Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutMINUTES - 02021988 - 2.3 THE BOARD OF SUPERVISORS OF CONTRA COSTA COUNTY, CALIFORNIA Adopted this Order on February 2, 1988 by the following vote: AYES: Supervisors Powers, Fanden, McPeak, Torlakson, Schroder NOES: None ABSENT: None ABSTAIN: None ------------------------------------------------------------------ ------------------------------------------------------------------ SUBJECT: Walnut Creek Fuel Oil Spill The Board received the attached report dated January 27, 1988 from Mark Finucane, Health Services Director. Dan Bergman, Environmental Health Dirctor, appeared this date and commented on the report. IT IS BY THE BOARD ORDERED that receipt of the report from the Health Services Director is ACKNOWLEDGED. cc: Health Services Director County Administrator I heresy certify that this is a true and correct cops=of ars action taken and entered on ti,e rnnb;t as a _he Board of Supervisors on the date shown, ATTESTED: fit- l7 • d v2P8f PFAHL 0ATC41 •i_Cq9, ,iorl/r;f give Soard of Supervisors and County Administrator By - _.J Deputy •;f _ - • CONTRA COSTA COUNTY HEALTH SERVICES DEPARTMENT To: Board of Supervisors Date: January 27, 1988 via Phil Batchelor County Odministr t r From: Mark FinuAw"' Subject: December 29, 1987 Board Order Health Services Di ector Requesting Report on Walnut Creek Fuel Oil Spill The attached report from our Environmental Health Division regarding the recent fuel oil spill into Walnut Creek is presented for your review and infor- mation. In addition, the County Administrator's Office has written the State Department of Health Services, Environmental Protection Agency, and the State- Water Resources Control Board, requesting independent reports from each agency detailing their evaluation of the handling and reporting of this spill . A review of our Environmental Health Division staff report indicates that Environmental Health Division staff conducted a site inspection of Walnut Creek in the vicinity of Solano Way and Imhoff Drive shortly after receiving notice of the fuel oil spill on the afternoon of December 23, 1987. Godfrey Becks, Occupational Health Specialist, detected a definite hydrocarbon odor and observed a slight oil sheen on the Walnut Creek waters during his investigation. He did not, however, observe significant pockets of accumulation of oil product at that time in the Walnut Creek channel . Mr. Becks did observe a small quantity of accumulating hydrocarbon product on the surface of the water, the ground, and in vegetation near the storm drain culvert outlet. Mr. Becks was unable to determine a specific source for the fuel oil discharge. Mr. Becks con- tacted a representative from the adjacent Southern Pacific Pipe Line terminal and reinspected the spill site with the Southern Pacific Pipeline employee. Mr. Becks requested that Southern Pacific Pipeline place absorbent hydrocarbon booms around the mouth of the culvert and both upstream and downstream of the drainage discharge point to confine and absorb any petroleum product that might be escaping from the culvert. Mr. Becks believed from his survey of the spill site _ that this remedial action would be sufficient to contain the minimal discharge that he observed until a more comprehensive investigation of the potential source of the fuel oil discharge could be conducted. -Mr. Becks returned to the Environmental Health Division office in Martinez as soon as he completed the site survey and telephoned the California State Fish and Game Division to report the incident and to request assistance in conducting a further site investigation. Mr. Becks was informed that no Fish and Game staff members were available to respond at that time. He was additionally informed that the State Fish and Game office had been notified of the initial incident earlier that week and that a preliminary investigation had been con- ducted. Fish & Game had apparently concluded that the oil -problem was seasonal and fluctuated with the tide. Mr. Becks then returned to the spill site to A-41 3/81 Board of Supervisors -2- January 27, 1988 verify that the absorbent booms had been installed as specifically agreed by Southern Pacific Pipeline. Mr. Becks did not notify the Regional Water Quality Control Board of our site investigation at this time. Mr. Becks returned to the spill scene the morning of December 24 and verified that the booms were still intact both upstream and downstream of the bridge. He did not notice additional accumulations of fuel oil product. Mr. Becks briefed another member of our Environmental Health staff of the situation to have the creek monitored during the holiday weekend. -Mr. Becks returned to the spill site on the morning of December 26, with additional absorbent pads in the event that the absorbent booms placed the previous day were no longer confining the fuel oil . He found conditions existing the previous day unchanged. Dan Bergman, Environmental Health Division Director, and two members of his hazard response team inspected the spill site the afternoon of December 26 following an emergency response to a hazmat spill in the Rodeo area. Mr. Bergman discussed the spill status with representatives of Fish and Game who were at the scene and agreed that additional containment measures were appropriate since there was visible product flowing from the storm drain culvert at that time. Southern Pacific Pipeline employees had already begun to build earthen and sand bag berms around the mouth of the storm drain culverts under_ the direction of Fish and Game. Mr. Bergman' s staff collected samples at the site for laboratory evaluation. The berms being constructed on Saturday after- noon were sufficient to contain contaminated storm drain runoff and prevent further discharge into Walnut Creek. On the morning of Monday, December 28, Fish and Game officers discussed the incident communication issues with Mr. Becks. There was also a discussion be- tween Mr. Becks and the District Manager for Southern Pacific Pipeline that indicates the U. S. Coast Guard, the California Dept. of Fish and Game, and the Regional Water Quality Control Board had been notified of the presence of hydro- carbons in the creek earlier during the month. Staff of Regional Water Quality Control Board had investigated the previously report of hydrocarbons in Walnut Creek and concluded that there was insufficient evidence of hydrocarbons to warrant remedial action at that time. The remainder of our report details remedial action efforts on the part of the Southern Pacific Pipeline following the initial release. I have directed Dan Bergman to prepare detailed protocols for Environmental Health staff to notify all appropriate State agencies and other potentially interested governmental agencies of our response(s) to reported spills in the future. The Environmental Health Division is currently prepared to assume responsibility for notification of concerned agencies of hazardous materials incidents occuring in this County on or about March 1, 1988. Environmental Health Division staff are continuing to actively participate in the remedial efforts jointly with State Regional Water Quality Control Board and Fish and Game staff. DB:rm r•`t CONTRA COSTA COUNTY HEALTH SERVICES DEPARTMENT j. ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH DIVISION _^*^ OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH/HAZARDOUS MATERIALS TO: Dan Bergman Assistant Director, Health Services/Environmental Health FROM: Godfrey Becks Sr. Occupationa ealth Specia ist SUBJECT: Oil Spill Incident: Walnut Creek, vic. Imhoff Dr. & Solano Way, Concord. CA. Date of Response: December 23 , 1987. DATE: January 8 , 1988 The report that follows is herewith submitted to provide you with an update on the status of the above (subject) oil leakage into Walnut Creek in the vicinity of Southern Pacific Pipelines property, Concord, CA. Complaintant: Mr. Jim Marieiro ( 415 ) 228-8258 Complaint: Oil present surfacing in the water of Walnut Creek, vicinity of the bridge on Imhoff Drive, near Solano Way. Very heavy deposit. Date of last update report: December 28 , 1987. Saturday, January 2, 1988: Approx: 14:00 hrs. Weather conditions on this date: light intermittent rain. I (GB) conducted a survey of the status of environmental conditions in the creek area that was involved in the recent oil spill in order to observe (a) the effectiveness of hydrocarbon cleanup and recovery activities that are being conducted by Southern Pacific Pipelines, Inc. , and (b) the impact of increased surface water runoff on the primary and secondary dams that have been installed to intercept the hydrocarbon product prior to reaching the creek. 1 OH-9 S.P. Pipelines Inc. Spill Incident Update: January 8 , 1988 Findings: The primary and secondary dams were holding up quite well. Water flow from the storm drain into the primary collection area was moderate; and a gas powered pump had been installed in order to reduce excessive head pressure on the primary dam. No visible hydrocarbon product could be observed in either the primary or the secondary dam. Numerous absorbant booms, floating absorbant pads and other portable floating dams have been installed at various areas of the water channels of the creek in order to collect and recover any hydrocarbon product that might bypass the primary collection system. A worker for S.P. Piplines has been posted in the area on a 24-hr. basis for security reasons and also to make any necessary adjustments that might be required. Discussion of the status of cleanup activities with the worker on-scene, revealed that no additional hydrocarbon material had been observed. Several water fowl were observed in the creek channel just south of the. absorbant booms between Imhoff Drive and Highway 4 ; however, no visible sign of petroleum oil contamination could be observed on their feathers. Sunday, January 3, 1988: Approx: 13:00 hrs. Rain has been relatively continuous for the past 24hrs. I (GB) returned to the creek area to evaluate the impact of additional runoff water upon cleanup activities that have been implemented in the subject area. Findings: No significant changes in conditions as were observed on the previous day (Saturday) . The worker on-site stated that no measurable quantity of petroleum product has been recovered. Water conditions in the creek appear to be •unchanged from earlier visits. Monday, January 4, 1988: 10:30hrs: Received a telephone call from Kaprillian Engineering, Benicia, CA. , relative to S.P. ' s intention to install additional groundwater monitoring wells in the area to monitor subsurface hydrocarbon product that had previously been identified (June, 1987 Spill incident) . Approx. 13:30 hrs. I (GB) met• on-site with Mr. Mardo, Kaprillian Engineering. He advised me that because of the continuous rain over the weekend, that some hydrocarbon product surfaced in the primary 2 S:P. Pipelines Inc. Spill Incident Update: January 8 , 198& dam area by early Monday morning. However, the amount that was recovered was not a measurable amount and any product recovery seems to be related to the amount of rainfall and the depth to groundwater. . Mr. Mardo also informed me that on Tuesday, January 5, 1988, his firm will begin the installation of additional monitoring wells in the area in order to evaluate the extent of lateral and vertical subsurface hydrocarbon contamination. Tuesday, January 5, 1988: Approx. 11:00 hrs. I (GB) met with Mr. Robert Cardinale, Southern Pacific Pipelines, Inc. representative. The following information was gathered during the course of . our meeting. Re: Remedial Work Performed to date. o The storm culvert that runs along Imhoff Dr. ( in the area between Solano Way - the mouth of the culvert) has been cleaned using a high pressure water hose. This task was performed in order to thoroughly inspect the integrity of the joints of the culvert in the area just south of the S.P. Pipelines facility. o Approximately 10-15 joints were found to be leaking hydrocarbon product apparently from the annular area around the drain. All of the joints that were accessible were repaired using epoxy grout by the plant personnel as an attempt to stop the intrusion of petroleum product into the culvert. o During the inspection, it was found that petroleum product had pooled in several areas inside the culvert where silt and debris had collected. Consequently, when it rained, water discharge through the storm drain would wash the product out of the culvert into the creek. o During the last week of December, 1987, all of the lines (including the main manifold) located at the Solano Way facility, were subjected to static pressure testing. All of the lines tested satisfactorily and are therefore, considered to be intact. Additionally, the product line that runs parallel to the easterly bank of Walnut Creek was also tested and found to be intact. 3 S.P. Pipelines Inc. Spill Incident Update: January 8, 1988 Re: Future Work Plan(s) : o The next step toward confining the petroleum that appears to be migrating toward the Walnut Creek area via pea gravel backfill material around (a) the storm drain line and (b) with the natural hydraulic gradient, will be the installation of an interceptor trench that will carry any recovered product over to S.P. Pipeline property just north of Imhoff Dr. Here, the product would be separated from the groundwater, and disposed of as hazardous waste. Recovered wastewater would be disposed of at the nearby TOSCO Refinery industrial wastewater pond. o A bentonite slurry wall will be installed at the creek bank aound the discharge of the storm drain for the purpose of preventing further seepage into the creek. o Within the next several weeks, a new technique will be employed at this site in an effort to define the direction and magnitude --of the product plume that seems to be fluctuating with the watertable. Aerial Infra-Red Scanning will be employed to produce an area map defining the boundaries of the plume in the area. Once this information is obtained, it is hoped that additional recovery wells can be strategically placed within the plume to recover as much of the fugative product as is technically possible. o Relative to toxicity testing of surface waters in Walnut Creek, results have been received of water samples that were submitted on Dec. 27th, 1987 for EP Toxicity Testing. The five ( 5) day survival rate (using Fathead Minnows as the target species) was 1000. Interpretation of this data suggests that dissolved organic constituents in the creek water does not fit the regulatory definition of being toxic. Thursday, January 7, 1988: 10:30hrs. : On this date, I (GB) visited the cleanup site. Working on a twenty four ( 24) hour schedule, installation of the recovery trench and the recovery well has been completed. Additionally, a slurry-bentonite wall has been installed at the terminal end of the trench to redirect product flow into the recovery system. 4 S.P. Pipelines Inc. Spill Incident Update: January 8 , 1988 Dimensions of the trench are as follows: Total length: 50 . ft. Total depth: 20. ft. Well casing dia. 26. inches (dia. ) Depth to groundwater: -14. ft. Depth to Drain casing: -19. ft. overall hydraulic head for product recovery: 4.0 ft. It should be noted that upon excavation of the trench, free flowing hydrocarbon product was found at the water interface (approx. -9 . 0 to -14.ft. ) in the center of Imhoff Dr. This obser- vation suggests that the hydrocarbon plume is not the result of a new release of hazardous material that occurred during the month of December, 1987 ; but rather, the manifestation of a chronic condition that is just now beginning to be physically visible. The overall amount of material appears to be substantial; and any attempt on my part to quantify the amount of product that is involved, would be purely speculative. RE: Historical Information: January 5, 1988: 10:00hrs. : (cont'd. ) During my .meeting with Mr. Cardinale, I inquired if any recent spill situations involving S.P. Pipelines facility that have occurred that might be attributed to the present situation. I was told by Mr. Cardinale that indeed hydrocarbon releases have occurred in the past. Prior to the last episode in June, 1987 , Storage Tank #14 developed a problem In 1976-77 that was subsequently repaired. Cleanup efforts were implemented at that time to abate the environmental hazard. Last June, 1987. Storage Tank #13 developed a leak that resulted in an environmental insult along Solano Way and the area eastward. The incident was reported to regulatory agencies in accordance with current regulations, and the Bay Area Regional Water Quality Control Board was aware of the situation. Periodic follow up inspections have been conducted by Mr. Kazemi to review cleanup progress and groundwater monitoring data. However, according to Mr. Cardinale, since June 1987, the structural integrity of all storage tanks, the main manifold, and all product lines have been verified to be intact. And current testing procedures have substantiated the fact that no further structural problems have occurred. 5 S.P. Pipelines Inc. Spill Incident Update: January 8, 1988 Without exception, it is the opinion of all of the consulting firms that are being contracted to manage the current situation that current conditions, now that the groundwater table is high and the soil is saturated with water from recent seasonal rains, is product that was lost last June, during dry weather when the water table was at a significantly lower level. Consequently with the rising groundwater table, hydrocarbon product is being forced into more porous srata (e.g. the pea gravel backfill around the storm drains) and is beginning to find its way via the hydraulic gradient to the creek area. sppipe2. ltr 6 r CONTRA COSTA COUNTY HEALTH SERVICES DEPARTMENT j; ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH DIVISION OCCUPATIONAL HEALTH/HAZARDOUS MATERIALS TO: Dan Bergman Assistant Director, Health Services/Envir amental Health FROM: Godfrey Becks Sr. Occupational Health Specialist SUBJECT: Oil Spill Incident: Walnut Creek, vic. Imhoff Dr. & Solano Way, Concord. CA. Date of Response: December 23 , 1987 . DATE: December 29, 1987 The report that follows, is a chronological narration of events and activities as they occurred during the course of this Department' s response to the above ( subject) emergency response incident. Initial Notification: Wednesday, December 23 , 1987 ' @13 : 45 hrs. Complaintant: Mr. Jim Marierro ( 415) 228-8258 Complaint: Oil present surfacing in the water of Walnut Creek, vicinity of the bridge on Imhoff Drive, near Solano Way. Very heavy deposit. Wednesday, December 23, 1987 14:00 hrs. I (GB) contacted Mr. Marierro by phone, and met with him at the site to evaluate environmental conditions as he had observed them in the creek area. Findings: On approaching the creek from the area underneath the bridge on Imhoff Dr. , a definite odor of petroleum hydrocarbon product could be detected in the air. The creek bank was surveyed (accompanyed by Mr. Marierro, and another gentleman) for a distance of approximately 150 ft. north and south of the bridge. A slight oil sheen could be discerned looking at the water surface in both directions, but no definitive gross pockets or accumulations of surfaced oil product were seen by myself at this time. JH-9 1 Oil Spill Incident; Imhoff Drive, Concord, CA. Dec. 23 , 1987 Findings: (cont'd. ) Upon returning from the creek bank area, a strong odor of volatile hydrocarbon product was again detected as we passed underneath the bridge. I then walked over to a storm culvert outlet that is situated near the creek area, and found an accumulation of hydrocarbon product on the surface of the water, the ground, and in the vegetation growth at the outlet of the culvert. The amount appeared to be less than one ( 1) gallon and was localized in one area at the base of the culvert. Water was trickling from the opening of the culvert and yet no visible obvious stream of hydrocarbon product could be seen flowing from the culvert with the emerging water stream. Continuing to look around the area, I observed an orange colored undergound pipeline marker just easterly of the culvert opening, just on the other side of the fenced flood control area. My immediate suspicion was that there was a possibility that the escaping petroleum product might be the result of a pipeline structural problem. And appropriately, the owner of the pipeline should be notified. But only finding. a small amount of product in the culvert. I wasn' t totally sure that the oil spillage was due to a pipeline problem. As there was also a street drain at the edge of the curb approximately 150 ft. east of the fence, I felt that there might be a possibility that diesel oil or some similiar hydrocarbon might have been deposited into the drain and the material had migrated down the culvert and been discharged into the subject area. 15:00 hrs. I (GB) went to the Southern Pacific Pipeline Terminal office, located on Solano Way, Concord, and spoke to Mr. Terry Bailey (a S.P. Pipelines worker who was on duty at the time) . I related to him my concern about the situation in the vicinity of the bridge, and the possibility that there might be a problem that requires investigation by the pipelines company. Mr. Bailey accompanied me to the site and verified the conditions that I have narrated earlier. After discussing the problem, and in the absence of any known pipeline structural problem, and in view of the fact that my- survey of the area failed to uncover any significant quantity of hydrocarbon product, I asked Mr. Bailey to agree to have absorbant hydrocarbon booms installed around the mouth of the culvert and to place additional absorbant booms both upstream and downstream of the general area in order to confine any petroleum that might escape from the culvert area. 2 Oil Spill Incident; Imhoff Drive, Concord, CA. Dec. 23 , 1987 This temporary remedial action was in my professional judgement appropriate until such time that additional resources could be mobilized during the normal working schedule to investigate the situation, identify if possible the responsible party, and/or remediate the environmental problem. Approx. 16:00 hrs. : I (GB) returned to the Environmental Health Office, and telephoned The CA. State Fish and Game Division (Yountville, CA. ) to report the incident, and to seek assistance in conducting further investigation in this case. I- was told by the dispatch person at the Fish and Game office that because of their department' s normal work schedule and the forthcoming Christmas holiday weekend no F&G staff members were available. When I explained my concern about the situation at Wanut Creek, I was told by the F&G dispatch person that their office was aware of the situation, and that notification of the incident had been made earlier during the week. The dispatch person then informed me that an investigation had been made, and that (a) the situation was not significant (b) , that a source of the problem could not be located and (c) , that oil problem is a seasonal one that fluctuates with the tide. With this information, specifically that (a) ,. another agency was aware of the problem and had investigated it and (b) , that my visual findings at the time did not indicate that environmental conditions were so serious that an emergency cleanup status was indicated, I felt confident that temporary mitigation measures ( i.e. placement of absorbant booms) would suffice to keep the contamination confined to a localized area until the following Monday ( 12/28/87 ) . The Environmental Health Division would then be able to research County Flood Control maps and S.P. Pipelines personnel could be mobilized to initiate testing of the structural integrity of the product line in the area; any required structural corrections could then be made. 16:20 hrs. I (GB) by request, returned a telephone call to Ms. Kathy Snapp (C.C. Times) and advised her of conditions as I found them during my survey of the creek and action that had been taken to control the environmental problem until further measures could be implemented in the forthcoming week. 17:00 hrs. I returned to the creek area and conducted a survey to personally verify that the absorbant booms had been installed in the specified areas . 3 ' - Oil`• Spill Incident; Imhoff Drive, Concord, CA. Dec. 23 , 1987 Thursday, December 24, 1987 08:30 hrs. : Followup evaluation of conditions at the culvert area near the creek was conducted to determine the status of product in the creek. My survey- of the water and the creek failed to reveal any change in conditions from what had been previously observed. The same marginal amount of product was still at the base of the culvert in a confined state behind the absorbant boom that had been installed earlier. The two ( 2) booms were still intact upstream and downstream of the bridge at Imhoff Dr. , and overall conditions appeared to be stable. No further action was taken at this time. 10:00 hrs. : I (GB) returned to the creek area with Mr. Roger Lewis (EHS staff member) in order to brief him on the creek situation and also to have him check the creek area over the holiday weekend should further notification and/or emergency cleanup activity be required. 13:45 hrs. : I returned a phone call to Mr. J. Marierro responding to his concern that insufficient effort was being expended to cleanup the creek. I reitterated to Mr. Marierro the efforts that this department had expended up to this point, and told him that the department was prepared to monitor the creek area for any changes in conditions over the holiday weekend. And if needed, that further emergency action would be implemented to further confine and/or cleanup the creek if necessary. However, based upon my personal observations several hours earlier, I was still of the opinion that the situation was not emergent and conditions were not getting worse. 4 Oil Spill Incident; Imhoff Drive, Concord, CA. Dec. 23 , 1987 Saturday, December 26, 1987 08:30 hrs. : Thinking about the possibility that because of tidal fluctuations some of the material might have managed to make its way around the edge of the booms, I went to the EHS storage shed (Goree Court, Martinez) , obtained a large stack of absorbant pads and proceeded to the creekside area with the intention of placing the pads on the water surface if the situation warranted. Conditions appeared to be unchanged from what was observed on Thurs. morning; so no further effort was made to alter the situation. Saturday afternoon, December 26, 1987. Although I personally was not involved in this emergency response, I was advised by EHS staff personnel that Messrs. Dan Bergman, Roger Lewis, and Bruce Benike responded to the spill site area. By that time, several regulatory agencies, S.P. Pipelines personnel and cleanup consultants were on the scene constructing additional dams in order to contain the product and/or to prevent any intrusion of the petroleum material into the creek. Samples of the petroleum product were collected by Environmental Health staff for subsequent analysis of the material for the purpose of identifying ownership, and/or if possible the source of spillage. Monday, December 28, 1987 08:00 hrs. : On reporting to work Monday a.m. , I was advised by EHS staff personnel that by Saturday afternoon, the creekside situation had been escalated to an emergency cleanup status, and that several consulting cleanup firms and regulatory agencies were on-scene to manage and abate the environmental problem. 08:45 hrs. : Officer Keith Long, CA. Fish and Game Division visited the EHS office, to inquire about what he felt had been a breakdown in the communications process between this department and his division. I related to - Mr. Long of my attempt to obtain assistance from his office on Wednesday Dec. 23rd. , and that I had been told by the dispatch person in his office that F&G was aware of the problem. 09:00 hrs. : The hydrocarbon product sample that had been previously collected by EHS emergency response staff members was submitted to TMA Thermo Analytical Laboratory, Richmond CA. with an urgent request for sample identification (GC/MS) of the major components 5 ILI ' Oil Spill Incident; Imhoff Drive, Concord, CA. Dec. 23 , 1987 of the sample. (See Attachment) . 09:30 hrs. : I (GB) contacted Mr. Robert Cardinale, District Manager for Southern Pacific Pipelines, on-site and reviewed the status of cleanup and source identification efforts with him and his consultant (Levin & Fricke) . (a) The primary dam around the discharge opening of the culvert (as a replacement of the absorbant boom that had been installed earlier) was still intact. (b) A secondary sandbag dam was being erected around the outer perimeter of the primary earthen dam to provide a backup catchment basin in the event that the pending rain weakened the original earthen dam. During a discussion of the course of events that had transpired during the past 96 hours, Mr. Cardinale indicated to me that the United States Coast Guard, the CA. State Fish and Game Division, and also the Regional Water Quality Control Board had been notified of the presence of hydrocarbons in the creek earlier during. ` the month. Further, that the Regional Water Quality Control Board (Mr. Hossain Kazemi) had investigated the creek during the week of Dec. 14th; and that no mitigative action had been implemented to manage the situation. Tuesday, Dec. 29, 1987 09:30 hrs: EHS received a telephone call from S.P. Pipelines informing the department of the status of cleanup activities: (a) The length of the culvert from the manhole in the vicinity of Solano Way westward to the mouth of the culvert near the creek has been visually inspected by S.P. Pipelines consulting contractors. Organic vapor was encountered in the line. However no significant evidence of organic petroleum product was found to be leaking into the culvert. (b) The birmed area around the mouth of the culvert remained free of any petroleum product from Monday, 08 : 00 to 24: 00 hrs. However, at some time between 24 : 00 and 05 : 00 Tuesday morning, product has reaccumulated in the primary dam. The material is confined and poses no problem of escaping. But the origin of its source, and/or the reason for its discharge is presently unknown. 6 ' Oil Spill Incident; Imhoff Drive, Concord, CA. Dec. 23 , 1987 15:00 hrs. I (GB) received a return telephone .call from Mr. Hossain Kazemi, Regional Water Control Borad. In our discussion of the Walnut Creek situation, Mr. Kazemi confirmed Mr. Cardinale' s statement to the effect that he had in fact, investigated the creek during the week of Dec. 14th, 1987 . Mr. Kazemi stated that he visited the site later in the evening (day/date not specified) on his way home; and that his survey of the area from the bridge and the upper creek bank, approximately 900 . ft. in both directions, failed to reveal any signs of hydrocarbon contamination in the creek. Consequently, no further action was taken on his part in the matter at that time. Mr. Kazemi also expressed his concern about what he feels was a serious communications breakdown on this department' s part in not informing his office of the discovery of an oil sheen in the surface waters of the creek as soon as I observed it on Wednesday evening. And to this point, I was in error. I assure you that I will personally correct discrepancies in my notification proceedures. I related to Mr. Kazemi also of my shared concern about CC EHS not being apprised earlier by his agency of the existence any potential problem in the creek that might ultimately involve Contra Costa County' s emergency first responders. I personally feel that if our department, or at least if I had been privileged to any prior communication from any of the aforementioned agencies relative to their experience(s) with the potential problem, that I would have been able to render more prudent decisions during my response activity to this incident. 7