WORK PLANS - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

i l ce Giambanco, Sr . MAY 2 01993 claim No . 830 Final Division Decision Page 5 Beginning in December of 1990 , Giambanco repeatedly missed the deadlines imposed and during the indepth review performed at the county on February 2 , 1993 he was deemed out of compliance with the countyts corrective on directives and permit require- These delays jeopardized both the environment and public safety . Sections 2811 (a) (4) and 2811 (b) (3 ) provide that " . . [w) ith respect to .n e operator of an underground storage task . . shallbe entitled t reimbursement for such costs only if the claimant took corrective action in accordance with any applicable Provisions of Chapter 6 , 7 (commencing with Section 25280) o the CaliforniaHealth and Safety Code and the Federal Act . 1 (Emphasis added) Also, Ear red after December 2 1991 , the corrective mu st ttbenin compliances incu 1 ' cable corrective actin Section 2804 defines grosu negligence as •failure to act by the owner or t operator, r employees , agents , or any other person under the o operator' s supervision or control, in reckless disregard of the co sequences, which causes allows a unauthorized release from an underground tank to occur or to continue . " (Emphasis added. ) Section 2810 . 3 provides that ^ [n) otwithstanding any other provision of Article 4 corrective costs and third party compensation claim costs whicha occasioned by or result from the gross negligence or the intentional o reckless a of the claimant o the agents servants , employees or representatives of the claimant, are not eligible for reimbursement from the Fund. " Beginning in December 9 and continuing an til his death, Giambanco repeatedly ignored c action from the county, and was grossly negligent by allowing free product to flow unabated . His failure to act n allowed a unauthorized release [ continue reckless disregard of the consequences . He violated5 25284-25292 of Chapter 6 . 7 of the California e Health and Safety Code and the sections listed above in the Underground Storage Task Cleanup Fund Regulations . This precludes him from being an eligible claimant to the Fund. u do n t the fact that G ambanco w of compliance You co action a directivea issued by the county . You assert thattthisw was t ongoing litigation with Shaughnessy for recision r of the purchase agreement and t the subsequent deaths o£ both parties in volved. Ongoing litigation i not a mitigating factor i the cleanup of contamination. reparable damage can he done to the environment and personal property while