Menu

TASTP/TCEQ Q & A

April 5, 2005

Q. 1) Please clarify the PI-7 procedures in relation to MDPE events. It is our understanding that the previous PI-7 form has been replaced by the Air Permit By Rule Checklist, which should now be filed in association with each MDPE event, not just the first one at a site.

A. 1) The Owner Operator should notify TCEQ of each MDPE event.

Q. 2) Regarding RCS', please clarify the following statement in Note 3 of the Site Closure activity (page 54): “If monitor wells are not to be drilled out, a reimbursement rate of 50% of $300 or $150 will be allowed. This rate will only apply to sites with five or more wells. The rate will be effective after the first four wells are plugged.” Specifically, is the intent of the term “drilled out” to mean that the casing is removed? If so, will partial removal of casing (e.g., if the casing breaks off during removal) still qualify for the full $300 rate?

A. 2) The intent is to pay by size of rig dispatched to the site. If a drill rig is sent to the site, the reimbursable amount is $300.00. If a skidsteer/Bobcat is sent to the site, the reimbursable amount is $150.00.

Q. 3) RCS' contain the same costs for driller mileage under the Site Closure activity that were in RCGs: “Mileage (over 50, max 450)”, which is different from the Site Assessment activity: “Mileage > 50, Maximum Additional 200 One Way”. For a 250 mile one-way mobilization for well plugging, will reimbursement continue to pay for the full 450 miles over the first 50 miles, as stated in rule?

A. 3) An amount of $250.00 will be paid for the first 100 miles and then an additional $1.25 per mile will be paid up to the maximum of 500 miles.

Q. 4) Since CARFs issued on and after 11/18/04 will be reviewed for reimbursement under the RCS', even though the CARFs were calculated under RCGs until recently, how will laboratory rates and vacuum truck rates be handled during reimbursement? Will lab rates and vacuum truck rates which are less than or equal to the RCG rates but exceed the RCS rates be disallowed, or will they be handled under a bottom line review policy?

A. 4) Any CARF after 11/18/04 will be reviewed under the RCS. All rates that exceed the RCS will be disallowed.

Q. 5) Please clarify the requirements for meeting the 12/23/96 deductible deadline for sites which were assessed before the introduction of risk-based assessment. It has been our understanding for several years that collection of a sample for TDS analysis and a half mile water well search were the necessary items for establishing a risk-based priority by 12/23/96 for previously assessed sites. However, recently we have had deductibles assessed on several sites even though these items were in place.

A. 5) The deductible are based on a SOP authored by Danny Lien dated 9/96.

Q. 6) At times we subcontract a portion of the office/professional personnel or follow-up gauging (in addition to MDPE field personnel) for an MDPE activity. It appears that the new MDPE cost spreadsheet is constructed such that markup can only be given on the MDPE field personnel. Can the spreadsheet be modified; do we need to get approval from the coordinator for omitted costs each time this happens, or will such markup be paid by reimbursement even if it wasn't preapproved?

A. 6) No - Mark up will not be given to subs doing gauging when connected to a MDPE event. If the gauging isn't connected to an MDPE event, the sub can be marked up. Disclose the purpose of the trip to gauge only prior to mobilizing.

Q. 7) Reimbursement question: Our understanding is that a form that is sufficient for a bonding company to consider has been submitted to the TCEQ for review and approval. Once this is approved by the TCEQ, bonding companies still need to determine the type of bond and the expense associated with it before it can be offered to companies, which could take several weeks or months. Since as of April 1, 2005, reimbursement applications now require this (if the subs have not already been paid), what will the TCEQ consider in the mean time?

A. 7) TCEQ will not approve or disapprove the bonds and will not make any comments or directives. The bond company should send a bond with the 3 page “Annual payment Bond” form attached with a representative of the surety company affixing his/her signature. Reimbursement applications submitted in April will not require a bond, although a voucher will still be required.

Q. 8) When will TCEQ be releasing the new APAR Guidance document and revised APAR report form that is currently being developed?

A. 8) This is not as much a Guidance Document as it instructions of how to fill out the form. The target date for release is mid May. This instruction document will not include information on TRRP. TCEQ will publish this to the web site when it's final.

Q. 9) In the past, the 60-day deadline for submitting protests has applied to ““Costs Deemed Not Reimbursable”” and not to withheld amounts. Also, it did not appear that the 60-day deadline for protesting Costs Deemed Not Reimbursable”” was enforced. However, it appears that the 60-day deadline now applies to all amounts unpaid for any reason. Is this a change in Reimbursement policy?

A. 9) No, this is not a change. The rules are explicit- the 60 day deadline applies for submitting all protests.

Q. 10) Is there a minimum amount, below which a bond would not be required?

A. 10) A minimum has not been established at this time; however it is being considered.

Q. 11) We have recently assumed responsibility for O&M of some older systems installed by OES, which have needed much repair to keep them running. Often, needed repairs or replacement parts are not discovered until the system goes down, since it is not clear how well the systems were installed or maintained. As the systems age, this becomes more common- will the site visits to replace worn parts be considered for the 85% run time requirement for reimbursement?

A. 11) Preapproval of costs is often a little more lenient on systems that have been taken over from another contractor.