- proposal aeration facility*

In addition, I would like to remind you that in accordancevith EPA*s policy regarding "C.ERCLA Compliance With Oth«r Environ-mental Statutes" (50 FR47946, November 20, 1985), it is EPA'spolicy to select a remedy that complies with all applicable orrelevant and appropriate federal environmental laws. Pleasereview the discussion oi the different remedial action alternativesclosely with respect to their compliance with the applicable orrelevant and appropriate federal 'environmental laws adrainist^reOby your program office.

Any questions regarding this site and the Sup^rfund processcan be directed to Patti Cleary of #y statf at 4-8U15. Cownsontsconcerning the OUFS report should be submitted to Patti Clearywithin thr«€' weeks.

Attachments

T-4-1: CLEAJRY : DIANA : Faye : x8 015 -. 2/2 4/8 7 : 9 02C

f/f/f- •• V /

MEMORANDUM

SUBJECT: Operable Unit Feasibility Study Reportfor the North Hollywood/Burbank Areain the San Fernando Valley Ground WaterBasin.

FROM: Jeffrey Zelikson, Acting DirectorToxics and Waste Management Division (T-l)

TO: Richard Coddington, Acting DirectorWater Management Division {K-l)

Attached for your review and corfur.ent is the Operable UnitFeasibility Study (OUFS) Report for the San Fernando ValleySupert'und sites located in Los Angeles County. The OUFS reportie an evaluation of potential remedial action alternatives forthe most contaminated well field the North Hollywood/Burfcankarea.

The OUFS report was released to the public in November,1966. EPA and the Los Angeles Department of Water and Power(LADWP) held a public meeting on the project in December 1986.After a review of comments received from the general public, theLADWP, and the EPA prograra offices, a draft Record of Decision(ROD) will foe prepared that will recommend which remedial actionalternative EPA should select as the remedy for the SortnHollywood/Burbank area of the San Fernando Velley sites. Thedraft ROD document will also be provided to your office forreview and comment.

The iinal ROD document will be routed through the programoffices for concurrence and to the Regional Administrator forsignature. A ROD briefing to which heads of program offices willbe invited will be held for the Regional Administrator prior tosignature in most cases.

-2-

I would likt? to highlight tjva toliowiny issues HOT yourconsideration during your review o* the GUPS report,

II EPA has awarded a Cooperative .Agreement for th« OUFS tothe Los Ancjelee Department c£ &ater and Power (LADWP), (%political subdivision of th** State of California. AlthoughCSBCLA l(M(d)(i) authorises Cooperative Agr^eoents withpolitical subdivisions, th*> language in Section 104(c)(3}clearly retires assurances ty tho Stst**. SAKA rices notalter this requirement (See Section 104(i)), Therefore,before EPA can assent the Cooperative Agreerc&nt to includefunding £or the remedial action in th# OUPS it will bonecessary for LADWP'to ot-tain the- required assurancesfror«; the State before the remedial action begins,

* On earlier versions of the OUFS th* alternatives presentedby LAD^P did not include a tr^atm^nt alternative thattreats down to the maximum contair<in<snt levels (flCL) lortrichloroethyleno (TCk) and perchJcrcethyleno (PCt:).Af tor extensive EPA cojajsent and review, thfc LADWP agre<?Cto pr^sssrnt ancl cost out a treatment system that achievesMCL's without fcJL«3r*JinQ. The recoremtjntlaG alternative is

to ise-st thes^ standards without blending,

* Citizens £or a Better Environment <C8E) has re<jue>ste£ thatEPA request ths South Coa&t Air Quality Management District(gCAQMB) to races it'y LA£»*P ' s permit for the aeration .facilityto a 991 VOC removal efficiency. The original permitallowed a 90% VOC reisoval etficiency. CBE tsels that theperiait should bs inodified. to reflect the actual deuignpsrainetera oJ; the proposed aeration facility.

In addition/ I would liks to remincl you that in accordancewith £PA*& policy regarding "CERCLA Cowpiiance l?ith Other Environ-mental Statutes" (50 PR47946, Sovejsbsr 20, 19SS), it is EPA'spolicy to select a remedy that complies with all applicable orrelevant and appropriate tederal environjsentsl laws. Pleasereview the discussion of the dit£**rent reoiwdial action alternativescloss-ly with respect to their compliance with the applicable orrelevant and appropriate i«<3eral environmental laws ddrrani&terec.-ty your program off'ico.

Any questions regarding this sit* «tnc5 tii& Sup&rtuno prccossjcan DP- <?irectc'<5 to Patti Cieafy Cf «vy statf et 4-8015, Coassentsconcern! r=Q the OUFS report should b« subRitt^d to Pstti Cl^arywithin

it: ntS

T-4-1:CLfcARY:DIANA:FayeixS015:2/24/87:9020

MBMORAKDOM

SUBJECT: Operable Unit Feasibility Study Report/for the Korth Holly wood/Burba nk "Area \.in the San Fernando Valley Ground Uater^Baaln. ______

PROHs J ft'roy 2eliksort, Acting DirectorToxics and Waste Manageaent Division (T-l)

TOs David Kowekarsp, DirectorAir Management Division (A-l)

Attached tor your review and comment is the Operable UnitFeasibility Study <OUFS) Report for the San Fernando ValloySuporfund sites located in I.QS Angeles County, The OUFS reportis an evaluation of potential r««i«dial action alternatives fortho ctost contaminated w«il field the North fJollywood/Burbankarea.

The OUFS report was rei«as«d to the public in1986. SPA an<3 the I,os Angelas Departiaent of Water and Power(LAD P) held a public eeoting on th« project in December 1986.After a reviev of comments received fro«s the general public, theLADS??, and the EPA program offices^ a draft Record of Decision(MOD) will foe prepared that will recowjsend which remedial actionalternative EPA should select as th« remedy for the KorthHolly wood/Bur bank area of the San Fernando Valley sites. Thedraft ROD document will also bo provided to your office forreview and

The final ROD <locura&nt will be routed through the programoffices for concurrence and to the Regional Administrator forsignature. A ROD Grieving to which head© of program offices willbe invited will foe held for the Regional Administrator prior tosignature in isosfc cas&a.

like to highlight the following Issy^s for yourconsideration during your review of the OOPS report.

* EPA has awarded a Cooperative A^ressasrst Cor th« OOFS tothe kos Angelas itepart&ent of Ifeter «m^ Power (LADWP), «political subdivision of the Stet« of California, AlthoughCEHCkA !04{d)(l) authorizes Cooperative Agreements withpolitics! subdivisions, the languatjs in Sections 104 (c) (3)clearly reguir&s assurances &y the Stat«?. SA8& does notalter this requirement {8e*> Section 104(1})* Therefore,before SPA earn asssnd tfaa Cooperative Agreement to include£yn<3In$ £or the rt^aedial action in the OOFS it will benecessary for LADfiJP to obtain th« r«Quir0

the Statd before th« re»«^ial action

OR earlier versions o€ the OCFS the alternativesbf LADW did not include a treatjeent alternetiv© thattr^-ats down to the maximuK contaiaiftant l«v«l» (HCl») fortrichlorosthyiene (TCE) afid p«rchloro«thylen<s (PCE).After sxt«n«iv« SFA consent an<J review, theto pressnt and cost out « treatment systera that

without olsftding. The recoffisnen<3od alternative isto meet tfess^ standards without blending.

iCiti3$3$ for a Better Etivironst^nt (CBE) h«s rsga^stsfd that '

the South Coast Air Quality Management Districtto asodifx Lh&ffl?>a p^rsalt for the aeratiors facility

to 6 £9% VOC removal effici&ncy. The original per»itallovsd a 90* VOC reasoval efficiency. CS£ t>els that the

should t>« »o<Sifted to reflect the actualof t!ve proposed «®ration facility,

la addition, I would like to remind you that In accordanceswith Hf'A's jioliey regarding "CEKCLA Cosiplianc* filth Other Environ-msntal Statutes* {50 FR47946, Sove fesr 20, 19£S>* it i« ^PA*spolicy to select a nmedy that complies with all applicable orrelevant and appropriate federal environmental laws. Pleasereview the sSiscuasion of the differeot rea^dial action alternativesclosely with respect te their compliance with the applie*t>le orr&lsvarst an<3 appropriato federsl ^nviron&sntal laws administeredby your pr0§ra# o££ic«*

Any questions regarding this site and the $uper£un<2 processtee- directed to Fatti clesry c£ my statf at 4-8015. CojR©anta

th® OUfS r gjort should b^ Bubssit'tod to Patti Cl^arythree wasks.

Attachments

T~4-l:CL£ARY;DIANA:Faye$x8015:2/24/87;902C

fEB 27 V987

HEMORAt-JDUH

SUBJECT; Operable Unit Feasibility Study Reportfor the North Hollywood/Burbank Areain the San Fernando Valley Ground WaterBasin.

PROM: Jef£r<jy 2eiikson, Acting DirectorToxics and Waste Management Division (T-l)

TO;- Devicl Howekaiap, DirectorAir Management Division (A-l)

Attached for your review and conuaent is the Operable UnitFeasibility Study (OUFS) Report for the San Pernancio ValleySuporfund sites located in Los Angeles County. The OUFS reportis an evaluation of potential remedial action alternatives forthe most contaminated well field the North Hollywood/Eurbankarea.

The CUPS report was released to the public in November,1986, EPA and the Los Angeles Department of Water and Power(LADWP) held a public meeting on the project in December 1986,After a review of comments received frois the general public, theLADWP, and the EPA program offices, a draft Record of Decision(ROD) will be prepared that will recommend which remedial actionalternative EPA should select as the remedy for the HorthHollywood/Burbank area of the San Fernando Valley sites. Thedraft ROD document wi!3 also be provided to your oftice forreview and corcwent.

The final ROD document will be routed through the programoffices for concurrence and to the Regional Administrator forsignature, A ROD briefing to which heads of program otfices willbe invited will be held for the Regional Administrator prior tosignature in most casos.

i would like to highlight th*? toiloving issues for yourconsideration during your revi*?v of the GUPS report.

£PA has awarded a Cooperative Agr«@m3nt for the OUt'S tothe Los Angelas Department ot W«tsr -ancv Power (LABWP), 3political subdivision ct the Stat© of: California. AlthoughCSRCLA 104(cO(i} authorizes Cooperative Agrt events withpolitical subdivisions, the language Iri Section 104{c}{3)clearly requires assurances i>y the Stat*», SARA doss notalter this requirement (Soe Section 104(i)), Therefore,before SPA can aeten.dLtitia Cooperative Agr^osont to includefunding for the rtnaedial action in the OUfc'S it will b&necessary £or LAEJWP__io obtain the required assurancesCroia the Stattj before the r$m«dial action begins.

On earlier versions o£ the ODFS the alternatives presentedby LAOHP did not include 3 treatwent alternative thattrcata down to th«..sajKimui& cont«»irtant levels (HCL) fortrichloroothyl^ne (TCE) er*d p«rchloroethylene (PCE).After ©xteneiva EPA <3otMsent and review, tho LADHP agreedto present and cost out a treatment system that achievesHCt'e withoyt blsnding. Tho recoassnided alt^cnastive Isdesigned to me&t these standards without blending.

Citizens for a B^ttesr Environment (CSE) has re^aestsd thatSPA request th& South Coast Air Quality Management Districtf'SCAQHP) to ssodigy LAC P's p«r$sit for tfce aeration facilityto a 99% VOC removal efficiency* The original permitallowed a 90% VOC removal e£fi<:l«ncy. CBE feel* that thepermit should fens »o^ified to Reflect the actual designparameters of the proposed a&fsticn

In addition, I would like to remind you that in accordancewith EPA's policy r«$«rdiRQ *CSKCLA Compliance With Other Environ-mental Statutes" (50 FR47946, Soveiaber 20, 19^5), it is EPA'spolicy to select a remedy that complies with ail applicable orrelevant and appropriate federal etwirofiEi«mtal l&v&« Pleasereview th$ discussion of th« different remedial action alternativesclosely with resp«ct to their cG8tpli«mc# with the applie«ble- orrelevant and appropriate federal environmental laws admin is tsredby your p ograa office.

Any questions regarding this^ sit$ and the Supercund proeoescan be directed to Patti Cleary or my stafi $t 4-8015. CoiR®e>ntsconcerning th§ OUFS report should be submitted to Patti Clearywithin thrse weeks.

Attachaswts

T-4-1:CLEARY:DIARA:Faye:x8015:2/24/87;902C