Laserfiche WebLink
SFAR BY: 11- 7-97 ;11:44AM CIRCLE K LEGAL4 912094640138-310810;# 1J 2 <br /> IrTOSCO MIARKETIN6 COMPANY <br /> Tosco SOF�@q��PORATION <br /> OT f ) <br /> Marketing PNOENIR,ARIZONA M72.2"4 <br /> Company <br /> PHONE: 602-awsms <br /> FAX: 602-5304147 <br /> W.THOMAS SKolt <br /> ASSISTANT GENERAL COUNSEL <br /> Novm.bcr 7, 1997 <br /> via FAX 209-I64-0138 <br /> Originat in Mail <br /> Margaret Lagorfo,REBS,Supervisor <br /> San Joaquin County Public Health Services <br /> Environmental Health Division <br /> 304 East Weber Avenue,Third,Floor <br /> Stockton, California 95202 <br /> He: 76 Service Station 6961 <br /> 4707 Pack Avenue,Stockton. t rnia <br /> Dear Ms. Lagorin <br /> Reference is made to your letter of October 30, 1997 to Tosco Marketing Company's Ed Ralston <br /> and Unocal Corporation's Bob Boust The following is a <br /> your letter response by Tosco to several issues in <br /> - <br /> During a September 5, 1997 meeting with Deputy District Attorney David Ivey on behalf of Tosco I <br /> indicated that all operating 76 branded service stations in the state of California were acquired by <br /> Tosco Corporation from Union Oil Company of California On March 31, 1997, including the subject <br /> servicestation. There have been no releases from the UST system and related piping since <br /> Tosco acquired its interest in the service station promisesfrom Unocal- However, pursuant to its <br /> contractual agreements with Unocal,Tosm is performing the on going remediation arising from <br /> Pre-March 31 uses of the premises by Unocal and its independent dealers, <br /> Consistent with file requirements of the State's Underground Storage Tank Cleanup Fund Review <br /> procedures,Tosco's consulting firm, Pacific Environmental Group Inc, prepared a letter to Dave <br /> Deaner and James Munch of the State of Catifomia Water Resources Board requesting their <br /> review of this project. I am advised that your Office had been advised by Tosco on or about <br /> October 14 that it would be fiting for this review process,and my copy of the Pacific Environmental <br /> r nc indicates your colleague, Mary Maeys received a copy of their report to Messrs. Deaner and <br /> PuFlnch. It appears that Pacific Environmental's letter of October 30, 1897 and yours of the same <br /> date have crossed in the mails---thus, H is possible you hadn't seen . 1997 and <br /> yours of the <br /> submission to the State by the time your letter was prepared. <br />