Laserfiche WebLink
Jr 'ri r <br /> Memorandum to Donna Heran <br /> November 8, 1994 <br /> Page 2 <br /> Ms. Birkie's second false statement that "the SWRCB has been privy to communications <br /> between the parties of which you [sic] agency has been unaware", is untrue because PHS- <br /> EHD was in constant communication with members of Mr. Deaner's staff. <br /> Thirdly, PHS-EHD has an obligation to perform consistent and objective regulatory oversight <br /> for all sites within San Joaquin County. The SWRCB seeks lead agency concurrence <br /> throughout their eligibility review process. The claimant named by the SWRCB (the Lorzs) <br /> were never in compliance; PHS-EHD did not choose to sign an acceptance that the party <br /> being reimbursed was a compliant claimant having made appropriate and applicable <br /> corrective action requirements. We choose instead to attach our letter document indicating <br /> that the site was in compliance with the corrective action requirements and let the record <br /> show that the Lorzs had been referred to the RWQCB for formai enforcement action on <br /> November 29, 1990. <br /> Based upon Mr. Schueller's ruling, the claimant (Lorzs) was reimbursed for eligible <br /> corrective action costs by providing invoices and copies of cancelled checks after the Letter <br /> of Commitment was issued by the SWRCB. Mr. Schueller further stated that the current <br /> property owners, Ron and Alison Conway, declared that they understood that the Lorzs <br /> would reimburse them for all of the Conway's corrective action costs. <br /> SITE CHRONOLOGY <br /> 10131189 Two underground storage tanks (USTs) were removed under permit and <br /> inspection by Public Health Services, Environmental Health Division <br /> (PHS-EHD). The PHS-EHD field staff observed slight odor in the tank <br /> pit at 8 feet below grade (fbg). Groundwater elevations were known to <br /> be as high as 11 fbg in this area (San Joaquin County Flood Control, <br /> Spring 1986). <br /> 11/22/89 PHS-EHD received soil results from Tank #1 (550 gallon leaded <br /> gasoline) and Tank #2 (350 gallon unleaded gasoline). The results <br /> indicated contents from the tanks had been released into the soil: <br /> Tank TPH-G m Toluene-(Ppm) Eth (benzene m X lens m <br /> #1 240 2.4 3.1 59 <br /> #2 11 3.0 22 17 <br /> Due to the contamination documented in the soil sample results and the <br /> observations noted during the time of the tank removal, the site was <br /> placed on the LUSTIS contaminated database. <br />