1. Department of Toxic Substances Control (DTSC) Draft Feasibility Study/Remedial Action Plan Draft Feasibility Study/Remedial Action Plan Schlage Lock and Southern Pacific Brisbane – OU1 September 2009

2. Welcome Wayne Hagen DTSC Public Participation Specialist

3. Agenda  Introduction – Wayne Hagen, DTSC Public Participation Specialist  DTSC Cleanup Process and Site Background – Karen Toth, DTSC Unit Chief  Proposed Cleanup Plan – Virginia Lasky, DTSC Project Manager – Virginia Lasky, DTSC Project Manager

4. Schlage Lock Public Comment Period September 10, 2009 to October 13, 2009

5. Public Comment Period Draft Remedial Action Plan Fact Sheet – mailed September 10, 2009 Public Notice – September 10, 2009 –San Francisco Examiner –Sing Tao (Chinese) –El Bohemio (Spanish)

6. Where Can I Find The RAP? Information Repositories –San Francisco Library, Visitacion Valley Branch –Visitacion Valley Community Center –Brisbane Public Library –DTSC File Room, Berkeley EnviroStor

7. EnviroStor Go to www.dtsc.ca.gov www.dtsc.ca.gov Click on EnviroStor in left hand menu. Type “San Francisco” in the “City” Field. Click “Get Report” at the bottom. Click on Schlage Lock on the 2 nd page. Click on “Community Involvement” tab. Fact Sheet and entire Draft RAP.

8. Community Briefings SF Redevelopment CAC – September 8, 2009 Visitacion Valley Planning Alliance – September 12, 2009 Brisbane Baylands CAG – September 15, 2009 Others? For informational purposes only

9. Public Meeting Fill out Card: Name, Address, Comment Fill out Card: Name, Address, Comment Cards will be collected When called please go to the microphone and make your comment. Court reporter is recording the proceedings. Response to comments document will be sent to all who comment.

10. Public Comments Can be Mailed or e-mailed Mailed comments postmarked October 13 Emails must be received by 5 PM October 13 Virginia Lasky, Project Manager DTSC DTSC 700 Heinz Avenue, 700 Heinz Avenue, Berkeley, CA 94710 VLasky@dtsc.ca.gov (510) 540-3829

11. Cleanup Process and Site Background Karen Toth DTSC Unit Chief

12. SITE INVESTIGATION AND CLEANUP PROCESS Preliminary Endangerment Assessment Community Profile Public Participation Plan Site Discovery Early Cleanup Measures Fact Sheet & Public Meeting Remedial Investigation & Feasibility Study Risk Assessment Draft Remedial Action Plan (RAP) Proposed CEQA Document Fact Sheet & Public Meeting Final RAP Final CEQA Document Remedial Design ImplementationCertification Operation & Maintenance

13. Nine Federal Criteria Threshold Criteria 1.Protect human health and the environment 2.Comply with other federal and state laws: Applicable or Relevant and Appropriate Requirements (ARARs) Balancing Criteria 3.Long-term effectiveness and permanence 4.Reduction of waste toxicity, mobility, or volume 5.Short-term effectiveness 6.Implementability 7.Cost Modifying Criteria 8.State acceptance 9.Community acceptance

15. Schlage OU and UPC-SF OU

16. Site History (Schlage Lock)  Schlage Lock manufactured door hardware and lock parts.  Operation started in 1926.  Ceased operation in 1999.  Universal Paragon Corporation became the owner in May 2008  Currently all buildings have been demolished.

17. Schlage Lock Background  Investigations began in 1982  Metals and volatile organic compounds (VOCs) found in soil and groundwater  VOC Contaminated Soil Removal in Plant 3 in 1996  Soil Vapor Extraction and Treatment System installed at Plant 3 in 1999  Soil Vapor Extraction and Treatment System shut down and decommissioned in 2008

18. Site History (UPC – OU1)  Property acquired in 1896 by the Southern Pacific Transportation Company (SPTC)  From 1914 to 1960, used for railcar rehabilitation, maintenance, material transfer operations  Tuntex (now UPC) acquired property in 1990  Current used is for storage of semi- truck trailers and landscape maintenance

19. UPC OU1 Background  Environmental investigation since 1981.  Metals and Volatile Organic Compounds (VOCs) in soil and groundwater.  Groundwater Extraction and Treatment System installed in 1994  Soil Removal in the Oil/Water Separator area in 1994  Groundwater Extraction and Treatment System shut down in 2008

20. Contaminants Schlage OU:  Groundwater: volatile organic compounds, primarily, PCE and TCE  Soil: volatile organic compounds, primarily, PCE and TCE UPC OU1:  Soil: metals, primarily, arsenic, lead and cadmium

21. Maximum Concentrations of VOCs in Soil Maximum Concentrations of VOCs in Soil Contaminants Max. Conc. (ppm) * Trichloroethylene62 Perchloroethylene12 *ppm - parts per million

23. Maximum Concentrations of Metals in Soil Maximum Concentrations of Metals in Soil Contaminants Max. Conc. (ppm) * Arsenic240 Lead810 *ppm - parts per million

25. Maximum Concentrations of VOCs in Groundwater Maximum Concentrations of VOCs in Groundwater Contaminants Max. Conc. (ppb) * Maximum Contaminant Level (MCL) (ppb) Trichloroethene (TCE) 230,0005 Tetrachloroethene9,5005 Cis-1,2- dichloroethene 2,5006 Vinyl chloride 1,2000.5 ppb- parts per billion

27. Proposed Cleanup Plan Virginia Lasky DTSC Project Manager

28. Draft FS/RAP Cleanup Objectives  Protection of Human Health and the Environment  Cleanup of the Site consistent with the land use

30. Cleanup Level of VOCs in Soil Gas Cleanup Level of VOCs in Soil Gas Contaminants Cleanup level (soil gas) ppm* Trichloroethylene0.015 Perchloroethylene0.005 *ppm - parts per million

31. Cleanup Level of VOCs in Groundwater Cleanup Level of VOCs in Groundwater Contaminants Current Max. Conc. (ppb) * Maximum Contaminant Level (MCL) (ppb) Trichloroethene230,0005 Tetrachloroethene9,5005 ppb- parts per billion

32. Cleanup Level of Metals in Soil Cleanup Level of Metals in Soil Contaminants Current Max. Conc. (ppm) * CleanupLevel ppm * Arsenic240 19.1 19.1 Lead810599 *ppm - parts per million

33. Alternatives Considered Four alternatives were considered to address soil and groundwater:  Alternative 1: No New Action  Alternative 2: Land Use Controls and Monitored Natural Attenuation Natural Attenuation  Alternative 3: Excavation and Onsite Treatment, Relocation and Capping for Soils/ In-situ Groundwater Treatment In-situ Groundwater Treatment  Alternative 4: Excavation and Offsite Disposal For Soils/In-Situ Groundwater Treatment Soils/In-Situ Groundwater Treatment and Monitoring and Monitoring

34. Recommended Alternative  DTSC recommends Alternative 3: Excavation and onsite treatment, relocation and capping for soils/ in-situ groundwater treatment Excavation and onsite treatment, relocation and capping for soils/ in-situ groundwater treatment

36. VOCs in Soil  About 15,000 cubic yards of soil with VOCs will be treated  Up to 6,000 cubic yards of contaminated soil will be disposed offsite to a permitted facility  Additional soil may be disposed offsite.

37. Confirmation Sampling  Soil gas sampling will be conducted to confirm that cleanup goal is met.

39. Metal Impacted Soil  About 22,000 cubic yards of soil will be excavated and relocated  Metal concentrations above the state’s definition of hazardous waste will be disposed offsite to a permitted facility  If there is no available fill capacity onsite, offsite disposal to a permitted facility is an option

40. Placement of Metal Impacted Soil  Under open space with a three foot cap of clean soil  Under hardscape (sidewalks, parking podium and buildings) and roadways  Under utility corridors with a minimum of one foot of clean soil under utility lines

41. Confirmation Sampling  Soils to be used as cap will be sampled to confirm soil is clean.

43. Groundwater Remediation  Injection of sodium lactate into contaminated groundwater  About 300 to 400 injection points  Initially perform two injections, once every 4 to 6 months and may be more depending upon observations

45. Post Cleanup Activities  Operation and Maintenance - maintenance of the groundwater - maintenance of the groundwater monitoring system monitoring system - inspection and maintenance of the cap - inspection and maintenance of the cap  Groundwater Monitoring Program  Land Use Controls - limit land use - limit land use - non-disturbance of cap - non-disturbance of cap - requirement of a soil management plan - requirement of a soil management plan

46. CEQA  A Draft Addendum to the Final Environmental Impact Report (EIR) has been prepared.  The Draft Addendum addresses differences in the remediation description between the Final EIR and the draft RAP.  DTSC has determined that these differences will not create any new significant impacts.

47. What happens next?  Comment Period for Draft FS/RAP ends 10/13/09  DTSC considers all comments received and drafts a Response to Comments document  DTSC approves final FS/RAP  Remedial Design/Implementation Plan will be submitted to DTSC for review and approval.  Work will be conducted according to the approved plan.  A work notice would be issued prior to the start of remediation work

48. Thank you  We appreciate your attendance at this briefing.  Additional questions may be referred to: Virginia LaskyWayne Hagen Project ManagerPublic Participation Specialist 700 Heinz Avenue700 Heinz Avenue Berkeley, California 94710Berkeley, California 95826 (510) 540-3829 Office phone: (510) 540-3911 vlasky@dtsc.ca.govToll-free Number:(866) 495- 5651 WHagen@dtsc.ca.gov