MenuHome Officers & Directors Member Directory Membership Information Schedule of events Links Previous Events TASTP/TCEQ Q & A |
TASTP/TCEQ Q & AAugust 14 , 2007Q. 1) Since a legislative intent letter dated June 26, 2007 was received by the TCEQ, are PST sites eligible to move from 30 TAC 350 to 30 TAC 334 now, or will it still require a rule change before the transition will be made effective? A. 1) The TCEQ stated that a rule change will be required before sites can move from 350 to 334. Until the rule change, it will be business as usual. Q. 2) Will a rule change be required to 30 TAC 350 to exempt LPST sites from TRRP? A. 2). Yes, a rule change will be required through 350. Q. 3) The LPST Database says that the database is updated daily, but it does not appear to be current. What steps are being taken to keep the database updated on a daily basis? A. 3) Apparently, there is code error in the LPST Database which indicates daily updates which never actually occur. In addition, the TCEQ is changing the database language which is still in progress. The TCEQ advised us to contact the individual project coordinators in lieu of the database. Q. 4) Will RPs and associated consultants be notified in writing if the site is referred to the State-Lead Program? We want to ensure we do not do any work after the August 31 deadline, but on some sites it is unclear whether the TCEQ has accepted the site or not. A. 4)The TCEQ stated that their goal was to notify both the RPs and consultants when the site has been accepted into State-Lead; however, State-Lead transfers are not being accepted at the time. Q. 5) Will there be any consideration for allowing increases in the reimbursable costs since Reimbursement has been extended for 4 more years? A. 5) The TCEQ is not considering any increases at this time. Q. 6) Since Chapter 334 will be opened up for rule changes, are there other Technical rule changes being considered other than those affected by the new Federal Rules? A. 6) Yes, other changes are being considered, especially regarding technical rules. Q. 7) The TCEQ web page only references the Husky Balance Vapor Recovery System on their ORVR approved list of systems. Is there a reason that balance is not listed as ORVR approved on the list or is only the Husky balance system approved as ORVR compliant? A. 7) All balance systems are deemed to be ORVR compatible and are approved for use in Texas. This follows the March 3, 2003 letter that was sent out by the California Air Resources Board (CARB). Q. 8) Are sites in the Houston/Galveston areas exempt from Stage I vapor recovery if they dispense less than 10,000 gallons of gasoline a month after January 1, 1991 and was constructed before November 15, 1992? Are tanks 1000 gallons and less exempt from Stage I? Are tanks used for fueling implements of agriculture exempt from Stage I? A. 8) Yes, the sites are exempt if they dispense less than 10,000 gallons of gasoline. New Questions: Q. 9) Drill cuttings from a monitoring well installation had a TPH of 34 ppm and no BTEX. When asked if these soils could be spread on site, the TCEQ coordinator replied "The stockpile soils should be handled in accordance with guidance that came out in 1993 regarding reuse of backfill material. I think these levels are too high to landfarm and should be disposed offsite, but I haven't had time to dig up that '93 memo." Perhaps the coordinator is referring to the old 334 Subchapter K Storage, Treatment, & Reuse Procedures for Petroleum-Substance Contaminated Soil? What regulation or "memo" currently applies to this reimbursable eligible LPST site? A. 9) In 30 TAC 334.503.(c).(3).(E), allowance is given for reuse of petroleum contaminated soil as fill. If soil contains<100 ppm TPH, soil can be spread onsite. If soil contains>100 ppm TPH, a PAH analysis would be warranted to determine if any health based concentrations for any individual constituents are present. BTEX concentrations must also be below health based concentrations for this to apply. If the soil is below these concentrations, the TCEQ will consider costs to spread the soils onsite. Q. 10) Some RPs agreed to let the consultants to keep the remediation equipment when they stop work. Since the RPs own the equipment, if they refer their sites to State Lead to complete remediation but the RP sold the equipment to the consultant, what happens? A. 10)The remediation equipment will stay onsite until it is no longer needed. State Lead will have use of the equipment if needed, regardless of ownership. Q. 11) On the Fund Payment Report, when there is an amount pending, the explanation is "the application cannot be processed or reimbursed until all claims with preapproval have been processed and paid". What is the current time line on these payments? A. 11) As it stands now, if an amount is deemed non-preapproved and it is older than 1/1/05, it is being processed now. Over 850 claims are being processed at this time. If the claim is after 1/1/05, these claims will be processed after the pre- 1/1/05 claims have been addressed. They are working the oldest first. Q. 12) Does the agency have an update on the status of implementing the Federal Energy Act? A. 12) The TCEQ is still waiting for feedback from the EPA. Click Here for a printable version. |
|
|
