ARCHIVED REPORTS_XR0002834 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Tri-Regional Recommendations Page 17 of 24 Appendix A . 5 Disposal methods requiring either the 5.0 VERIFICATION MONITORING-42727 Regional Board's General Permit for dis- charge to surface water(NPDES) or land Verification monitoring includes all activities (WDRs)may be evaluated Selection of this required to verify implementation of the CAP and type of disposal requires the responsible evaluate its effectiveness The discharger shall party to submit an application and support- verify successful completion of the CAP through ing documentation in a timely sampling or other monitoring of soil and/or manner (See Region 5 Web page) groundwater for a period of time determined by the lead agency to demonstrate that seasonal 4 3 Final Remediation Plan (FRP) groundwater fluctuations will not mobilize any remaining contamination in quantities sufficient to The FRP is a corrective action implementation degrade water quality and that rebound of plan with detailed plans of the approved remedial contaminant concentrations will be insignificant system to be installed,and a proposed schedule Using the monitoring results obtained during this for system construction and startup period, the discharger shall evaluate the effectiveness of corrective actions at the site The FRP is to include the following minimum information 6 0 NO FURTHER ACTION REQUIRED • A description of the remedial technology (NFAR) REPORTING approved by the LIA and/or Regional Board All regulatory agencies, including the Regional Board, are required to issue a standard Case • A listing of the approved cleanup levels NFAR letter when closure is appropriate That . from the PAR, and predicted timeframe to letter is described in Section 25296 10(g) of the meet these cleanup levels using the selected Health and Safety Code The purpose for a remedial alternative NFAR report is to provide a document upon • which the regulator may make an objective Detailed plans for installation of the ap- decision regarding a request by the responsible proved remedial alternative, such as soil to party for site NFAR when contaminants remain be excavated, layout of the soil vapor ex- but are no longer considered to be a significant traction system, air sparge injection points, risk (See Disclaimer,page 2) In general, the number and placement of remedial Regional Board staff approve NFAR requests wells and associated equipment, the pro- when risks to public health and safety and posed pumping rate, disposal of wastes, etc ecological receptors are reduced to insignificant Ievels and • A discussion of implementation, including a phased schedule for construction and sys- 1 Groundwater quality/beneficial uses are not tem startup threatened by soil contamination, and • chemical contaminants in groundwater Operation and maintenance procedures, have been remediated to non-detectable tests, and schedules including startup, long- levels,or term monitoring program for influent and effluent concentrations and periodic evalua- 2 Groundwater contains detectable contarni- tion of the need for system optimization nants below water quality objectives and concentrations are expected to reach back- Should delays occur or time extensions be needed, ground conditions through natural proc- torequests, with supporting documentation, are esses within a reasonable period of time, or to be submitted by letter to the LIA and/or Re- gional Board 3 Groundwater contains contaminants above water quality abjectives,where best avail-