Activity Overview

 

Table of Contents

The California Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC)The department within the California Environmental Protection Agency in charge of the regulation of hazardous waste from generation to final disposal. DTSC oversees the investigation and cleanup of hazardous waste sites. and the U.S. Department of the Interior (DOI)The United States department charged with conservation and development of natural resources. The U.S. Department of the Interior uses sound science to manage and sustain America’s lands, water, wildlife, and energy resources, honors our nation’s responsibilities to tribal nations, and advocates for America’s island communities. are the lead governmental agencies responsible for the environmental investigation and cleanup of the Topock Project Site (Site). These agencies oversee the Pacific Gas and Electric Company’s (PG&E's) actions to protect the Colorado River and to clean up soil and groundwaterWater beneath the Earth’s surface that flows through soil and rock openings (aquifers). contamination in the vicinity of the PG&E Topock Compressor Station (Station). Environmental investigation and groundwater monitoring have been under way at the Site since 1997. The plumeA body of contaminated groundwater. The movement of a groundwater plume can be influenced by such factors as local groundwater flow patterns, the character of the aquifer in which the groundwater is contained, and the density of contaminants. of affected groundwater (containing mainly hexavalent chromiumHexavalent chromium is a form of chromium. Chromium is a metal naturally found in rocks, soil, and the tissue of plants and animals. Hexavalent chromium can be found naturally at low concentrations, but it is also used in industrial products and processes and is a known carcinogen. On May 28, 2014, the California Department of Public Health adopted a new California drinking water standard at 10 parts per billion for hexavalent chromium.) lies beneath federally owned lands, and lands owned by PG&E, BNSF Railroad, and the Fort Mojave Indian Tribe. To view the current groundwater monitoring locations, click on the map below. To view the most recent plume maps based on quarterly groundwater data, visit the Resource Conservation Recovery Act (RCRA) Facility Investigation/Remedial Investigation (RFI/RI) page or the Groundwater and Surface Monitoring page.

(Click on images above for larger view)

Top

Resource Conservation and Recovery Act Facility Investigation/Remedial Investigation

PG&E has submitted two volumes of the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act Facility Investigation/Remedial Investigation (RFI/RIAn investigation that occurs in the corrective action process following a Facility Assessment under RCRA and/or a Site Inspection under CERCLA. It is an in-depth study designed to gather data needed to determine the nature and extent of contamination at a site.) report for the Site. These studies include Volume 1 for site background and history, and Volume 2 for groundwater, surface water, hydrogeological characterization, river-sediment, and pore water. Volume 1 was completed in August 2007. A revised final Addendum to Volume 1 was completed on May 30, 2014. The RFI/RI Volume 2 - Hydrogeologic Characterization and Results of Groundwater and Surface Water Investigation was completed in February 2009. DTSC and DOI both approved the report in February 2009. An Addendum to the RFI/RI Volume 2 Report was completed in June 2009 and was approved by both DTSC and DOI in June 2009. Preparation of the Volume 3 Soil Investigation Results is anticipated to begin in 2018 after completion of the soil investigation field work and risk assessment.

Top

Human and Ecological Risk Assessment

In December 2008, DTSC and DOI approved the Revised Risk Assessment Work Plan (RAWP) for the Site. In 2009, PG&E prepared the first addendum to the RAWP, and the addendum was approved in December 2009. 

In November 2009, PG&E completed a Human and Ecological Risk Assessment of Groundwater report at the Site. This study used standard models and assumptions to estimate potential risks associated with the known groundwater plume contamination. The result of the Risk Assessment confirmed the cleanup goals for the Site. The Final Groundwater Risk Assessment was approved by the agencies in December 2009.

The Risk Assessment Work Plan Addendum II was submitted May 7, 2014, and contains updated information relevant to soil risk assessment activities and evaluation based on comments received by Tribal Nations, agencies, and stakeholders. Comments were received from DTSC, DOI, and Tribes. The Work Plan Addendum II was approved by the agencies on August 24, 2015. The Soil Risk assessment will begin in 2017 after completion of the soil investigation field work.

Top

Corrective Measure Study/Feasibility Study

A Corrective Measures Study/Feasibility Study (CMS/FS) Report for contamination in groundwater was prepared by PG&E to address groundwater contamination associated with past releases from the Station to the Bat Cave Wash (designated as Solid Waste Management Unit [SWMU] 1/Area of Concern [AOC] 1), previous injection well PGE 8 (designated as SWMU 2), and the East Ravine (designated as AOC 10). The report identified and evaluated cleanup options (or remedial alternatives) for the groundwater contamination and recommended a cleanup approach.

The Final CMS/FS Report was approved by the agencies (DTSC and DOI) in December 2009.

PG&E will, if necessary, prepare a Corrective Measure Study/ Feasibility Study for soil contamination after the site investigation and completion of the risk assessment. 

Top

In Situ Pilot Tests

PG&E conducted both a floodplain reductive zone in situ pilot test (ISPT), as well as an upland reductive zone ISPT for groundwater contamination. The purpose of these ISPTs was to evaluate the efficacy of using food-grade reagent mixture to remove hexavalent chromium from groundwater using chemical reduction Typical chemical reduction/oxidation process (sometimes referred to as Redox) reactions chemically convert hazardous contaminants to nonhazardous or less toxic compounds that are more stable, less mobile, and/or inert. Redox reactions involve the transfer of electrons from one compound to another. Specifically, one reactant is oxidized (loses electrons) and one is reduced (gains electrons).to form stable, insoluble trivalent chromium.

The floodplain tests and monitoring were conducted starting in May 2006, with monitoring completed in June 2014. The upland tests were conducted starting in March 2008, with monitoring completed in June 2014. Post-test monitoring of the wells in the floodplain ISPT demonstrated that hexavalent chromium continued to be reduced in the contaminated groundwater test areas. All post-test monitoring was completed in June 2014.

Top

Groundwater Remedy Selection

Before a final remedy was selected, DTSC evaluated the potential environmental impacts of the remedial alternatives and the proposed remedy in a draft Environmental Impact Report (EIR) pursuant to the California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA). In addition to the draft EIR, DTSC also prepared a draft Statement of Basis A document which describes the basis for DTSC's proposed remedy and cleanup standards.that concurred with PG&E’s recommended alternative as the preferred remedy and explained the rationale for the selection. Based on the feedback received, DTSC adopted the proposed remedy and certified a Final EIR, and its mitigation measures, on January 31, 2011.

DOI underwent a parallel process for groundwater remedy selection. DOI prepared a Proposed Plan that identified the preferred alternative selected by DOI and explained the rationale for the selection. DOI finalized the Groundwater Record of Decision in December 2010.



Based on the evaluations conducted in the CMS/FS report, the potential impacts assessment of the EIR, and input from stakeholders, DTSC and DOI concurred with PG&E on the use of in situ treatment with fresh water flushing as the final remedy The final cleanup action proposed for managing contaminants at a project site.for the groundwater contamination associated with SWMU 1/AOC 1 and AOC 10.

In May 2015, DTSC determined that the preparation of a Subsequent EIR (SEIR) is required to evaluate potential environmental impacts resulting from design details of the selected groundwater remedy (In situ TreatmentTreatment of contamination in place. with Freshwater FlushingMoving of fresh water through the well system to push the plume through an In-Situ Reduction Zone located along National Trails Highway.) that were added or modified since the approval of the conceptual Groundwater Remediation Project in the 2011 Final Groundwater Remedy EIR and the 2013 Addendum to the EIR. DTSC issued a Notice of Preparation announcing this decision. The public comment period began on May 5 and ended on June 4, 2015. In addition, DTSC held public meetings on May 19 and 20, 2015, where the local agencies, members of the public, and Native American Tribes learned more about the Project and provided comments to help scope the environmental issues to be addressed in the Draft Subsequent EIR for the groundwater remedy. All comments received will be considered in the preparation of the Draft SEIR. DTSC anticipates that the Draft SEIR will be available early 2017.

Top

Corrective Measure/Remedial Action Implementation

PG&E prepared a Work Plan (the Groundwater Corrective Measures Implementation/Remedial Design [CMI/RD] Work Plan for SWMU 1/AOC 1 and AOC 10) with design schedules to implement the remedy. Based on the format and schedule outlined in the Work Plan, PG&E submitted the Basis of Design/Preliminary (30%) Design on November 18, 2011. On April 5, 2013, PG&E submitted the Basis of Design Report/Intermediate (60%) Design to DOI and DTSC. The Intermediate (60%) Design Report included comments received on the 30% design and presented a design that has a higher (60%) level of detail.

The final remedy, as proposed, will require a supply of freshwater. On January 28, 2013, PG&E submitted a Final Implementation Plan for Evaluation of Alternative Freshwater Sources in the Topock Remediation Project Area, which incorporated comments from regulatory agencies, Tribal Nations, and stakeholders. On September 4, 2013, DTSC and DOI approved the Final Implementation Plan, and field work began on October 2, 2013. A Summary of Findings associated with the Evaluation of Alternative Freshwater Sources in the Topock Remediation Project Area was completed mid-July 2014. An addendum to the above-mentioned report was included as an appendix in the Pre-Final 90% design.

The 90% Design was submitted September 8, 2014 which provided further details on the construction details of the remedy. Comments received on the 90% design was reviewed and considered.  The responses to the comments are attached to the final (100%) design.  The Final Design was submitted on November 18, 2015 for agencies’ approval pending completion of the Subsequent EIR. 

 Top

Coordination with Tribal Nations and Stakeholders

DTSC and DOI are coordinating the investigation and cleanup of the Site with multiple state and federal agencies, Tribal Nations, and stakeholders regularly as part of the Consultative Workgroup (CWG)A group consisting of stakeholders and multiple state and federal agencies that have an interest in the cleanup of a contaminated site, and meet regularly to discuss actions and make decisions., the Technical Workgroup (TWG)A focused stakeholder subgroup of the Consultative Work Group (CWG) where various stakeholders and their consultants discuss technical project related issues in greater detail which are then reported back to the CWG., the Clearinghouse Task Force (CTF)A group formed to develop and implement processes and tools to improve communications and enhance Topock stakeholder understanding of project technical and regulatory information., and the Topock Leadership Partnership (TLP)Forum that enables senior officials to provide input to the regulatory agencies on the direction of actions necessary to complete the Topock project..

The CWG, established by DTSC in March 2000, consists of agencies, Tribal Nations, and other entities that have an interest in protecting the Colorado River and the surrounding environment. The goal of the CWG is to allow timely input on proposed activities and decisions to be made. In addition to the CWG, DTSC conducts outreach to the public, governmental representatives (including federal, state, county, and city elected officials and staff), and leaders and staff of Tribal Nations.

DTSC established the TWG as a subgroup of the CWG. The TWG meets to deliberate on specific technical issues of the Project in greater detail and then report back to the CWG with the results. All CWG members are invited to send staff to participate in the TWG. Technical areas of discussion include geochemistry, hydrogeology, statistics for investigation, modeling and engineering design, human health and ecological risk assessments, remediation alternatives, and remedial design for the Project. The TWG meets monthly to quarterly depending on Project needs.

The TLP was created as a result of an understanding that a forum was needed to enable senior officials of Tribes and stakeholder groups to provide input to DTSC and DOI on the direction of actions necessary to complete the Project. The purpose of the TLP is to exchange information, views, and opinions on various actions proposed by DTSC and DOI to ensure timely development, selection, and implementation of the groundwater and soil remedy for the Site. The intent is not government-to-government consultation with Tribes, but to provide a senior-level perspective of each participant’s interest, and gain understanding of differing points of view that could be considered before critical decisions are made by the agencies. The TLP has met several times since 2008, prior to critical Project decisions.

A subgroup of the TLP is the CTF. The CTF was formed to develop tools and implement ideas to improve communications and enhance stakeholder understanding of the technical and regulatory processes of the Project. The goal is to foster timely and effective project management, and early collaboration with Tribal Nations and stakeholders, and to inform state and federal agencies on issues and concerns prior to decision making on the Project.

Top