ARCHIVED REPORTS_XR0005114 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

t ■ cntena for satisfactory completion of remediation ■ cleanup standards ■ policies, guidelines, and methods used to establish cleanup standards In early 1996,the Technical Advisory Committee was scheduled to submit recommendations to the ' SWRCB regarding changes to the California LUST Program needed to ensure that cleanup standards are technologically feasible and necessary to protect human health, safety, and the environment The submittal of these recommendations has been delayed and is currently pending The LLNL report completed in October 1995 was presented to the SB 1764 Technical Advisory ' Committee for their consideration in preparing recommendation to the SWRCB The SWRCB may choose to implement recommendations from the Technical Advisory Committee through revisions to ' the SWRCB Resolution 92-49 in mid 1996 or though revised regulations in 1997 The USEPA will participate in these proceedings to ensure that changes to California's LUST cleanup requirements are consistent with national and regional policy and are protective of human health and the ' environment ' Pending recommendations from SB 1764 Technical Advisory Committee and revisions to State resolutions and/or regulations,the SWRCB issued direction through a December 8, 1995, correspondence from Walt Pettit, Executive Director,to streamline the closure process for low-nsk Msites (Pettit 1995) This correspondence was sent to all Regional Water Board Chairpersons, Regional Water Board Executive Officers and Local Oversight Program (LOP) Agency Directors ' Subsequently, each RWQCB issued some form of documentation presenting their position on the December 8, 1995, letter from Walt Pettit and the LLNL report ' The RWQCB-V issued a position memorandum on January 8, 1996, tilted Underground Tank "No Further Action"Requirements in the Central Valley Region (RWQCB 1996) The memorandum ' states that"Although definition of low risk ground water is subject to debate, we agree that with the proper site charactenzation, any site can be considered for closure with no further action required if impacts to ground water and beneficial uses are insignificant' The memorandum further states that ' RWQCB-V provides guidance w for Tank Owners to investigate, remediate and closure tanks saes " The available guidance includes a checklist of closure documentation requirements located ' in Appendix B of the Th-Regional Board Staff Recommendations for Preliminary Investigation and Evaluation of Underground Tank Sites ' The January 8, 1996, memorandum further descnbes then commitment of the RWQCB-V to discuss and implement expedited closure procedures within their jurisdiction FLUOR DANIEL GTI