Laserfiche WebLink
1 <br /> September 22, 1997 <br /> TO: Annabel <br /> FROM: Icon Markle <br /> SUBJECT: Claim no. 12513(Graffigna) .' <br /> My review of the claim file raised the following questions: <br /> 1. Permit compliance issue- there is no record that the claimant applied for or obtained a permit for <br /> the tanks prior to lil/90 and there is no record of a waiver of the requirement with the double deductible9 <br /> it appears than the claimant did not permit the tank prior to having obtained a permit in 1993°to''remove the <br /> tank. The checklist indicates that the claimant met the requirement prior to 111/90. 7.1 <br /> 2. Priority issue-the claimant railed to complete VII(E)of the claim application listing the tank <br /> operator at the time of discovery or at the time of claim application. Perhaps the tanks were not being J. <br /> operated. The tenant on the site is a small discount lumber company so I am comfortable with Otho``H" <br /> priority assigned. However,the claimant should have been required to complete the application so we <br /> know whether the tanks were operated and so we are com sortable that the correct priority is being assigned <br /> to the claim. 0 <br /> I don't want to raise the priority issue with the claimant now but I do bel icve that a permit waiver with the I <br /> double deductible is proper on this claim. is <br /> L: <br /> 3'. <br /> • 1. <br /> } <br /> i. <br /> } <br /> £0el 699'ON QNai dnNd3-1O 1Sn £1 :60 : LG/VE/60 ) <br /> t <br />