Laserfiche WebLink
Vicki McCartney [EH] <br /> From: Margaret Lagorio [EH] <br /> Sent: Wednesday,April 22, 2009 10:13 AM <br /> To: 'judie kidle' <br /> Cc: Vicki McCartney[EH] <br /> Subject: RE: 16(l Turnpike, Stockton <br /> Judie, <br /> The Regional Water Quality Control Board normally issues a cleanup and abatement order (C <br /> and A) for sites that we r fer to them as non-compliant. This is my understanding of a C <br /> and A. It contains direct ves with dates for compliance. If directives are not complied <br /> with they have fines and penalties that can be administered. Non-responsive people <br /> individually are not refer ed,the site is referred. As long as there is action there is <br /> no referral. The Regional Board names responsible parties according to the Water Code and <br /> they name them all equally as we do and if there is no action they pursue all parties. <br /> It's a long, complicated process and I don't have details. Our contact at the Regional <br /> Board is Jim Barton (916) 64-4615 and he can explain the process. I don't think this <br /> site would qualify as an Orphan Fund site. Jim knows more about that fund as well. I <br /> think it would be a recalcitrant site and go into the Emergency, Abandoned, Recalcitrant <br /> (EAR) fund. This is also a long process that results in the lead agency, Regional Board, <br /> contracting out the corrective action, the clean-up fund paying for the work and the <br /> responsible parties pursued for reimbursement by the State Controllers Office. We have <br /> referred sites to the Regional Board, one had expended all there cleanup fund money, so <br /> they are in the EAR fund. <br /> I don't think there are any operators of the former underground storage tank (UST)who <br /> leased the site from yourarents. That was the whole basis of naming Turnpike Associate <br /> partnership and the individual partners. The statements from your parents and sister were <br /> that the UST was not used during their ownership of the property. <br /> The correspondence is all the appeal information and our directives to install wells, <br /> approve work plans, etc. <br /> Margaret <br /> -----Original Message----- <br /> From: judie kindle [mailto tomballodiMgmail.com] <br /> Sent: Tuesday, April 21, 2 09 6:00 PM <br /> To: Margaret Lagorio [EH] <br /> Cc: Vicki McCartney [EH] <br /> Subject: Re: 1601 Turnpike Stockton <br /> Thanks. This is all coming back to me now--I think most of this information was provided <br /> to us when first we met. Do you have any idea what the Regional Water Quality Board does <br /> when they get referrals? Fake legal action? Turn over to the Orphan Fund? Other. <br /> Have you ever referred people who are non-responsive if you do have one who is (as in this <br /> case) ? As I recall, the "penalty" for being out of compliance is forfeiture of the Barry <br /> Keane reimbursement. <br /> There is another company which might be a responsible party as well as they were operators <br /> who leased the site from our folks. <br /> Seems like you had said at our first meeting that if anyone would pursue the other <br /> responsible parties, it would have to be us. Has the policy changed on that? Do you have <br /> a contact at the Water Qua ity Board I might call. <br /> I hope it is clear that we continue to be responsive but as all drags on, it annoys us <br /> even more that we are the my ones from the site investing our time and money! (This <br /> comment is just an aside p ease <br /> know. ) <br /> Again, thanks for getting ack to me so quickly. Can you please tell me what <br /> 1 <br />