Laserfiche WebLink
Chronology - 4 - 17 February 1993 <br /> Geweke <br /> 8 Aug 91 During a telephone conversation between Geweke and Board <br /> staffs, reinjection of treated ground water and the need for <br /> Waste Discharge requirements was discussed. <br /> 9 Aug 91 During a telephone conversation between Board and County <br /> staffs, the need for soil remediation as well as ground water <br /> remediation and reinjection of treated ground water were <br /> discussed. <br /> 13 Aug 91 During a telephone conversation between Board and County <br /> staffs, the PAR was discussed. No radius of influence <br /> calculations were included, modifications to the monitoring <br /> program had been requested by Geweke, and the FRP was to be <br /> submitted by 16 September 1991 . <br /> 19 Aug 91 In a letter to Geweke, County staff commented on the Progress <br /> Report. The letter allowed modification of the monitoring <br /> program, repeated the information to be included in quarterly <br /> reports, and required submittal of a quarterly report by <br /> 16 September 1991 . <br /> 28 Aug 91 In a letter to Geweke, County staff commented on the PAR.. The <br /> letter approved the ground water remediation concept but <br /> required additional aquifer testing and a soil remediation <br /> plan. Submittal of a Draft FRP was requested by 16 September <br /> 1991 . <br /> 6 Sep 91 During a telephone conversation with PES staff, Board staff <br /> stated that it was OK to delay additional aquifer testing <br /> until they were certain they are going to reinject. <br /> 9 Sep 91 In a letter to County staff, PES stated that aquifer testing <br /> was not necessary unless they propose to reinject treated <br /> ground water and that they would consider soil remediation. <br /> 10 Sep 91 During a telephone conversation with County staff, Board staff <br /> stated that delay of the additional aquifer test was OK, soil <br /> remediation was necessary, and a Notice of Violation was <br /> recommended due to failure to submit quarterly reports. <br /> 16 Sep 91 Draft FRP not submitted. <br /> 16 Sep 91 Quarterly report not submitted. <br /> 18 Sep 91 During a telephone conversation between County and Board <br />• staffs, a draft NOV was discussed. <br /> 10 Oct 91 In a letter to County staff, Board staff recommended that <br />