SITE INFORMATION AND CORRESPONDENCE

Home Browse Search

Mr. Riddle • - 3 - Claim 3 -Claim No. 13324 1 respectfully disagree. The Fund's authority to reimburse claimants is subject to a number of conditions specified in Chapter 6.75 of the California Health and Safety Code (H&SC) and the Petroleum Underground Storage Tank Cleanup Fund Regulations, Title 23, Division 3, Chapter 18 of the California Code of Regulations (Fund Regulations). The SJCEHD in conjunction with the Regional Water Quality Control Board is responsible for many tasks, including protecting human health and safety, the environment, and the current and potential beneficial uses of the waters of the State. However, the Fund is only able to reimburse for reasonable and necessary costs directly related to corrective action associated with an "unauthorized release" from an eligible "UST" as these terms are defined in Section 2804. As a result, although the SJCEHD may have required the evaluation of the extent or source of the ineligible chlorinated solvents, the cost associated with this work cannot be covered by the Fund. You have also stated that monitoring wells MW-5, MW-6 and MW-7 were installed as part of the investigation of the unauthorized release from the UST. It is clear from my review that initially the investigation was related to the petroleum UST. However, after December 2000, the investigation of the petroleum UST was complete. Subsequent investigation was specifically related to the further assessment of the extent of the PCE contamination. As I noted above, a work plan for installation of these wells clearly stated that the purpose of installation of three additional monitoring wells was "to further investigate the lateral extent of chlorinated solvents in the groundwater beneath the site'. You further stated that until the SJCEHD determines the source of the PCE contamination is from offsite, the Fund is obligated to reimburse for the costs incurred to investigate the unauthorized release from the UST. I agree that the Fund should reimburse the corrective action costs for the petroleum release from the eligible UST. However, the Fund cannot reimburse costs for quarterly monitoring, reporting and further delineation of the ineligible PCE contamination. Issue#2 Your letter states that you disagreed with the FMD that the installation of the automatic belt skimmer to recover free product was not reasonable or necessary and that placement of a petroleum absorbent material in the well would be more appropriate. You further state that the automatic belt skimmer was the only method that could effectively remove the product. While I agree with the Fund Manager that the installation of an automatic belt skimmer seems excessive for the small thickness of free product measured at your site it appears to be effective. On this basis, I find that the Fund will continue to reimburse reasonable cost for operation of the skimmer as long as it is effective in removing measurable free product. Calijorn<a EnvrronmeirlalPrafecliah Agency �.Cf iPecydedpoper