FAQs
Each month (4th Thursday) the Community Advisory Committee (CAC) holds an open forum Community meeting at the Hinkley Elementary School. A part of the agenda is devoted to taking questions from the audience, and either immediately providing responses, or researching the issue and responding at the following meeting.
This section of the website displays questions and answers since January 2013.
Community Questions from April 24, 2014 CAC Meeting
Whole House Replacement Water (WHRW) Program
How will the final drinking water standard for chromium 6 affect the WHRW program?
With the final drinking water standard for chromium 6 in effect July 1, PG&E will assess the existing WHRW and bottled water programs using all available information to determine the future of the current programs. There are no immediate changes to the programs planned at this time. We will work with the Water Board and program participants to plan for any anticipated changes to the programs. Any eventual changes to these programs will be communicated with adequate notice to the community and program participants.
What is the status of the SEP project?
The Supplemental Environmental Project (SEP) is part of an agreement reached in 2012 between the Lahontan Water Board and PG&E to pay for a new permanent water system to serve the school. The project includes installation of a new pipeline from the Mojave Riverto the school.
Progress continues on the project including ongoing pipeline construction, trenching and backfilling activities on the 35000 block of Dixie Road and northeast area of the Compressor Station. The system is anticipated to be fully operational by the end of the year.
Supplemental Environmental Project (SEP)
Community Questions from March 27, 2014 CAC Meeting
Whole House Replacement Water (WHRW) Program
How will the final drinking water standard for chromium 6 affect the property purchase program?
With the issuance of a final drinking water standard, PG&E will assess the existing programs using all available information to determine whether property purchase as a part of the WHRW program is needed any longer.
PG&E is available to meet and discuss property purchase with eligible property owners at the owners’ request.
Why was the standard for bottled water changed from .06 ppb to 1.2 ppb for chromium 6?
As part of PG&EJs bottled water program, this bottled water is routinely tested for chromium 6. The amended Water Board Order recognizes that even using the latest filtration and treatment technology, periodically low levels of chromium 6 (less than 1.2 ppb) are found in the bottled water produced by these nationally recognized bottled water providers and supplied to consumers throughout the country.
PG&E purchases bottled water from nationally recognized commercial bottled water providers. This bottled water is produced using the latest bottled water filtration and treatment technology and meets all state and federal drinking water standards. The water provided by the vendors is the same water as any that might be purchased in a store or provided to any other community serviced by these providers.
Bottled Water
Community Questions from February 27, 2014 CAC Meeting
Whole House Replacement Water (WHRW) Program
How will the final drinking water standard for chromium 6 affect the WHRW program?
With the issuance of a final drinking water standard, PG&E will assess the existing program using all available information to determine whether the treatment systems are needed any longer. If the adopted drinking water standard for chromium 6 is such that water treatment is no longer required on your property, PG&E will pay all costs associated with the removal of the treatment system. Alternatively, at the property owner’s request, treatment systems may be retained and maintained by the property owner.
PG&E is available to meet and discuss these options with eligible property owners. Personalized solutions such as resident’s choosing to retain the reverse osmosis units, while having PG&E remove the ion-exchange units at the conclusion of the program, will be available.
Why was the standard for bottled water changed from .06 ppb to 1.2 ppb for chromium 6?
PG&E purchases bottled water from nationally recognized commercial bottled water providers. This bottled water is produced using the latest bottled water filtration and treatment technology and meets all state and federal drinking water standards. The water provided by the vendors is the same water as any that might be purchased in a store or provided to any other community serviced by these providers.
As part of PG&E’s bottled water program, this bottled water is routinely tested for chromium 6. The amended Water Board Order recognizes that even using the latest filtration and treatment technology, periodically low levels of chromium 6 (less than 1.2 ppb) are found in the bottled water produced by these nationally recognized bottled water providers and supplied to consumers throughout the country.
The standard of 1.2 ppb imposed by the Water Board was based on average naturally occurring chromium 6 levels in area wells based on historic data.
Does PG&E test for uranium in area groundwater?
Yes. Testing for uranium in area groundwater will occur to a limited extent in the updated background study and in some area wells as a part of baseline sampling efforts outlined in the Environmental Impact Report to make sure there are no significant environmental impacts as a result of future remediation efforts.
Also, as part of the WHRW program, PG&E tests for substances other than chromium 6, including manganese, arsenic and uranium. We do this to make sure that the systems that we are installing will meet California drinking water standards.
It is important for residents to know that there are a number of possible substances in Hinkley groundwater such as arsenic, manganese and uranium. These constituents may occur naturally or as a result of agricultural or industrial operations unrelated to PG&E. PG&E is not responsible for constituents in well water that are not a result of PG&E operations.
Bottled Water
Investigation
Community Questions from January 23, 2014 CAC Meeting
Whole House Replacement Water (WHRW) Program
Will PG&E consider a community water system?
PG&E reviewed the feasibility of a community water system with external agencies and determined that it is not feasible for the small number of homes that would be served.
Will PG&E’s remediation efforts draw down the water table?
Draw down of area wells is a potential effect of PG&E’s future remediation efforts. These impacts have been considered in the approved Environmental Impact Report (EIR) for the project. PG&E is currently working with the Water Board on a monitoring plan that will work to localize and mitigate any of these potential impacts for area residents.
How many pivots does PG&E currently use for agricultural treatment? How many additional pivots is PG&E seeking to utilize?
5 pivots, irrigating 162 acres, are currently in use in PG&E’s agricultural treatment efforts. Future plans include upgrading and expansion of the existing pivots and the additional pivots in the coming years.
Remediation
Respuestas a las preguntas hechas durante la reunión del CAC del 23 de enero de 2014
Programa de Reemplazo de Agua para Toda la Casa (WHRW)
¿Considerará PG&E un sistema de agua comunitario?
PG&E revisó la factibilidad de un sistema de agua comunitario con agencias externas y determinó que no es factible para servir a un pequeño numero de casas.
¿Agotará el trabajo de remediación de PG&E la capa freática?
El agotamiento de los pozos en el área es una posible consecuencia de los futuros esfuerzos de remediación de PG&E. Se ha tenido en cuenta este impacto en el Informe de Impacto Ambiental (EIR) aprobado para este proyecto. PG&E está trabajando actualmente con la Agencia del Agua en un plan de monitorización que trabajará para localizar y mitigar cualquier impacto posible para los residentes del área.
Actualmente, ¿cuantos pivotes usa PG&E para los tratamientos agricolas? ¿Cuántos pivotes adicionales está tratando de utilizar PG&E?
En el trabajo de tratamiento agrícola de PG&E se están usando actualmente cinco (5) pivotes que riegan 162 acres. Los planes futuros incluyen la modernización y la ampliación de los pivotes existentes y pivotes adicionales en los próximos años.
La Remediación
Community Questions from November 21, 2013 CAC Meeting
Whole House Replacement Water (WHRW) Program
Will remediation of the plume continue even if a large number of people choose to sell their properties to PG&E?
Yes. We are committed to cleaning up the environment, protecting public health and safety, and working with the community to restore the land and water quality in Hinkley. The remediation program will continue until PG&E’s clean up goals are achieved.
What does PG&E plan to do with all of the property they purchase? Will these properties ever be available for purchase?
Each piece of property is evaluated for potential re-use in PG&E’s remediation efforts. As for future uses or eventual sale of these properties, PG&E looks forward to the opportunity to work with members of the community and other key stakeholders to plan for the future of the Hinkley community once we have more certainty around major program milestones.
The potential for select properties or homes to be resold by PG&E is a possibility in the coming years./p>
Does every home purchased by PG&E get demolished?
No. Each piece of property is evaluated for potential re-use in PG&E’s remediation efforts. Many homes have been retained and are used by PG&E and our contractors. Other properties are cleared of structures and restored as desert habitat.
As for future uses of these properties, PG&E’s planning will be informed by some of the major technical and community milestones (background study, Hwy 58 relocation) pending over the next few years. PG&E looks forward to the opportunity to work with members of the community and other key stakeholders to plan for the future of the Hinkley community once we have more certainty around these major milestones.
What is the purpose of the updated background study?
Background levels of a substance are those found naturally in the environment. Established background levels allow regulators to determine where chemicals are present naturally and where they are present due to human activities. In 2008, the Lahontan Regional Water Quality Control Board (Lahontan Water Board) established background chromium 6 concentrations in the Hinkley area are up to 3.1parts per billion (ppb)./p>
In February 2012, PG&E submitted a draft work plan for evaluation of background chromium in Hinkley Valley groundwater to the Lahontan Water Board which seeks to propose a new background study to address criticism of the old study and incorporate our improved understanding of area groundwater, geochemistry and geology based on data collected since the last background study was completed.
Over the last 18 months, PG&E has been working closely with the Lahontan Water Board, United States Geological Survey (USGS), the Community Advisory Committee (CAC) and their Independent Review Panel Manager to update the study for a more accurate and defensible background number. The eventual background number to be established by this additional data collection and analysis could be higher or lower than the current established level of 3.1ppb.
Does the updated background study consider other constituents such as arsenic and manganese?
Yes. Understanding overall site geochemistry in the Hinkley Valley is a key component of the background study and this includes understanding other naturally occurring constituents such as arsenic and manganese.
Natural occurrences of some constituents like arsenic above the drinking water standard are typical throughout much of the Western United States.
How are by-products of in-situ treatment being addressed?
On November 20, PG&E submitted a comprehensive technical report summarizing our findings which are conclusive that manganese and arsenic created as a result of the in- situ process are not impacting resident’s domestic wells. In-situ remediation is a safe, responsible and appropriate remedy for the Hinkley groundwater program and a key component for the program’s future success.
PG&E has been listening to the concerns expressed by community members regarding remediation by-products and the presence of substances such as manganese and arsenic in area wells. Over the last 12 months, PG&E has responded to these concerns and had an active dialog on the topic with residents, the Community Advisory Committee (CAC), the CAC’s Independent Review Panel Manager and the Lahontan Water Board.
Prior to expansion of In-situ remediation, will there be any baseline measurements to ensure area domestic wells are not impacted by remediation efforts?
Yes. Baseline measurements and monitoring of area wells is one of the mitigations discussed in the Environmental Impact Report to make sure remediation is not negatively impacting nearby domestic wells.
Can chromium 3 turn back into chromium 6 after treatment?
The conversion of chromium 3 to chromium 6 is a naturally occurring process that accounts for background chromium 6 levels in groundwater. This same natural process may convert a small portion of the chromium 3 formed from in-situ treatment back to chromium 6, resulting in concentrations of chromium 6 comparable to background concentrations.
This natural process was considered in choosing the remediation alternatives in use in Hinkley and will not impact their ultimate effectiveness.
Updated Background Study
Remediation
Community Questions from October 24, 2013 CAC Meeting
What is the purpose of the updated background study?
Background levels of a substance are those found naturally in the environment. Established background levels allow regulators to determine where chemicals are present naturally and where they are present due to human activities. In 2008, the Lahontan Regional Water Quality Control Board (Lahontan Water Board) established background chromium 6 concentrations in the Hinkley area are up to 3.1 parts per billion (ppb).
In February 2012, PG&E submitted a draft work plan for evaluation of background chromium in Hinkley Valley groundwater to the Lahontan Water Board which seeks to propose a new background study to address criticism of the old study and incorporate our improved understanding of area groundwater, geochemistry and geology based on data collected since the last background study was completed.
Over the last 18 months, PG&E has been working closely with the Lahontan Water Board, United States Geological Survey (USGS), the Community Advisory Committee (CAC) and their Independent Review Panel Manager to update the study for a more accurate and defensible background number. The eventual background number to be established by this additional data collection and analysis could be higher or lower than the current established level of 3.1ppb.
What is the significance of tritium in the groundwater?
As a result of nuclear weapons testing throughout the late 1950s and early 1960s, tritium occurs all over the world and can be used by the USGS and other scientists in the analysis of groundwater to determine whether groundwater surfaced above ground after this period.
This analysis, along with better understanding of groundwater flow, geochemistry and geology may provide insight into whether chromium 6 present in parts of the Hinkley Valley is a result of PG&E’s historic operations or is occurring naturally.
Does the updated background study consider other constituents such as arsenic and manganese?
Understanding overall site geochemistry in the Hinkley Valley is a key component of the background study and this includes understanding other naturally occurring constituents such as arsenic and manganese.
Natural occurrences of some constituents like arsenic above the drinking water standard are typical throughout much of the Western United States.
How are by-products of in-situ treatment being addressed?
PG&E has been listening to the concerns expressed by community members regarding remediation by-products and the presence of substances such as manganese and arsenic in area wells. Over the last 12 months, PG&E has responded to these concerns and had an active dialog on the topic with residents, the Community Advisory Committee (CAC), the CAC’s Independent Review Panel Manager and the Lahontan Water Board.
On November 20, PG&E submitted a comprehensive technical report summarizing our findings which are conclusive that manganese and arsenic created as a result of the in- situ process are not impacting resident’s domestic wells. In-situ remediation is a safe, responsible and appropriate remedy for the Hinkley groundwater program and a key component for the program’s future success.
Can chromium 3 turn back into chromium 6 after treatment?
The conversion of chromium 3 to chromium 6 is a naturally occurring process that accounts for background chromium 6 levels in groundwater. This same natural process may convert a small portion of the chromium 3 formed from in-situ treatment back to chromium 6, resulting in concentrations of chromium 6 comparable to background concentrations.
This natural process was considered in choosing the remediation alternatives in use in Hinkley and will not impact their ultimate effectiveness.
Is the digging and construction work occurring along Santa Fe Avenue part of the pipeline project to the school?
Yes. The construction work along Santa Fe Avenue is part of the connection from the freshwater injection pipeline to the Hinkley School and will be complete by the end of 2013; the connection of the new supply wells and associated piping will be completed in the second half of 2014, and handover of the system to the School District is anticipated to be completed later in the year.
Based on the current construction schedule, PG&E anticipates completing the SEP project by late 2014.
Respuestas a las preguntas hechas durante la reunion del CAC del 24 de octubre de 2013
¿Cuál es el propósito de la actualización del estudio de fondo?
Los niveles naturales de una substancia son los que se encuentran de forma natural en el medio ambiente. Los niveles naturales establecidos permiten que los reguladores puedan determinar donde se encuentran las sustancias químicas de forma natural y dónde están presentes debido a las actividades humanas. En el 2008, La Agencia Reguladora Regional de Control de Calidad del Agua de Lahontan (La Agencia del Agua de Lahontan) estableció un nivel de fonda para las concentraciones de cromo 6 en el área de Hinkley que son de hasta 3.1 partes por cada mil millones (ppb).
En febrero de 2012, PG&E entrego el borrador de un plan de trabajo para evaluar el nivel de fondo de cromo en las aguas subterráneas del valle de Hinkley a La Agencia del Agua de Lahontan, que trata de proponer un nuevo estudio de niveles de fondo para abordar las críticas sobre el viejo estudio e incorporar nuestro entendimiento mejorado de las aguas subterráneas en el área, la geoquímica y la geología basándose en datos recopilados desde que se hizo el último estudio de fondo.
Durante los últimos 18 meses, PG&E ha estado colaborando estrechamente con La Agencia del Agua de Lahontan, el Servicio Geológico de Estados Unidos (USGS), el Comité Consejero Comunitario (CAC) y su gerente del panel de expertos independientes para actualizar el estudio a un numero de fondo más preciso y defendible. El número de fondo final que se establecerá por la recopilación y análisis de datos adicionales puede ser más alto o más bajo que el nivel actual de 3.1 ppb establecido.
¿Cuál es la importancia de tritio en las aguas subterráneas?
A consecuencia de las pruebas de armas nucleares a finales de la década de 1950 y a principios de la de 1960, el tritio se encuentra por todo el mundo y puede ser usado por el USGS y otros científicos en el análisis de las aguas subterráneas para determinar si las aguas subterráneas brotaron a la superficie después de este periodo de tiempo.
Este análisis, junto con un mejor entendimiento del flujo de las aguas subterráneas, la geoquímica y la geología puede brindar una nueva percepción de si el cromo 6 existente en partes del valle de Hinkley fue a consecuencia de las operaciones historicas de PG&E o se encuentra alii de forma natural.
¿Tiene en cuenta el estudio de fonda actualizado otros elementos tales como el arsénico y el manganeso?
Entender la geoquímica en general del valle de Hinkley es un componente clave del estudio de fonda y esto incluye el entendimiento de otros elementos que existen de forma natural tales como el arsénico y el manganeso.
La existencia natural de algunos elementos tal como el arsénico por encima del nivel estándar de agua potable es típica en la mayor parte de los Estados Unidos occidental.
¿Como se está abordando el tema de los subproductos del tratamiento in situ?
PG&E ha estado escuchando las inquietudes de los miembros de la comunidad con respecto a los subproductos de la remediación y la presencia de substancias tales como el manganeso y el arsénico en pozos del área. Durante los últimos 12 meses, PG&E ha respondido a estas inquietudes y ha entablado un dialogo activo sobre el tema con los residentes, el Comité Consejero Comunitario (CAC), el gerente del panel de expertos independientes del CAC y La Agencia del Agua de Lahontan.
El 20 de noviembre, PG&E entrego un informe técnico exhaustivo resumiendo nuestros resultados que son concluyentes que el manganeso y el arsénico creados como resultado del proceso in situ no están impactando los pozos domésticos de los residentes. La remediación in situ es un remedio seguro, responsable y apropiado para el programa de aguas subterráneas de Hinkley y es un componente clave para el éxito futuro del programa.
¿Se puede convertir el cromo 3 en cromo 6 después de habérsele dado tratamiento?
La conversión de cromo 3 a cromo 6 es un proceso que ocurre de forma natural y que es la causa de los niveles de cromo 6 de fondo en las aguas subterráneas. El mismo proceso natural puede convertir una pequeña porción del cromo 3 formada por el tratamiento in situ de nuevo a cromo 6, resultando en las concentraciones de cromo 6 comparables a las concentraciones de fondo.
Este proceso natural se tuvo en cuenta al elegir remedios alternativos para el uso en Hinkley y no afectara su eficacia máxima.
¿Es el trabajo de excavación y construcción que se está llevando a cabo a 10 largo de la avenida Santa Fe parte del proyecto de tuberías para la escuela?
Sí, el trabajo de construcción a 10 largo de la avenida Santa Fe es parte de la conexión de las tuberías de inyección de agua fresca a la escuela Hinkley y se terminara a finales del 2013; la conexión de los nuevos pozos de suministro y las tuberías asociadas se terminaran durante la segunda mitad del 2014, y se espera entregar el sistema al distrito escolar a finales de ese año.
Según el calendario actual de construcción, PG&E espera terminar el proyecto de SEP a finales de 2014.
Community Questions from September 26, 2013 CAC Meeting
What is the deadline to submit comments on the Draft Chromium 6 MCL?
The California Department of Public Health announced it has submitted a proposed drinking water standard for hexavalent chromium (chromium-6) to the Office of Administrative Law for public review and comment. The proposed standard, also called a Maximum Contaminant Level (MCL), is 10 parts per billion (10 ppb).
Any written comments pertaining to these regulations, regardless of the method of transmittal, must be received by the Office of Regulations by 5:00 p.m., October 11, 2013.
Written Comments may be submitted as follows:
- By email to: regulations@cdph.ca.gov. It is requested that email transmission of comments, particularly those with attachments, contain the regulation package identifier “DPH-11-005” in the subject line to facilitate timely identification and review the comment; or
- By fax transmission: (916) 440-5747; or
- By mail to: Office of Regulations, California Department of Public Health, MS 0507, P.O. Box 997377, Sacramento, CA 95899-7377; or
- Hand-delivered to: 1616 Capital Avenue, Sacramento, CA 95814.
What is the deadline to submit comments on PG&E’s Whole House Water Program Modification request?
Water Board staff are now soliciting comments on the proposals received by two individuals and PG&E, both of which would amend who was eligible for the Program. Comments are due by noon on October 21, 2013. Please submit comments to Patty Z. Kouyoumdjian, Executive Officer, by way of either email (patty.kouyoumdjian@waterboards.ca.gov) or mailed/hand delivered to the South Lake Tahoe office (2501 Lake Tahoe Boulevard, South Lake Tahoe, CA 96150). If you have any questions, please contact Richard Booth, Senior Engineering Geologist, at Rbooth@waterboards.ca.gov or (530) 542-5574.
Community Questions from July 25, 2013 CAC Meeting and August Workshops
What does it mean to “opt out” of the Whole House Replacement Water program?
PG&E’s Whole House Replacement Water (WHRW) program is a voluntary program for eligible residents who choose to participate. Some residents have chosen to “opt out” of the program by continuing to receive bottled water or simply choosing not to participate.
If I “opt out” now or choose to get the water treatment system can I sell my property to PG&E at a later date?
No. From the initiation of our program, eligible residents who choose to participate have been requested to make a timely choice between the Whole House Replacement Water program and the property purchase program. Property purchase may not always be an option available in the future.
Why can’t PG&E extend the WHRW program to all of the Hinkley zip code, and not just around the plume?
PG&E offered the WHRW program in early 2012 in response to the concerns expressed by Hinkley residents regarding their domestic well water. PG&E heard from residents that while the State of California is in the process of determining a safe drinking water standard specifically for chromium 6, the community continued to have questions about whether their well water supplies were safe. PG&E offered our programs to residents living within a mile of the groundwater plume; by extending our replacement water programs well beyond the plume boundary, it was intended to create a generous buffer to ease residents’ concerns. At this time, there is not scientific data to support the expansion of the program beyond the current extent.
Now that the Environmental Impact Report (EIR) has been approved, when will we see implementation of the final remedy?
The approval of the Final EIR allows PG&E to apply for other necessary permits, including permits from the California Department of Fish and Game and U.S. Fish and Wildlife, to expand existing treatment systems for a successful final remedy. We are hopeful that some measures such as more agricultural treatment can be implemented as soon as next year.
Why are the Water Board and PG&E doing a new background study? Are they trying to change the established background number of 3.1ppb to a higher number?
In February 2012, PG&E submitted a draft work plan for evaluation of background chromium in Hinkley Valley groundwater to the Lahontan Water Board which seeks to propose a new background study to address criticism of the old study and incorporate our improved understanding of area groundwater, geochemistry and geology based on data collected since the last background study was completed in.
Over the last 18 months, PG&E has been working closely with the Lahontan Water Board, United States Geological Survey (USGS), the Community Advisory Committee (CAC) and their Independent Review Panel Manager to update the study for a more accurate and defensible background number. The eventual background number to be established by this additional data collection and analysis could be higher or lower than the current established 3.lppb.
What is the role of the USGS, are they working for PG&E?
The United States Geological Survey (USGS) is working closely with the Lahontan Water Board, PG&E, the Community Advisory Committee (CAC) and their Independent Review Panel Manager to update the background study for a more accurate and defensible background number. The USGS is the premier, independent scientific organization dedicated to providing impartial information on the health of our ecosystems and environment. The USGS representative, Dr. John lzbicki, assisting in this work has studied chromium 6 in groundwater in the Mojave Desert for more than twenty years.
Consistent with common practice in engaging independent, third party experts, PG&E has provided funding for the Water Board to engage USGS to assist them in their review and input on the updated background study.
Are there plans to install any more monitoring wells to the west of the current plume delineation?
PG&E will continue to work with the Water Board and private property owners to install monitoring wells in areas where more data is needed to better understand plume conditions. Additionally, PG&E will continue to work collaboratively with the Water Board and USGS to review existing information that takes into account all relevant, site-specific data,including other critical information such as groundwater flow, elevation and chemistry.
What is going on with the pit located on PG&E property just southwest of the intersection of Community Boulevard and Hinkley Road?
In recent community meetings, Hinkley residents expressed concerns that unauthorized dumping was occurring on PG&E property into an open pit. Following up on these concerns, PG&E verified that various trash and debris were present in an open pit on undeveloped land owned by PG&E.
PG&E worked quickly to secure the area and plan a sensitive cleanup. Biological experts were consulted to ensure any cleanup activities were protective of local sensitive species such as the desert tortoise and Mojave ground squirrel. Excavation of the pit and removal of debris took place over several weeks in late June and early July. Trash and debris were removed from the pit as deep as 30 feet and included household and automotive waste such as the parts and pieces from two separate vehicles, paint cans, oil containers, tires, glass bottles, and miscellaneous metal and wood debris. Industrial waste was not observed as a part of excavation and removal activities. Groundwater was not encountered during excavation activities; groundwater is more than 80 feet deep in this area of the desert. As cleanup was underway, soil samples were taken and analyzed which documented low concentrations of diesel and motor oil consistent with the type of debris removed; chromium 6 was not detected in any of the soil samples. Debris and contaminated soil will be disposed of at appropriate landfill facilities.
Confirmation samples were collected from the bottom and sidewalls of the excavation and analyzed for multiple constituents. All analytical results were well below State and Federal residential risk screening concentrations. PG&E completed backfilling of the excavation area with clean fill and demobilized from the site on August 12, 2013.
What is PG&E doing to address arsenic in domestic wells?
Arsenic is a common element in desert environments and can occur naturally at low levels in groundwater. Natural occurrences of some constituents like arsenic above the drinking water standard are typical throughout much of the Western United States.
Results of groundwater monitoring reveal that arsenic resulting from remediation operations has not impacted water quality in domestic wells in Hinkley. PG&E is not responsible for constituents in well water that are not a result of PG&E operations.
How close is the plume to 40892 Harper Lake Rd.?
The plume is approximately 8 miles from that address.
What is being done about the byproducts produced from the ethanol injection?
PG&E submitted a status report in August stating that monitoring wells have been installed and sampled for byproduct chemicals, such as manganese. In addition, two tracer tests in groundwater were begun in July to track the path of groundwater flow from the IRZ areas. Initial results of the investigation will be reported by the end of November 2013.
What are the Chromium 6 values in Lucerne Valley?
According to the California Department of Public Health Drinking Water Program’s water quality database that reported Chromium 6 findings from 2000 to November 2012, the wells that were tested in Lucerne Valley had values of Chromium 6 from <1 ppb to 4.8 ppb. The complete database can be found at the following link: http://www.cdph.ca.gov/certlic/drinkingwater/Pages/Chromium6sampling.aspx.
Whole House Replacement Water Program
Final Remedy
Background Study
Investigation
Recent Desert Cleanup & Debris Removal
Other Issues
Community Questions from June 27, 2013 CAC Meeting
I want to eventually sell my property to PG&E, but until then, can I get the water treatment system. Can I do both?
No. From initiation of our program, residents have been requested to make a choice between the Whole House Replacement Water program and the property purchase program. Property purchase may not always be an option available in the future.
Is the plume contained? We hear in the news that it is moving, but here in Community Advisory Committee meetings that it isn’t.
PG&E measures the direction of groundwater flow every month in the areas south of Thompson Road. These measurements indicate that groundwater in these areas has been moving toward the center of the plume for several successive quarters. This demonstrates that the plume is contained in these areas.
Some new monitoring well data outside of these areas can show chromium 6 levels at or above 3.1 parts per billion. However, these pockets of chromium appear to be unrelated to PG&E’s plume. Continued work with the Lahontan Water Board (Water Board) and United States Geological Survey (USGS) will bring greater clarity to this issue by helping to better define what is naturally occurring chromium 6 in the Hinkley Valley from that which was a result of PG&E’s historic operations.
Is the plume moving towards Harper Lake?
Some new monitoring well data in the northern end of the Hinkley valley sometimes shows chromium 6 levels results at or above 3.1 parts per billion. However, these pockets of chromium appear to be unrelated to PG&E’s plume and do not demonstrate plume movement towards Harper Lake. Continued work with the Water Board and USGS will bring greater clarity to this issue by helping to better define what is naturally occurring chromium 6 in the Hinkley Valley from that which was discharged by PG&E’s historic operations.
How do we ensure the new background study is unbiased when it is funded by PG&E?
Consistent with common practice in engaging independent, third party experts PG&E has provided funding for the Water Board to engage USGS to assistthem in their review and input on the updated background study.
Why does it take so long to install a water treatment unit?
Installing the treatment units and ensuring optimal performance prior to turning over the unit to a property owner involves several different contractors and coordination with several agencies including the County building inspector, Southern California Edison, and the Lahontan Water Board.
What is PG&E doing about property value loss in Hinkley?
PG&E is committed to the long-term health and safety ofthe Hinkley community. It is our responsibility to clean up our historical impacts. We understand there are concerns about property values. In accordance with our commitments and in response to concerns from residents, last year we expanded our property purchase program to include all homes eligible for Whole House Replacement Water. This is a voluntary program which provides for water treatment or property purchase. Ultimately, it is the property owner’s decision whether or not to participate in the program.
Is PG&E buying the mineral rights when they purchase the properties? What do you plan to do with the mineral rights?
PG&E has no plans to use any mineral rights that it may acquire through property purchases in Hinkley. However, to the extent there are transferable water rights acquired through property purchases, PG&E does intend to use those water rights in connection with the chromium remediation. Few of the properties purchased by PG&E in Hinkley have transferable water rights, since typical residential water use falls within the Mojave Water Agency’s “Minimal Producer Program” which allows a domestic well owner to pump up to ten-acre feet per year for domestic purposes. Such minimal producer rights are non-transferable and are extinguished when a domestic well is decommissioned.
Community Questions from May 23, 2013 CAC Meeting
Are soil samples taken in the source area of the former ponds?
Following removal of the top few feet of soil in the former pond area in the early 1990’s, multiple rounds of soil samples have been taken in the area and have not shown elevated levels of chromium.
What are all of the chemicals PG&E are allowed to use as a part of in-situ remediation?
There are four broad types of chemicals approved for use in our permits and related correspondence:
- Reductants, which are used to help convert Chromium 6 to Chromium 3. We are currently using food-grade ethanol for this purpose, though, other substitutes are also approved , such asvegetable oil, whey and molasses.
- Tracers, which are used by scientists to ‘trace ‘ where the water which has been injected goes, such as bromide, fluorescein and eosine.
- Well cleaning agents, which are similar to the chemicals that any homeowner or water supplier could use (without a permit) to keep their well clean, such as citric acid, hydrochloric acid and sodium hydroxide.
- Nutrients, which could be used to promote growth of microbial community for treatment. We are not currently using nutrients in our in-situ treatment remediation.
Will remediation of the plume continue even if a large number of people choose to sell their properties to PG&E?
Yes. We are committed to cleaning up the environment, protecting public health and safety, and working with the community to restore the land and water quality in Hinkley. The remediation program will continue until clean up goals are achieved.
What does PG&E plan to do with all of the property they purchase? Will these properties ever be available for purchase?
Each piece of property is evaluated for potential re-use in PG&E’s remediation efforts. As for future uses or eventual sale ofthese properties, PG&E is committed to working with the Community Advisory Committee and other key stakeholders to plan for the future of the Hinkley community.
Can households continue to receive bottled water without participating in the Whole House Replacement Water Program?
Yes.
What happens to the treatment systems when there is a power failure?
Just as power is required for the operation of a well, power is re~uired to operate the treatment system. When power is returned, the system will restart. A dedicated 24-hour-a-day, 7 days a week hotline is set-up for Whole House Replacement Water participants for service questions or treatment system problems.
After a treatment unit is handed over to the resident, is the well water still tested?
Yes. Untreated well water within the program area is tested as a part of our well sampling program. Treated water is tested as a part of the Whole House Replacement Water monitoring program.
Does PG&E provide notice to residents when there is a change in the Whole House Water program area?
Yes. Any residents that are potentially newly eligible for the Whole House Replacement Water program are notified by mail and follow up phone outreach.
Does every home purchased by PG&Eget demolished?
No. Each piece of property is evaluated for potential re-use in PG&E’s remediation efforts. Many homes have been retained and are used by PG&E and our contractors. As for future uses of these properties, PG&E’s planning will be informed by some ofthe major technical and community milestones (background study, final EIR, Hwy 58 relocation) pending over the next year.
PG&E looks forward to the opportunity to work with members of the community and other key stakeholders to plan for the future ofthe Hinkley community once we have more certainty around these major milestones.
Are dust control measures in place on properties being demolished?
Yes, in addition, PG&E has heard dust concerns and is responding with extra trips with water trucks on large parcels that have been disturbed to develop a crust. For the smaller parcels, we are investigating a “tack coat” that we can apply to hold ground cover until a crust forms.
Community Questions from March 28, 2013 CAC Meeting and April 20, 2013 Open House
What are the procedures for removing a septic tank when a house is demolished?
All septic tank removal activities are permitted through the San Bernardino County Building & Safety Division. The removal process includes:
- All septic systems are located and unearthed on each property.
- Each system is rinsed and pumped clean by a licensed septic system contractor. Contents are transported by the licensed contractor to County-approved disposal facilities.
- The clean system is inspected by San Bernardino County Department of Building and Safety field inspector.
- Once inspection is completed, and further work approved, the tank and piping is removed, dismantled, and hauled off-site with other demolition debris to a local licensed landfill.
- After all site work is completed, San Bernardino County inspectors return for a final site inspection to verify all site work has been completed in accordance with their requirements and sign off on final permit.
After a house is demolished, how are the pipes discarded? Are the pipes taken to the dump?
All disposed materials are disposed of in compliance with San Bernardino County and disposal facility regulations. PG&E uses a 3’d party, independent consultant to complete a property survey for any suspected hazardous materials. These samples are analyzed and verified for cleanup activities prior to demolition and site cleanup activities. All materials (lead, asbestos, regulated building materials, household waste) are properly removed and collected on-site. All waste is properly packaged, profiled and transported off-site for disposal at approved landfills.
Once the waste has been removed, the 3’d party consultant conducts a final inspection to confirm that all waste has been removed, and then authorizes the contractor to begin demolition and cleanup activities.
What is done with trees that are left on properties purchased by PG&E? If the house is torn down, are the trees chopped down as well? Are there biological studies done before a tree is chopped down?
Prior to any site demolition activities, PG&E biologists perform a site survey, issue biological guidelines, and based on the biologist review, PG&E prepares a site-specific plan for all field work that can take place on the site. As part of that plan, the PG&E biological team determines exactly what vegetation is protected in place and how vegetation should be protected.
Has there been testing to see what the natural background levels are for Manganese?
Yes. Manganese is a common element in desert environments and can occur naturally at low levels in groundwater. United States Geological Survey (USGS) data shows past manganese detections in groundwater in the Hinkley area ranged from non-detect to 75 ppb. At PG&E’s IRZ areas, manganese was detected up to 210 ppb just prior to initiation of our in-situ remediation activities.
What is the tracer being used? Is it harmful? Is PG&E the only one to use it? Is it harmful to us if it is in our wells?
The tracer studies planned for summer of 2013 will use the non-toxic dye, fluorescein, as the tracer.
There is extensive technical literature demonstrating that tracer dyes, such as fluorescein, present no health or environmental problems at typical study concentrations. Fluorescein is widely used for tracer studies in both groundwater and surface water. For example, Oregon State University oceanography scientists and students have used the harmless fluorescein dye in the ocean to learn more about the movement of water in the inner shelf region of the Pacific Ocean off the Oregon Coast.
Is PG&E going to keep testing domestic wells for Chromium 6 and Manganese after a house has been demolished?
PG&E has proposed a process to the Lahontan Water Board regarding the testing of domestic wells on properties acquired by PG&E. That process calls for inactive domestic wells on property owned by PG&E to be removed from the sampling program if there is at least one planned or active monitoring well within 2,000 feet of the inactive domestic well, if sampling results collected since September 29, 2011 indicate that the well does not contain detectable hexavalent and total chromium concentrations of 2.0 ppb or greater, or if the well is otherwise approved for removal from the program by the Water Board.
How many WHRW units have been installed?
5 units have been completely installed and turned over to residents; more than 20 additional units are in the process of installation and will be turned over to residents in the next 90 days. Additional residents have requested to wait and see if other alternatives become available as a part of PG&E program modification proposal.
Who owns the treatment systems? Can I take the system with me when I move?
PG&E will own the system for the duration of the WHRW program. When the program ends, the property owner will have the opportunity to take over ownership and maintenance of the system or ask PG&E to remove the system.
Until the program ends and the property owner takes ownership of the treatment system, PG&Eowns the system and it cannot be moved without permission from PG&E.
What happens to the Reverse/Osmosis (R/O) Units I already have in my home?
Any existing (R/O) Units in the home would be replaced by a unit approved by our program and maintained by PG&E. Storage or re-use of the homeowner’s pre-existing units would be the responsibility of the homeowner.
Does the R/O treatment unit create a waste stream that goes into my septic system?
Chromium 6 is removed from well water from the Ion-Exchange system prior to treatment from the (R/O) unit. The (R/O) unit merely acts as a secondary polishing filter for other constituents not treated by the Ion-Exchange system (e.g. arsenic, manganese, nitrates). The process does not create any by-products or add any chemicals to the water. The (R/O) process uses at least 2 glasses of water for every glass of treated water produced. This additional glass of water runs through the sink drain and into your septic system like any other excess water from other faucets and appliances in your home.
Does the R/O unit remove other minerals and nutrients that may be good to drink?
The (R/O) units are certified by the California Department of Public Health (CDPH) to meet California drinking water standards for other constituents including arsenic, nitrates and uranium. This filtering process can remove other non-toxic minerals present in water.
Can I still use my water softener along with the treatment systems?
Using a water softener is a homeowner’s choice. The use of a water softener may increase the frequency of maintenance visits on the (R/O) units, but does not otherwise affect the systems.
What does PG&E plan to do with all of the property they purchase?
Each piece of property is evaluated for near term potential re-use in PG&E’s remediation efforts. As for future uses of these properties, PG&E’s planning will be informed by some of the major technical and community milestones (background study, final EIR, Hwy 58 relocation) pending over the next year.
PG&E looks forward to the opportunity to work with members of the community and other key stakeholders to plan for the future of the Hinkley community once we have more certainty around these major milestones.
Community Questions from February 28, 2013 CAC Meeting
ls PG&E going to keep testing domestic wells for test¡ng Chromium 6 and Manganese even after the house has been demolished?
PG&E has proposed a process to the Lahontan Water Board regarding the testing of domestic wells on properties acquired by PG&E. That process calls for inactive domestic wells on property owned by PG&E to be removed from the sampling program if there is at least one planned or active monitoring well within 2,000 feet of the inactive domestic well, if sampling results collected since September 29,2011- indicate that the well does not contain detectable hexavalent and total chromium concentrations of 2.0 ppb or greater, or if the well is otherwise approved for removal from the program by the Water Board.
lf the standard to discontinue testing a well is if it tests at 2.0 ppb for chromium 6 or below, how many quarters of testing at those levels is needed till the well is removed from the sampling program?
PG&E has proposed a process to the Lahontan Water Board regarding the testing of domestic wells on properties acquired by PG&E. That process calls for inactive domestic wells on property owned by PG&E to be removed from the sampling program if there is at least one planned or active monitoring well within 2,000 feet of the inactive domestic well, if sampling results collected since September 29,201L indicate that the well does not contain detectable hexavalent and total chromium concentrations of 2.0 ppb or greater, or if the well is otherwise approved for removal from the program by the Water Board.
After the purchase and subsequent demol¡tion of a residence, can PG&E continue to use a water truck for a period of time afterwards to keep the dust under control?
PG&E has heard this concern and is responding with extra trips with water trucks on large parcels that have been disturbed to develop a crust. For the smaller parcels, we are investigating a “tack coat” that we can apply to hold ground cover until a crust forms.
PG&E has requested the Water Board consider modifications to the Whole House Replacement Water (WHRW) program. What are the other alternatives to be considered?
The Water Board has not yet responded to PG&E’s request for a 90-day extension to revisit the WHRW feasibility study. Other water alternatives have not been fully vetted or selected at this time. Options we have previously looked at such as trucking in water to a holding tank may be revisited.
Will PG&E consider a community water system?
PG&E has reviewed the feasibility of a community water system with external agencies and have determined that it is not feasible for the small number of homes that would be served. With the high number of residents pursuing property purchase, this option will only become less feasible in the future.
ls a signed PG&E access agreement required to receive a WHRW filtration unit?
Yes. PG&E recently prepared a shortened and simplified agreement in response to requests of some residents to allow for installation and operation of a treatment system.
Are the WHRW units working?
Yes. The WHRW units, when operated as designed, are treating chromium 6 to 0.06 ppb and the RO units are removing the other constituents to MCLs. While we have encountered mechanical and process challenges on the first two units installed, we are learning and improving the process and have put corrective actions in place.
Why does PG&E have to test inside the home so many times, causing residents to come home from work early?
The Water Board’s monitoring plan currently requires this frequent sampling of the reverse – osmosis units within homes. PG&E has requested the Water Board revise this monitoring plan to allow for less frequent sampling or allow residents to choose only the ion-exchange system without reverse-osmosis units.
How many WHRW units have been requested by eligible residents?
36 Residents have currently requested WHRW treatment units.
How many WHRW units have been installed?
2 units have been completely installed and turned over to residents; another L8 are in the process of installation and will be turned over to residents in the next 60 days. The remaining residents have requested to wait and see if other alternatives become available as a part of PG&E’s program modification proposal.
Community Questions from December 2012 Meeting
Asuntos de la Comunidad A Partir de la Reunión de diciembre 2012
Health tests – who will pay? Who will treat people possibly made sick by the water? There are concerns about children’s health at the school.
Pruebas de salud – ¿Quién pagará? ¿Quién va a tratar a las personas posiblemente quien se enferman por el agua? Existen preocupaciones acerca de la salud de los estudiantes en la escuela de Hinkley.
Answer:
Anne Holden from the Lahontan Water Board spoke with Joy Chakma of San Bernardino County Environmental Health and asked him about any mechanisms he’s aware of to fund health tests or treatment for Hinkley residents concerned about their water. He said San Bernardino County does not have any funding or way to offer health tests or treatment. Their authority is limited to dealing with the water systems in Hinkley that are permitted by the county (for example, the Senior Center, Hinkley Market, Hinkley School, Sunrise Mobile Home Park, and a few others). If sampling results show exceedances of MCLs, then SB county requires the water purveyor to notify customers, possibly sample more frequently and install treatment if needed. If the system is permitted by the State, then the State Department of Public Health can step in, but Joy says they typically require the same steps as the county would (there are no State-permitted systems in Hinkley). Joy said in general he didn’t see high or increasing trends of Mn in wells for which he has data in Hinkley, and he will send me the data he does have.
Respuesta:
Anne Holden de la Junta de Aguas de Lahontan habló con Joy Chakma de San Bernardino de Salud Ambiental del Condado y le preguntó acerca de los mecanismos que está consciente de financiar las pruebas de salud o tratamiento para los residentes de Hinkley preocupados por el agua. El Condado de San Bernardino dijo que no tiene ningún fondo o forma de ofrecer pruebas de salud o tratamiento. Su autoridad se limita a hacer frente a los sistemas de agua en Hinkley que son permitidos por el condado (por ejemplo, el Centro de Ancianos, el mercado de Hinkley, La Escuale de Hinkley, Sunrise Mobile Home Park, y algunos otros). Si los resultados del muestreo mostran las superaciones de los niveles MCL, entonces el condado requiere que el proveedor de agua para notificar a los clientes, tal vez probar con más frecuencia e instale el tratamiento si es necesario. Si el sistema está permitido por el Estado, el Departamento de Estado de Salud Pública puede intervenir, pero Joy dice que normalmente requieren los mismos pasos que el condado (no hay sistemas estatales permitidas en Hinkley). Joy dijo que en general no veía las tendencias altas o crecientes de Mn en los pozos sobre los que enviar los datos de Hinkley, y él me enviará los datos que tiene.
CAC to review PG&E pre-2007 IRZ pilot test reports, discuss with Water Board, and report back to the Community.
El CAC va a revisar informes del IRZ de PG&E de las pruebas piloto de 2007, discutir con Junta de Aguas, e informar a la Comunidad.
Answer:
Reports have been supplied to the CAC and are under review, in conjunction with Mn studies.
Respuesta:
Los informes han sido entregados al CAC y son objeto de examen, junto con los estudios de Mn.
PG&E to bring sample truck in January at 5:30pm. PG&E traerá un camión muestra en enero a las 5:30 pm.
Answer:
For demonstration purposes a water sampling truck is available in the school parking lot from 5:30pm to 6:00pm, January 24, 2013.
Respuesta:
A efectos de cálculo de un camión muestreo del agua estará disponible en el estacionamiento de la escuela de 5:30 pm a 6:00 pm, 24 de enero 2013.
Ability of PG&E to complete cleanup under existing water rights?
Capacidad de PG & E para completar la limpieza bajo los derechos de agua existentes?
Answer:
PG&E can operate its existing agricultural units without acquiring additional water rights. However, to implement any of the action alternatives described in the EIR (4B, 4C-2 through 4C-5), PG&E would need to acquire more water rights, ranging from 1,919 acre-feet year (afy) to 5,134 afy. For more details, read below.
Background
As of the 4th quarter 2011 (that’s the EIR analysis date), PG&E owns 2,429 acre-feet/year (afy) of water rights and has a “free production allowance” of 1,994 afy. The free production allowance is the amount of water that can be pumped by a water right owner from a given subarea of the Mojave River Groundwater Basin (Hinkley is in the Centro Subarea).
The free production allowance is a percentage of the annual production amounts set each year for each subwatershed in the Mojave River Groundwater Basin by the Watermaster to meet the requirements of the adjudication judgment set in 1996 to address water shortages in the Mojave basin. Recent property purchases will increase PG&E’s water right amount somewhat (the EIR estimates that increase to be 730 afy, but could this estimate may be a bit low).
Discussion of Ability to Remediate under Existing Water Rights
PG&E currently holds enough water rights to run their existing agricultural units, with an excess of at least 220 afy, (or more, considering any water rights gained from property purchases). Existing (4th Q 2011) pumping rates are estimated at 1,774 afy, so that’s below the 1,994 free production allowance. So PG&E could continue to operate their existing agricultural units without purchasing any more water rights.
Discussion of Ability to Implement EIR “Action Alternatives” under Existing Water Rights
For any of the EIR alternatives to be implemented, PG&E would need to acquire additional water rights.
The amount of water rights needed vary between alternatives, ranging from an additional 1,919 afy for alternative 4B, to 5,134 additional afy for alternatives 4C-3 and 4C-4 (see table 3.1-7, page 3.1-52). The EIR looked at whether there is enough surplus water rights available in the Centro subarea for purchase to implement any of the EIR alternatives (see page 3.1-51 for this discussion). There are additional water rights, since the production in the Centro subarea has been less than the subarea’s free production allowance and less than the sustainable yield since 1993. In the last five years, production in the Centro subareas has been less the free production allowance by 14,329 afy.
Respuesta:
PG&E puede operar sus unidades agrícolas existentes sin necesidad de adquirir derechos de agua adicionales. Sin embargo, para ejecutar cualquiera de las alternativas de actuación descritas en el EIR (4B, 4C-2 a 4C-5), PG&E sería necesario adquirir más derechos de agua, que van desde 1.919 acres-pies al año (AFY) a 5.134 afy. Para más detalles, lea a continuación.
Antecedentes
A partir del 4 º trimestre de 2011 (que es la fecha de análisis del EIR), PG&E posee 2.429 acre-feet/year (AFY) de los derechos de agua y tiene un “subsidio de producción libre” de 1.994 afy. La asignación de producción libre es la cantidad de agua que puede ser bombeada por un propietario de derecho de agua a partir de una subzona dada por el Mojave River Cuenca de Agua Subterránea (Hinkley es en la Subárea Centro).
La asignación de producción libre es un porcentaje de las cantidades de producción anuales establecidos cada año para cada subcuenca del Río Mojave Cuenca de Agua Subterránea por la Watermaster para cumplir con los requisitos de la sentencia de adjudicación establecidos en 1996 para hacer frente a la escasez de agua en la cuenca del Mojave. Compras recientes propiedad se incrementará la cantidad de agua correcta PG&E, un poco (las estimaciones de la RIE que aumentan a ser 730 afy, pero podría esta estimación puede ser un poco baja
Discusión de Capacidad para Remediar con Derechos de Agua Existentes PG&E tiene actualmente suficientes derechos de agua para ejecutar sus unidades agrícolas existentes, con un exceso de al menos 220 afy, (o más, teniendo en cuenta todos los derechos sobre el agua adquirida en la compra de propiedades). Existentes (4 º Q 2011) las tasas de bombeo se estiman en 1.774 AFY, por lo que está por debajo de la producción autorizada de 1.994 libre. Así que PG&E podría continuar operando sus unidades agrícolas existentes sin necesidad de adquirir ningún más derechos de agua.
Discusión de Capacidad para Aplicar el EIR “Alternativas de Acción” en Derechos de Agua Existentes
Para cualquiera de las alternativas que se aplicarán en el EIR, PG&E tendría que adquirir derechos de agua adicionales.
El importe de los derechos de agua necesarios varían entre las alternativas, que van desde un adicional de 1.919 afy para la alternativa 4B, a 5.134 afy adicional de alternativas 4C-3 y 4C 4-(ver tabla 3.1-7, página 3.1-52). En el EIR analizó si hay derechos de agua suficientes excedentes disponibles en la subzona centro para la compra de implementar cualquiera de las alternativas en el EIR (vea la página 3.1-51 para esta discusión). Hay derechos de agua adicionales, ya que la producción en la subzona Centro ha sido inferior al subsidio de producción libre de la subárea y menor que el rendimiento sostenible desde 1993. En los últimos cinco años, la producción en las subzonas Centro ha sido menos la previsión de producción libre de 14.329 afy.