Remedial Action Report 

for 

Sola Optical USA, Inc. 

Superfund Site 

Sonoma County, California 

May 11, 2012 

Prepared By: 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 

Region IX 

75 Hawthorne Street 

San Francisco, California 94105 

Approved by: 

Mic el Montgomery, Assistant Director 

Fe ral Facilities and Cleanup Branch 

Superfund Division 

EPA Region IX 

Date 

SDMS DOCID# 1133116
I 

TABLE OF CONTENTS 

Table of Contents ......................................................................................................................... I

Acronyms ....................................................................................................................................III

I. Introduction........................................................................................................................................ 1

Location, size, environmental setting, land and resource use............................................................. 1 

Operational history and waste management practices ........................................................................ 2 

Regulatory and enforcement history, Site investigation activities and major findings, Prior 

Removal and remedial activities ............................................................................................................. 2 

Operable Units Designated, Operable Unit Applicable to this RA Report....................................... 4 

II. Operable Unit Background ................................................................................................. 5 

Requirements Specified in the ROD for the OU.................................................................................... 5 

Basis for Cleanup Goals ............................................................................................................................ 5 

ROD Amendment...................................................................................................................................... 6 

Remedial Design........................................................................................................................................ 7 

III. Construction Activities....................................................................................................... 8 

IV. Chronology of Events ......................................................................................................... 8 

Major Events and Significant Milestones ............................................................................................... 8 

Projected Attainment of Cleanup Goals................................................................................................. 8 

V. Performance Standards ........................................................................................................ 8 

Technology performance in comparison to cleanup goals, Results of sampling effort................... 8 

Performance Data Quality........................................................................................................................ 9 

Oversight Activities................................................................................................................................... 9 

VI. Final Inspection and Certifications................................................................................ 10 

Results of Inspections.............................................................................................................................. 10 

Institutional Controls .............................................................................................................................. 10 

Operational and Functional ................................................................................................................... 10 

VII. Operation & Maintenance Activities ........................................................................... 11 

Operation and Maintenance Activities................................................................................................. 11 

Future Ground Water Restoration Activities....................................................................................... 11 

VIII. Summary of Project Costs............................................................................................. 12 

Actual Final Costs.................................................................................................................................... 12 

Previous Cost Estimate ........................................................................................................................... 12 

Comparison .............................................................................................................................................. 12 

Oversight Costs........................................................................................................................................ 12 
II 

IX. Observations and Lessons Learned................................................................................ 12 

X. Operable Unit Contact Information................................................................................. 13 

XI. References............................................................................................................................ 14 

Tables and Figures .................................................................................................................... 16 

Table 1: ROD-Specified MCLs and Drinking Water Standards, Sola Optical USA, Inc., 

Sonoma County, CA ............................................................................................................... 18 

Table 2: Chronology of Site events, Sola Optical USA, Inc., Sonoma County, CA ....................... 19 

Table 3: Groundwater Quality Data, Primary VOCs (1997 to Present), Former Sola 

Optical U.S.A., Inc., Facility, Petaluma, California............................................................. 22 

Table 4: EPA Oversight Costs ............................................................................................................... 28 

Figure 1: Site Vicinity Map, Sola Optical USA, Inc., Petaluma, California..................................... 29 

Figure 2: Monitoring Well Locations, Sola Optical USA, Inc., Petaluma, California.................... 30 

Figure 3: Concentrations of 1,1-DCE Versus Time in Well W-27..................................................... 31 

Figure 4: Concentrations of 1,1-DCA Versus Time in Well W-27.................................................... 32 

 
III 

ACRONYMS 

1,1,1-TCA 1,1,1-trichloroethane 

1,1,1-TCA 1,1,1-trichloroethane 

1,1,2-TCA 1,1,2-trichloroethane 

1,1-DCE 1,1-dichloroethene 

1,2-DCA 1,2-dichloroethane 

bgs below ground surface 

CSPRMD County of Sonoma Permit and Resource Management Department 

EPA United States Environmental Protection Agency 

GWTS groundwater extraction and treatment system 

IC institutional control 

MCL Maximum Contaminant Limit 

μg/L micrograms per liter 

MNA monitored natural attenuation 

msl mean sea level 

O&M operation and maintenance 

OU operable unit 

PCE tetrachloroethene 

ppb parts per billion 

RAO Remedial Action Objective 

ROD Record of Decision 

TCE trichloroethene 

tDCE trans-1,2-dichloroethene 

TI technical impracticability 

UST underground storage tank 

VOC volatile organic compound 
1 

I. Introduction 

Location, size, environmental setting, land and resource use 

The Sola Optical USA, Inc. (Sola) Superfund Site (Site) is located in the City of Petaluma in 

Sonoma County, California, just east of Lakeville Highway’s intersection with Interstate 

Highway 101, as shown on Figure 1. Adobe Creek lies 0.3 mile west of the Site and flows into 

the Petaluma River one mile from the Site. The Site is essentially flat, and a manufacturing 

building and adjoining administration office building occupy the main property. Six 

underground storage tanks (USTs) were formerly located behind the north corner of the 

manufacturing part of the facility. The Site building is occupied by three companies, which 

access the main facility building and the loading docks. There is a fence located along the 

eastern Site boundary. Since 2005, an asphalt parking lot and four building pads with the 

associated below grade infrastructure (i.e., electrical and plumbing) have been constructed on 

the auxiliary 11 acre lot, adjacent to the main property. 

The topography of the area, including the Site, gently slopes 50 feet per mile from low hills in 

the east towards the Petaluma River, located approximately one mile southwest of the Sola 

building. Adobe Creek, located 0.3 mile west of the Sola building, runs north-south and flows 

intermittently into the Petaluma River one mile south from the Site. 

Geologic investigations indicate that the depositional sediments at the Site consist of a complex 

sequence of alluvial deposits consisting of interbedded clays, silts, and sands, with lesser 

amounts of gravel. At depths of approximately 80 to 100 feet below ground surface (bgs), 

thicker clay intervals are present, which appear to be relatively continuous over distances of 

hundreds of feet. Interbedded within the clay are silt, sand, and gravel layers of various 

thicknesses. These deeper sediments probably represent complex alluvial and estuarine 

depositional environments (LFR, 1989). 

Since October 2005, groundwater in the shallow sediments is generally encountered from 6 to 

18.5 feet above mean sea level (msl). The aquifer is unconfined and the groundwater flows 

south/southwesterly towards the Petaluma River, most likely the point of discharge. Natural 

recharge occurs at the base of the foothills to the north/northeast. The shallow aquifer extends 

to approximately 30 feet below msl and has been classified by the U.S. Environmental 

Protection Agency (EPA) as a Class IIa drinking water source aquifer. Below the shallow 

aquifer, the intermediate aquifer is approximately 30 to 60 feet below msl. The deep aquifer is 

from approximately 60 to 100 feet below msl, the deeper aquifer from approximately 100 to 200 

feet below msl, and the deepest aquifer is greater than 200 feet below msl (LFR, 1990). 

The 35-acre Sola property is zoned for industrial use. Land-use in the surrounding area is 

industrial, commercial, residential, and undeveloped land. The adjacent property to the west of 

the Site was previously owned by Stero Company, a manufacturer of dishwashers. There are 

residential subdivisions to the north and northwest of the Site, approximately 200 feet away. 

Property east of the Site is used for office space and the Harvest Christian School. 
2 

Approximately 11 previously undeveloped acres (889,060 square feet) in the southwest portion 

of the Site were purchased by RNM Cader, L.L.C. (RNM) for development. An asphalt parking 

lot and four building pads with the associated below grade infrastructure (i.e., electrical and 

plumbing) were constructed on this lot between 2005 and 2010. The remaining 24 acres of the 

Sola property, including the buildings, were sold to Kland, L.L.C. in 2002. Buildings on the Site 

facility parcel include the original manufacturing building, an adjoining administration office 

building, and a parking lot surrounding the buildings. Three commercial tenants currently 

occupy the Site building: Petaluma Poultry, Reynolds Packaging, and Scott Laboratories. 

Petaluma Poultry conducts sales and distribution of poultry; Reynolds Packaging conducts 

storage and distribution of food packaging materials; and Scott Laboratories conducts 

manufacturing and finishing of cork for the wine industry. 

The City of Petaluma uses the unconfined aquifer in the area as a drinking water source. In the 

vicinity of the Site, one City of Petaluma municipal water supply well (Station #5, screened 

from 180 to 512 feet bgs) and two private wells (Stero industrial well and Crandell residential 

well) were previously used. In addition, one City of Petaluma well (screened from 60 to 280 feet 

bgs) was installed at the Site but never used. All of these wells have been shut down and/or 

abandoned in accordance with State of California well decommissioning requirements. 

Operational History and Waste Management Practices 

Sola manufactured ophthalmic lenses from 1978 through 2001. The facility consisted of one 

manufacturing building and an adjoining administration office building. The manufacturing 

process involved the injection of a catalyzed, thermosetting resin into a cavity between polished 

glass molds. The mold assembly was then placed in an air oven to cure the resin. The assembly 

was removed from the oven and subsequently put through a cleaning process before the 

production was repeated. The six USTs located behind the rear north corner of the 

manufacturing part of the facility were used to store solvents such as 1,1,1-trichloroethane 

(1,1,1-TCA), acetone, and methanol. 

Regulatory and enforcement history, Site investigation activities and major findings, 

Prior removal and remedial activities. 

In May 1982, Sola found low concentrations of volatile organic compound (VOC) contamination 

in the groundwater beneath the Site, near the six USTs. In 1983, the San Francisco Regional 

Water Quality Control Board (Regional Board) directed Sola to investigate the contamination 

and 1,1-DCA, 1,1-dichloroethene (1,1-DCE), methylene chloride, and 1,1,1-trichloroethane 

(1,1,1-TCA) were identified in the groundwater. In July 1985, Sola excavated and removed the 

six USTs. When the tanks were removed, there were no signs of leakage from the tanks; 

however, observations of the tank fill pipes and surrounding backfill showed staining on the 

pipes and in the adjacent backfill (LFR, 1990). It was concluded that the groundwater 

contamination might be a result of accidental spillage adjacent to, or leakage from, the fill pipes. 

The tank removal included excavation of gravel backfill materials and three to five feet of native 

soil from the sides and bottom of the excavation pit. Confirmation sampling identified the 

presence of three contaminants: acetone, 1,1-DCE, and trans-1,2-dichloroethene (tDCE). Based 

on these findings, an additional two feet of soil was excavated from the eastern wall of the 
3 

former tank area. Further confirmation sampling demonstrated the presence of VOCs, including 

acetone. No additional excavation was performed (LFR, 1990). 

In July 1986, soil gas samples were collected from 40 locations, ranging from three to five feet 

bgs, to determine if VOCs were migrating from shallow groundwater and to aid in selection of 

locations for groundwater monitoring and extraction wells. Chemicals detected in the soil gas 

included: chloroform, carbon tetrachloride, 1,1-DCA, 1,1-DCE, tetrachloroethene (PCE), and 

1,1,1-TCA. Maximum concentrations were found approximately 70 feet downgradient from the 

location of the former USTs (CH2M Hill, 1991). 

In 1987, the Regional Board ordered Sola to construct and operate a groundwater extraction and 

treatment system (GWTS). Sola conducted the activities, with the treated groundwater being 

discharged into Adobe Creek, just northwest of the Site, under a permit from the Regional 

Board. The extraction and treatment system began operating in 1988. Sola also arranged to have 

the City of Petaluma shut down the nearby municipal water supply well, to avoid interference 

with the groundwater clean-up efforts and prevent potential use of Site-impacted groundwater. 

In 1989, EPA became the lead regulatory agency for remedial activities at the Site. On February 

21, 1990, EPA added the Site to the National Priorities List of Superfund sites. Soon thereafter, 

EPA issued an administrative order directing Sola to conduct further environmental sampling 

and to prepare a remedial investigation report and a feasibility study of clean-up options, both 

of which Sola completed in 1991. 

Based on the remedial investigation report, feasibility study, and risk assessment, EPA issued 

the original Record of Decision (ROD) on September 27, 1991. The ROD determined that an 

expanded GWTS was the most appropriate method for remediating contamination at the Site. 

Sola expanded the system in 1992 pursuant to EPA’s ROD, and continued operations. The 

system was expected to restore the shallow groundwater to clean-up standards within 15-20 

years. Initially, concentrations of the VOC contamination at the Site decreased significantly. By 

1997, however, the rate of contaminant reduction slowed to almost zero. Groundwater 

monitoring data at four wells showed that concentrations of two contaminants, 1,1-DCE and 

1,1,-DCA, appeared to have stabilized and reached an asymptote at levels above the clean-up 

standards. Continued monitoring reflected no further reductions in contaminant concentrations. 

Some parts of the contaminated aquifer had achieved the clean-up standard of 5 parts per 

billion (ppb) for 1,1-DCA by this time, but some parts had not. The extraction and treatment 

system was no longer effectively removing these lower concentrations of contaminants from the 

groundwater. 

In 1997, Sola requested approval from EPA to shut off the extraction and treatment system and 

issue a technical impracticability (TI) waiver, arguing that the clean-up goals for these two 

contaminants could not be achieved using extraction and treatment. EPA requested instead 

that Sola examine monitored natural attenuation (MNA) as a potential remedy for the Site. Sola 

ceased operating the groundwater extraction and treatment system and monitored the aquifer’s 

response under EPA’s oversight. 
4 

The concentrations of the two remaining contaminants slowly declined. In 2001, Sola analyzed 

the data gathered since system shut-down in 1997 and presented its evaluation of MNA, 

following EPA guidance. Sola concluded that extraction and treatment alone would not be 

capable of achieving the clean-up standard for the remaining aquifer contaminant. Sola’s 

evaluation concluded that MNA would likely be an effective remedy for attaining the clean-up 

standard. The extraction and treatment system was decommissioned in 2002. 

Since 2002, Sola continued semi-annual monitoring. Results have shown that concentrations of 

the two contaminants continued to decline. In 2007 EPA formally selected MNA as the site 

remedy in a Record of Decision. 

Operable Units Designated, Operable Unit Applicable to this RA Report 

There was only one operable unit (OU) designated for this site. 

 
5 

II. Operable Unit Background 

Requirements Specified in the ROD for the OU 

The ROD for the Site was signed on September 27, 1991 (EPA, 1991). The Remedial Action 

Objective (RAO) was to restore groundwater to its beneficial use, which is drinking water. The 

selected site cleanup remedy consisted of the following elements: 

n Groundwater monitoring to assure capture of contaminated groundwater and to 

demonstrate restoration of groundwater to cleanup standards throughout the aquifer 

n Operation of existing extraction wells (8) 

n Construction and operation of two additional shallow extraction wells 

n Conversion of monitoring wells LF-13 and LF-17 to deep extraction wells 

n Construction and operation of additional piping for the new and converted wells 

n On-site treatment and discharge off-site or discharge to the City of Petaluma sewage 

treatment system 

The enhanced GWTS, which began operating in 1992, was expected to restore the shallow 

groundwater to clean-up standards in 15 to 20 years. The system’s deep extraction wells were 

needed to prevent further migration of contaminants into the deeper portion of the aquifer. The 

remedy included constructing a carbon filtration system at the facility to treat the extracted 

groundwater, and discharging the treated water off-site to Adobe Creek (EPA, 1991). The 

groundwater cleanup standards were set at state or federally promulgated drinking water 

standards, known as Maximum Contaminant Levels (MCLs). The applicable drinking water 

standards and the MCLs listed in the ROD are shown in Table 1. 

In 1997, the GWTS was turned off because it was no longer effectively reducing contaminant 

concentrations. Without the GWTS operating, contaminant concentrations slowly continued to 

decrease. Sola believed natural attenuation was causing this decrease, and they began to study 

the phenomena. After two years, the GWTS was decommissioned and a number of the 

monitoring wells and piezometers were decommissioned. Based on the groundwater 

monitoring data during this time, Sola requested that EPA consider MNA as a final remedy 

(LFR, 2001). The first five year review for the Site was conducted in 2000 and indicated that the 

ROD remedial action objectives of preventing migration of contaminated groundwater and 

restoring the aquifer continued to be met, even though the GWTS was no longer operating, and 

the PRP was studying the natural attenuation believed responsible for the continued 

contaminant decrease. 

Basis for Cleanup Goals 

Although the interim remedial actions in the 1980’s – interim pumping and treatment of 

groundwater, and removal of tanks and contaminated soil – reduced Site risks, groundwater 

beneath the Site still exceeded drinking water standards, reducing its full beneficial use as 

drinking water. Twelve chemicals of potential concern were identified in the 1991 ROD: 

acetone, butanone, 1,1-DCA, 1,2-dichloroethane (1,2-DCA), 1,1-DCE, Freon 113, 4-methyl-2-

pentanone, PCE, toluene, 1,1,1-TCA, 1,1,2-trichloroethane (1,1,2-TCA), and trichloroethene 

(TCE). Contamination was found in the soil (acetone ranging up to 54 mg/kg and 1,1-DCE at 

0.051 mg/kg), and in the groundwater (primarily 1,1-DCA, 1,1-DCE, 1,1,1-TCA, and Freon-113). 
6 

The highest contaminant concentration in groundwater was 1,1-DCE (3,300 micrograms per 

liter [μg/L]) detected in shallow well W-14 located downgradient of the former UST area. The 

wells on the downgradient edge of the Site indicated that the lateral extent of the VOC 

contamination within the Sola property was at or below the clean-up standards (EPA, 1991). 

The risk assessment presented in the ROD indicated an excess lifetime cancer risk based on use 

of on-site contaminated groundwater for drinking water of 1x10-4 (1 person out of 10,000 

people), primarily from 1,1 DCE. The non-carcinogenic risk estimate for contaminated 

groundwater indicated that no adverse noncarcinogenic health effects were expected. 

The ecological assessment identified Adobe Creek as the closest surface water body to the Site 

and as a site of a local project to reintroduce anadromous steelhead trout to the creek. However, 

water quality samples from groundwater monitoring wells installed between the Sola property 

and Adobe Creek did not detect any contaminants, indicating that discharge of contaminants to 

surface water had not occurred. In addition, contaminants detected in groundwater at the Site 

were below their corresponding federal surface water quality criteria for the protection of 

aquatic life. 

ROD Amendment 

EPA worked with Sola on evaluating the groundwater remediation after the GWTS was shutdown in 1997. Sola prepared a report evaluating Monitored Natural Attenuation (MNA) in 

2001, and EPA indicated it would proceed with amending the ROD to establish MNA as the 

new remedy. In 2002, Sola demolished the GWTS and prepared a workplan and monitoring 

report for MNA. Due to low site risks and higher environmental priorities, EPA did not proceed 

with the remedy decision process until 2005. In 2006, EPA prepared a Proposed Plan (issued in 

January 2007) for the MNA remedy. In March 2007, EPA signed the ROD Amendment that 

selected MNA and institutional controls (ICs) to achieve and sustain clean-up standards at the 

Site. 

Sola began implementing the MNA monitoring in 2003, upon EPA approval, consisting of semiannual sampling. They continued the semi-annual sampling through December 2009. One 

groundwater monitoring event was conducted in 2010 and none in 2011. EPA is engaging with 

Sola to resume the monitoring program. 

In July 2007, EPA approved Sola’s proposal to abandon three groundwater monitoring wells 

(W-22, W-25, and LF-2) and three extraction wells (E-3, E-5, and E-7) that were not needed for 

the MNA monitoring plan. In accordance with the 2007 ROD Amendment, no additional wells 

have been installed on the Site. 

ICs were also a component of the ROD Amendment. ICs are non-engineering methods by 

which access to contaminated environmental media is restricted. The 1991 ROD did not include 

ICs as part of the remedy (EPA, 1991) on the basis that groundwater at the Site would soon be 

cleaned up to federal and state groundwater standards, rendering it available for domestic uses. 

The 2005 Second Five-Year Review report determined that ICs should be implemented (EPA, 

2005a). Accordingly, the 2007 ROD Amendment included ICs to protect against inappropriate 
7 

use of the contaminated groundwater until the clean-up standards were achieved. The IC’s 

included a restrictive covenant and the local well permitting process. The restrictive covenant 

was never implemented. The well permitting IC consisted of having the County of Sonoma 

Permit and Resource Management Department (CSPRMD) place a notification in their 

computerized system called Permits Plus, regarding the Superfund site. This institutional 

control was not initially implemented, but as a result of the 2010 Five-Year Review it has 

subsequently been put in place. 

Remedial Design 

Sola had submitted a workplan for implementing MNA back in 2002, consisting of continued 

semi-annual groundwater monitoring. Monitoring would consist of water level measurements 

for 4 wells and water quality sampling for 1 well (W-27). (See figure 2). EPA approved this 

proposal as the remedial design (EPA, 2008). In July 2007, three groundwater monitoring wells 

(W-22, W-25, and LF-2) that were no longer used and three extraction wells (E-3, E-5, and E-7) 

were abandoned. In accordance with the 2007 ROD Amendment, no additional wells were 

installed. 

 
8 

III. Construction Activities 

No additional facilities were constructed for the implementation of the ROD Amendment. 

Operation and maintenance (O&M) for the MNA remedy has consisted of conducting semiannual sampling of water levels and quality. Since 2005, LFR/Arcadis have conducted 

groundwater monitoring events on a semi-annual and annual basis on behalf of Sola. 

IV. Chronology of Events 

Major Events and Significant Milestones 

Table 2 provides a chronology of events at the Site. 

Projected Attainment of Cleanup Goals 

Based on data gathered through 2010, it is projected that the groundwater would by now have 

attained cleanup goals. (See Table 3, Figures 2 and 4). Additional sampling is needed to confirm 

whether cleanup goals have been attained and maintained. EPA is working with the PRP to 

arrange the confirmatory sampling. 

V. Performance Standards 

Technology performance in comparison to cleanup goals, Results of sampling effort 

Shallow wells are those screened within the approximate interval of 0 to 30 feet bgs (LFR, 1990). 

Constituents detected in the shallow aquifer since 2005 include 1,1 DCA, and 1,1,1-TCA. Table 3 

shows the maximum concentrations of 1,1-DCE, 1,1-DCA, and 1,1,1-TCA detected in 

groundwater samples from the seven shallow wells (W-22, W-25, W-27, LF-2, E-3, E-5, and E-7) 

from 2005 to 2010. (LFR/Arcadis, 2009 and Roth, 2010). The concentrations of all three 

chemicals in most wells had shown a dramatic decline from high initial concentrations in 1986 

to low concentrations or non-detect by 2005 and later. In well W-27, concentrations of 1,1-DCE, 

1,1-DCA, and 1,1,1-TCA were non-detect in 1986 and rose later. Their concentrations fluctuated 

until April 1991, when 1,1-DCA started to steadily increase and remained above the MCL 

through 2009, except for an occasional dip in concentration. As of 2009, only one well (W-27) in 

the shallow aquifer was still monitored for VOCs. The 1,1-DCE concentrations over time in W27 are shown in Figure 2, and the 1,1-DCA concentrations over time in the same well are shown 

in Figure 4. 

The concentration of 1,1-DCA in well W-27 had dropped below the MCL of 5 μg/L in the June 

2010 sampling, although it will be sampled in 2012 to confirm the trend. Since 2005, the 1,1-

DCE concentration had been below the MCL (6 μg/L) in all locations. 

Since 2005, 1,1,1-TCA has not been detected in groundwater samples collected from any of the 

shallow wells on the Site. 
9 

Groundwater was continuously analyzed and data reported for 1,2-DCA, TCE, and Freon 113, 

but most often these constituents were non-detect in all of the wells. Since 2005, 1,2-DCA, TCE, 

and Freon 113 have not been detected in any of the groundwater samples collected from 

shallow wells on the Site. No emerging constituents of concern (COCs) have been identified in 

soil or soil gas at the Site (EPA, 2005a). 

Performance Data Quality 

To provide quality control for the semi-annual groundwater monitoring, the MNA Work Plan 

specified that one field blank and one duplicate sample would be taken during each sampling 

event (LFR, 2002). The duplicate samples were taken and their results reported only once 

during the two sampling events in 2003, twice annually during 2004 and 2005, only once in 2006 

and no times since then. No data validation reporting was made. 

Oversight Activities 

EPA oversight of the MNA activities has consisted of reviewing the semi-annual groundwater 

monitoring results, as reported by Sola’s contractor, and conducting 5-year reviews. 

Groundwater monitoring reports were submitted in 2003, 2005, 2006, 2007, 2008, 2009 and 2010. 

A 5-year review was conducted in 2000, 2005 and one in 2010. 

 
10 

VI. Final Inspection and Certifications 

Results of Inspections 

No additional construction activities occurred to implement the remedial activities selected by 

the 2007 ROD Amendment. 

Institutional Controls 

Actions were taken pursuant to the 2007 ROD Amendment to implement one of the two 

institutional controls selected, the restrictions within the County of Sonoma’s well permitting 

process. Sonoma County’s Permit and Resource Management Department (CSPRMD) is 

responsible for issuing all well installation permits (EPA, 2007b). The CSPRMD has a 

computerized system called Permits Plus that is used to maintain information about properties 

in Sonoma County (EPA, 2007b). As described in the 2007 ROD Amendment, EPA requested 

that the CSPRMD place a notification within the Permits Plus system regarding the Site parcel 

that lies directly above the contaminated groundwater. This notice would indicate that the 

parcel is part of a Superfund site and that well permits should not be issued before consulting 

with the CSPRMD and EPA. If anyone requests a permit for the Sola Site parcel, this notice 

would appear within the Permits Plus system and the CSPRMD would review the permit 

request within the context of the Site requirements. 

During the 2010 5-Year Review, EPA learned that the Permits Plus system did not contain any 

notice that the Site parcel lies directly above the contaminated groundwater and that wells 

should not be constructed on the property. Although no additional wells had been installed on 

the Site since the previous 5-Year Review, the County of Sonoma well permitting restriction IC 

had not been implemented. As a result of this finding, EPA contacted the County and had them 

place a notice in their permitting database regarding the groundwater at the Sola Optical 

Superfund Site. 

Operational and Functional 

EPA determined that the MNA remedy was operational and functional when EPA approved 

the remedial design for the MNA remedy on February 2, 2008 (EPA, 2008). 

 
11 

VII. Operation & Maintenance Activities 

Operation and Maintenance Activities 

The O&M activities associated with the MNA remedy consists of semi-annual groundwater 

monitoring. In 2005, 2006, and early 2007, ten wells were monitored for groundwater elevation 

semi-annually, seven wells were sampled for VOCs annually, and four wells were sampled for 

VOCs semi-annually. In July 2007, three groundwater monitoring wells (W-22, W-25, and LF-2) 

and three extraction wells (E-3, E-5, and E-7) were abandoned and sealed in accordance with 

Department of Water Resources (DWR) guidelines (LFR, 2007b). Sampling had shown that VOC 

concentrations in these wells had been consistently below clean-up standards. The well 

destruction was performed under California State Department of Health Services 

Environmental Health Division permit number 05582 HMW. Figure 2 shows the status of the 

monitoring wells in 2010. No intermediate or deep wells remain; all remaining wells are 

shallow. One or more of the remaining extraction wells may be used for future sampling if the 

need is identified. Since October 2007, the remaining four wells have been monitored for 

groundwater elevation and one of them (W-27) continues to be monitored for VOCs. 

No O&M activities are conducted relating to the IC remedy component. 

Future Ground Water Restoration Activities 

The same activities will continue in the future until groundwater cleanup standards are 

achieved and maintained. 

 
12 

VIII. Summary of Project Costs 

Actual Final Costs 

In April 2010, LFR/Arcadis reported that the Site annual O&M costs are approximately 

$14,500/year for the groundwater monitoring (Roth, 2010). 

Previous Cost Estimate 

The present worth cost, as documented in the ROD Amendment, was estimated to be $149,000. 

Capital: 0 

Annual: $18,000 for each of first 3 years, 

then $8,000 annually for next 2 years, 

Future: $36,000 

Total Present Value: $143,000 at 7% interest rate 

$149,000 at 5% interest rate 

Comparison 

The annual cost of the groundwater monitoring appears to be within close range to the estimate 

from the ROD Amendment. 

Oversight Costs 

EPA’s oversight costs have averaged approximately $3,200 per year when the only activities 

were reviewing the groundwater monitoring reports. The cost for the 2005 5-Year Review was 

approximately $49,600 (incurred in 2005). The cost for the 2010 5-Year Review was 

approximately $82,000 (incurred in 2010 and 2011). The cost for preparing the Proposed Plan 

and the 2007 ROD Amendment was approximately $50,300 (incurred in 2006 and 2007). The 

annual oversight cost bills are summarized in Table 4. 

IX. Observations and Lessons Learned 

Monitored Natural Attenuation appears to have successfully remediated the lingering 

groundwater contamination in the aquifer. After pumping and treating the groundwater for 

approximately 10 years, the PRP proposed that it was technically impracticable to remediate the 

groundwater. They pointed to the stabilization of the contaminant concentrations above the 

MCL as evidence. Whereas the pump and treat system had become ineffective at making 

further progress towards the cleanup level, through another alternative, the aquifer was capable 

of achieving the MCL. The lesson learned is that at Sola Optical a TI waiver was not 

appropriate whereas MNA could be an effective tool for reducing groundwater contamination 

to MCLs. 

 
13 

X. Operable Unit Contact Information 

EPA Contact: 

Dante Rodriguez 

Remedial Project Manager 

U.S. EPA Region 9 

75 Hawthorne Street, SFD-8-2 

San Francisco, CA 94105 

(415) 972-3166 

rodriguez.dante@epa.gov

PRP Contact: 

Hahn Nguyen 

Senior Account Manager 

Carl Zeiss Vision Inc. 

12121 Scrips Summit Drive, Suite 400 

San Diego, CA 92131-4609 

(858) 790-7696 

hanh.nguyen@vision.zeiss.com

PRP/Site Contractor: 

Daren Roth 

Task Manager 

LFR Arcadis 

1900 Powell Street, 12th Floor 

Emeryville, CA 94608 

(510) 596-9558 

daren.roth@arcadis-us.com

 
14 

XI. References 

CH2M Hill. 1991. Public Health Risk Assessment; Sola Optical USA, Inc. April. 

Levine Fricke (LFR). 1989. Evaluation of Implemented Interim Remedial Measures and Proposed Final 

Remedial Measures at Sola Optical, USA Inc. Facility, Petaluma, California. June 15. 

__________. 1990. Remedial Investigation Report; Sola Optical USA, Inc, Petaluma, California.

December 3. 

__________. 2001. Evaluation of Monitored Natural Attenuation as a Remedy to Meet Remedial Action 

Objectives; Sola Optical USA, Inc., Site. April 4. 

__________. 2002. Letter from LFR to EPA regarding work plan to implement monitored natural 

attenuation. October 22. 

LFR/Arcadis. 2009. Groundwater Monitoring Report, January through June 2009, Former Sola Optical 

USA, Inc., Facility, 1500 Cader Lane, Petaluma, California. September 1. 

Roth, Daren. 2010. (Project Geologist, Arcadis, Emeryville, California). Personal communication 

with Ahnna Westrich of CDM, Walnut Creek, California. March 17. 

United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). 1991. Record of Decision, Sola Optical Site.

September 27. 

__________. 2005a. Second Five-Year Review Report for Sola Optical USA, Inc. Superfund Site, 

Sonoma County, California. September. 

__________. 2007b. Record of Decision Amendment for the Sola Optical USA, Inc. Superfund Site, 

Petaluma, California. March 30. 

__________. 2008. Letter from EPA to Carl Zeiss Vision and LFR regarding Approval of 

Remedial Design, Sola Optical Superfund Site. February 20. 

 
15 

[This page intentionally left blank] 
16 

XII. Tables and Figures 

 
17 

Table 1 

ROD-Specified MCLs and Drinking Water Standards 

Sola Optical USA, Inc., Sonoma County, CA 

Chemical 

Drinking Water Standard

(μg/L) RAO 

(μg/L) 

State Federal

1,1-DCE 6 7 6 

1,1-DCA 5 NE 5 

1,1,1-TCA 200 200 200 

Freon 113 1,200 NE 1,200 

NE = none established 

 
18 

Table 2 

Chronology of Site Events 

Sola Optical USA, Inc., Sonoma County, CA 

Date Event 

1978-2001 Sola operates as ophthalmic lens manufacturing facility. 

1978-1985 Six 1,000-gallon underground storage tanks (USTs) are used to store 1,1,1-

trichloroethane (1,1,1-TCA), acetone, and methanol. 

1982 Volatile organic compounds (VOCs) are detected in shallow groundwater in immediate 

vicinity of USTs. 

1983 The California Regional Water Quality Control Board – San Francisco Bay Region 

(Water Board) orders a groundwater investigation. 

July 1985 Sola removes six 1,000-gallon USTs. 

July 1986 Sola conducts soil gas and soil boring investigation. Maximum detection of 150 

milligrams per liter (mg/L) 1,1,1-TCA in soil gas. 

November 1986 Trace concentrations of VOCs are detected in City of Petaluma Station 5 municipal 

water supply well, located approximately 300 feet downgradient of the Site. 

April 1987 Water Board issues Site Clean Up Order (Docket # 87-038) requiring Sola to construct a 

groundwater extraction and treatment system (GWTS). 

May 1987 Water Board refers site to EPA for inclusion on the National Priorities List (NPL). 

May 1987 EPA Special Notice Letter proposes additional Remedial Investigation (RI) activities and 

preparation of a Feasibility Study (FS) for the Site. 

October 1987 Sola installs a GWTS, which is fully operational by August 1988. 

June 1988 City of Petaluma ceases operation of Station 5 well. 

October 1989 Sola and City of Petaluma enter written agreement to cease operations at Station 5 well 

until such pumping would no longer have the potential to impede any remedial 

measures at the Site. 

October 1989 EPA issues administrative order (Docket # 89-22) for RI/FS; additional soil and soil gas 

sampling conducted under EPA oversight. 

February 1990 Site was placed on the NPL. 

April 1990 Use of Stero’s private water supply well discontinues; Sola removes pumping system 

and agrees to pay for municipal water supply. 

December 1990 Sola submits RI. 

June 1991 Sola submits FS with detailed evaluation of enhancements to current GWTS remedy, 

i.e., installing two additional shallow extraction wells and converting two deep monitoring 

wells into extraction wells. 

September 1991 EPA issued a Record of Decision (ROD), selecting expansion and continued operation 

of the existing GWTS system, with off-site disposal of treated effluent. Concludes that 

soils do not pose unacceptable risk. 

January 1992 EPA issues Administrative Order (Docket # 92-07) for Remedial Design/Remedial 

Action. 
19 

Table 2 (Continued) 

Date Event 

February 1992 Remedial Design/Remedial Action Work Plan submitted to EPA. Specified enhanced 

GWTS system. 

July 1992 Enhanced extraction system started. This included two new shallow monitoring wells 

and the conversion of two deep monitoring wells into extraction wells. 

August 1992 Construction complete and interim closeout report signed: eight extraction wells, liquid 

phase carbon treatment. 

January 1993 Public Health Assessment Report concludes no apparent public health hazard at the 

Site because contaminated groundwater is not currently a source of drinking water. 

Future exposures were considered unlikely if the groundwater extraction system 

reduces concentrations to levels below health concerns. 

November 1996 Sola submits request for a Technical Impracticability (TI) Waiver because the California 

Department of Public Health maximum contaminant levels (MCLs) had not been 

achieved throughout the Site with active groundwater extraction after eight years of 

pumping. 

March 1997 EPA stated that a TI waiver could not be determined without additional information, 

including turning off the extraction wells and treatment system for two quarters and 

evaluating potential rebound during quarterly monitoring for six months. GWTS shut 

down at this time. 

November 1997 No rebound noted during end of 6-month test period. Sola abandons 17 groundwater 

monitoring wells and 4 piezometers that have been at non-detect (ND) levels or below 

the MCLs and decreases monitoring frequency from quarterly to semiannual. 

September 2000 First Five-Year Review and site inspection. 

April-May 2001 Abandonment of 34 monitoring, extraction and piezometers at site 

April 2001 Extraction wells E-5, E-6, E-7, and E-11 were decommissioned in preparation for 

proposed development of adjacent property (pumps pulled and wellhead piping 

removed). 

November 6, 2001 to 

January 13, 2002 

Dismantling of GWTS system completed. Extraction wells E-1, E-2, E-3, E-4, and 

E-10 were also decommissioned at this time. 

May 2001 MW-19 destroyed to accommodate site development. E-7 added to monitoring program 

as a replacement well. 

September 2002 EPA requests a work plan to implement monitored natural attenuation (MNA) at the Site. 

October 2002 Sola submits Work Plan to implement MNA (Levine Fricke [LFR], 2002b). Also submits 

request to abandon and destroy six former monitoring and extraction wells. 

December 2002 EPA approves the MNA Evaluation Report/Work Plan. Groundwater monitoring plan 

further modified in January 2003. 

April 2004 Six groundwater monitoring and former extraction wells located at the Site were 

abandoned (W-14, LF-25, LF-26, E-6, E-10, and E-11), under Destruction Permit # 

4245, County of Sonoma – Department of Health Services (CSDHS). 

June 2005 Sola submits Groundwater Monitoring and Additional Site Activities Report (LFR, 2005). 

This report included data from groundwater monitoring events from May 2003 through 

May 2005.

September 2005 Second Five-Year Review and site inspection (EPA, 2005a). 
20 

Table 2 (Continued) 

Date Event 

August 2006 Sola submits Groundwater Monitoring and Additional Site Activities Report (LFR, 2006). 

This report included data from groundwater monitoring events in October 2005 and 

June 2006. This report also included a request to abandon three groundwater 

monitoring wells (W-22, W-25, and LF-2) and three extraction wells (E-3, E-5, and E-7). 

January 2007 EPA submits Proposed Plan to public entitled EPA Proposes Amending the Clean-up 

Plan for Contaminated Groundwater, Sola Optical USA, Inc. Superfund Site 

(EPA, 2007a). 

February 2007 Sola submits Groundwater Monitoring and Additional Site Activities Report 

(LFR, 2007a). This report included data from the groundwater monitoring event in 

October 2006 and also included a request to abandon three groundwater monitoring 

wells (W-22, W-25, and LF-2) and three extraction wells (E-3, E-5, and E-7). 

March 2007 EPA issues a ROD Amendment, selecting MNA to achieve groundwater clean-up 

standards, institutional controls (ICs) to protect against inappropriate use of the 

contaminated groundwater until the clean-up standards are achieved, and monitoring of 

both of the remedy components until clean-up standards are achieved and sustained. 

The goal for MNA is aquifer restoration (EPA, 2007b). 

August 2007 A Conditional Use Permit application is submitted to the City of Petaluma – Community 

Development Department to relocate the Harvest Christian School (HCS) to 1500 Cader 

Lane (HCS, 2007). Sola submits report regarding the well abandonment activities in 

July 2007 (LFR, 2007c). 

September 2008 Sola submits Groundwater Monitoring and Additional Site Activities Report 

(LFR, 2008a). This report included data from the groundwater monitoring event in April 

2008. This report also described the work associated with the conversion of the W-27 

stove-pipe well box to a flush mounted well box. This work was conducted at the request 

of RNM Properties, which is an agent to RNM Cader, LLC (RNM), the current owners of 

the auxiliary 11 acres, in order for them to install a parking lot in the area of the well as 

part of site development activities (LFR, 2008a). 

November 2008 The CSDHS submits a Notice of Potential Groundwater Contamination letter to 

constituents who own property within 1⁄4-mile of the Sola Site (CSDHS-EHD, 2008). 

December 2008 Sola submits Groundwater Monitoring Report (LFR, 2008b). This report included data 

from the groundwater monitoring event in September 2008. 

September 2009 Sola submits Groundwater Monitoring Report (LFR/Arcadis, 2009). This report included 

data from the groundwater monitoring event in May 2009. 

May 2010 Sola submits Groundwater Monitoring Report (LFR/Arcadis, 2010). This report included 

data from the groundwater monitoring events July through December 2009. 

On-going Groundwater monitoring of one remaining shallow groundwater well. The next 

monitoring event was conducted in June 2010 (report forthcoming). 

 
21 

Table 3

Groundwater-Quality Data

Primary VOCs (1997 to Present)

Former Sola Optical U.S.A., Inc., Facility

Petaluma, California

All concentrations expressed in micrograms per liter (μg/l)

Well ID 

Sample 

Date Lab Method 1,1-DCE 1,1-DCA 1,2-DCA 

1,1,1-

TCA TCE 

Freon 

113 

W-14 20-Jun-97 EPA8010 19 52 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 

9-Sep-97 EPA8010 24 54 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 

11-Jun-98 EPA8010 3.1 7.8 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 

16-Oct-98 EPA8010 8.9 24 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <1.0 

duplicate 16-Oct-98 EPA8010 9.1 24 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <1.0 

17-Mar-99 EPA8260A(8010) 1.7 3.7 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <1.0 

duplicate 17-Mar-99 EPA8260A(8010) 1.7 3.7 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <1.0 

23-Sep-99 EPA8260A(8010) 3.4 8.1 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <5.0 

duplicate 23-Sep-99 EPA8260A(8010) 3.4 7.9 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <5.0 

12-Apr-00 EPA8260B 1.0 1.9 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <5.0 

duplicate 12-Apr-00 EPA8260B 1.1 1.9 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <5.0 

8-Sep-00 C&T EPA8260B 1.2 2.9 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <5.0 

duplicate 8-Sep-00 C&T EPA8260B 1.0 2.7 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <5.0 

2-Apr-01 C&T EPA 8260B <0.5 0.7 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <5.0 

duplicate 2-Apr-01 C&T EPA 8260B <0.5 0.8 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <5.0 

19-Oct-01 C&T EPA 8260B 0.9 1.9 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <5.0 

16-Apr-02 C&T EPA 8260B 0.6 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <5.0 

08-Oct-02 C&T EPA 8260B 0.5 0.8 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <5.0 

*** 06-Apr-04 

W-19 16-Oct-98 EPA8010 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <1.0 

17-Mar-99 EPA8260A(8010) 0.7 <.5 <.5 <.5 <.5 <1.0 

23-Sep-99 EPA8260A(8010) 0.9 <.5 <.5 <.5 <.5 <5.0 

12-Apr-00 EPA8260B 1.1 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <5.0 

8-Sep-00 C&T EPA8260B 1 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <5.0 

2-Apr-01 C&T EPA 8260B 0.9 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <5.0 

*** 14-May-01 

W-22 16-Oct-98 EPA8010 2.7 1.6 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <1.0 

17-Mar-99 EPA8260A(8010) 3 1.8 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <1.0 

23-Sep-99 EPA8260A(8010) 2.3 1.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <5.0 

12-Apr-00 EPA8260B 2.2 1.4 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <5.0 

8-Sep-00 C&T EPA8260B 1.4 1.1 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <5.0 

2-Apr-01 C&T EPA 8260B 2.4 1.6 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <5.0 

19-Oct-01 C&T EPA 8260B 1.3 0.9 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <5.0 

16-Apr-02 C&T EPA 8260B 1.7 1.2 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <5.0 

08-Oct-02 C&T EPA 8260B 1.3 1.0 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <5.0 

22-Oct-03 C&T EPA 8260B 1.0 0.9 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <5.0 

16-Nov-04 C&T EPA 8260B 1.5 0.9 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <5.0 

20-Oct-05 C&T EPA 8260B 1.0 0.7 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <5.0 

26-Oct-06 C&T EPA 8260B 0.7 0.6 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <5.0 

*** 03-Jul-07 

W-25 16-Jun-97 EPA8010 4.1 1.8 <0.5 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 

duplicate 16-Jun-97 EPA8010 3.8 1.7 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 

10-Sep-97 EPA8010 2.4 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 

duplicate 10-Sep-97 EPA8010 2.7 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 

12-Jun-98 EPA8010 1.9 1.1 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 

16-Oct-98 EPA8010 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <1.0 

duplicate 16-Oct-98 EPA8010 3.1 1.4 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <1.0 

17-Mar-99 EPA8260A(8010) 3.3 1.7 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <1.0 

23-Sep-99 EPA8260A(8010) 3.3 1.8 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <5.0 

12-Apr-00 EPA8260B 3.9 1.8 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <5.0 

8-Sep-00 C&T EPA8260B 2.4 1.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <5.0 

2-Apr-01 C&T EPA 8260B 2.9 1.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <5.0 
22 

Table 3

Groundwater-Quality Data

Primary VOCs (1997 to Present)

Former Sola Optical U.S.A., Inc., Facility

Petaluma, California

All concentrations expressed in micrograms per liter (μg/l)

Well ID 

Sample 

Date Lab Method 1,1-DCE 1,1-DCA 1,2-DCA 

1,1,1-

TCA TCE 

Freon 

113 

19-Oct-01 C&T EPA 8260B 2.7 1.2 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <5.0 

16-Apr-02 C&T EPA 8260B 2.3 1 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <5.0 

08-Oct-02 C&T EPA 8260B 2.1 0.9 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <5.0 

8-Apr-03 C&T EPA 8260B 2.3 0.8 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <5.0 

22-Oct-03 C&T EPA 8260B 1.6 0.9 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <5.0 

17-May-04 C&T EPA 8260B 1.3 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <5.0 

16-Nov-04 C&T EPA 8260B 1.2 0.5 J <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <5.0 

3-May-05 C&T EPA 8260B 1.5 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <5.0 

20-Oct-05 C&T EPA 8260B 1 0.4 J <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <5.0 

6-Jun-06 C&T EPA 8260B 1.3 0.4 J <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <5.0 

26-Oct-06 C&T EPA 8260B 0.9 0.4 J <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <5.0 

11-Apr-07 C&T EPA 8260B 0.7 0.3 J <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <5.0 

*** 03-Jul-07 

W-27 02-Jul-97 EPA8010 7.1 12 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 

10-Sep-97 EPA8010 6.8 12 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 

duplicate 10-Sep-97 EPA8010 6.4 12 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 

11-Jun-98 EPA8010 10 15 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 

duplicate 11-Jun-98 EPA8010 11 15 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 

16-Oct-98 EPA8260A(8010) 12 15 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <1.0 

17-Mar-99 EPA8260A(8010) 11 16 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <1.0 

23-Sep-99 EPA8260A(8010) 9.9 15 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <5.0 

12-Apr-00 EPA8260B 10 20 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <5.0 

8-Sep-00 C&T EPA8260B 6.3 16 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <5.0 

** 21-Nov-00 C&T EPA8260B 3.6 14 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <5.0 

* 21-Nov-00 CLI EPA8260A <0.5 14 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <5.0 

2-Apr-01 C&T EPA 8260B 7.1 18 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <5.0 

19-Oct-01 C&T EPA 8260B 8.3 16 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <5.0 

duplicate 19-Oct-01 C&T EPA 8260B 7.9 15 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <5.0 

16-Apr-02 C&T EPA 8260B 4.9 12 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <5.0 

08-Oct-02 C&T EPA 8260B 5.6 15 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <5.0 

duplicate 8-Oct-02 C&T EPA 8260B 5.7 15 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <5.0 

8-Apr-03 C&T EPA 8260B 4 14 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <5.0 

duplicate 8-Apr-03 C&T EPA 8260B 4.9 15 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <5.0 

22-Oct-03 C&T EPA 8260B 4.7 21 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <5.0 

17-May-04 C&T EPA 8260B 3.9 14 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <5.0 

duplicate 17-May-04 C&T EPA 8260B 3.9 14 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <5.0 

16-Nov-04 C&T EPA 8260B 4.8 20 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <5.0 

duplicate 16-Nov-04 C&T EPA 8260B 4.9 20 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <5.0 

3-May-05 C&T EPA 8260B 3.8 20 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <5.0 

duplicate 3-May-05 C&T EPA 8260B 3.6 19 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <5.0 

20-Oct-05 C&T EPA 8260B 2.6 16 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <5.0 

duplicate 20-Oct-05 C&T EPA 8260B 3.2 17 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <5.0 

6-Jun-06 C&T EPA 8260B 3 16 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <5.0 

26-Oct-06 C&T EPA 8260B 1.5 12 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <5.0 

duplicate 26-Oct-06 C&T EPA 8260B 1.6 12 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <5.0 

11-Apr-07 C&T EPA 8260B 1.2 8 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <5.0 

19-Oct-07 C&T EPA 8260B 1.9 8.8 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <5.0 

4-Apr-08 C&T EPA 8260B 1.2 9 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <5.0 

29-Sep-08 C&T EPA 8260B 2.2 11 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <5.0 

15-May-09 C&T EPA 8260B 0.6 4.7 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <5.0 

30-Dec-09 C&T EPA 8260B 0.8 6.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <5.0 

23-Jun-10 C&T EPA 8260B 0.3 J 2.6 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <5.0 
23 

Table 3

Groundwater-Quality Data

Primary VOCs (1997 to Present)

Former Sola Optical U.S.A., Inc., Facility

Petaluma, California

All concentrations expressed in micrograms per liter (μg/l)

Well ID 

Sample 

Date Lab Method 1,1-DCE 1,1-DCA 1,2-DCA 

1,1,1-

TCA TCE 

Freon 

113 

duplicate 23-Jun-10 C&T EPA 8260B 0.3 J 2.7 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <5.0 

W-33 16-Jun-97 EPA8010 3.1 0.7 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 

9-Sep-97 EPA8010 2.7 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 

12-Jun-98 EPA8010 1.6 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 

** 21-Nov-00 C&T EPA8260B 1.6 0.8 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <5.0 

* 21-Nov-00 CLI EPA8260A 1.3 0.53 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <5.0 

*** 15-May-01 

LF-2 20-Jun-97 EPA8010 30 61 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 

09-Sep-97 EPA8010 4.6 2.4 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 

09-Jun-98 EPA8010 4 2 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 

duplicate 09-Jun-98 EPA8010 4.6 2 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 

16-Oct-98 EPA8010 5.0 2.3 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <1.0 

17-Mar-99 EPA8260A(8010) 5.5 2.2 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <1.0 

23-Sep-99 EPA8260A(8010) 5.0 2.4 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <5.0 

12-Apr-00 EPA8260B 5.4 2.3 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <5.0 

8-Sep-00 C&T EPA8260B 4.1 2.1 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <5.0 

2-Apr-01 C&T EPA 8260B 5.3 2.4 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <5.0 

19-Oct-01 C&T EPA 8260B 3.3 1.7 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <5.0 

16-Apr-02 C&T EPA 8260B 3.9 1.9 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <5.0 

08-Oct-02 C&T EPA 8260B 4.1 2.3 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <5.0 

22-Oct-03 C&T EPA 8260B 2.6 2.4 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <5.0 

16-Nov-04 C&T EPA 8260B 1 0.4 J <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <5.0 

20-Oct-05 C&T EPA 8260B 2.0 1.4 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <5.0 

26-Oct-06 C&T EPA 8260B 1.1 1 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <5.0 

*** 03-Jul-07 

LF-25 19-Jun-97 EPA8010 2.8 1 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 

09-Sep-97 EPA8010 3.1 1.1 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 

duplicate 09-Sep-97 EPA8010 2.6 1 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 

10-Jun-98 EPA8010 2.3 1.1 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 

duplicate 10-Jun-98 EPA8010 2.4 1.1 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 

16-Oct-98 EPA8010 2.5 1 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <1.0 

17-Mar-99 EPA8260A(8010) 3 1.1 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <1.0 

23-Sep-99 EPA8260A(8010) 2.6 1.1 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <5.0 

12-Apr-00 EPA8260B 2.6 0.9 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <5.0 

8-Sep-00 C&T EPA8260B <0.5 1.2 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <5.0 

2-Apr-01 C&T EPA 8260B 2.8 1.4 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <5.0 

19-Oct-01 C&T EPA 8260B 1.8 0.8 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <5.0 

16-Apr-02 C&T EPA 8260B 2.2 0.8 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <5.0 

08-Oct-02 C&T EPA 8260B 1.7 0.7 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <5.0 

*** 06-Apr-04 

LF-26 19-Jun-97 EPA8010 4.2 1 <0.5 0.6 <0.5 <0.5 

duplicate 19-Jun-97 EPA8010 4.1 0.9 <0.5 0.6 <0.5 <0.5 

09-Sep-97 EPA8010 2.8 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 

10-Jun-98 EPA8010 4.3 1.1 <0.5 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 

duplicate 10-Jun-98 EPA8010 4.2 1.1 <0.5 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 

23-Sep-99 EPA8260A(8010) 3.6 1.1 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <5.0 

12-Apr-00 EPA8260B 3.2 1.0 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <5.0 

8-Sep-00 C&T EPA8260B 2.5 0.8 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <5.0 

2-Apr-01 C&T EPA 8260B 2.6 1 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <5.0 

19-Oct-01 C&T EPA 8260B 1.9 0.6 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <5.0 

16-Apr-02 C&T EPA 8260B 2.3 0.9 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <5.0 

08-Oct-02 C&T EPA 8260B 2 0.9 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <5.0 
24 

Table 3

Groundwater-Quality Data

Primary VOCs (1997 to Present)

Former Sola Optical U.S.A., Inc., Facility

Petaluma, California

All concentrations expressed in micrograms per liter (μg/l)

Well ID 

Sample 

Date Lab Method 1,1-DCE 1,1-DCA 1,2-DCA 

1,1,1-

TCA TCE 

Freon 

113 

*** 06-Apr-04 

E-3 18-Jun-97 EPA8010 7.6 10 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 

11-Sep-97 EPA8010 9 11 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 

11-Jun-98 C&T EPA8010 15 18 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 

8-Apr-03 C&T EPA 8260B 4.2 3.8 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <5.0 

22-Oct-03 C&T EPA 8260B 3.6 2.9 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <5.0 

17-May-04 C&T EPA 8260B 4.8 3.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <5.0 

16-Nov-04 C&T EPA 8260B 1.8 1.4 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <5.0 

3-May-05 C&T EPA 8260B 0.9 1 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <5.0 

20-Oct-05 C&T EPA 8260B 2.0 1.9 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <5.0 

6-Jun-06 C&T EPA 8260B 1.9 1.4 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <5.0 

duplicate 6-Jun-06 C&T EPA 8260B 2.0 1.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <5.0 

26-Oct-06 C&T EPA 8260B 2.2 2.3 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <5.0 

11-Apr-07 C&T EPA 8260B 1.8 2.3 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <5.0 

*** 05-Jul-07 

E-5 18-Jun-97 EPA8010 10 4 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 

11-Sep-97 EPA8010 11 3.7 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 

15-Jun-98 EPA8010 9.7 3.1 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 

16-Oct-98 EPA8010 12 3.7 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <1.0 

17-Mar-99 EPA8260A(8010) 13 3.7 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <1.0 

23-Sep-99 EPA8260A(8010) 15 4.3 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <5.0 

12-Apr-00 EPA8260B 12 3.7 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <5.0 

08-Sep-00 C&T EPA8260B 12 3.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <5.0 

** 21-Nov-00 C&T EPA8260B 10 3.6 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <5.0 

* 21-Nov-00 CLI EPA8260A 6.5 2.9 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <5.0 

2-Apr-01 C&T EPA 8260B 13 4.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <5.0 

19-Oct-01 C&T EPA 8260B 8.3 3.4 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <5.0 

16-Apr-02 C&T EPA 8260B 5.1 2.2 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <5.0 

duplicate 16-Apr-02 C&T EPA 8260B 6.4 2.4 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <5.0 

08-Oct-02 C&T EPA 8260B 9.3 3.3 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <5.0 

8-Apr-03 C&T EPA 8260B 7.2 2.9 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <5.0 

22-Oct-03 C&T EPA 8260B 7.1 3.4 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <5.0 

duplicate 22-Oct-03 C&T EPA 8260B 6.9 3.3 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <5.0 

17-May-04 C&T EPA 8260B 5.1 2.2 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <5.0 

16-Nov-04 C&T EPA 8260B 4.5 1.8 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <5.0 

3-May-05 C&T EPA 8260B 3.7 1.8 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <5.0 

20-Oct-05 C&T EPA 8260B 5.6 2 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <5.0 

6-Jun-06 C&T EPA 8260B 3.3 1.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <5.0 

26-Oct-06 C&T EPA 8260B 4.7 1.9 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <5.0 

11-Apr-07 C&T EPA 8260B 2.8 1.1 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <5.0 

duplicate 11-Apr-07 C&T EPA 8260B 2.7 1.1 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <5.0 

*** 05-Jul-07 

E-7 18-Jun-97 EPA8010 <0.5 0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 

11-Sep-97 EPA8010 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 

12-Jun-98 EPA8010 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 

19-Oct-01 C&T EPA 8260B <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <5.0 

16-Apr-02 C&T EPA 8260B <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <5.0 

08-Oct-02 C&T EPA 8260B <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <5.0 

22-Oct-03 C&T EPA 8260B <0.5 0.3 J <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <5.0 

16-Nov-04 C&T EPA 8260B <0.5 0.3 J <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <5.0 

20-Oct-05 C&T EPA 8260B <0.5 0.3 J <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <5.0 

26-Oct-06 C&T EPA 8260B <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <5.0 
25 

Table 3

Groundwater-Quality Data

Primary VOCs (1997 to Present)

Former Sola Optical U.S.A., Inc., Facility

Petaluma, California

All concentrations expressed in micrograms per liter (μg/l)

Well ID 

Sample 

Date Lab Method 1,1-DCE 1,1-DCA 1,2-DCA 

1,1,1-

TCA TCE 

Freon 

113 

*** 05-Jul-07 

Field 

Blanks 

 

W-33-FB 16-Jun-97 EPA8010 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 

LF-16-FB 17-Jun-97 EPA8010 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 

LF-3-FB 18-Jun-97 EPA8010 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 

LF-25-FB 19-Jun-97 EPA8010 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 

W-28-FB 20-Jun-97 EPA8010 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 

W33-FB 9-Sep-97 EPA8010 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 

LF-6-FB 10-Sep-97 EPA8010 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 

W-28-FB 9-Jun-98 EPA8010 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 

LF-16-FB 10-Jun-98 EPA8010 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 

W-25-FB 16-Oct-98 (1) EPA8260A(8010) <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <1.0 

W-14-FB 17-Mar-99 EPA8260A(8010) <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <1.0 

W-19-FB 23-Sep-99 EPA8260A(8010) <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <5.0 

W-27-FB 12-Apr-00 EPA8260B <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <5.0 

LF-26FB 8-Sep-00 C&T EPA8260B <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <5.0 

W-27FB 2-Apr-01 C&T EPA 8260B <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <5.0 

EX-7-FB 19-Oct-01 C&T EPA 8260B <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <5.0 

W-27FB 16-Apr-02 C&T EPA 8260B <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <5.0 

W-14FB 8-Oct-02 C&T EPA 8260B <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <5.0 

FB040803 8-Apr-03 C&T EPA 8260B <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <5.0 

LF-2FB 22-Oct-03 C&T EPA 8260B <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <5.0 

W-27-FB 17-May-04 C&T EPA 8260B <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <5.0 

LF-2-B 16-Nov-04 C&T EPA 8260B <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <5.0 

5-03-05-B 3-May-05 C&T EPA 8260B <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <5.0 

W-25-FB 20-Oct-05 C&T EPA 8260B <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <5.0 

EB 060606 6-Jun-06 C&T EPA 8260B <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <5.0 

W-25-FB 26-Oct-06 C&T EPA 8260B <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <5.0 

W-25-FB 11-Apr-07 C&T EPA 8260B <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <5.0 

W-27-FB 19-Oct-07 C&T EPA 8260B <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <5.0 

W-27-FB 4-Apr-08 C&T EPA 8260B <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <5.0 

W-27-FB 29-Sep-08 C&T EPA 8260B <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <5.0 

W-27-FB 15-May-09 (2) EPA 8260B <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <5.0 

W-27-FB 30-Dec-09 C&T EPA 8260B <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <5.0 

W-27-FB 23-Jun-10 C&T EPA 8260B <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <5.1 

Trip 

Blanks 

 

17-Jun-97 EPA8010 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 

TB 20-Jun-97 EPA8010 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 

9-Sep-97 EPA8010 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 

10-Sep-97 EPA8010 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 

9-Jun-98 EPA8010 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 

12-Jun-98 EPA8010 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 

15-Jun-98 EPA8010 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 

* 21-Nov-00 CLI EPA8260A(8010) <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <5.0 

2-Apr-01 C&T EPA 8260B <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <0.5 <5.0 

Data updated by MD. Proofed by . 

 

Notes: 

(1) = Chloroform detected at 1.7 micrograms per liter. 

(2) = Chloroform detected at 0.8 microgram per liter. 
26 

Table 3

Groundwater-Quality Data

Primary VOCs (1997 to Present)

Former Sola Optical U.S.A., Inc., Facility

Petaluma, California

All concentrations expressed in micrograms per liter (μg/l)

Well ID 

Sample 

Date Lab Method 1,1-DCE 1,1-DCA 1,2-DCA 

1,1,1-

TCA TCE 

Freon 

113 

1,1-DCE = 1,1-Dichloroethene 

1,1-DCA = 1,1-Dichloroethane 

1,2-DCA = 1,2-Dichloroethane 

1,1,1-TCA = 1,1,1-Trichloroethane 

TCE = Trichloroethene 

VOCs = Volatile organic compounds 

J = Estimated value. 

* = Samples collected by Environ. 

** = Split sample collected by LFR. 

*** = Well destroyed. 

Analytical Laboratories: 

C&T = Curtis & Tompkins, Ltd., Analytical Laboratories, Berkeley, 

California. 

CLI = Chroma Lab, Inc., Environmental Services, Pleasanton, 

California. 

 
27 

Table 4 

EPA Oversight Costs 

Date Of Bill Amount Dates Covered Activities

February 8, 2001 $3,345.59 11/1/00 – 10/31/01 1 Monitoring 

January 24, 2005 $9,186.12 11/1/01 – 10/31/04 2 Monitoring 

March 20, 2006 $52,866.90 11/1/04 – 10/31/05 3 Monitoring, 5-Year Review 

January 12, 2007 $15,299.89 11/1/05 – 10/31/06 4 Monitoring, Proposed Plan 

March 4, 2008 $41,525.98 11/1/06 – 10/31/07 5 Monitoring, Proposed Plan, ROD Amendment 

January 23, 2009 $3675.11 11/1/07 – 10/31/08 6 monitoring 

January 13, 2010 $2716.49 11/1/08 – 10/31/09 7 monitoring 

November 22, 2010 $45,152.58 11/1/09 – 10/31/10 8 Monitoring, 5-Year Review 

December 5, 2011 $43,225.72 11/1/10 – 10/31/11 9 Monitoring, 5-Year Review 

REFERENCES: 

1. Ltr Blank (EPA) to Sanzari (Sola Optical) dated 2/8/01. 

2. Ltr Blank (EPA) to Sanzari (Sola Optical) dated 1/24/05. 

3. Ltr Blank (EPA) to Sanzari (Sola Optical) dated 3/20/06. 

4. Ltr Blank (EPA) to Sanzari (Sola Optical) dated 1/12/07. 

5. Ltr Blank (EPA) to Sanzari (Sola Optical) dated 3/4/08. 

6. Ltr Blank (EPA) to Muenz (Carl Zeiss Vision) dated 1/23/09. 

7. Ltr Moore (EPA) to Muenz (Carl Zeiss Vision) dated 1/13/10. 

8. Ltr Moore (EPA) to Nguyen (Carl Zeiss Vision) dated 11/22/10. 

9. Ltr Moore (EPA) to Nguyen (Carl Zeiss Vision) dated 12/5/11. 

 
28 

Figures
2y 

74 

ft I 

1. a I 

I I 

1 

29 
End Treohneql 

Figu.K. 

ComentratIons of 1.147CE Venus time ifi Well W27 

1 f. 

Vg F •E F; gEg FWET EA! E 

8 

I.1 E 

30 

 
Figure 1 

Concentrations of 1.1-13r—A- Versus Time in Weil 411r-77 

cn FiT F.IFTFPOFT F.TF.W.Fg'F.TF .,VE.TE.'PEE2fVEK'ELTVil'Erg ErgEVEV'EP;E r 

7.'? TT. 7 -9 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7, 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 7 

co cm co co 03 cis tc. 

w

4,2 w uti ID at. a a a ca o a a. a a 

CV 

 a La a 

CI a --1 -4 95 ca 49 .b} =I r.J 4.1. 4.. a um. [El a L-J CO 4I2. r*-1 1,) L.) r44 CP. Ln CR. --J - 4 CV DP. Ea rj, 

'KC 

I • I -11- 1•11- 

31