Laserfiche WebLink
William Sawyer, Esq. <br /> March 20, 1998 <br /> Page 3 <br /> The problems at the site are technical, real world problems. They don't disappear by fancy minutes <br /> or crafty posturing. The cost of these problems can be minimized by effective cooperation with the <br /> regulators, but nothing approaching cooperation is taking place. Amid the posturing and the <br /> jockeying of facts, very little actual progress on the site has been achieved, and the frustration of the <br /> regulators is evident by the threat to turn the site over to the district attorney's office. I've already <br /> discussed with you our view that there is a great deal of defensiveness over past mistakes, yet this <br /> dynamic clearly continues to drive the decision-making and conduct of Del Monte's representatives. <br /> In our meeting with Del Monte on February 3, Del Monte even acknowledged that it had <br /> mismanaged things. When our clients offered to take over the management of the relations with the <br /> county, precisely because these relations have been mismanaged, Del Monte declined, citing its need <br /> to retain control over the contacts with the county because it had to control what happens on its <br /> property. Despite assurances that prior mismanagement would not contain, it is apparent that nothing <br /> haschanged. <br /> While I had originally thought it best to work quickly and cooperatively with the county and Del <br /> Monte towards site closure. I no longer have confidence in this approach. Del Monte appears <br /> incapable of changing its approach. As the county noted in its meeting, it has wasted hundreds of <br /> thousands of dollars on this site. Apparently, it intends to continue to do so. If we cannot take over, <br /> nor get Del Monte to change its ways, a "partnership" on costs and technical approach is hard to <br /> imagine. <br /> Our client is back from Chile, and we are reassessing our status in light of the complete failure of Del <br /> Monte to live up to the program of cooperation—with us and with the county—it had promised. I <br /> again suggest that Del Monte immediately contact the county and offer to implement all of the <br /> county's requests for data within the time frames specified by the county. I also request that your <br /> consultant provide a detailed explanation of its evidence that the USTs leaked before they were <br /> transferred and an explanation of how oxygenates can be on the property and be attributed to fueling <br /> activities before 1976. Assuming that you can salvage our status with the county, and we have an <br /> adequate explanation of the oxygenates,we can again consider the settlement as I had proposed in <br /> my draft. Otherwise, we will be pursuing another approach on this site. <br /> Very 1 our , <br /> Rory J. C mpbell <br /> RJC:ba <br /> cc: Warren L. Simmons <br /> 807838.7 <br />