Laserfiche WebLink
`..� *../ <br /> CYNTHIA C ADKISSON <br /> Page 3 <br /> time frame nor was the WDR issued within the 120 day period. Based on these <br /> failures to act, the discharge may be initiated as planned. <br /> With regard to the documents missing from the CVRWQCB files, courtesy copies <br /> should be mailed to the CVRWQCB for all reports submitted to PHS-EHD. Historical <br /> data relative to the UST removal are filed in the PHS-EHD office. Removal reports <br /> are not routinely submitted to the CVRWQCB. EBMUD has had several consultants <br /> over the years since the tank removal; however, the documents have been submitted <br /> to PHS-EHD and duplicates can be provided to the CVRWQCB should that be <br /> necessary. Ultimately, at the time of closure certification, the final prepared <br /> document will be an all-inclusive document containing all the historical data. <br /> In the January 24, 1994 letter, PHS-EHD stated that quarterly monitoring of <br /> Monitoring Wells #1, #8, and #9 would continue effective April 1994, thereby granting <br /> EBMUD's request for a reduction in the number of wells sampled; the CVRWQCB <br /> was courtesy copied. Gradient variances were adequately investigated in the <br /> "Addendum No.1 to the Additional Site Assessment and Remedial Options Report" <br /> dated September 1994. Furthermore, the " Quarterly Groundwater Monitoring <br /> Program and Tidal Study-Second Quarter 1992" prepared by Weston and dated <br /> August 26, 1992 was re-explored, at PHS-EHD's request, by BVWSI; the results are <br /> stated in the aforementioned September 1994 report. The conclusions of both <br /> consultants were that no influences from the tides are observed in the on-site <br /> EBMUD wells. <br /> PHS-EHD is now concerned that the proposed in-situ bioremediation system may not <br /> be appropriate based upon the original feasibility study of December 1993. As the <br /> lead regulatory agency for the investigation and cleanup of the UST site, PHS-EHD <br /> recommends re-evaluating the proposed bioremediation treatment system to <br /> determine whether it is still appropriately suited to address the site's problem, and <br /> you should consider implementing an action that would preclude CVRWQCB Waste <br /> Discharge Unit input to facilitate timely implementation of the chosen remediation <br /> system. <br />