Benzene were found in Former Tustin Marine Base
- Thread starter bkshopr_IHB
- Start date
NEW -> Contingent Buyer Assistance Program
The first article says the contamination is 20'-25' below ground. So I'd wonder what, if anything, is accomplished by replacing the soil only ten feet above that... is it just so they can "say" they did something?
This is exactly why I chose an earlier article because the later articles were selective editorials to exclude pertinent information such as depth were the chemical were found. The earlier articles were non bias and not clouded with corporate and political objectives.
Actually up to 15' of earth were replaced and I am no expert like you but my logic also tells me that as long fido does not dig 15' deep he should not come into contact with the original earth assuming there is no capillary property in soil of course.
Mrs BK always tell me when someone pee in the pool and the only way to clean up the pee is to drain the entire pool.
The article also pointed out the Government also were responsible in cleaning up the site. I trust my government very much and my government has never let me down. I look forward to paying my taxes because my government totally deserves it.
That is one of the differences between benzene and TCE (trichloroethylene), which was the primary volatile organic chemical (VOC) that was present at the base... TCE does not degrade as quickly, so it can migrate through the soil and potentially enter a home at the surface. And yes, I do find it ironic that VOCs (Volatile Organic Chemicals) are an issue at VOC (Villiage of Columbus).
Do you see a potential risk when all landscape irrigation is from reclaimed water stored in below grade tanks and nuissance water collected through soil and other tributaries. The water is then sprayed on landscape and mist may land on children playing at the parks?
Reclaimed wastewater used for irrigation (the water in the purple pipes) has been treated at a wastewater treatment plant to meet certain regulatory standards. There are a couple of different standards, but the most common in California are known as the "Title 22 Standards" for such water. It is basically safe to drink but has a high 'yuck' factor that is difficult to overcome. It certainly has a potential for containing some unfriendly chemicals that you would not want to ingest on a long-term basis. (Google "endocrine disruptors" for some discussion.) Thus, that water is used mostly for irrigation or industrial applications. Incidental, occasional exposure would not be a real concern, in my opinion. More highly treated reclaimed wastewater is being used to prevent saltwater intrusion into Orange County drinking water aquifers, and it eventually finds it way to water supply wells. This water uses the same types of recycling technologies that are now being used on the Space Shuttle to provide the astronauts with their drinking water from their reclaimed wastewater. In addition, that reclaimed water in Orange County will spend months/years/decades underground where natural processes will remove contaminants that might survive the treatment processes. Remember, ALL your water is recycled, in one way or another. Where do you think the wastewater from Las Vegas eventually ends up?
I would not see benzene as a potential contaminant of concern from landscape irrigation.
Uh, doesn't this go back to the disclaimer you need to sign when you purchase over there...You can eat your own grown fruit?
So in your opinion, VOC residents are at risk for TCE exposure and harm?
BTW, I like these types of discussions. I know it angers some, but I like knowing the potential harm in Irvine and surrounding areas. If there is harmful chemicals, I'm sure it isn't isolated to just Tustin.
No. That's definitely NOT what I intended to say. First of all, I was not involved in the site investigation/remediation at the Tustin base, and I am speaking in a general case. TCE is just harder to deal with during the remediation process because you can't depend as much on nature dealing with the problem on its own. At VOC, I believe the remediation process has been completed for all identified chemicals of concern.
Then if the remediation process has been completed, why can't they take off the disclaimer of not growing and eating your own fruit on the land?
I know it says agriculture, but do you believe it? It also says related which can generate anyones interpretation. Oh, chemicals are chemicals.
Let's see... I'll assume the following:
Aerial photos dating back to the 1920s, showing the use of the land.
Maps showing where industrial facilities were located on the base.
Reasonable, but not perfect, consultants with no hidden agenda conducting the site investigation.
(In fact, these folks would LIKE to find issues, because it increases their activity and billing on the project.)
Reasonable, but not perfect, government agency oversight, with a general tendency to be overcautious. (It's not their money.)
Publication of all the reports and documentation, subject to public viewing and public hearings.
What have you got? A tin foil hat?
Edit: Thanks, Zovall for the edit help!
You mean like the much more prevalent and widespead mess under south/west irvine? Check into the TCE from El Toro that moved under woodbridge and surrounding neighborhoods. the Tustin situation is actively managed and has monitoring and cleaning efforts underway.
And in a different thread, I found some stats on the fridge filters that came with the GE fridges for the Camden home owners.
filter comparison chart
99% removal of benzene and TCE. not bad - considering the drinking water comes from other, non-contaminated areas anyway.
I don't quite know what to make of that filter comparison chart. There are chemicals listed that should be removed by any decent reverse osmosis unit or activated carbon filter. But, for example, the chart shows that the Brita filter I use (activated carbon) isn't good for removal of many organics (Benzene
and other VOCs). But that doesn't make any sense. Carbon filters are very good at removing these chemicals. The organics prefer to be attached to a carbon media rather than stay dissolved in water. So as water passes through the filter, the chemicals attach to the carbon, until the filter is saturated and can't hold any more. An RO unit uses a different approach; it is basically a very, very fine screen. Tiny water molecules can pass through. Bigger molecules, like benzene, have a lot more trouble and are held back. Why the table shows that one brand of device works, while another using the same technology does not is puzzling. It may be that the manufacturer did not subject his device to the specific testing protocol required for this report.
I use the filter because it improves the taste of the water, not because I am worried about chemical contamination. My morning tea tastes better! IRWD does a good job of providing safe water. So I'll stick with what I've got.
Matchbox_IHB
New member
Huh? I thought its why everyone has been referring to it as "VOC".
bkshopr_IHB
New member
rickhunter_IHB
New member
I hope you're not becoming TMZ. I read your links and for
Tustin - Article was from 2001, fully disclosed, cleanup was in order, above the state's standards for school sites.
"There was also toluene and ethyl benzene, plus other toxic chemicals, at the site that are above the state's standards for school sites," Clendening said. The statistical risk is that five people out of 100,000 could get cancer, she said.
VERSUS
Carson - "Preliminary results showed benzene levels up to 100,000 times the state standard."
Tustin - Article was from 2001, fully disclosed, cleanup was in order, above the state's standards for school sites.
"There was also toluene and ethyl benzene, plus other toxic chemicals, at the site that are above the state's standards for school sites," Clendening said. The statistical risk is that five people out of 100,000 could get cancer, she said.
VERSUS
Carson - "Preliminary results showed benzene levels up to 100,000 times the state standard."
bkshopr said:
GoIllini_IHB
New member
I'm disappointed, BK. First of all, in your choice of titles. It is inflamatory.
Second, what's the point in posting links to these two unrelated news stories? To imply that there is a current risk to VOC residents? Just to scare people? Just to perpetuate the rumor-mongering about VOC?
The first cite is from a 2001 article. It's no big news that benzene was one of the contaminants beneath the former Tustin Marine Base. The contamination at the Tustin Marine Base has been discussed on these forums many times. Benzene is a component of gasoline, and fuel spills occurred on portions of the base. The key information since that ancient article is that the site was fully investigated and remediated under oversight of the California regulatory agencies. The remedial reports are public information. What was true in 2001 is not true now. Benzene wasn't even the primary contaminant of concern.
The second cite indicates that benzene is a carcinogen. No big news there, either. It's been known for decades.
Second, what's the point in posting links to these two unrelated news stories? To imply that there is a current risk to VOC residents? Just to scare people? Just to perpetuate the rumor-mongering about VOC?
The first cite is from a 2001 article. It's no big news that benzene was one of the contaminants beneath the former Tustin Marine Base. The contamination at the Tustin Marine Base has been discussed on these forums many times. Benzene is a component of gasoline, and fuel spills occurred on portions of the base. The key information since that ancient article is that the site was fully investigated and remediated under oversight of the California regulatory agencies. The remedial reports are public information. What was true in 2001 is not true now. Benzene wasn't even the primary contaminant of concern.
The second cite indicates that benzene is a carcinogen. No big news there, either. It's been known for decades.
bkshopr_IHB
New member
In the Carson neighborhood houses were slab on grade construction with plumbing buried beneath the slab and infrastructure below grade. Typical standards of tract construction. Water and soil are the two biggest contaminants factors. The tract was from the mid 80's and residents with cancer have lived there range from just a few years to several decades. The site was graded and top 10'-15' soil was replaced and imported with new earth before construction.
SoCal78_IHB
New member
bkshopr said:
The first article says the contamination is 20'-25' below ground. So I'd wonder what, if anything, is accomplished by replacing the soil only ten feet above that... is it just so they can "say" they did something?
bkshopr_IHB
New member
SoCal78 said:
This is exactly why I chose an earlier article because the later articles were selective editorials to exclude pertinent information such as depth were the chemical were found. The earlier articles were non bias and not clouded with corporate and political objectives.
Actually up to 15' of earth were replaced and I am no expert like you but my logic also tells me that as long fido does not dig 15' deep he should not come into contact with the original earth assuming there is no capillary property in soil of course.
Mrs BK always tell me when someone pee in the pool and the only way to clean up the pee is to drain the entire pool.
The article also pointed out the Government also were responsible in cleaning up the site. I trust my government very much and my government has never let me down. I look forward to paying my taxes because my government totally deserves it.
GoIllini_IHB
New member
For benzene to be a risk, you have to either breath it, eat it, drink it, or be exposed to it on your skin. You don't drink the groundwater, so that pathway is eliminated. The clean soil on top of the site eliminates many of the other pathways. Benzene is biodegradable, especially when oxygen is present. So, benzene that is in soil vapor will readily be destroyed by soil bacteria before it migrates through a 10 foot soil column.SoCal78 said:
That is one of the differences between benzene and TCE (trichloroethylene), which was the primary volatile organic chemical (VOC) that was present at the base... TCE does not degrade as quickly, so it can migrate through the soil and potentially enter a home at the surface. And yes, I do find it ironic that VOCs (Volatile Organic Chemicals) are an issue at VOC (Villiage of Columbus).
MojoJD_IHB
New member
bkshopr_IHB
New member
bkshopr_IHB
New member
GoIllini said:
Do you see a potential risk when all landscape irrigation is from reclaimed water stored in below grade tanks and nuissance water collected through soil and other tributaries. The water is then sprayed on landscape and mist may land on children playing at the parks?
GoIllini_IHB
New member
bkshopr said:
Reclaimed wastewater used for irrigation (the water in the purple pipes) has been treated at a wastewater treatment plant to meet certain regulatory standards. There are a couple of different standards, but the most common in California are known as the "Title 22 Standards" for such water. It is basically safe to drink but has a high 'yuck' factor that is difficult to overcome. It certainly has a potential for containing some unfriendly chemicals that you would not want to ingest on a long-term basis. (Google "endocrine disruptors" for some discussion.) Thus, that water is used mostly for irrigation or industrial applications. Incidental, occasional exposure would not be a real concern, in my opinion. More highly treated reclaimed wastewater is being used to prevent saltwater intrusion into Orange County drinking water aquifers, and it eventually finds it way to water supply wells. This water uses the same types of recycling technologies that are now being used on the Space Shuttle to provide the astronauts with their drinking water from their reclaimed wastewater. In addition, that reclaimed water in Orange County will spend months/years/decades underground where natural processes will remove contaminants that might survive the treatment processes. Remember, ALL your water is recycled, in one way or another. Where do you think the wastewater from Las Vegas eventually ends up?
I would not see benzene as a potential contaminant of concern from landscape irrigation.
frank69m_IHB
New member
GoIllini said:
Uh, doesn't this go back to the disclaimer you need to sign when you purchase over there...You can eat your own grown fruit?
GoIllini said:
So in your opinion, VOC residents are at risk for TCE exposure and harm?
BTW, I like these types of discussions. I know it angers some, but I like knowing the potential harm in Irvine and surrounding areas. If there is harmful chemicals, I'm sure it isn't isolated to just Tustin.
GoIllini_IHB
New member
JVNA said:
No. That's definitely NOT what I intended to say. First of all, I was not involved in the site investigation/remediation at the Tustin base, and I am speaking in a general case. TCE is just harder to deal with during the remediation process because you can't depend as much on nature dealing with the problem on its own. At VOC, I believe the remediation process has been completed for all identified chemicals of concern.
frank69m_IHB
New member
GoIllini said:
Then if the remediation process has been completed, why can't they take off the disclaimer of not growing and eating your own fruit on the land?
I know it says agriculture, but do you believe it? It also says related which can generate anyones interpretation. Oh, chemicals are chemicals.
GoIllini_IHB
New member
frank69m said:Then if the remediation process has been completed, why can't they take off the disclaimer of not growing and eating your own fruit on the land?
I know it says agriculture, but do you believe it? It also says related which can generate anyones interpretation. Oh, chemicals are chemicals.
Let's see... I'll assume the following:
Aerial photos dating back to the 1920s, showing the use of the land.
Maps showing where industrial facilities were located on the base.
Reasonable, but not perfect, consultants with no hidden agenda conducting the site investigation.
(In fact, these folks would LIKE to find issues, because it increases their activity and billing on the project.)
Reasonable, but not perfect, government agency oversight, with a general tendency to be overcautious. (It's not their money.)
Publication of all the reports and documentation, subject to public viewing and public hearings.
What have you got? A tin foil hat?
Edit: Thanks, Zovall for the edit help!
MojoJD_IHB
New member
JVNA said:
You mean like the much more prevalent and widespead mess under south/west irvine? Check into the TCE from El Toro that moved under woodbridge and surrounding neighborhoods. the Tustin situation is actively managed and has monitoring and cleaning efforts underway.
And in a different thread, I found some stats on the fridge filters that came with the GE fridges for the Camden home owners.
filter comparison chart
99% removal of benzene and TCE. not bad - considering the drinking water comes from other, non-contaminated areas anyway.
GoIllini_IHB
New member
MojoJD said:
I don't quite know what to make of that filter comparison chart. There are chemicals listed that should be removed by any decent reverse osmosis unit or activated carbon filter. But, for example, the chart shows that the Brita filter I use (activated carbon) isn't good for removal of many organics (Benzene
and other VOCs). But that doesn't make any sense. Carbon filters are very good at removing these chemicals. The organics prefer to be attached to a carbon media rather than stay dissolved in water. So as water passes through the filter, the chemicals attach to the carbon, until the filter is saturated and can't hold any more. An RO unit uses a different approach; it is basically a very, very fine screen. Tiny water molecules can pass through. Bigger molecules, like benzene, have a lot more trouble and are held back. Why the table shows that one brand of device works, while another using the same technology does not is puzzling. It may be that the manufacturer did not subject his device to the specific testing protocol required for this report.
I use the filter because it improves the taste of the water, not because I am worried about chemical contamination. My morning tea tastes better! IRWD does a good job of providing safe water. So I'll stick with what I've got.