STATE OF CALIFORNIA Department of Toxic Substances Control Report of Investigation Rev 4/08 Case Numbers: 914561-48 914562-48 Date of Complaint: 04/12/2016 EPA Number. NiA Hauler Reg. Number: NA Date of Report: 9/4/2016 Subject: City of Sacramento (d.b.ay(a.k.a.)(c/o): Parks and Recreation Department, Mangan Pistol and Rifle Range Address: 2140 34!" Street, Sacrarnento, California 95824 Allegation: Illegal disposal of hazardous waste Findings / Disposition: [SHASTA ili Recommendations: EXcase Closed []Supplemental ‘Other Case sent to (J City Attomey [J District Attomey Cus. Attomey [1] Attorney General ["] Other Summary ‘On April 12, 2016, |, Department of Toxic Substances Control (hereafter DTSC), Office of Criminal Investigations (hereafter OCI) Investigator Charles Stone, was assigned case number 914561-48 and case number 914562-48 by Supervising Criminal Investigator Tiffany Chavez. These complaints allege the Sacramento City Parks and Recreation Department (Hereafter City) mishandled lead waste at the former Mangan Gun Range located at 2140 34th Avenue, Sacramento California 95822. A subsequent investigation determined the site was contaminated with lead from normal site use and previous remediations. One sample that shows lead in concentration at 61 times the state standard for hazardous waste appear to remnants of previous cleanup activities and not an intentional act of scons Redacted 0 fl) 0. | ill nee Origin: Complaint to the DTSC hotline! Sacramento Bee ArticleREPORT OF INVESTIGATION OF THE CITY OF SACRAMENTO. Page 2 CASE NUMBER 914561-48; 914562-48 Details: On Aprit 12, 2016, |, DTSC, OCI Investigator Charles Stone, was assigned case number 914561-48 and case number 914562-48 by Supervising Criminal Investigator Tiffany Chavez. These complaints allege the City mishandled lead waste at the former Mangan Gun Range located at 2140 34" Avenue, Sacramento California 95822. (Attachment 1) The Mangan gun range is an indoor shooting facility for rifel and gun enthusiasts. This site has been in operation since 1960 at this same location with no significant modification to the facility. The City owns the facility but leases the facility to numerous third parties for activities at the site. | first confirmed the City was the site owner by viewing the City of Sacramento Assessor Parcel program located at the City of Sacramento's web page. According to the assessors online information since 1850 the site is described as “City Owned Property N of Air Port (sic) in Sec 25, T8NREM'’, consisting of 8.21 acres". As part of the complaint, | was informed to review several news articles prior to a meeting with the City and Sacramento County officials (hereafter County). The first article | reviewed was the Sacramento Bee's dated April 9, 2016 entitled “Shuttered gun range in south Sacramento park (sic) leaked toxic lead dust.” * This article details the operation of the site as well as the sites failures to meet modem safe range operation, which include handling the lead residue, spent lead bullets and bullet fragments. The article continues to allege the City had knowledge of the lead contamination beginning in 2006 when a series of test were completed. These tests were again completed in 2014 and on December 24, 2014, the City Manager ordered the site closed, which has remained closed ever since. The second article | reviewed was the Sacramento News and Review's article dated August 20, 2015, entitled "City-owned gun range operated for years with toxic lead levels, Sacramento auditor says (sic) Some regular users say they were never told of the contamination risks"? This article predates the Sacramento Bee Article and is the first to impute knowledge on the City that hazardous levels of lead were found at the site as early as 2006 and did not inform the users of the property. The article states;” Vicci Gritz, operations manager at Universal Security Academy, a regular user of Mangan Range, wrote in an email, “We used the range for many years and NO ONE ever said anything about having concems about the health issues.” The article continues and states “The auditor noted other problems with how the range was operated, which the City says was managed by the United Revolver Club of Sacramento.” The next news story regarding this site was a CBS 13 news story dated August 19, 2046, in this, article Ronald Morales with the United Revolver Club of Sacramento stated “The group managed the range, but the careful process of lead collection leftover from spent bullets was the City’s job."® The story continues and states the levels of lead found on the property were found to be up to “300 times the state standard.” This story does not state which law the test found to be “300 times the state standard” nor do the stores specify what the city did wrong other than fail to tell users of the hazards, * http://assessorparcelviewer. saccounty.net/jsviewer/assessor.html 2 http://www. sacbee.com/news/local/news-columns-blogs/City-beat/article70934657.html 3 httnsi//www.newsreview.com/sacramento/Clty-owned- gun-range-operated-for/content?old-18026324 ‘This statement is not consistent with the statement sent in response to the PRA request sent on Luly 19, 2016 in that the City was ‘managed by the United Revolver Club. The PRA request states the City managed and maintained the property. 5 http://sacramento.cbslocel. com/2015/08/19/why-did-a-gun-range-owned-by-the-City-of sacramento-close/ 2REPORT OF INVESTIGATION OF THE CITY OF SACRAMENTO Page 3 CASE NUMBER 914561-48; 914562-48 After the Sacramento Bee's article dated April 9, 2016, several other news outlets picked up the story and re-broadcasted the original allegations. Based on these stories, | deduced there were several allegations made against the City. These are the City failed to warn residents and users of a facility of lead contamination and the City allowed lead particulates to be released during range operations. Specifically, the City failed to comply with the Safe Drinking Water Act and Toxic Enforcement Act of 1986 (hereafter “the Act") also known as Proposition 66, in that it failed to warn its employees and the public of the danger of lead exposure. Specifically the Act states: “No person in the course of doing business shall knowingly discharge or release a chemical known to the state to cause cancer or reproductive toxicity into water or onto or into land where such chemical passes or probably will pass into any source of drinking water, notwithstanding any other provision or authorization of law except as provided in Section 25249.9.” Note: The Act does not apply to the City of Sacramento because the law defines: “Person in the course of doing business” does not include ... any City, county, or district or any department or agency thereof or the state or any department or agency thereof or the federal government or any department or agency thereof; or any entity in its operation of a public water system as defined in Section 116275." | also reviewed the documents to determine if there were violations of Health and Safety Code Section 25189.5 for illegal disposal of a hazardous waste. There are no documents showing the testing and sampling method. On April 12, 2016, | met with Sacramento City, County officials regarding the site and the current status of the cleanup. Present at the meeting were City of Sacramento Senior Attomey, Sheryl Patterson, City of Sacramento Director of Parks and Recreation, Christopher Conlin, City of Sacramento, Chief of Staff for Councilmember Jay Schneider, Joseph M. Devlin, Sacramento County Chief of Environmental Management Department Marie Woodin, Sactamento County Deputy Chief Counsel Diana L. Ruiz, DTSC Investigator Lee Meyers and I. This meeting was an initial fact finding meeting to determine if the City was taking the appropriate ‘steps to ensure human health and the environment with the closing of the Mangan Gun Range. We received background information on what happened at the site from Ms. Patterson who explained this case. She also explained that the complaints arose out of civil litigation as a result of a ricocheted bullet that injured a patron. From this, a separate claim and eventually a lawsul for exposure to lead was generated accusing the City of failing to warn employees and patrons of the dangers of lead exposure. According to Ms. Patterson, once the City became aware of the issue they took steps to remediate the property via a contract with PARC Environmental Contractors. The initial contract was to ensure worker safety by removing lead contamination within the working area. This consisted of a “deep clean” of the property. Through this contract, the site was remediated twice to include cleaning all of the surfaces and removing any lead debris. Once the initial remediation of the site was complete, the City hired TRS Range Services to conduct an evaluation of the site to determine if it met current building and safety standards. This evaluation concluded the site needed significant upgrades to comply to with the Americans with Disabilities Act and bring the facilities air filtration system to current standards, The estimated cost of this upgrade was 1.7 million dollars, funds the City did not have. Because the City did not have these funds the site was closed until funds could be identified and the building made safe. At the conclusion of this meeting, | was provided a packet of documents (See attachments 3-8) to support Ms. Patterson's commentsREPORT OF INVESTIGATION OF THE CITY OF SACRAMENTO Page 4 CASE NUMBER 914561-48; 91456248 On April 14, 2016, | was notified by DTSC Deputy Director Elise Rothschild that signs warning of the lead exposure needed to be placed on the site. | then immediately coordinated drafting a sign and obtaining the appropriate approvals. These signs were placed on the property that evening with CBS 13 news present. (Attachment 2) ‘On April 15, 2016, | contacted the original complaining party'Katherine Ely. Ms. Ely stated she made the complaint based on the Sacramento Bee article and lives near the site. She does not have any concerns but thinks somebody should look into this. Also on April 15, 2016 the City held a press conference regarding the site and specifically sampling results that do not show any evidence of lead disposal at the site®. The City provided these test results to Sacramento County just four hours before the scheduled press conference. These test results indicate there is no hazardous lead on-the property. According to Supervising Hazardous Substances Engineer Il, Charlie Ridenour The samples were collected on April 1, 2016 by The Westmark Group and were taken 12 inches below ground surface level. The results were below the Department of Toxic Substances Control Screening Levels for lead (80 mgikg).. On April 18, 2016, | began reading the numerous documents provided by the City. These documents detail how the allegation against the City came about, from an injury to a patron who was struck by a ricocheting bullet. A July 23, 2014, memorandum from TRS Range Services Safety Officer Dan Driscoll provided an evaluation of the Mangan Gun Range and finds “Based on these documents it is apparent ‘that cleaning procedures are in place and that those procedures are consistent with generally accepted procedures outlined in the “Indoor Firing Ranges Industrial Hygiene technical Guide” document, However, sampling results by Sacramento DPR staff dated January 2012 (See Appendix B of this document) indicate that the portions of the range still exceed acceptable limits for lead dust contamination. This is after a reported cleaning occurred between December 2011 and January 2012 lead sampling events.” In addition the report went on to state “Exhaust fans, when operating, appear to vent indoor air directly to the outside without any fitration.” (Attachment 3) A November 20, 2014, memorandum from Entek Consulting Group, Inc. to PARC Specialty Contractors Inc. stated “Clearly, there is extensive lead contamination inside the building in every room and on the roof of the building. Entek did not assess the lead in the soil in the immediate surrounding area of the building where lead from the roof would presumably have settled from rain and wash off from the roof.” The report found lead at the roof up to 19,000 ug/ft? (Attachment 4) In the “Complaint for Personal Injuries and Damages” dated October 1, 2015, filed on behalf of lan Willis et al, and associated documents, the complaint states the City failed to follow Cal. Gov't Code 831.7(c); as well as “numerous subsections of 8 CCR § 6198" and § 16.22.207 of the Sacramento County Code. These sections cover the failure to wam of a hazard, the applicable standard for lead exposure, and that buildings, structures, and premises are to be maintained so as not to pose a threat to the health and safety of any person or persons. (Attachment 5) Defendants provided their responses on November 24, 2015. (Attachment 6) did not receive these sample results this meeting was based upon until April 20, 2036. 4REPORT OF INVESTIGATION OF THE CITY OF SACRAMENTO Page 5 CASE NUMBER 914561-48; 914562-48 In response to this litigation and claim the City contracted with DLR group to provide a Facility Condition Assessment. This document detailed the buildings previous uses and dilapidated condition. This assessment states ‘The gravity intake vents and supply air fans that serve the range do not meet the minimum standards published by the National Institute for Occupational Safety and Health (NIOSH) for lead exposure. The existing systems are undersized, and they do not have the required filtration in place. In addition the existing systems are in a state of disrepair and in some cases, may not function.” (Attachment 7, Page 5) On December 23, 2014, Entek Consulting Group was asked by the City for recommendations “for immediate safeguards to potential lead hazards at the Mangan Rifle and Pistol Range until a completed remediation ......" Based on this request Entek provided several recommendations to make the facility safe *...until such time will allow for a complete remediation of the facility from the ceiling down to floor level or all building surfaces.” (Attachment 8) However, the City determined it was best to close the facility all together, On April 20, 2016, | attended a coordination meeting with Sacramento County Environmental Management to determine the status of the investigation and remediation. This meeting detailed the current state of the remediation of the property which is being handled by the City under a delegation of authority from DTSC. The site was currently closed and has been secured, via a chain link fence from visitors. This fence keeps the public from accessing the facility and surrounding areas which are contaminated. The City has taken responsibilty for the remediation of the property by hiring numerous consulting and remediation companies and is actively working with Sacramento County Environmental Management Department to ensure the site is properly characterized and remediated. This remediation will continue for the foreseeable future until the City determines the new use of the facility. From the samples taken that were released on April 16, 2016, Sample number ECG-16-3934-05Soil showed hazardous waste levels of lead directly below Bullet Trap Exterior Access Hatch. These results show 61,000 mg/kg well above the hazardous waste level of 1,000 mg/kg. This area is where the bullet trap would be cleaned out and placed in a container for disposal by the City’s contractor PARC Environmental Contractors. Based on the location of the sample and the historical uses of the property we cannot determine if the lead was deposited recently or is remnants of historical uses and cleanup. The City has tested the sidewalks and surrounding areas to determine if lead has migrated outside the initial containment area. The City moved the fence to ensure people aré protected from exposure of lead in this expanded area, DTSC has delegated the authority to approve cleanups to the County of Sacramento therefore DTSC's role in this matter is purely advisory. County staff are going to work with Charles Ridenour on developing a cleanup standard and plan that meets both State and Federal standards. As part of the investigation, | assisted in developing a list of Public Records Act (hereafter PRA) questions to be presented to the City. (Attachment 9) These questions would be added to a PRA Request from the County of Sacramento to the City requesting specific documents regarding the range and related activities, ‘On April 20, 2016, the County sent the City a PRA request for documents. (Attachment 10) The April 22, 2016 response to this request was sent on a disk which has been uploaded into Envirostor. | reviewed the disk and its numerous contents which include the City's remediation plan, purchase of Personal Protective Equipment, Facility Use Agreements where the City is the owner and manager of the property and numerous other responsive documents. The following are the key responsive documents that go towards who was in charge of maintenance at the site. 5REPORT OF INVESTIGATION OF THE CITY OF SACRAMENTO Page 6 CASE NUMBER 914561-48; 914562-48 On May 14, 2015, Director of the Sacramento Parks and Recreation Department, Jim Combs sent an email to City employees Consuelo Hemandez and Howard Chan which states: “allached is an assessment report that we had General Services prepare to inform us as to the condition of the facility. Below you can see the direction that | provided staff earlier today. This is no ruse. There are serious code violations and hazardous conditions in the building that must be remediated prior to re-use by the public, Needless to say, the City does NOT have the $1.3-1.7 million to invest in rehabilitation of the gun range. While the United Revolver Club and the Capital Rifle Club voluntarily maintained the olub in the past as Mr. Lyons indicted, the lead lovels were never brought within compliance range, placing the public and staff at risk.” (Attachment 11) City of Sacramento “Application for Facility Use" signed by Richard Wooten, President of the United Revolver Club of Sacramento. This document does not state who is responsible for site maintenance and repair but shows the City is leasing the property to third parties for at times a fee, therefore showing dominion and control over the site. (Attachment 12) On July 8, 2016, Sacramento County sent to the City an amended PRA request. This request was to specifically answer the question of who had supervisory and maintenance responsibility for the Mangan Gun Range. The City responded to this PRA Request on July 19, 2016 with the following statement in response to the question of who was responsible for the *...control, maintenance and cleanup of the property.” “Response: The City retained responsibility for the control, maintenance and cleanup of the range even though it was rented to user groups. The United Revolver Club oversaw the public use of the range one evening per week, but patrons still had to pay the City for the user fee and were required to comply with posted range rules enforced by the range master. Neither the United Revolver Club nor any other user group undertook the maintenance, alteration or any janitorial cleaning of the facility.” This response reiterated the numerous documents that indicate the City was the responsible party for the maintenance of the facility and failed to properly maintain and upgrade the facility over time. (Attachment 13) On August 2, 2016, | interviewed Ms. Vicci Gritz (Nevada CDL: Le ETE aco REGECIEGNENES acramento, California 95828) of the Universal Security Academy about her role al Mangan Gun Range. Ms, Gritz stated that they have been using the range since about 2003 when a George Larabi used to open up the facility. Unfortunately Mr. Larabi died in 2006 and the City provided Universal Security Academy and others, keys and passcodes to the facility based on a rental agreement. Ms. Gritz stated she has been in the facility about 5 times a month up until the closure of the property in 2014. Mis. Gritz stated they did not clean the property other than pick up their spent brass, The cleaning of the property was left to United Pistol and Rifle club and the City. She does not have any knowledge of the bullet trap being cleaned. | asked Ms. Gritz if she had any evidence of exposure and she responded that she does have some evidence her grandchildren may have been exposed to lead. According to Ms. Gritz she was unable to identify how else her grandchildren would have been exposed to lead but for the gun range. | asked, if the parents agree, as | would like for these records to be sent to me for review. Ms, GritzREPORT OF INVESTIGATION OF THE CITY OF SACRAMENTO. Page 7 CASE NUMBER 914561-48; 914562-48 stated she will look into this for me. As of the date of this report Ms. Gritz has not provided any evidence of exposure. I continued to contact the United Pistol and Rifle club members and president. Unfortunately, all attempts to contact them have failed. United Pistol and Rifle club used the Mangan range as a base of operations listing it as the site as well as their phone number as their contact information. On August 2, 2016, | did make contact with Richard Wooten, President of United Revolver Club. Mr. Wooten stated he did use the facility but never did any cleanup of the property as this was always left up to the City. Mr. Wooten did not take part in any lead remediation at the bullet trap and does not have any knowledge of the cleaning or site remediation by the City. Based on the City’s ownership of the property, they are the responsible party for the site remediation and cleanup. In addition, | cannot find any evidence that City employees or third parties intentionally disposed of any lead based material onto the ground in or around the range. The high lead levels found on the roof and at the bullet trap appear to be from normal use and site remediation, not intentional disposal, Recommendation: Although lead was deposited at the bullet trap area and other areas in the immediate vicinity of the range building, ie Cleanup of this facility is being hat ir. Ridenour ar 's Site Cleanup group in conjunction with the City and County. Redacted ee Investigator Tl 10/ vb | Iw Tiffany Chavez Supervising Criminal Investigator |