Laserfiche WebLink
On August 27, 2009, a return to compliance certification, corrective actions statement <br />and supporting documentation was submitted in response to the August 7, 2009, routine <br />LIST inspection (Attachment 19). The supporting documentation included a copy of the <br />approved response plan, the May, June, and July 2009 monthly designated operator <br />inspection reports, and the August 11, 2009, secondary containment test report. The <br />statement indicated that the secondary containment failures and the outstanding issues <br />with the LIST system were being worked on. <br />1561NUT 111�rliiil I= <br />RON <br />NNE M low <br />-16if wilwil <br />eyff -N'el-e-ff 0 <br />tight. Mr. Fieock wanted assurance from Mr. Naidu that no fines would be imposed if <br />they were working diligently on correcting the violations. Mr. Naidu stated that he could <br />not grant any assurance and reminded Mr. Fieock that the facility had not taken any <br />action to correct the violations since August 2008. Mr. Naidu also reminded Mr. Fieock <br />of the secondary containment failures on August 11, 2009. <br />I IN IN P A I NMI <br />On September 16, 2009, a permit application, SR0058341, was submitted to make <br />secondary containment repairs to the diesel return line and piping sump, and to remove <br />the two pipes installed without a permit in 2008. The permit was approved by Mr. NaidL <br />#n September 18, 2009 (Attachment 20). <br />On October 9, 2009, Mr. Naidu was on site to witness the exposure of the failed <br />secondary containment return line. Upon his arrival, Mr. Naidu was shown that the <br />piping was damaged when a chain link fence was installed recently. While drilling near <br />the tank pad to install a fence post, the secondary piping return line was damaged. It <br />was decided that sampling would be required to ensure a release had not occurred. Mr. <br />Naidu witnessed the sampling and took photos of the damaged piping (Attachment 21). <br />F41 <br />