SITE INFORMATION AND CORRESPONDENCE

Home Browse Search

MEMORANDUM CALIFORNIA REGIONAL WATER QUALITY CONTROL BOARD • CENTRAL VALLEY REGION 3443 Routier Road, Suite A Phone: (916) 255-3000 Sacramento, CA 95827-3098 CALNET• 8-494-3000 TO: Wendy L. Cohen FROM: Philip S. Isorena Senior Engineer Associate Engineer DATE: 27 December 1993 SIGNATURE: 7" �- SUBJECT: SITE STATUS REVIEW OF TOWER PARK MARINA, SAN JOAQUIN COUNTY During a telephone conversation on 18 November 1993, Mr. Harry Crocket of Real Estate Asset Specialist, 555 Capitol Mall, Suite 647, Sacramento 95814, informed me that he is the receiver (a person appointed by a court to take charge of a business or property of others, pending litigation) for Tower Park Marina. He said he has paid the bills for Law Crandall, Inc. (LCI); therefore, LCI should be able to proceed with implementation of the Phase II work plan. In response to his question regarding the cost of cleaning up the entire site, I said it would be difficult to come up with an estimate at this time because the extent of contamination has not been fully defined. However, LCI might be able to give him a rough estimate based on available data. Mr. Crocket's phone number is (209) 477-0884. In a related matter, Ms. Susan Gahry of LCI informed me on 19 November 1993 that she had been contacted by Mr. Crocket who said that LCI should proceed with the work plan implementation to avoid any enforcement action by the Board. Ms. Gahry explained to Mr. Crocket that since LCI will now be working for him, LCI's contract with Westrec (Tower Park owners) will have to be revised to reflect this change, contract modification will take at least two weeks, and the Board would unlikely take an enforcement action that is based on work plan implementation delays particularly if such delays were caused by a litigation. I told Ms. Gahry that I concurred with her statements and requested a revised schedule for performing Phase II work. She said she would send me the schedule along with the response (due 24 November 1993) to my comments on the work plan. On 8 December 1993, I spoke with Mr. Del Oros of the Resolution Trust Company who inquired about the site's investigation and compliance status. I informed him that the first phase of the investigation has been completed, an investigation report and a work plan for Phase II have been submitted, I provided comments on the Phase I investigation report and approved the Phase II.work plan through our 2 November 1993 letter, and the latter required a response by 24 November 1993. Regarding compliance with our requirements, I informed Mr. Oros that our regulatory authority comes from the Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act. I specifically cited Section 13268 which authorizes the Board to levy a fine of$1,000 a day fine for failure to submit a technical report. I also informed Mr. Oros that it was my understanding that LCI was going to be paid by Mr. Crocket so that the site investigation could continue. Furthermore, I said that inherent delays due to change in ownership or responsibility are understandable as long as Board staff is informed of the delays and such delays are not prolonged. A two-week delay would be acceptable but a two-month delay may result in staff recommendation for an enforcement action.