Current through August 26, 2024
(1) GENERAL. Site
investigations which were not started as of January 15, 1993, and for which a
remedial alternative was received by the department before April 21, 1998,
shall conform to this section.
(2)
MAXIMUM ALLOWABLE COST. The maximum allowable cost for a site investigation and
the development of a remedial action plan shall be no more than $40,000,
excluding interest, feasibility testing, and interim action costs, unless
approved under par. (a).
(a) If the
investigation will exceed $40,000, the responsible party or its agent, shall
contact the department in writing and provide an estimate of additional work
and funding required and obtain the department's approval. If the additional
approval is not obtained, costs above the $40,000 level will not be
reimbursed.
(b) The consultant is
responsible for monitoring the costs incurred in the investigation and remedial
plan development and identifying that the $40,000 maximum may be exceeded. The
consultant shall notify the owner, in writing, at the earliest point at which
the consultant may know, or may have been reasonably expected to know, that the
maximum allowable cost may be exceeded and that the approval of the department
shall be obtained before any costs above $40,000 will be reimbursed by the
department. The notification to the owner shall be made before the owner has
incurred liabilities above the $40,000 maximum.
(3) CONSIDERATION OF ALTERNATIVES.
(a) The remedial action plan developed for
the site shall include a consideration of at least 3 alternatives, one of which
shall be passive bio-remediation with long-term monitoring. The consideration
of alternatives shall include a basic comparison of costs and the recommended
alternative shall have a detailed cost estimate. If passive bio-remediation
with long-term monitoring is feasible but not the recommended alternative, a
clear rationale shall be provided as to why this alternative is not acceptable.
Costs of long-term monitoring, or operation and maintenance shall be included
in the comparison of costs in considering the alternatives.
(b) If the consideration of the passive
bio-remediation or monitoring alternative shall be excluded because of site
characteristics, the alternative shall be replaced by consideration of another
alternative. If an alternative is substituted for the passive bio-remediation
or monitoring alternative, the reason for this change shall be documented in
the analysis.
(c)
1. The comparison of alternatives shall be a
concise document written so that the responsible party and the department may
easily compare alternatives. Only alternatives which are reasonably expected to
be approved may be included in the comparison. The comparison of alternatives
shall be submitted to the department if the proposed alternative is greater
than $60,000. The comparison submitted to the department shall not include the
full remedial action plan, unless requested by the department.
2. If the comparison document is determined
by the department to be excessive or non-approvable alternatives are included,
the department may require that the comparison be revised and
resubmitted.
(4) START OF INVESTIGATION. An investigation
shall be considered started if, after confirmation of a contamination is
obtained, additional soil borings, soil sampling or monitoring-well
construction have begun. In addition, the work on the site shall have an
element of continuity. If work on a site stops for a period of 2 years or more,
the site shall then fall under s. NR 747.335(2) and (3) or depending 747.337 on
whether a remedial alternative was received by the department as of April 20,
1998.
