SITE INFORMATION AND CORRESPONDENCE

Home Browse Search

i Gene Gabbard, Inc -2- Claim No. 13324 Background A 250-gallon waste oil UST was located at the site that is the subject of this claim. In 1997, the claimant removed the UST, discovered petroleum contamination, and, in 1998, became a Fund claimant. The claimant has received reimbursement in the amount of$155,191.20 (after application of the deductible). In my previous decision, I determined that the extent of the petroleum contamination in the soil and groundwater beneath the site had been defined by December 2000, after the installation of eight soil borings and monitoring wells MW-1 through MW-4. By that date, laboratory analyses of samples collected from these borings and wells showed that the petroleum contamination associated with the waste oil UST was limited to the immediate vicinity of the UST, and only monitoring well MW-3, installed in the center of the former UST excavation, continued to detect petroleum contamination. PCE contamination is also present at the site. Costs associated with the cleanup of PCE are not eligible for reimbursement from the Fund. PCE has been identified in groundwater samples collected from all of the monitoring wells at the site, except MW-3. In a work plan for installation of additional monitoring wells, dated April 4, 2002, Ground Zero Analysis, Inc. (GZA) stated that the purpose of installation of three additional monitoring wells (MW-5, MW-6, and MW-7)was "to further investigate the lateral extent of chlorinated solvents in the groundwater beneath the site." Similarly, subsequent work plans called for the installation of five more wells to further investigate the extent of PCE contamination. In the previously issued FDD, I concluded that the extent of petroleum contamination associated with the waste oil UST had been determined by December 2000, and, for corrective action costs incurred after December 2000, only costs associated with MW-3 (petroleum product recovery and quarterly monitoring and reporting)would be eligible for reimbursement from the Fund. Discussion I have reconsidered my previous decision. In addition to the costs determined eligible in the FDD, I now find that quarterly monitoring and reporting costs associated with MW-1, MW-2, and MW-4 are eligible for reimbursement from the Fund. While petroleum product recovery is ongoing in MW-3, costs for continued monitoring and reporting for these other three wells located near the waste oil UST excavation pit are reasonable costs. Though petroleum has not been detected in MW-1, MW-2, and MW-4, monitoring of these wells provides information concerning the extent of the petroleum contamination detected in MW-3. Costs associated with the investigation and cleanup of chlorinated solvents, including installation and operation of MW-5, MW-6, and MW-7, are not eligible for reimbursement. California En viron m ental Protection,4gen cy 0,FeeydedPnpei