Laserfiche WebLink
an <br />February 2, 1987 <br />Mr. Timothy A. Crandall <br />Project Engineer <br />California Regional Water Quality <br />Control Board <br />Central Valley Region <br />3443 Routier Road <br />Sacramento, CA 95827-3098 <br />Re: Your letter of 22 <br />Class III Landfill <br />28960-12501 <br />Dear Tim: <br />MAILING ADDRESS: <br />P.O. DRAWER 20 <br />STOCKTON, CALIFORNIA 9 52 01-3 02 0 <br />REFER TO FILE NO: <br />4 <br />ENVIRGME!-�T'AL HEALTH <br />FER <br />PAITAERVI E <br />January 1987/Forward Landfill - <br />(Case No. 2209)/Our file: <br />On 22 January 1987 your sent a letter to Greg Basso at <br />Forward, Inc. in which you stated "I inspected Forward's <br />new class III landfill on 16 January 1987. The landfill <br />was constructed without the knowledge or approval of the <br />Regional Board. This landfill cannot be operated until <br />[various design plans and engineering certifications have <br />been submitted]." <br />It is my understanding that this letter was perhaps <br />hastily worded, and that you have acknowledged that you had <br />preexcavation conversations in November of :1986 with Greg- <br />ory about the new excavation. As you have since acknowl- <br />edged also, this is not a "new landfill" but merely a Class <br />III excavation on an existing permitted Class III site. <br />The various design plans and engineering certifications <br />which you indicated were necessary are in fact already in <br />preparation to be submitted to you. The excavation is not <br />yet being used and will not be until the requirements are <br />met. <br />Tim, the tone of the letter _is unfortunate in view of <br />the involvement of the District is <br />'and I am writing <br />this letter solely to correct what may be misapprehended. <br />dP' <br />Neumiller & Beardslee <br />A PROFESSIONAL CORPORATION <br />ROBERT L. BEARDSLEE <br />JACK S. JOHAL <br />ATTORNEYS COUNSELORS <br />THOMAS J.Sy�H�EPHARD. SR. <br />RICHARD M. ARCHBOLD <br />DUNCAN:R. ICPHERSON <br />C. DAVID HURST <br />RUDY K BILAWSKI <br />PAUL N. SALESTRACCI <br />FIFTH FLOOR WATERFRONT OFFICE TOWER 11 <br />ROBERT C. MORRISON <br />STEVEN D. CRABTREE <br />509 WEST WEBER AVENUE <br />JAMES R. DYKE.: <br />MICHAEL J. DYER <br />JAMES A. ASKCW <br />GERALD L. HOBRECHT <br />STOCKTON, CALIFORNIA 95203 <br />JOHN W STOVALL <br />DEMETRA N. GEGES <br />(209) 948-8200 <br />STEVEN A. HERUM <br />JEANNE ZOLEZZI <br />` <br />LESLEY D. HOLLAND <br />an <br />February 2, 1987 <br />Mr. Timothy A. Crandall <br />Project Engineer <br />California Regional Water Quality <br />Control Board <br />Central Valley Region <br />3443 Routier Road <br />Sacramento, CA 95827-3098 <br />Re: Your letter of 22 <br />Class III Landfill <br />28960-12501 <br />Dear Tim: <br />MAILING ADDRESS: <br />P.O. DRAWER 20 <br />STOCKTON, CALIFORNIA 9 52 01-3 02 0 <br />REFER TO FILE NO: <br />4 <br />ENVIRGME!-�T'AL HEALTH <br />FER <br />PAITAERVI E <br />January 1987/Forward Landfill - <br />(Case No. 2209)/Our file: <br />On 22 January 1987 your sent a letter to Greg Basso at <br />Forward, Inc. in which you stated "I inspected Forward's <br />new class III landfill on 16 January 1987. The landfill <br />was constructed without the knowledge or approval of the <br />Regional Board. This landfill cannot be operated until <br />[various design plans and engineering certifications have <br />been submitted]." <br />It is my understanding that this letter was perhaps <br />hastily worded, and that you have acknowledged that you had <br />preexcavation conversations in November of :1986 with Greg- <br />ory about the new excavation. As you have since acknowl- <br />edged also, this is not a "new landfill" but merely a Class <br />III excavation on an existing permitted Class III site. <br />The various design plans and engineering certifications <br />which you indicated were necessary are in fact already in <br />preparation to be submitted to you. The excavation is not <br />yet being used and will not be until the requirements are <br />met. <br />Tim, the tone of the letter _is unfortunate in view of <br />the involvement of the District is <br />'and I am writing <br />this letter solely to correct what may be misapprehended. <br />