SITE INFORMATION AND CORRESPONDENCE

Home Browse Search

r Marcus L. Pierce R.G., 61ja • June 9,2000 Page 2 of 3 initially installed are now in need of replacement at $25,000 each. In addition to these capital expenditures that have been and need to be incurred,there are ongoing operation and maintenance (O&M) costs. Annual O&M costs are approximately$5,500.00,which includes the costs of testing. Finding 7 of the Regional Board WDR 99-079 adopted June 18, 1999 states that the "City of Ripon Municipal Supply Wells surround this facility. Two wells have been affected by Nestle's TCE plume and the City has installed GAC wellhead treatment on one of the wells, Well No. 9. Several other City supply wells are threatened by the plume. . . .The City of Ripon and the Discharger are currently arranging a permanent alternate water supply." There has been no effort to arrange an alternate water supply. The City of Ripon has demand that Nestle reimburse the City for the $540,594.00 in expenses that the City has incurred as of April of 1999. In addition,the City demanded that Nestle commit to fund actual capital and O&M costs for the operation of Well No. 9 in the future, so long as VOC levels in the well are detectable. At this point those costs, including capital and O&M costs, are estimated to be approximately $55,500.00 per year. There are, of course, other alternatives that could be discussed. A new well, for example, could be drilled in an area unaffected by VOC contamination. Costs for such an alternative would run from$1 million to $1.5 million as evidenced by the City of Ripon's recent AB 1600 report. Water Supply Protection The Regional Board has acknowledged, and the City is concerned,that additional municipal supply wells could become contaminated in the future, and additional expenditures incurred for wellhead treatment. The City's public drinking water supply has been directly impacted by contamination from the Nestle property. As the responsible party,Nestle must make the City whole, and is responsible for preventing additional natural resource damages. At a February 8, 2000 meeting,the Regional Board was critical of Nestle for not having installed critical guard wells between the plume and threatened municipal supply wells that were requested last year, and indicated that further delays would not be acceptable. In your recent April 27, 2000 letter to Nestle commenting on the 1999 Annual Groundwater Monitoring Report, you directed Nestle to include a discussion of extractions for all operating municipal wells, stating that this information is needed to assess current/future plume migration and develop corrective actions to control plume migration. You also noted that there are an insufficient number of guard wells to monitor plume migration away from the Nestle site toward the City of Ripon's supply wells. The Regional Board had requested that Nestle install such wells nearly two years ago, and repeatedly since then. While Nestle proposed installation of these wells in their 1999 schedule of activities, only one well was installed (M-24C1). Because of the damage that has been done to the City's municipal supply wells, and the potential for additional damage, installation of sentry wells to protect the municipal water supply is F:\documents\1084-084\JMZ\5288.doe