SITE INFORMATION AND CORRESPONDENCE_2001-2018

Home Browse Search

Mr. Bradford J. Dozier - 4 - MAY $ 4 2010 currently in use. The permit requirement applies to the owner and the operator of every UST that has not been properly removed or closed as required by section 25298. Petitioner became the owner of the UST when it purchased the property in January 1979. The requirement for a UST owner to obtain a permit to own or operate a UST became effective January 1, 1984. (See § 25284.) Petitioner became subject to the permit requirement in section 25284 when the applicable local agency, SJEHD, began issuing permits in 1988. Petitioner remained out of compliance with the permit requirements until the spring of 2004 when the USTs were properly removed. Therefore, Petitioner does not meet the requirement in section 25299.57, subdivision (d)(4)(A). If a claimant acquires real property on which a UST is situated and, despite the exercise of reasonable diligence, was unaware of the existence of the UST when the real property was acquired, the claimant may be eligible to file a claim with the Fund pursuant to section 25299.57, subdivision (d)(4)(B), if the claimant: . . . has obtained a permit required by subdivision (a) of Section 25284 for the underground storage tank that is the subject of the claim within a reasonable period, not to exceed one year, from when the claimant should have become aware of the existence of the underground storage tank, or when the applicable local agency began issuing permits pursuant to Section 25284, whichever occurs later. You contend that Petitioner had no knowledge of the UST's existence before the release occurred. The SJEHD notified Petitioner by letter dated August 3, 2001, that during an emergency response call a fuel pipe and vent pipe were located and existed on the property indicating "that a UST had existed or presently does exist on the site." The SJEHD directed Petitioner to investigate and to determine if a UST existed at the site. Therefore, at the latest, Petitioner had knowledge of the potential UST upon receiving the August 3, 2001, letter from the SJEHD. You admit that the August 3, 2001, letter from the SJEHD put Petitioner on notice that there was a possibility that a UST existed on the site. You assert, however, that financial difficulties and pending legislation precluded Petitioner from investigating the matter at that time. The Act, however, requires that land owners who unknowingly acquire "real property on which [a UST] is situated" to obtain the UST permit within a reasonable period of time "from when the claimant should have become aware of the existence of the [UST]." The Act sets an absolute bar, "not to exceed one year," on that reasonable period of time. Financial difficulties and pending legislation do not relieve owners and operators of the requirement to comply with the permitting requirements within that one-year period. Petitioner did not take any action to investigate and determine if a UST existed at the site until March 2004. After locating the UST on March 26, 2004, Petitioner obtained a removal permit on April 31, 2004, over two and a half years after being notified of the possible UST by the SJEHD. Therefore, because Petitioner did not obtain a permit within one year from when Petitioner should have become aware of the existence of the UST, Petitioner does not meet the requirements of section 25299.57, subdivision (d)(4)(B). California Environmental Protection Agency rJ Recycled Paper