LOS Angeles County

Recommendations 6

• R1
  Who: Your Name: _______________________________________________________________________ Address: ________________________________________________________________________ City, State, Zip, Code: _______________________________________________________________ Telephone: ( ) Extension: ______________
• R2

  Page 166
  3 (2009–2010) LADWP should continue maximum efforts to obtain United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) funding for the cleanup of the San Fernando Basin Aquifer. LADWP’s Sustainability and Economic Development Officer. LOS ANGELES COUNTY 2014–2015 CIVIL GRAND JURY FINAL REPORT LADWP’s written response to the Los Angeles County 2009–2010 Civil Grand Jury on November 22, 2010 LADWP agrees with the finding. LADWP agrees and continues to work with and engage the USEPA to effect cleanup of the San Fernando Basin (SFB). CGJ’s written questions to LADWP on February 10, 2015 What progress has LADWP made in obtaining funding from the United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA) to effect cleanup of the SFB? Please indicate the funding amounts received from the potentially responsible parties since 2010. Please indicate the status of the North Hollywood Operable Unit (NHOU) Second Interim Remedy (RI2) and monitoring wells including their location, construction, and operational dates. LADWP’s written response to the 2014–2015 CGJ on March 3, 2015 USEPA has designated three Superfund areas in the easterly portion of the SFB; a fourth SuperFund area was also designated within the Verdugo Basin, a neighboring sub-basin within the Upper Los Angeles River Area watershed.8 USEPA have implemented three groundwater remediation facilities—the NHOU, the Burbank Operable Unit, and the Glendale North and South Operable Units. Our response is limited to the NHOU, since this facility is located within the city of Los Angeles (city) and primarily affects solely LADWP’s use of its water rights in SFB. LADWP continues to work closely with USEPA on SFB remediation, and our ongoing collaboration is currently focused on NHOU remediation facility, which began operating in 1989 and now requires replacement. USEPA issued a Record of Decision for RI2 in 2009, requiring a new remediation facility. The responsible parties have submitted work plans to USEPA and are currently conducting its remedial design investigation to determine the appropriate size and scope of the replacement facility. Expected construction and operational dates for the RI2 facility is 8 The Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA), commonly known as the Superfund, was enacted by congress on Dec. 11, 1980. This law created a tax on the chemical and petroleum industries and provided broad federal authority to respond directly to releases or threatened releases of hazardous substances that may endanger public health or the environment. Over five years, $1.6 billion was collected, and the tax went to a trust fund for cleaning up abandoned or uncontrolled hazardous waste sites. http://www.epa.gov/superfund/policy/cercla.htm. LOS ANGELES COUNTY 2014–2015 CIVIL GRAND JURY FINAL REPORT subject to completing their investigation and are undetermined at this time. Responsible parties have also completed installation of 33 groundwater monitoring wells in 2013, and they use these wells to collect samples of groundwater for laboratory analysis. Funding for the NHOU is provided through the USEPA Superfund Program, which reimburses 90 percent of the operating costs. Funds are provided by the responsible parties to USEPA, which then reimburses LADWP based on actual expenditures. Since January 1, 2010, responsible parties have provided $2,082,283 in reimbursements through December 31, 2014. Notes taken from 2014–2015 CGJ’s telephonic conversation on April 17, 2015, clarifying LADWP’s March 3, 2015, response NHOU needs to be replaced—it will be replaced by RI2. USEPA issued a Record of Decision for RI2 in 2009, requiring a new remediation facility. The responsible parties have submitted work plans to USEPA and are currently conducting a remedial design investigation to determine the appropriate size and scope of the replacement facility. Expected construction and operational dates for the RI2 facility are subject to completing the investigation and are undetermined at this time. The Potentially Responsible Parties (PRP) are Honeywell, Lockheed, and minor PRPs. The PRPs have installed 33 groundwater monitoring wells in 2013. Some are inside and around Home Depot, and others are near NHOU at 11845 Vose in North Hollywood. The PRPs send the groundwater samples for laboratory analysis. LADWP operates NHOU. LADWP agrees upon a work plan budget for NHOU operating costs for the year (personnel, electricity—direct and indirect costs). The PRPs give 100 percent of the budget to USEPA, and USEPA reimburses LADWP 90 percent. LADWP received $2,082,283 in reimbursements through December 31, 2014 from USEPA. The RI2 will clean up four primary contaminants—1.44 Dioxane, Hexavalent Chromium, Trichloroethylene, and Tetrachloroethylene. The City Attorney is coordinating with the USEPA and the engineers.
• R3
  When: Date(s) of incident: ______________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________ 165 LOS ANGELES COUNTY 2014–2015 CIVIL GRAND JURY FINAL REPORT
• R4
  Where: Names and addresses of other departments, agencies or officials involved in this complaint. Include dates and types of contact, i.e. phone, letter, personal. Use additional sheets if necessary. ______________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________
• R5
  Why/How: Attach pertinent documents and correspondence with dates. ______________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________ ______________________________________________________________________________ 166 LOS ANGELES COUNTY 2014–2015 CIVIL GRAND JURY FINAL REPORT Complaint Guidelines Communications from the public can provide valuable information to the Civil Grand Jury. Any private citizen, government employee, or officer may submit a completed complaint form to request that the Civil Grand Jury conduct an investigation. This complaint must be in writing and is treated as confidential. Prior to submitting the Complaint Form to the Grand Jury office, please retain a copy for your records if needed. Receipt of all complaints will be acknowledged. If the Civil Grand Jury determines that a matter is within the legally permissible scope of its investigative powers and would warrant further inquiry, additional information may be requested. If a matter does not fall within the Civil Grand Jury's investigative authority, or the jury determines not to investigate a complaint, no action will be taken and there will be no further contact from the Civil Grand Jury. The findings of any investigation conducted by the Civil Grand Jury can be communicated only in a formal final report published at the conclusion of the Grand Jury's term, June 30th. Some complaints are not suitable for civil grand jury action. For example, the Civil Grand Jury has no jurisdiction over judicial performance, actions of the court, or cases that are pending in the courts. Grievances of this nature must be resolved through the established judicial appeal system. The Civil Grand Jury has no jurisdiction or authority to investigate federal or state agencies. Only causes of action occurring within the County of Los Angeles are eligible for review. The jurisdiction of the Civil Grand Jury includes the following: • Consideration of evidence of misconduct against public officials within Los Angeles County. • Inquiry into the condition and management of the jails within the county. • Investigation and report on the operations, accounts, and records of the officers, departments or functions of the county including those operations, accounts, and records of any special legislative district or other district in the county created pursuant to state law for which the officers of the county are serving in their ex officio capacity as officers of the districts. LOS ANGELES COUNTY 2014–2015 CIVIL GRAND JURY FINAL REPORT • Investigation of the books and records of any incorporated city or joint powers agency located in the county. Mail complaint form to: Los Angeles County Civil Grand Jury Clara Shortridge Foltz Criminal Justice Center 210 W. Temple Street, 11th Floor, Room 11-506 Los Angeles, CA 90012 168 LOS ANGELES COUNTY 2014–2015 CIVIL GRAND JURY FINAL REPORT CONTINUITY COMMITTEE Ken Star, chair Jim Contreras, vice chair Simeon Zano, secretary Shari E. Pearce John A. Rangel Wesley C. Thompson Margaret M. Yasuda CONTINUITY COMMITTEE The Continuity Committee serves a statutory function of the Los Angeles County Civil Grand Jury: to archive and organize responses to the previous year’s Final Report. The Los Angeles County 2014–2015 Civil Grand Jury (CGJ) also ensured continued retention of CGJ materials and changed the method of indexing that information. California Penal Code Section 933(c) mandates responses, , to the previous year’s reports by the public agencies to whom recommendations were made by the Final Report. The CGJ followed up to ensure reasonably timely compliance by the agencies addressed in the 2013–2014 Final Report. Penal Code Section 933.05 requires that agency responses be specific to each individual finding and recommendation. The committee reviewed the responses and found they substantially complied with the legal requirements. Please take note that the responses filed by the agencies are much more extensive than indicated in the following pages and were placed with the custodians set forth in Penal Code Section 933(c) and also on the CGJ website at http://grandjury.co.la.ca.us/gjreports.html. ARCHIVAL/ORGANIZATIONAL ROLE The committee has continued the actions of its predecessors in maintaining copies of previous reports and responses, both hard copy and electronic. Past Continuity committees have also prepared tables of reports and recommendations for the following year’s jury to use as a
• R9
  1 Los Angeles Department of Water and Power’s research and development lab at the La Kretz Innovation Campus should work with the UCLA La Kretz Center for California Conservation Science to request academic research into groundwater remediation in the San Fernando Basin to help speed the cleanup of the San Fernando Basin Aquifer. As described in the committee’s interview report with LADWP’s Chief Sustainability and Economic Development Officer. LOS ANGELES COUNTY 2014–2015 CIVIL GRAND JURY FINAL REPORT