SITE INFORMATION AND CORRESPONDENCE FILE 1

Home Browse Search

J PETE WILSON, GovelnO/ oT� e OF CALIFORNIA-CALIFORNIA ENVIRON(�AL PROTECTION AGENCY �F STATE WATER RESOURCES CONTROL BOARD _DA4&ON OF CLEAN WATER PROGRAMS ENIVIROt'41 ENTAL HEALT11 2014 T STREET,SUITE 130 OFRI41T SERVICE pB P.O. BOX 944212 Q SACRAMENTO,CALIFORNIA 94244-2120 94 DEC 14 PM 1: 38 (916) 227-4307 (916) 227-4530 (FAX) DEC 9 3 1994 Jack Vaughn P. O. BOX 3013 Sonora, CA 95370 UNDERGROUND STORAGE TANK CLEANUP FUND PROGRAM, CLAIM NO. 008463, NOTICE OF INTENDED REMOVAL FROM PRIORITY LIST This is to notify you that during the detailed review of your application, it has been determined that your claim for the 507 1/2- 5998 East Eleventh St. , Tracy, CA 95376 is not eligible for reimbursement from the Underground Storage Tank Cleanup Fund. It is being proposed, therefore, that your claim be removed from the Priority List based on the following reason: You received $100, 000 ($50, 000 from INA Insurance Company and $50, 000 from Ohio Farmers Insurance Company) in settlements of litigation centered around the discovery of contamination on the site at 507 1/2- 599 East Eleventh St. , Tracy. The issue here is whether or not any of the $100, 000 received was intended for the costs of remediating all contaminants discovered on site. Settlement agreements have been difficult for the Fund to handle. Where the agreements are specific as to what the funds are for, and where that characterization appears to have merit, the Fund tries to honor the terms of the agreement. In this case, the agreements do not characterize the funds paid. Where the litigation and settlement were centered around the discovery of contamination and the costs to cleanup that contamination, I believe it is unreasonable to assume that all funds received were intended for costs other than overall site investigation and remediation. Your attorney, Laurence Paridis, indicated that the settlement monies received were for the remediation of oil contamination, not gasoline contamination. Since the settlement agreements were not specific, we believe it is reasonable to assume that the settlement money received covered all contamination discovered on the site. Since you are not obligated to repay the amount collected in settlement and your estimated reimbursable cost for eligible corrective action is only $22, 832 . 00, reimbursement of your claim would result in double payment. Claimants are not entitled to double payment of any corrective action costs (Section 2812 (2) (b) of the Cleanup Fund Regulations) .