Laserfiche WebLink
10/27/93 07:12 UST r' EANUP FUND 209463710e N0.437 901 <br /> Post-It's brand tax transmittal memo 7671 n of Page. . Z <br /> To from <br /> Co. Co. <br /> Dept. Ph M <br /> Fax Fax <br /> TO: Mr. James Hoblitzell —' <br /> Vice President and Environmental Manger <br /> FROM: Ron Markle <br /> UST Cleanup Fund <br /> SUBJECT : REQUEST FOR ADVISORY OPINION ON ELIGIBILITY <br /> Your letter dated October 2 , 1993 requested an opinion on <br /> eligibility. <br /> A person recently inherited property in Stockton. The site <br /> was a gas station in the 30s . There may be underground tanks <br /> on the site . If there are tanks, they have not been operated <br /> since at lease 1940 . The tenant on the site since about 1960 <br /> is interested in buying the property and has advised the <br /> property owner that it appears there are two or three tanks on <br /> the site . <br /> If tanks do exist and are removed and if contamination is present, <br /> would the property owner be eligible for the Fund? <br /> I cannot give you a definitive response because there may be facts <br /> not presented. However, let me briefly outline eligibility <br /> requirements : <br /> 1 . Claimant must be the owner or operator of the underground <br /> storage tank that caused the contamination. <br /> It would appear that the property owner is also the tank owner <br /> since the tanks may exist on the property he inherited and <br /> there is no known legal tank owner. <br /> 2 . Must be a tank that contains or contained petroleum. <br /> Assuming these tanks were used at a service station, they most <br /> likely contained petroleum. <br /> 3 . Must be a petroleum tank as defined in Section 25281 (x) of the <br /> California Health and Safety Code (H&SC) . <br /> If the tanks were used at a service station and contained <br /> petroleum they would be eligible tanks that are subject to the <br /> tank laws (permits to own, installation, monitoring, and <br /> release reporting requirements, etc . ) . <br />