Laserfiche WebLink
'1 State Vater Resources Contro`hoard <br /> Division of Financial Assistance <br /> 1061 1 Street•Sacramento,California 95814 <br /> Terry Tamminen P.O.Sox 944212•Sacramento,California•94244-2120 ' <br /> Secreiaryfor (916)341-5761 . FAX(916)341-5806 • www.swrcb.ca.gov/cwphome/ustcf Arnold Sehwarzenegger <br /> Environmental Governor <br /> Protection RECEIVED <br /> June 30,2004 JUL 0 2 2004 <br /> David Warwick ENVIRONMENT HEALTH <br /> 5730 Bennett Valley Rd PERMITISERVICES <br /> Santa Rosa,CA 95404 <br /> UNDERGROUND STORAGE TANK CLEANUP FUND (FUND),NOTICE OF INTENDED REMOVAL <br /> FROM PRIORITY LIST, CLAIM NUMBER 018052, SITE ADDRESS: 640 SAN JOAQUIN ST N, <br /> STOCKTON <br /> This is to notify you that during the detailed review of your application,it has been determined that your claim <br /> for the subject site is not eligible for reimbursement in the Underground Storage Tank Cleanup Fund. <br /> Therefore,it is being proposed that your claim be removed from the Priority List based on the following <br /> reason: <br /> Work performed was not considered corrective action.' <br /> Ms. Laurie Cotulla of San Joaquin County Environmental Health Department(County)stated in her letter <br /> dated June 12, 2003 to Nicole Gleason of Downey Brand Attorneys,LLP, "...After review of the <br /> activities...and the EHD program files on this site,we do not agree that the actions taken by the property <br /> owners were corrective action directed by EHD staff..."2 <br /> During the detail review of your file at the County's office on June 6,2004, I met with Ms. Margaret Lagorio <br /> of that office,who stated that the County gave no directives for any corrective action work. <br /> Fund management recommended that the Fund's technical staff review file(before issuing a letter of <br /> commitment)to determine if any corrective action work was done for your site. Bob Trommer of the Fund's <br /> technical staff reviewed file documents and concluded that work for this site was for detection of a release. He <br /> agreed with the County in that work performed for your site was not for corrective action. Therefore,if no <br /> corrective action was done then there are no costs to be reimbursed by the Fund. <br /> Section 281 L(a)(5)of the Fund Regulations states in part that you shall be entitled to reimbursement for <br /> eligible corrective action costs if: <br /> "...Any corrective action...was performed in accordance with California Code of Regulations,title <br /> 23, division 3, chapter 16 article 11. Any corrective action performed was performed in accordance <br /> with the written or oral directives of the appropriate regulatory agency. If oral directives are relied <br /> Califomia Code of Regulations,title 23,division 3, chapter 16 article 11 states in part: <br /> "..."Corrective action"means any activity necessary to investigate and analyze the effects of an unauthorized <br /> release...Corrective action does not include...Detection, confirmation, or reporting of the unauthorized release..." <br /> 2 This letter was in response to Downey/Brand's June 10, 2003 letter to County,requesting a letter from County <br /> naming claimant a responsible party and directing them to perform corrective action. Downey/Brand's letter stated <br /> "Although some of the Warwick's costs were incurred while discovering the unauthorized release and inclosing the <br /> tank in place,the majority of their costs were incurred to investigate the unauthorized release." <br /> California En v&onmental Protection Agencv <br /> aRecyc%d Paper <br />