IN THE SUPERIOR COURT OF THE STATE OF CALIFORNIA IN AND FOR THE COUNTY OF AMADOR ---oOo--- The People of the State of California) Plaintiff, ) ) vs. ) No. 98-0767 ) ROBERT ROLAND WOMACK, DAVID STERLING ) MASON III and MARK SHERRILL, ) Defendants. ) _____________________________________) PROCEEDINGS HELD BEFORE THE GRAND JURY NOVEMBER 23, 1998 VOLUME VIII APPEARANCES: For the People: DAVID J. IREY Deputy District Attorney Reported by: JAN BENEDETTI-WEISBERG, CSR No. 4643 1980 1 ---oOo--- 2 WITNESS INDEX Page 3 ROLAND WOMACK Examination by Mr. Irey 1993 4 NADINE WOMACK 5 Examination by Mr. Irey 2046 6 ROBERT FOURT Examination by Mr. Irey 2116 7 ---oOo--- 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 1981 1 E X H I B I T S 2 Exhibit No. Description Ref. 3 4 3 Videotape, 8 millimeter 2069 5 5 Blow-up of check 2008 6 14 Certificate of Tank Destruction 2180 7 18 Title Company File 2060 8 28 Building Department Street File 2171 9 32 Underground Tank Storage Removal 2126 Permit 10 34 Work Plan - Buckley 2168 11 50 KRL Financial Statement 2017 12 58 Voluntary Withdrawal from 2015 13 Partnership 14 59 Voluntary Withdrawal from 2019 Partnership 15 60 Voluntary Withdrawal from 2023 16 Partnership 17 68 Check to the City 2030 18 71 Roland Womack's File 2058 19 72 Check Register 2005 20 76 Sherrill Videotape 2069 21 78 Owner/Builder and Receipt 2097 22 110 Accounting of Checks 2008 23 113 Copy of Check 2029 24 114 Subpoena 1995 25 115 Property Report 2100 1982 1 EXHIBIT INDEX - Continued 2 Exhibit No. Description Ref. 3 4 116 Binder of Environmental Documents 2145 5 118 Count Permit Application 1988 2191 6 119 Application for Tank Closure 2191 7 ---oOo--- 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 1983 1 JACKSON, CALIF., MONDAY, NOVEMBER 23, 1998, 9:03 A.M. 2 BEFORE THE GRAND JURY OF AMADOR COUNTY 3 ---oOo--- 4 THE FOREPERSON: On the record. 5 MR. IREY: I can stay for this. 6 THE FOREPERSON: Okay. 7 THE SECRETARY: I am going to go ahead and take 8 roll. 9 (Redacted.) 10 GRAND JUROR XXXXXXX: Here. 11 THE SECRETARY: (Redacted.) Here. 12 (Redacted.) 13 GRAND JUROR XXXXXXXX: Here. 14 THE SECRETARY: (Redacted.) 15 GRAND JUROR XXXXX: Here. 16 THE SECRETARY: (Redacted.) 17 GRAND JUROR XXXXXX: Here. 18 THE SECRETARY: (Redacted.) 19 GRAND JUROR XXXXX: Here. 20 THE SECRETARY: (Redacted.) 21 GRAND JUROR XXXXXXXXXX: Here. 22 THE SECRETARY: (Redacted.) 23 GRAND JUROR XXXXXXXX: Here. 24 THE SECRETARY: (Redacted.) 25 GRAND JUROR XXXXXX: Here. 1984 1 THE SECRETARY: (Redacted.) 2 GRAND JUROR XXXXXXXX: Here. 3 THE SECRETARY: (Redacted.) 4 GRAND JUROR XXXXXX: Here. 5 THE SECRETARY: (Redacted.) 6 GRAND JUROR XXXXXXX: Here. 7 THE SECRETARY: (Redacted.) 8 GRAND JUROR XXXXXXX: Here. 9 THE SECRETARY: (Redacted.) 10 GRAND JUROR XXXXX: Here. 11 THE SECRETARY: (Redacted.) 12 GRAND JUROR XXXXX: Here. 13 THE SECRETARY: (Redacted.) 14 GRAND JUROR XXXXXX: Here. 15 THE SECRETARY: (Redacted.) 16 GRAND JUROR XXXXXXXX: Here. 17 THE SECRETARY: (Redacted.) 18 GRAND JUROR XXXXXXXX: Here. 19 THE SECRETARY: (Redacted.) 20 THE FOREPERSON: Here. 21 22 (Whereupon, pages 1985-1991 were reported and transcribed, but are under separate 23 confidential cover.) 24 ---oOo--- 25 1992 1 THE FOREPERSON: Mr. Womack, will you remain 2 standing, please, and raise your right hand. 3 You do solemnly swear that the evidence 4 you shall give in this investigation now pending before 5 this Grand Jury shall be the truth, the whole truth and 6 nothing but the truth, so help you God. 7 THE WITNESS: I do. 8 THE FOREPERSON: Thank you. You may be seated. 9 THE WITNESS: Microphone working? 10 THE FOREPERSON: I think it is. 11 THE WITNESS: You hear me all right? 12 GRAND JUROR: Right. 13 THE WITNESS: Can I say something first when we 14 get started here? 15 (TIME NOTED: 9:15 A.M.) 16 ---oOo--- 17 ROLAND WOMACK 18 Called as a witness herein by the People, 19 having been duly sworn to tell the truth, was examined 20 and testified as follows: 21 22 EXAMINATION 23 BY MR. IREY: 24 Q I could ask a question. 25 Mr. Womack, is there something you would 1993 1 like to start the day with? 2 A Yes, there is. I don't know what happened 3 Friday. When I left here, my understanding was it was 4 tentatively scheduled for sometime Friday afternoon. I 5 walked out, asked Ron if he wanted to see my wife. 6 And he said no. And he asked me what went 7 on in here. And I said, Maybe Friday afternoon. He 8 said, We will call you. He has called us before and has 9 told us when to come in. He called us and has moved the 10 times. 11 Then my wife gets a call Friday 12 afternoon -- well, before that, I asked my wife two or 13 three times if anybody has called and scheduled for 14 Friday. Patients -- we moved patients from Friday 15 afternoon. We are figuring on coming in Friday. 16 Somebody from the Jury called Friday, 2:30 or 2:45, 17 wanting to know how come we weren't there. We been 18 sitting for an hour and a half since 1:00, I guess. That 19 was news to us. 20 Then they are also asking about papers 21 that, the subpoena that you don't have. Everything that 22 I -- I had, I brought last time. Everything else was at 23 the office on Ridge Road. I will go into that in a 24 minute. And we had moved patients during the week until 25 Monday. I had a full day today. And then 5:00 Friday, I 1994 1 get another call saying that I have to be here 8:30 this 2 morning or they are going to come and get me. 3 So we hustled and moved patients again 4 today. I have already had two or three emergencies this 5 morning call. I don't know what -- what the deal is. 6 Ron has always called us and told us the time to come. 7 And that did not happen Friday. I know the jury wasted 8 an hour and a half, an hour 45 minutes, and sure, I would 9 be upset, too. My wife said she could tell that it 10 sounds like we are not following the subpoena or -- and 11 we are not bringing in papers. I don't know. You know, 12 I don't know what the deal was about Friday. 13 And as far as the papers, I have gone 14 through this. Everything, like I said, that we had, 15 except for a few papers that I brought in last week that 16 were at my dental office, were at the office in Ridge 17 Road. And you guys were there for eight hours. There 18 was boxes of stuff taken. We have bills that are due, 19 checkbook my dad said was gone. Titles to cars. I mean, 20 everything was missing out of there. The computer. 21 Q So what day were you served -- go ahead. 22 It sounds like you have a comment. 23 A I am done. 24 Q And you remember the admonition regarding 25 perjury, correct? 1995 1 A From last time? 2 Q Yes. 3 A Yes. 4 Q You are going to testify truthfully today? 5 A Yes. 6 Q Maybe you could help the Grand Jury out. 7 Maybe it will just take you one second. 8 So who is KRL? 9 A KRL Partnership? 10 Q Today. 11 A Legally, it's me and my brother Larry. 12 Q Three quarters you, one quarter Larry? 13 A No. I think we -- half and half. I am 14 not -- verbally, it's between all of us. Legally, Larry 15 and I, I think -- on the papers, I think I said, so we 16 could sign. You need at least two signatures. It's 17 always been known that it was us kids. It was set up 18 years ago for us. Investment, inheritance. But legally, 19 I think Larry and I are. 20 Q This has been marked Grand Jury Exhibit 21 114, Mr. Womack. Is that a copy of the document that you 22 were served with, you being you and your wife, a week 23 ago? 24 A Yeah, it looks like it. 25 Q Okay. And could you go ahead and read the 1996 1 entire first page into the record. 2 A "To custodian of records KRL Partnership. 3 You are commanded to appear before the Grand Jury of the 4 State of California in and for the County of Amador, 5 Grand Jury Room, Department 3 thereof, at the courtroom 6 of the said Superior Court at Jackson, California on 7 November 16th, 1998, 9:00 a.m." 8 Q Can you hear in the back? Okay. 9 A "As a witness in the above-entitled 10 criminal action on the part of the People. And you are 11 required also to bring with you the following articles:" 12 Q Then it's a colon, correct? 13 A Correct. 14 Q Then if you could read each item that was 15 requested and let us know if we have all of those 16 records. And then read the next item that was requested, 17 please. 18 A "All records of all payments to any 19 person for the return of a 2,000 gallon gas tank." 20 Q Did you bring those today? 21 A I don't have 'em. 22 Q Are you the custodian of records for KRL 23 Partnership? 24 A I am a partner, so... 25 Q Do you know who the custodian of records 1997 1 is for KRL Partnership? 2 A I guess it would be us. 3 Q "Us" being whom? 4 A The partnership. 5 Q So the answer to any person for the return 6 of 2,000 gallon gas tank, are you saying that no records 7 exist? Or that you have already -- 8 A I am saying you should have 'em. 9 Everything that I know of was in the office on Ridge 10 Road. And we can't find anything. I am assuming that 11 you guys have everything. 12 Q So you looked? 13 A I went through that day when -- after you 14 guys had left with my dad. And I have asked him. He is 15 the one that keeps everything. And he said everything is 16 missing. 17 Q Okay. So after you received the subpoena, 18 did you personally look for documents anywhere on this 19 planet? 20 A Yes. 21 Q What locations did you look for records 22 personally? 23 A Mmmm... Well, personally, I didn't. My 24 wife found payments to Mark Sherrill, the ones I brought 25 last time I was here. 1998 1 Q Okay. So she found that before you were 2 here last time, correct? She found that between 3 receiving the subpoena last Monday and your testimony on 4 Wednesday? 5 A Right. When I received this, I showed it 6 to my dad, and I showed it to my wife. And those... 7 Q The second item. 8 A "All records related to property located 9 at 505 Sutter Street." 10 Q Okay. What about those records? 11 A Mmmm... I -- 12 Q Same questions. Did you look for them 13 yourself? 14 A Mmmm... My wife and my -- I think that's 15 just on the -- well, say, my wife and my dad. I don't 16 know if that deed -- we don't have actual records on 505 17 Sutter Street. There was loan papers. 18 Q You were told by your dad he looked for 19 those? Or he said they already have everything? 20 A Yeah. He looked through and said 21 everything to do with KRL and the file that had the 22 service station, everything was missing. 23 Q Do you -- 24 A You don't believe him. I don't -- he is 25 the one in there and keeps track of everything. I 1999 1 don't -- when I was over there that day when they were 2 in searching, they were asking me where stuff was. And I 3 wouldn't point them to the direction. I opened the safe 4 for 'em and let 'em in. And I didn't know -- I don't 5 even know -- I can turn the computer on. I don't know 6 how to run it. 7 Q Did you talk to your buddy the carpet guy 8 after you were here last time? 9 A No, I haven't seen him. 10 Q Okay. So what's the next thing? 11 A "All records of any business transactions 12 with David Mason III or Mason Oil Company." 13 That's -- must be the loan papers. That I 14 brought in last time. 15 Q And those are all -- 16 A My wife -- 17 Q -- all business transactions with David 18 Mason or Mason Oil Company? 19 A That we could find. 20 Q Okay. The next. 21 A "All documents, records, paperwork, deeds, 22 bylaws, Articles of Incorporation." Again, anything to 23 do with the corporation -- it says incorporation. It's 24 not a partnership. But it would be at the office Ridge 25 Road. 2000 1 Q Did you go to Ridge Road and look for -- 2 it doesn't say all 1998 records on there, does it? 3 A I'm -- no. 4 Q It says all records, correct? 5 A Correct. 6 Q And it was a corporation that changed into 7 a partnership sometime in the early '90s; is that your 8 understanding? 9 A Yeah, I think around there. 10 Q So did you look for any of the old 11 corporate records? 12 A Personally, no. 13 Q So you received a subpoena from this 14 Grand Jury that required that you bring these records, 15 and you didn't look. 16 A I personally didn't look. I trusted my 17 dad. He said he would look for everything. And, you 18 know, I don't -- this is since the gas station, anyways. 19 Q It doesn't say on there anywhere, though, 20 right? 21 A No. 22 Q So you got a subpoena, you didn't look. 23 You asked your dad. He told you we had everything. 24 A Yeah. You know, I asked my wife, too. I 25 trusted her, too. 2001 1 Q Did she go up to your dad's house and 2 look? 3 A I don't know. I don't think so. 4 Q Are the KRL records kept anywhere other 5 than Ridge Road? 6 A No. It's all at the office on Ridge 7 Road. My wife handled everything to do with the loan 8 papers and all that stuff. 9 Q At 505? 10 A Yeah. With Mark Sherrill Trucking. 11 Q Okay. Let's go to the next one then. 12 "All records of..." 13 A "All records of" -- "All records of 14 employee timecards." 15 I asked my dad on that and he said there's 16 no timecards. 17 Q Okay. Did he say there weren't any 18 employees? 19 A No. He is considered an employee. 20 Q So your dad is an employee? 21 A Mm-hmm. 22 Q And for -- 23 A I guess. 24 Q I take it, Nick Hernandez was an employee 25 for the tank pull? 2002 1 A Who was? 2 Q Nick Hernandez, truckdriver. 3 A I guess. 4 Q Since Wednesday, have you spoken with an 5 attorney? 6 A No. 7 Nick Hernandez, he is an employee of Mark 8 Sherrill's, I think. 9 Q What about Bill Wolin on May 2nd? 10 A I think he showed me a check from last 11 time on Bill. I think that's all we have on that. 12 That's paid for Bill Wolin. 13 Q And you understand your right to 14 self-incrimination, correct? 15 A No. 16 Q That's been explained to you twice by the 17 Foreman. 18 A Yeah. I mean, I don't know exactly, I 19 guess. 20 MR. IREY: Okay. You could read it one more 21 time, please. 22 THE FOREPERSON: Sure. 23 Mr. Womack, you are advised under the 24 Fifth Amendment to the Constitution of the United States 25 and also under Article 1 of the California Constitution 2003 1 that you have a privilege against self-incrimination. 2 That is to say, you do not have to answer any questions 3 that may tend to incriminate you or subject you to 4 punishment for a crime. And you can refuse to answer any 5 such questions by stating that the answer may tend to 6 incriminate you. 7 Do you understand? 8 THE WITNESS: Yes. 9 Q BY MR. IREY: Okay. Does -- what is the 10 name of your business? Your business as a dental office? 11 A Roland Womack, Family Dentist. 12 Q D.D.S.? 13 A Mm-hmm. 14 Q And it's a partnership? Or you are a sole 15 proprietor? 16 A Sole proprietor. 17 Q Do you have Workmen's Comp. insurance? 18 A I think so. 19 Q Who is your carrier? 20 A I don't know. 21 Q Okay. Do you have Workmen's Comp. 22 insurance that covers underground storage tank removals? 23 A I am not sure. 24 Q What would be the best way that you could 25 make the decision whether or not you had Workers' Comp. 2004 1 insurance? 2 A For removal of underground storage? 3 Q Or for at work, for your own employees. 4 A My wife would probably know. She handles 5 all the billing and insurance and everything. I am sure 6 we have it. 7 Q For the dental office? 8 A For the dental office. 9 Q But when the dental office wants to expand 10 into buying real estate and pulling underground storage 11 tanks -- I think that was similar to your testimony. Do 12 you have Workers' Comp. insurance for that? 13 A I can't tell you exactly. I don't know if 14 the partnership -- if it's the same as owner business. I 15 don't know. 16 Q So you don't know about Roland Womack, 17 D.D.S. one way or the other? 18 A No. 19 Q What about KRL? 20 A I am not sure. 21 Q Okay. I have -- 22 A That's my dad -- my dad manages KRL and he 23 knows all the stuff. My office -- I am at my office full 24 time with patients. My wife handles all the business 25 aspect of it, transactions. I am not even clear on stuff 2005 1 at the office, let alone stuff with KRL. And that's why 2 we have managers and accountants. 3 Q Here is the Grand Jury Exhibit 72. It's 4 called the secretary on the front cover. It's Checks 5 3485 to 3869. 6 Do you recognize this document? 7 A I am not sure, no. It doesn't look 8 familiar. 9 Q The majority of the handwriting on any 10 page inside here -- do you recognize that handwriting? 11 A Yeah. It looks like my dad's. 12 Q Could you take two minutes to go through 13 here and see if there is any Workers' Comp. insurance 14 paid for by KRL that might help refresh your memory 15 whether or not KRL has any Workers' Comp. insurance. 16 A I see some Farmers Insurance, but I don't 17 know if that is an automobile. 18 Q What check number? 19 A 3556. 20 Q For what amount? 21 A 397.50. 22 Q So that's KRL paperwork? 23 A Yeah, I believe so. 24 Q So as of today's date, would that fit 25 under all documents, records, paperwork of KRL? 2006 1 A Yeah. If you are not specifying a date. 2 Q Is there a date specified? 3 A On here? 4 Q Yes. 5 A No. 6 Q So did you bring all your insurance 7 policies today on KRL? 8 A On KRL? I assume you guys have 9 everything. I don't know why... 10 Q Did you bring all KRL insurance policies 11 today? 12 A I didn't bring anything today. 13 Q If you had brought the KRL insurance 14 policies today, do you think that would have aided the 15 Grand Jurors in knowing whether or not there was Workers' 16 Comp. insurance? Because you would have been able to 17 specifically point out, yes, we have Workers' Comp. 18 insurance? 19 A I am sure it would. 20 Q So do you think that would speed up this 21 process? 22 A Yeah, it's -- 23 Q But you didn't bring anything? 24 A You guys have everything. How come we are 25 going back so far? Wasn't the tank and the demolition of 2007 1 the service station done in May? 2 Q Okay. So no records of employee draws, 3 correct? Or did you bring those? 4 A The draws, Dad said, are all done at the 5 end of the year. If I take money KRL, my brother, it's 6 all tallied up at the end of the year. He keeps it on a 7 record. I think he shows it in a checkbook as a draw. 8 And then at the end of the year, he said he -- whatever 9 draws I took, he puts under my name, and whatever my 10 brother took. And then an accountant takes it from 11 there. 12 Q The accountant being whom? 13 A Mmmm... Dennis Ohlmsted. 14 Q Out of Sacramento? 15 A Mm-hmm. 16 Q They can't hear you in the back. 17 A I believe so. 18 Q How long has Dennis been the accountant? 19 A I can't tell for sure. I think, you know, 20 I am assuming four or five years. 21 Q And before that, the accountant would have 22 been? 23 A Well, I know at one time he had a friend 24 Joe Horizon was an accountant for quite a while. 25 Q Okay. Do you know this account number, 2008 1 Grand Jury Exhibit 110. 0148-200-5XX. 2 What are you squinting at, Mr. Womack? 3 A Trying to read that. 4 Q What does it say? 5 A $500. And it says: Robert for tank 6 removal. Or question mark. It -- he has it in cursive: 7 Robert Womack tank removal. 8 Q Kind of small and hard to read, huh? 9 A Yeah. 10 Q Grand Jury Exhibit 5. Is that easier to 11 read? 12 A Mm-hmm. 13 Q What does it say? 14 A Robert for tank removal. I guess, 15 removed. Or reward for tank reward. 16 Q Did your dad pay himself for the tank 17 reward? 18 A I don't think so. 19 Q Did you ever ask, Dad, who did you pay for 20 the tank reward? 21 A No. 22 Q Did you ever say, Dad, how much did KRL 23 pay for the tank reward? 24 A I thought it was a thousand. 25 Q Did your dad ever tell you he paid a 2009 1 thousand dollars for the tank reward? 2 A I think he did. 3 Q How did that story come up, about the tank 4 returning to Lodi? If you can give the best story you 5 have heard so far, please. 6 We had a meeting on September 2nd. Start 7 there, please. 8 A I don't recall everything. I remember you 9 suggesting that we put up a thousand dollars reward. I 10 think that was done. The next thing I heard, it was 11 found down in Lodi. Lodi or Galt. 12 Q You don't remember the specifics about the 13 whole story? It was in Stockton. It was going to be 14 used by a water thing. It was by some deputy sheriff. 15 What's the best, most full story, that you 16 know of to be a factor that you were told by your father? 17 A I haven't been told exactly. There's so 18 much hearsay out there. This is the first I have heard 19 about Stockton. 20 Q So your dad just say, Good news, Roland. 21 The tank showed up. I am going pay a thousand bucks. 22 Then afterwards, he says, I gave the guy a thousand 23 bucks. I don't know who he was. 24 A Right. I think you said, offer $1,000 25 reward, and didn't care who took it or your main concern 2010 1 was getting the tank back. 2 Q So under all payments, for any payments 3 for return of 2,000 gallon gas tank, you think it was 4 $1,000, but there are no records? 5 A I think that's -- you had said, Why don't 6 you guys put up $1,000 reward? And I think that's what 7 me dad said. And that's what was paid. 8 Q Hypothetically, earlier during this Grand 9 Jury proceedings, people testified that they had no doubt 10 that when they left that meeting on September 2nd, that 11 your dad knew where the tank was. 12 Is that what you got out of that meeting, 13 too? 14 A I don't recall that. 15 Q Do you recall anything from that meeting? 16 They were talking about, We will find the tank. We will 17 get the D.A. off our back. And then we will fight it. 18 Do you remember that part of the 19 conversation? 20 A No. I remember him talking about, mmmm, 21 working with Mason, you know, reason we were even 22 demolishing the service station. I know Masons were 23 there, him and his son, and Wolins and Sherrills. 24 I know Connie -- you jumped Connie over 25 something. She wasn't there. But Mark was there. And I 2011 1 remember -- 2 Q So you don't remember the conversation 3 related to, We will find the tank and then we will just 4 fight the D.A.'s Office? You don't remember that 5 conversation? 6 I am trying to refresh your recollection, 7 because maybe some people have testified that was the 8 discussion. 9 A I remember your main concern was finding 10 the tank. I remember going in and saying the reason they 11 did it that weekend and getting a deal with Cal-Trans 12 and giving everything away that they removed. 13 And I remember your main concern was 14 finding the gas tank. When I first mentioned you came to 15 my office, and you said there was an investigation going 16 on. 17 Q And your name was on all the paperwork? 18 During that conversation? 19 A Yes. Nadine and I were the ones that were 20 handling the property. I told you and Ron at the time 21 what we were planning on doing. Just looked at the 22 parking lot and explained why we needed more parking. 23 And Dave had said we could start parking down there. 24 That's what I told you. And the girls had been parking 25 down there. 2012 1 But you was afraid that the station was 2 unsafe. There was a pit in there. And it just didn't 3 look very stable. And that was the main reason for the 4 demolition of the service station. 5 Q Okay. So and you don't remember anything 6 from the September 2nd meeting. 7 So let's get back to Grand Jury Exhibit 8 No. 110. Do you recognize that checking account? 9 A Bank of Amador. 10 Q What? 11 A Bank of Amador account. 12 Q No. The checking account, Pay to the 13 order. 14 A Oh. No. Doesn't look familiar. 15 Q Would it refresh your recollection if 16 that's your dad's account? 17 A Hmmm... It could be an account. I am 18 not... 19 Q Would it refresh your recollection if 20 that's the most occurring check that comes out of KRL's 21 paperwork? 22 A Wouldn't surprise me. 23 Q Okay. And how many checking accounts do 24 you know of that your father has? 25 A I am not sure. 2013 1 Q Did KRL vote to decide that the phone bill 2 was paid out of KRL's account? Or is that something that 3 Bob Womack decides? 4 A We didn't take a vote. He uses the phone. 5 Everybody uses the phone. 6 Q How about PG&E? Everybody use the 7 electricity? 8 A Yeah. We spend a lot of time over there. 9 Q You spend a lot of time in the KRL part 10 of the house? 11 A No. Usually not the office. 12 Q Okay. 13 A Garage. And there is a pool. And we are 14 over there -- going over there for Thanksgiving. My 15 sister -- I mean, all of us spend a lot of time over 16 there. 17 Q Okay. Last time we were here, you started 18 to explain how your dad was trying to get the titles back 19 for his cars. Do you remember that? 20 A I think he is working on it, yeah. 21 Q Okay. You talked about -- I don't know if 22 you had spoken about it, but it was actually in the 23 newspaper about how Bob Womack was going to DMV to get 24 his pink slips returned. 25 Is that your understanding? 2014 1 A It could be. 2 Q Have you ever tried to get a pink slip 3 returned or remade or whatever? 4 A No. 5 Q Don't you have to check that it was lost 6 or stolen? 7 A I don't know. 8 Q If you know. 9 A I don't know. 10 Q Do you know whether or not any pink slips 11 have been lost or stolen? 12 A I know there is a lot of titles missing. 13 Q Are those lost or stolen? Or do you know 14 exactly where they are? 15 A I don't know exactly. 16 Q You what? 17 A I don't know. I assume they are -- they 18 are gone. There is a lot of stuff missing from the 19 office. 20 Q Okay. Who owns the cars for KRL? 21 A KRL. 22 Q Who is KRL again? 23 A Legally? It's Larry and I. 24 Q Kimberly testified something along those 25 lines, if that helps. 2015 1 How is KRL in reality held? 2 A It was set up years ago. 3 Q Currently. 4 A When he draws -- I haven't taken hardly 5 any draws. I am okay at the dental office. My brother 6 has probably taken more draws. 7 Q Your brother whom? 8 A Larry. 9 And it's mainly set up for investments. 10 And all of us are pretty much working on our own and have 11 families. And probably be handed down to our kids. 12 Q Okay. So why on the '66 Volkswagen would 13 the front of the envelope say "Bob's dune buggy" if KRL 14 owns it? 15 A I don't know. I don't know what this has 16 to do with the tank. I think -- I think I am causing 17 more confusion. When I left here last time, I was 18 confused. I can imagine how the jurors... 19 Like I said, I trust my dad. He handles 20 that. I trust my wife at my office to handle that part 21 of the business. I am not familiar with a lot of things. 22 Q Okay. Have you ever seen Grand Jury 23 Exhibit 58? 24 A Yeah. 25 Q Paragraph 2 talks about the partnership 2016 1 agreement of KRL dated January 1st, 1987? 2 A Right. 3 Q Okay. Did you bring that partnership 4 agreement today? 5 A No. 6 Q Would that be listed under all documents, 7 records, paperwork, deeds, bylaws, articles of 8 incorporation? 9 A I assume. 10 Q So if you had brought the partnership 11 agreement of KRL, the Grand Jurors might have an idea who 12 KRL really is. True? 13 A True. 14 Q But you didn't bring it? True? 15 A You guys should have it. 16 Q Did you look for it? 17 A Everything is kept there in the office. I 18 don't know what this has to do with anything. 19 Q Okay. So do you recognize this document, 20 Grand Jury Exhibit 58? 21 A I see I signed it. 22 Q Do you keep a copy of this at home? Or do 23 you keep all KRL at Ridge Road? 24 A Everything is at Ridge Road. 25 Q In 1994, about what was the value of KRL 2017 1 holdings, to your knowledge? 2 A I am not sure. It has fluctuated quite a 3 bit over the years. 4 Q What was the lowest it was in the '90s? 5 Three, four, five million? 6 A I don't -- we have had that piece of 7 property in Elko for quite a while. I know it's worth 8 quite a bit. 9 Q Over 2 million? Around 2 million? 10 A Mmmm... If we would sell it, get 2 11 million out of it, but... 12 Q So you have had that quite a while. 13 So in 1994, you have no idea what the 14 value of KRL was. Is that what your testimony is? 15 A I am not sure. There is Jackson Creek 16 property. There's various properties that KRL owns 17 and... 18 Q Is Jackson Creek the one you guys just 19 sold? 20 A Mmmm... Sold part of it, I think, to the 21 Indians. 22 Q Okay. These KRL Partnership documents 23 that are called financial statements. Grand Jury Exhibit 24 50. Do you recognize that? 25 A I recognize it. Some of the stuff on 2018 1 there. 2 Q 1 of '97? 3 A Yes. 4 Q Did you bring the financial statement 1 of 5 '98 with you today? 6 A No. I assumed you guys have all that. 7 Q 1 of '96? 8 A I don't understand what this has to do 9 with -- you guys have everything to do with KRL. I have 10 a slip here showing everything that was taken. There was 11 miscellaneous documents written on the slip. And there 12 was nothing -- no detailed receipts on exact stuff that 13 was taken. 14 Q So No. 4 on the affidavit, "All documents, 15 records, paperwork, deeds, bylaws, articles of 16 incorporation." You brought zero documents today, 17 correct? 18 A I didn't have any to bring. Everything I 19 had I brought last time. 20 Q But as custodian of records, where are 21 those records kept? 22 A Kept at Ridge Road. 23 Q Did you spend one minute looking at Ridge 24 Road for the documents that have been outlined in your 25 subpoena? 2019 1 A No. 2 Q And that's the same as your answer, have 3 you spent one minute asking Environmental Health whether 4 the property was contaminated, correct? 5 A I haven't asked Environmental Health that. 6 Q Okay. So if Luke testified that he gave 7 it to you on 3/10 of '94 for $100, was he giving you his 8 share of the property for $100? Or was it just kind of 9 a something done on paper? And remember, he has already 10 testified. 11 A I don't know. Legally, I guess he did. 12 Q Okay. Did you pay gift taxes on that 13 million plus gift? 14 A I don't know. 15 Q Did you bring any paperwork with you today 16 from KRL Partnership telling whether or not you paid gift 17 taxes on it in 1994? 18 A No. 19 Q Did you look for 1994 paperwork? 20 A No. 21 Q Okay. The reason I am asking about the 22 Exhibit 58 is because Exhibit 59 is eleven days later; 23 and that's signed by your sister, Kimberly Moore. 24 Correct? That appears to be her signature? 25 A Yes, correct. 2020 1 Q She gave you her quarter of KRL for 100 2 bucks? 3 A Right. 4 Q That looks to me, on 3/94, Roland owns 5 three quarters, Larry owns a quarter. Is that what it 6 looks like to you? 7 A That's what it may appear in the 8 paperwork. 9 Q But do you think there is other KRL 10 paperwork that the Grand Jurors haven't seen that 11 indicates that you own half and Larry owns half? 12 A Legally. I mean, that's -- County or 13 title company or wherever they have it would show. 14 Q They are not the ones that got the 15 subpoena. It was you, Mr. Womack. You didn't bring 16 'em. So legally, if you brought the records, we would be 17 able to know, as of today, November 23rd, 1998, who owns 18 KRL. Correct? 19 A If you guys don't have 'em. 20 Q And if you brought the records that the 21 Grand Jury's subpoena required, we would certainly know 22 who owned KRL on April 30th through May 30th, 1998. 23 Correct? 24 A Right. What does -- I still don't 25 understand what this has to do with the case. I told you 2021 1 that it's Nadine and I. It was our purchase. We are the 2 one that are purchasing the property. 3 Q That's certainly been your story in 4 November '98. 5 What is -- Luke said he was forced to give 6 away his share. Does that sound familiar, if Luke said 7 that? 8 A No. 9 Q Got his girlfriend pregnant, dad got 10 PO'ed. Does that sound familiar? 11 A No. 12 Q Let's get around to selling Larry's 13 house. Now, if Larry owned half -- I think we did this 14 already. Maybe it was Kimberly. If Larry owns half of 15 KRL -- we did do that. 16 How could your dad possibly sell the 17 house? 18 A Legally, I don't think he can sell the 19 house. 20 Q Has the house been sold? 21 A I think it's in the process of being sold. 22 Q So Larry agreed to that? 23 A I am sure he did. He moved. 24 Q If Larry owns half of KRL, how come his 25 rent check bounced in Marysville? 2022 1 A I own half of KRL. I have my own income 2 on the side. Like I said, it's for an investment. We 3 don't take out money just... 4 Q So it just pays for hair cuts and things 5 like that; not for the kids that own it? 6 A It's paid for part of my education and 7 part of Luke's. Larry went to school back East, paid for 8 part of his. I don't know why I have to -- 9 Q Who is Joe C-A-L-L-E-L-L? 10 A Joe Callell? 11 Q Okay. 12 A He is a friend of ours. 13 Q Okay. He owns some of the KRL cars or 14 holds notes on them. Is that your understanding? 15 A Probably. We borrowed money from him 16 before. 17 Q He, being Bob Womack, borrowed money from 18 Joe Callell before? 19 A My dad could have. 20 Q Okay. So you don't know anything about 21 Luke had to give up his share because he got somebody 22 pregnant. Is that your testimony? 23 A That is personal stuff that I don't think 24 we need to go in. 25 But it isn't -- we are all -- my brothers, 2023 1 my sister, we are all very close. There is an 2 understanding that KRL is all part of ours. Legally, 3 it's done this time -- I don't know if there was a lot of 4 paperwork going on and we needed signatures all the time 5 and me and Larry were the most convenient. This is how 6 it had to be written up to get them out. And that's how 7 it was. 8 Q So did you give $100 to Larry and Kim, 9 give them good -- get a crisp Ben Franklin out and give 10 it to them? 11 A I am sure it was worked out. 12 Q This has been marked Grand Jury Exhibit 13 60. That document, if you could explain to us, I would 14 be very happy.  Especially five. 15 A That the undersigned does transfer his 16 entire partnership interest to Nadine Womack for the sole 17 consideration of love and affection. 18 I don't think this is -- this isn't 19 recorded. I don't think this was ever recorded. I think 20 we talked about one time if Nadine would get on there, it 21 would be easier, because we are easier to sign stuff. 22 She is here. Larry was -- I don't know if he was around 23 then at the time. 24 Q So it hasn't been recorded? 25 A I think legally, it's Larry and I that are 2024 1 still on there. 2 Q And somewhere in between the '94 and the 3 '98, there was a period where June and Robert owned it, 4 correct? 5 A There could have been. I -- at one time, 6 I think it was talked about. They were thinking about 7 moving or... 8 Q You don't know the only way for that to 9 happen is, you would have had to transfer one-quarter or 10 whatever of your three quarters or Larry. So you either 11 signed a document transferring some of it to June and Bob 12 or not. Did you? 13 A I could have at one time. 14 Q Did you bring it today? 15 A I don't think -- I didn't have it. 16 Q And at some point June and Bob would have 17 had to transfer it back to you. Do you have those 18 documents? 19 A You guys have everything that was there in 20 the office. 21 You know, I still don't understand -- 22 well -- 23 Q Part of what you don't understand is why 24 we are not just coming after Roland Womack because he is 25 the one that pulled the tank illegally. Is that part of 2025 1 what you don't understand? 2 A No. 3 Q Is part of what you don't understand that, 4 at this point, it should be clear to everyone who runs 5 and owns KRL. Is that what you don't understand? 6 A There is a lot that goes on that I am not 7 real familiar with. And I am trying to clear it up to 8 the Jurors. I am sure they are getting more confused. 9 The property was mine and Nadine's. Those 10 papers you showed me the other day with KRL -- if it was 11 a KRL deal, it would have been just mine and, I think, my 12 brother's signature on there. Nadine's signature 13 wouldn't have been on there. 14 Q Nadine can't sign for KRL? 15 A It was a KRL deal, it would have just had 16 KRL. 17 Q I saw a document somewhere -- and I am 18 trying to find it this morning. But basically, there was 19 a document at one point that said the only people that 20 can buy or sell property for KRL are June, Bob and 21 Roland. 22 Do you remember seeing that document or 23 signing that document? 24 A That can buy and sell property? 25 Q Yes. 2026 1 A I don't remember seeing that. 2 Q Okay. So tell us about your dad's two 3 driver's licenses again. 4 A I don't know. I don't know he still has 5 an Oregon one. 6 Q If he still has an Oregon one, what was 7 your story you started to tell the Grand Jury last time 8 about how he acquired it so he could purchase vehicles or 9 he lived there part of the time or whatever that story 10 was? 11 A I think you are -- I don't know if that's 12 exactly what is said. I think that when one of the cars 13 was dual registered, Oregon and California, driver's 14 license, I know he has had a Oregon one, I think, in the 15 past. They were thinking about moving up there. They 16 still are kind of thinking. Go up there quite a bit. 17 And they are down here. I think that was the reason for 18 the dual registration. 19 Q Okay. On the KRL car that you are paying 20 the Bank of Amador, the Navigator and the town car, have 21 you seen the documents related to who actually owns the 22 Navigator? 23 A I am not sure if they were in KRL's name 24 yet or my dad's. 25 What -- sorry. 2027 1 Q Have you and your sister or brother ever 2 had to basically take a ticket for your dad on a zoning 3 violation? Let's say, hypothetically, that KRL owned the 4 property, your dad got in trouble for doing some work on 5 the property without permits, and then your dad stood by 6 while the Code Enforcement had to write you, the 7 individuals that owned KRL, tickets? Have you been part 8 of that transaction before? 9 A I don't think so. 10 Q So if someone testified that Bob Womack 11 stood there and made Linda Van Vleck write tickets to the 12 kids because the kids were the ones whose names were on 13 the property, you don't recall that? 14 A No. 15 Q So let's say the violation of the law is 16 done by your dad, but everything is in KRL's name. Would 17 that help you understand why we are trying to figure out 18 who is KRL? 19 A I don't -- I don't know where this is 20 going. I am -- I am getting confused on stuff that is 21 brought up. I am going to take the Fifth, you know. You 22 are confusing the issues on things. 23 You want to ask business-related 24 questions, my office, or a little more about notes on the 25 gas station property, my wife -- I guess she is still 2028 1 waiting out there. She would know more than I would. I 2 know more about K -- if you want to know more about KRL, 3 ask my dad. He manages it. I am not -- it's getting into 4 so much stuff that's unrelated to this that I am not real 5 clear on. You know, if I have to, I am going to take the 6 Fifth. 7 Q On KRL? 8 A At this point, I am not -- you know, 9 personal stuff about me and Nadine, I am not going to get 10 into all that either. So I guess on everything. 11 Q Okay. Then I am going to walk... 12 So you are going to refuse to answer 13 questions related to KRL, correct, based on your 14 constitutional rights? 15 A Correct. 16 Q But if I ask you specific questions 17 regarding your purchase of property at 505, you may at 18 this time answer some of those, correct? 19 A I think I have answered everything I 20 could. My wife did all the dealings with the title 21 company and George Ryan on the loan papers, with Mason. 22 She would have a better understanding of it. I think I 23 am just causing more confusion here. Sorry. I am not 24 real clear on all this stuff. And it's just -- I don't 25 see what a lot of it has to do. But I am not the best 2029 1 person to be up here explaining everything. 2 MR. IREY: Well, Mr. Womack, at this time, I was 3 nowhere near completed with my questioning of you. 4 However, the Grand Jurors have an opportunity to ask 5 questions. Because you have taken your constitutionally 6 allowed -- or your -- you have decided to invoke the 7 right against self-incrimination, I am going to go ahead 8 and read these questions, and then probably we are not 9 going to be able to ask them. At which point, I will 10 read them into the record after you leave. 11 You have, though, been served with a 12 perfectly valid Grand Jury subpoena, which requests 13 numerous records which you know the best location of and 14 at this point have not attempted to -- have not 15 personally attempted to gather. I may suggest that you 16 consult your own counsel and do everything in your power 17 to comply with that subpoena, because failure to comply 18 with that subpoena has repercussions similar to those 19 that were mentioned to you last week by this Grand Jury 20 and the District Attorney's Investigations unit. 21 You can take the Fifth on the next 22 question. I am going to go ahead and ask this. But it 23 might be helpful for you to just go ahead and answer it. 24 That's up to you. 25 But on Grand Jury Exhibit 113, who belongs 2030 1 to the R. Womack signature that appears on the KRL 2 checks, Robert or Roland Womack? Again, think about it. 3 Make a decision whether or not you would like to invoke 4 your Fifth Amendment rights. 5 If you do, just say again, I refuse to 6 answer the question on the grounds -- 7 A The R. stands for Roland. 8 Q Whose signature? 9 A Looks like my dad's. He can write on the 10 checks. He can write on the checking accounts. It's my 11 dad's. 12 Q On Grand Jury Exhibit 68? But he is 13 signing, stands for Roland Womack? 14 A No. Stands for him, Robert Womack. 15 Q So a minute ago, you said it stood for 16 Roland, but you think now it stands for Robert? 17 A No. KRL is -- the R stands for Roland. 18 He can sign checks. He is on the checking account. 19 Q Before you continue to ask questions, I am 20 going to go ahead and ask that we take our first break 21 for ten minutes. I would like Mr. Womack to be able to 22 answer freely the questions that he chooses to answer, 23 but I don't want to push the issue. 24 And so at this point, Mr. Womack, if we 25 can break until the Grand Jury Foreman states. At that 2031 1 time, we will either have more questions or we won't have 2 more questions. This is absolutely your last time to 3 testify before this Grand Jury. And you may make a 4 decision that, after having a break, that you are going 5 to waive some of your rights. But if you choose not to, 6 that is perfectly -- that's perfectly understood that you 7 have that right. 8 So with that said, Mr. Foreman. 9 THE FOREPERSON: Mr. Womack, you are admonished 10 not to reveal to any person except as directed by the 11 Court what questions were asked or what responses were 12 given or any other matters concerning the nature or 13 subject of the Grand Jury's investigation that you 14 learned during your appearance before the Grand Jury. 15 This admonition continues unless and until 16 such time as a transcript of this Grand Jury proceeding 17 is made public. Violation of this admonition is 18 punishable as contempt of Court. 19 This does not prevent you from discussing 20 the matter with your attorney if you have an attorney 21 advising you with respect to your appearance before the 22 Grand Jury. 23 And here is the admonition. 24 THE WITNESS: If I don't have an attorney right 25 now advising me, but I get one, that would still apply? 2032 1 MR. IREY: Short answer is, I can't give you any 2 legal advice. 3 Second answer is, you have had seven 4 months to think about this. 5 Third answer is, it's absolutely perfectly 6 reasonable for you to contact an attorney. And I don't 7 know availability of criminal defense attorneys in Amador 8 County at 10:15 on Monday, November 23rd. Mr. Ryan's 9 office is close enough that you might be able to check 10 with him. 11 THE WITNESS: No. I am not -- you mean, right 12 now? 13 MR. IREY: You are not going to be able to 14 testify again later. So if it is your goal to present 15 exculpatory evidence that your father did not commit 16 crimes or that Mr. Mason did not commit crimes, a week 17 ago Wednesday was your opportunity to do that. We 18 continued it based on the fact that many, many people, 19 including, I think, your sister, but maybe not, were 20 coming from a rather long distance to be here. And so we 21 pushed you back until Friday. 22 At this time, once you have made a 23 determination to no longer testify on your Fifth 24 Amendment Constitutional rights, then that's okay. So I 25 guess I can't answer your question. But the simple 2033 1 answer is, you have ten minutes and you can bounce it off 2 of a couple people. Some people as close as two doors 3 away. 4 THE WITNESS: Can you explain about Friday? I 5 feel the jury just thinks I didn't show up in 6 disregarding the summons. 7 MR. IREY: You have made your statement on the 8 record. The Grand Jury probably reviewed the transcript 9 of the last 15 minutes of your testimony. I am not sure 10 how much of it. And the Grand Jurors can make that 11 decision on their own. 12 If you, indeed, believe that Ron Hall gave 13 you some type of waiver, you may try to convince him to 14 come in here and tell us that. That's between you and 15 him. However, you can't discuss any Grand Jury testimony 16 with him, in the sense of, he said, you said. You can 17 say, Ron, don't you remember? If he remembers, we would 18 be perfectly happy to bring him in and -- 19 THE WITNESS: I don't think he -- need a waiver. 20 You asked if I could come back. And I said it's possible 21 I could come back Friday afternoon. And I walked out 22 there. He said they would call. Has always called us. 23 MR. IREY: Okay. 24 THE WITNESS: I am not going to sign right now 25 until I find out. 2034 1 MR. IREY: He doesn't want to sign. Is that what 2 I heard? 3 THE FOREPERSON: That's correct. 4 MR. IREY: You can put on the record what he 5 refused -- did not want to sign; not refused. 6 THE FOREPERSON: Mr. Womack refuses to sign the 7 admonition I read to him before our recess. 8 MR. IREY: Okay. So 10:30? 9 THE FOREPERSON: Yes, we will recess until 10:30, 10 Mr. Womack. If you could come back at that time, please. 11 The Grand Jurors are admonished that they 12 are not to form or express any opinions about this case 13 or discuss it among themselves until the Grand Jury 14 receives the cases for deliberation. In addition, no 15 inspection of evidence should be conducted without the 16 permission of the Foreperson and on the advice of the 17 prosecuting attorney. 18 A violation of this rule could result in 19 a charge of contempt against a Grand Juror who would 20 investigate or view any matters with regard to this case 21 without the entire body of the Grand Jury. 22 We will recess until 10:30 a.m. 23 (Recess taken from 1:18 to 10:30 a.m.) 24 THE FOREPERSON: Okay. We are on the record. 25 Mr. Womack, I remind you, you are still 2035 1 under oath from this morning. You may be seated. 2 Q BY MR. IREY: Mr. Womack, do you want to 3 answer any more questions? 4 A From -- 5 Q Related to this Grand Jury investigation? 6 A Not really. 7 Q Okay. 8 A If the Jury has some, I will see what they 9 ask. 10 Q You can't have it both ways. You have to 11 answer questions I ask and questions the Grand Jury 12 asks. I mean, you could have it both ways, we would just 13 have to go through each of my individual questions, and 14 then you would have to take the Fifth or not take the 15 Fifth on those. Then, at the end of my questioning, then 16 the Grand Jury has questions to ask. I read those into 17 the record. You have the same option whether or not you 18 want to take the Fifth on each of those questions or 19 whether you want to testify. 20 So I think the standard is, you can take 21 it on any question. You can refuse to answer any 22 question. But if you refuse to answer any such question, 23 you need to state on the record that the answer may tend 24 to incriminate you. We could do that for a while if you 25 want to do that. 2036 1 Or again, if you have any exculpatory 2 documents that would help yourself, KRL or your father, 3 we would be happy to review those. I think I mentioned a 4 week ago, you needed to give me a date to review them. 5 And you didn't bring any documents to the District 6 Attorney's Office, to my knowledge. 7 But at this point, we can do it any one of 8 those three ways. You can stop answering questions. You 9 say, I want to try to answer some questions for a while; 10 but, on each question, I want the option of refusing to 11 answer the questions. Or you can answer everything. 12 Since you have taken the Fifth once, I am 13 probably going to keep bouncing the Fifth Amendment 14 admonition off of you. I want you to feel comfortable in 15 answering these questions. 16 It's just at this point, I consider it 17 something that I truly want you to understand. Because 18 it's beginning to come down to some things are Bob 19 Womack, some things are KRL, some things are Roland 20 Womack. In which case, your covering or not covering for 21 your father may tend to incriminate you. You need to 22 think seriously about that before you answer any of these 23 questions. 24 Who owned the underground storage tank is 25 a big issue. If it was Mason, it was Mason. If it was 2037 1 you, it was you. If it was KRL, it was KRL. If it was 2 Bob Womack, it was Bob Womack. Those type of questions, 3 it may be advisable to you to consult an attorney. 4 With that said, how would you like to 5 proceed? 6 A Can I say something first? 7 Q Sure. Is there something you would like 8 to say? 9 A Yes. 10 GRAND JUROR: Speak up. 11 THE WITNESS: Sorry. A lot of this stuff with 12 KRL is -- it's not a stranger that manages KRL. It's my 13 dad. My mom and dad I am very close to. I trust 'em. 14 That's -- it's probably hurt because I haven't kept up on 15 a lot of these things. 16 As far as the property there, next to my 17 office, like I said before, that's something that my wife 18 and I wanted to get to improve our office. Since all 19 this -- first time I met with Irey and Mr. Hall came to 20 my office and they told me there was an investigation on 21 the service station, he said my dental license could be 22 in jeopardy and I could even do some jail time if there 23 was charges. 24 I don't understand. I think I need to 25 probably get an attorney and not answer any more. 2038 1 MR. IREY: Okay. Well, again, we appreciate your 2 candidness up to the point when you were able to deeply 3 think about this. And everybody here realizes it's not 4 as straightforward and it's not all one-sided. 5 However, with that said, you probably are 6 doing a perfectly reasonable thing, and it is your 7 constitutional right. So I will not ask any of the 8 questions that the Grand Jurors had for you. I probably 9 will read those into the record with a caveat on each of 10 those questions that Mr. Womack has invoked his 11 privilege. 12 THE WITNESS: Can my wife, when she comes in -- 13 MR. IREY: To certain questions, sure. She can 14 do it -- I can't give you any legal advice, but there are 15 certain legal privileges that apply. Her right against 16 self-incrimination will apply to her. She will probably 17 be given the perjury admonition, but I don't think that 18 would apply with her. 19 There are spousal and marital privileges 20 to a point. However, if there was a conversation between 21 yourself and your father and her, all three of you 22 present, then the marital or spousal privileges do not 23 apply. She would have to take the Fifth Amendment if it 24 was going to incriminate her. At some point, our office 25 may make a decision whether or not to give her immunity 2039 1 and then she with would be required to testify. 2 So with that said, without talking about 3 the specifics of this case, if you want to chat with your 4 wife for five minutes, that's perfectly reasonable. If 5 you want to go two doors down and talk to George and talk 6 to him, who might able to give you advice this morning, 7 that would be perfectly reasonable. She will be called 8 in and she will be admonished and she will be given 9 her -- sworn in. And at that point, it's her 10 determination. She holds the rights. 11 And with that said, I am no longer 12 comfortable in asking Mr. Roland Womack any further 13 questions today. 14 And the Foreman will again read you your 15 admonition. You don't have to sign it, apparently. But 16 we will put that on the record. Then we will go from 17 there. 18 THE WITNESS: Okay. 19 MR. IREY: But you have received a copy of the 20 subpoena. And that subpoena was valid. You might want 21 to make that one of the first things you talk about with 22 anyone you contact for legal advice. Because failure to 23 comply with that does have repercussions. 24 THE WITNESS: I don't think I am going to sign 25 it. 2040 1 THE FOREPERSON: Okay. You are admonished not to 2 reveal to any person except as directed by the Court what 3 questions were asked or what responses were given or any 4 other matters concerning the nature or subject of the 5 Grand Jury's investigation that you learned during your 6 appearance before the Grand Jury. 7 This admonition continues unless and until 8 such time as a transcript of this Grand Jury proceeding 9 is made public. Violation of this admonition is 10 punishable as contempt of court. This does not prevent 11 you from discussing the matter with your attorney if you 12 have an attorney advising you with respect to your 13 appearance before the Grand Jury. 14 And you are refusing to sign the 15 admonitions; is that correct? 16 THE WITNESS: (Witness nods head.) 17 THE FOREPERSON: The record showed that Mr. 18 Roland Womack refuses to sign the admonition I just read 19 to him. 20 MR. IREY: Thank you, Mr. Womack. Five minutes 21 to talk with your spouse. Please don't talk about the 22 specifics. Just generally her rights. It's up to 23 you. 24 At this time, with the caveat I am not positive 25 of the law, I am going to go ahead and read each of these 2041 1 questions into the record. If the court reporter could 2 make a notation regarding sealed until further order of 3 the Court. And then the second caveat that his -- after 4 taking -- invoking his Fifth Amendment right, he more 5 than likely would not have answered these questions. We 6 could have asked and gone back and forth on each 7 question. A lot of times these are the zinger questions. 8 I would probably rather ask all my questions before some 9 of these questions were asked. We are going to put those 10 on the record. 11 12 (Whereupon, pages 2042-2044 were reported and transcribed, but are under separate 13 confidential cover.) 14 ---oOo--- 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 2045 1 MR. IREY: At this point, we will call Ms. Nadine 2 Womack and go from there. 3 THE FOREPERSON: Ms. Womack, if you could remain 4 standing, please, and raise your right hand. 5 You do solemnly swear that the evidence 6 you shall give in this investigation now pending before 7 this Grand Jury shall be the truth, the whole truth and 8 nothing but the truth, so help you God. 9 THE WITNESS: Yes. 10 THE FOREPERSON: Okay. You may be seated. 11 Record show that Ms. Nadine Womack answered in the 12 affirmative. 13 MR. IREY: If you could read the next admonition, 14 please. 15 THE FOREPERSON: Okay. You are advised under 16 the Fifth Amendment to the Constitution of the United 17 States and also under Article 1 of the California 18 Constitution that you have a privilege against 19 self-incrimination. That is to say, you do not have to 20 answer any questions that may tend to incriminate you or 21 subject you to punishment for a crime. And you can 22 refuse to answer any such with question by stating that 23 the answer may tend to incriminate you. 24 Do you understand? 25 THE WITNESS: Yes. 2046 1 THE FOREPERSON: Okay. Thank you. 2 (TIME NOTED: 10:45 A.M.) 3 ---oOo--- 4 NADINE WOMACK 5 Called as a witness herein by the People, 6 having been duly sworn to tell the truth, was examined 7 and testified as follows: 8 9 EXAMINATION 10 BY MR. IREY: 11 Q Ms. Womack, if you do choose to answer 12 questions today, speak clearly so the person in the back 13 can hear you, please. 14 A Okay. 15 Q And I am going to read you a couple of 16 evidentiary codes. 17 971. "Except as otherwise provided by 18 statute, a married person whose spouse is a party to a 19 proceeding has a privilege of not being called as a 20 witness by an adverse party to proceeding without the 21 prior express consent of the spouse having the privilege 22 under this section, unless the party calling the spouse 23 does so in good faith without knowledge of the marital 24 relationship." 25 There is a comment in the Codes which 2047 1 indicates that that does not apply to a Grand Jury 2 proceeding. 3 Additionally, Section 972. Exceptions to 4 the privilege. "A married person does not have a 5 privilege under this article in E, a criminal proceeding 6 in which one spouse is charged with E-2, a crime against 7 the person or property of a third person, committed in 8 the course of committing a crime against the person or 9 property of the other spouse, whether committed before or 10 during marriage." 11 And there is a second privilege, 980 of 12 the Evidence Code. "Subject to Section 912 and except as 13 otherwise provided in this article, a spouse, whether or 14 not a party, has a privilege during the marital 15 relationship and afterwards to refuse to disclose and to 16 prevent another from disclosing a communication if he/she 17 claims the privilege and the communication was made in 18 confidence between him/her and the other spouse while 19 they were husband and wife." 20 985. "There is no privilege under this 21 article in a criminal proceeding in which one spouse is 22 charged with (b) a crime committed at any time against 23 the person or property of a third person committed in the 24 course of committing a crime against the person or 25 property of the other spouse." 2048 1 So I wanted to read those into the record. 2 Ms. Womack, could you state for the record 3 your full legal name and spell your last name for the 4 record, please. 5 A Nadine Louise Womack, W-O-M-A-C-K. 6 Q Okay. And how long have you been married 7 to Roland Womack? 8 A Since September of '86. 9 Q Okay. And that entire time, have you 10 lived in Amador County? 11 A Yes. 12 Q And do you have a brother who is somehow 13 related to the Highway Patrol? 14 A Yes, I do. 15 Q And what is his job? 16 A CHP helicopter. 17 Q Okay. 18 A Well, let's see. We were married in '86. 19 So for actually the first two years, he was still going 20 to school. 21 Q At University of Pacific in San Francisco? 22 A Yes. 23 Q And then you moved to -- 24 A Amador County. 25 Q But not -- currently, you live in the 2049 1 County? Or do you live in the City limits of Jackson? 2 I don't know. 3 A I don't know either. 4 Q So the generic question is, can you shed 5 some light on this investigation? 6 A Mmmm... For the purpose of our dental 7 office, we were going to expand the parking. So for just 8 everything that we needed, insurance-wise and to if, at 9 any point, we were to sell the office, my husband and 10 myself needed that piece to be listed as one under Roland 11 and Nadine Womack, like I say, for insurance of liability 12 with the existing office and parking that we have at this 13 time. So it was for a purchase to expand our parking 14 area. It's pretty tight and we have had quite a few 15 patients say it would be nice if it was easier to get 16 into this. So for the space, once they make the turn 17 onto Rex, it would be pretty bottleneck once cars were 18 parked in that area. 19 So real good patient of ours, once he saw 20 the sign go up for sale, he was bringing his wife in and 21 had said, I am going to call that number for you. And so 22 we were just joking around. But at that point, you know, 23 for us to get parking and Mr. Mason was wanting to get 24 rid of it. And then all of a sudden, things happened 25 pretty fast. I think he needed to pay off a loan and 2050 1 whatnot. 2 Q Are you the custodian of records for KRL? 3 A I am an authorized signer for the KRL 4 Partnership. 5 Q Okay. And how long have you been an 6 authorized signer for the KRL Partnership? 7 A Mmmm... I am not real sure. 8 Q Is that just the Bank of Amador account or 9 all KRL paperwork, if you know? 10 A I am not real sure at this time. 11 Q Back in 1989, '90 and '91, is it true that 12 it switched from a corporation to a partnership? 13 A I would have to go back in the records. I 14 am -- I am very fortunate that I do have a father-in-law 15 that advises on quite a bit of the dealings for the 16 partnership. So I have to be more right now on the 17 patients end where I am, you know, mainly the front 18 office at the office. 19 Q And that's your number one job? 20 A That's correct. 21 Q With your family, along with your family? 22 A Yes. 23 Q Several years ago, KRL Partnership 24 received a citation from the land use agency, being Code 25 Enforcement. Do you remember that citation? 2051 1 A I do not. 2 Q Do you know who else can sign on the KRL 3 account? 4 A My husband, Roland. And also Robert. At 5 this time, possibly Larry. I am not... 6 Q Do you currently have a understanding of 7 the makeup of the partnership, as far as who owns what at 8 this time? 9 A Well, the partnership -- I guess I am not 10 understanding why that is being so involved in this 11 case. The reason I thought we were here is discussing 12 the actual part of soil that a tank was removed on which 13 was a purchase from myself and my husband. So for KRL 14 information, I am not really going to go into all that. 15 Q Because you think you have the right not 16 to go into that? 17 A Well, I don't understand, I guess, the 18 connection. 19 At the start of this, I believe Western 20 Land Title had put KRL onto the papers, and that was just 21 in a possible oversight, seeing Robert in asking just for 22 a preliminary report. But I did call back to Evelyn and 23 she put me in touch with Chris, Chris who, at that time, 24 rolled the papers into mine and my husband's name as it 25 should have been from the start. 2052 1 Q After the tank came out of the ground? 2 A No, sir. That was before. 3 Q What day before? 4 A Probably the day I had to write the 5 first -- the check on the property. It would have been 6 in the amount of, like, $5,000. 7 Q On May 1st, the day before the tank came 8 out of the ground? 9 A Possibly the last day of April, maybe May 10 1st. I am not sure. 11 Q Okay. So are you familiar with Robert 12 Womack negotiating to buy the property himself and keep 13 it as a gas station? 14 A Mmmm... At with one point, possibly for 15 his son, he was looking at it. But we all discussed it. 16 And I said, It's awful parking access in and out. I see 17 a lot of kids coming down from the school trying to, you 18 know, cross the street. And when it was the surplus, it 19 was becoming like a hang-out. There was constant garbage 20 down there. 21 So my input was, it's not going to be 22 another good gas station site. I felt it was -- you 23 know, the building, itself, was pretty dilapidated. And 24 there was a lot of kids that would go hang out in the 25 back of the station and just smoke. And it would -- 2053 1 Q Inside the building or up underneath the 2 eaves? 3 A Around the back side. They would walk 4 through the carport area where there was a lift. And 5 they would -- you would constantly see garbage and 6 smoking. 7 Q And for a while there, right when you were 8 purchasing it, it went from Toms Sierra gas station to 9 vacant and it was at its worst then? Or was it at its 10 worst when it was a surplus? 11 A The surplus, he tried to clean it out. 12 And he swept it up quite a bit. So it was a time when it 13 was closed and nobody was really there to keep up the 14 grounds. But the surplus man did try to keep it clean 15 when he was there and it was open. 16 Q And his name was, if you know? Do you 17 know his name? 18 A I'm sorry. I don't. 19 Q Do you know about when it was open? 20 A It wasn't a long time. And it seemed like 21 his hours were real sporadic. I think he would be there 22 more on weekends. But I am unsure of the dates. 23 Q Okay. You said that he may have been 24 thinking about buying the gas station for his son. 25 A At one time, it was just a question. Mr. 2054 1 Mason, like I said, was wanting to sell it. If it was 2 kept as a gas station, we all decided it wouldn't be a 3 good thing, just because it hadn't made it there in the 4 past as a gas station. 5 Q How does the "we all" work there? Who is 6 the "we all" in we all? 7 A The family members. It was, you know, 8 unanimous through all the brothers and sisters. 9 Q Is this on the phone? Or how did this 10 work? 11 A Well, we are at family gatherings quite 12 often and discuss things. 13 Q Who was present when these discussions 14 happen? 15 A I could not name dates or -- but whether 16 they were there or not, we would talk on the phone if, 17 you know, they were not there. But for dates, I am not 18 sure. 19 Q I am a little confused. So if he was 20 going to buy it for one of his sons, was he going to buy 21 it in KRL's name? Or was he going to buy it in Roland's 22 name? Or was he going to buy it in Larry's name? Or was 23 he going to buy it in Luke's name? 24 A It never came to that point. If it was 25 that serious and it sounded like we would, you know, back 2055 1 it up, it could have been in KRL's name. 2 But for the purpose that we needed it as a 3 gas station that had to write in Roland's and myself's 4 name for liabilities and insurance and to put it in with 5 the piece that is currently there in mine and my 6 husband's name. 7 Q At one point, it was all one parcel or 8 because of the lack of parking for commercial space? Or 9 what -- if the insurance drove this, what drove this to 10 where it had to be yours and Roland's? 11 A It was just something that we wanted to 12 purchase that would be in our names for the sole purpose 13 of the office is in our names, as well. So that's what 14 the whole purpose of purchasing that would be, to add 15 parking to the existing building and the parking that is 16 there right now. 17 Q I am not trying to twist you up, although 18 many attorneys think that's their best thing in life to 19 do. 20 But a while ago you said you needed it for 21 insurance purposes. I think my last question was, what 22 about insurance required you to do it this way? Why 23 could KRL not have owned the property and the building 24 and you just rented a parking space? What was it that 25 drove it to Roland and Nadine that was insurance related? 2056 1 A That is just the part that we wanted in 2 our name solely away from the partnership. Because we 3 would have to take on all the liability to do with the 4 dental office. Somebody came out and for whatever 5 purpose, something happened within the premises, that is 6 a blanket coverage under our dental office. So that is 7 the purpose we would personally purchase that piece for 8 parking. 9 Q For slip and fall accidents and those 10 types of insurances, not the ability -- I think you said, 11 and I am not trying to put words in your mouth. But if 12 you ever wanted to sell it, you needed to have that 13 parking? 14 A It just looks like a nicer piece. And if 15 it's all connected. It should be all under one person's 16 name. So that is why we were going to purchase that for 17 additional parking for the office. 18 Q Okay. And about when did you make that 19 decision? "You" being you and Roland. After escrow was 20 opened? 21 A No. That was something, like I say, we 22 started with a patient's suggestion. Mr. Mason had been 23 in touch with my father-in-law. And at -- I'm not sure 24 on dates. But it was always at that point for the 25 purpose of our office, for parking, to improve that 2057 1 site. It was, you know, unsafe and... 2 Q Okay. But before that, you did have a 3 chat about keeping it open as a gas station. I think you 4 testified to that. 5 A That was before, I believe, the -- it was 6 just in discussion that, at one point, you know, if he 7 was looking at it for a gas station, we turned that down 8 fast. Just because the fact that I and my husband are 9 there to see the traffic congestion, to see that the gas 10 station would never work, to see that the surplus station 11 would never work. There was no parking for that little 12 piece of property. If people wanted to see the surplus 13 station, they were parking on the street or across the 14 street at Coast to Coast. So that was not feasible to 15 have anything other than parking for our office. 16 Q Okay. Did Robert Womack ever tell you 17 that he had negotiated a gasoline purchase agreement with 18 David Mason IV? Is what he goes by? Bob Womack say, I 19 got a great deal on gas when we buy this property? 20 A I don't recall. 21 Q Okay. You don't recall at what point it 22 switched from being KRL buying the property to yours and 23 Roland buying the property? 24 A Mmmm... I have my checks that we wrote 25 out of our personal account, so I... 2058 1 Q That's the paperwork that Roland brought 2 on Wednesday last week? 3 A I believe so. 4 Q 71. I think this is the file. So inside 5 there is the $55,000 check? 6 A Correct. 7 Q A couple things on the wall, work on the 8 wall? 9 A Right. 10 Q A document to you dated June 1st, '98 from 11 Chris, Western Land? 12 A Yes. 13 Q An addendum to agreement where I think -- 14 are these changes in your handwriting? 15 A Yes. When I received this, I had noted 16 that it was still writing in KRL. So I called and talked 17 to Evelyn. And then she had Chris correct it. And then 18 everything I believe from this point on I received 19 correct, under our name. 20 Q So there is more documents than we have 21 received here? 22 A No. This should be everything that was 23 turned in last Wednesday, should be a note to Mr. Mason 24 under our name. And then a purchase note on -- once that 25 the -- this would be our name, as well. 2059 1 Q On 5/29/98, correct? 2 A Yes. Under our name. Everything, you 3 know, once I called and talked to Chris, she did start 4 getting everything right. 5 Q But this document that's called an 6 addendum to the agreement with your handwritten notes on 7 it, you wrote these on. You basically called Chris at 8 Western Land and said, Please make these changes? 9 A Yes. I believe I did. 10 Q And is there a copy of the document with 11 changes made anywhere? 12 A Just everything from that point forward 13 was correct, in mine and my husband's name. 14 Q Okay. So after May 29th, when you signed 15 as the buyer by KRL Partnership. Is this your signature? 16 A This is not correct. This is still all 17 the original ones. I did call to have that changed over, 18 so nobody signed under the KRL Partnership. Roland 19 signed under his name. I signed under my name. And like 20 I say, this -- once this form and I called, she had 21 everything on track. And it was coming under the correct 22 names, mine and my husband. 23 Q From May 29th forward; not before May 24 29th? 25 A Well, I believe I have a check. This is 2060 1 May 1st to Western Land. And it's gone through the bank 2 stamped by Western Land under our name. 3 Q Under the name of the dental office? 4 A This is correct. 5 Q Okay. 6 A This is mine and my husband's account, and 7 then out of the $5,000 deposit. 8 Q Okay. 9 A May 1st. So then there should have been a 10 receipt with this, too, showing that they received the 11 5,000. 12 Q There is one, I think. I don't know if it 13 came with your paperwork. 14 A All right. 15 Q Go ahead. See if you see anything with 16 your paperwork. 17 A I would probably have to go back to 18 Western Land and have them look at my records for that 19 check. Because it just shows that they have stamped and 20 cashed it on May 1st. 21 Q Okay. So this is dated -- this letter in 22 Grand Jury Exhibit 18 -- to help you, it's the original 23 Western Land Title file. 24 A Mm-hmm. 25 Q On April 23rd, 1998, do you see this 2061 1 letter Western Land Title? 2 A Yes, I do. 3 Q It's made out to whom? 4 A KRL. 5 Q From? 6 A Jerry. I can't say I know who Jerry is. 7 Q Okay. And that's April 23rd. 8 A Mm-hmm. 9 Q Okay. And then the file was actually 10 opened almost a month before in late -- notes on the 11 opening date of the file, it was opened on 4/6. 12 A Okay. 13 Q So from 4/6 to 5/1, every document in this 14 file is KRL, as far as I can tell. 15 A Okay. 16 Q Then on 5/1, there was a receipt. And I 17 am going to find it real quickly. Where it said KRL, and 18 then it crossed out and someone wrote in either Roland 19 and Nadine. Here we go. In ink. Your receipt said KRL. 20 And then it looks like someone later went ahead and wrote 21 in Roland E. Womack. 22 A That looks like it probably came from the 23 title company, that they corrected themselves. Because I 24 don't have that one in my records. 25 Q But you are sure that happened on 5/1? 2062 1 A I don't work there. I can't tell you. I 2 know that our payment and our check cleared the bank on 3 5/1. 4 Q Okay. But at the time, everything at 5 Western Land was still KRL? You have a single document 6 or have you ever seen a single document that didn't say 7 KRL for 5/1? 8 A Well, where Roland is a partner in the 9 KRL, I don't feel that Western Land, until they actually, 10 you know -- it came down to all the documents that whose 11 name it has to be in for legal purposes. At that point, 12 it rolled into mine and my husband's name. 13 Q At the end of May? 14 A No. I would understand it May 1. 15 Q Because there is a document -- 16 A Because I have my canceled check for the 17 $5,000. 18 Q So because -- 19 A At the beginning of the payment. I 20 would -- 21 Q So once you and Roland made a payment out 22 of your account instead of KRL, in your mind, that made 23 it Roland and Nadine's, as opposed to the contract which 24 says KRL? 25 A Well, I feel that the agreement between 2063 1 the Masons and myself and my husband made that part the 2 legal standing of who owns this piece of property once 3 all this is done. 4 Q Okay. So how was that negotiated? You 5 and Roland called up David III and talked to him a lot 6 about this? Or did Robert Womack do it all? 7 A My father-in-law, acting as a concerned 8 father, did that on my best interests and my husband's. 9 Q So your father is the one that made a 10 decision on your best interest and your husbands's to 11 pull the tank on a weekend? 12 A I was not here that weekend. 13 Q Do you know who made that decision? 14 A I do not know. 15 Q Did you make that decision? 16 A I can't say that I did or I didn't. 17 Q Did you know the underground storage tanks 18 were coming out that weekend? 19 A I did not. 20 Q Did you know that your father-in-law had 21 been told that he needed to get underground storage tank 22 permits? 23 A I believe he did not -- he went to the 24 City, received a permit. The permit did not exclude the 25 tank. And I believe, you know, to the best of his 2064 1 knowledge, he went through all the right chain of 2 commands. 3 Q Have you been told subsequent to that that 4 he had been told to get a County permit? 5 A No, I have not. 6 Q Have you been told that he specifically 7 wasn't told to get a County permit? 8 A No. I was not. 9 Q Before I forget, could you please explain 10 to us all now about the videotape taken during the 11 underground storage tank demolition? 12 A I know my mother-in-law had taken a tape 13 and, you know, wanted to show the grandkids, thought it 14 would be neat. So there was -- you know, middle of the 15 day, she had taken the tape. I believe they gave you a 16 copy of the tape. 17 Q You believe that based on whose statement? 18 A At this point, I don't recall. There is a 19 lot of commotion about all this at this point. And I 20 just know that that was something given to -- maybe I 21 could say the D.A.'s Office. I don't know who 22 personally. 23 Q But you don't know who told you that? You 24 don't know whether it was Robert, June -- 25 A I cannot remember. 2065 1 Q It wasn't you? 2 A I did not give the tape, no, sir. 3 Q Okay. So you know there is a tape and you 4 know it was given to the D.A.'s office. Do you know what 5 was on the tape? 6 A I believe it was to do with the day's 7 taping of what she taped that day. 8 Q The weekend's taping or just that day? 9 A Mmmm... There was probably more on 10 there. I think she went and watched my boys one day at 11 akido or -- 12 Q How does akido work, if you can tell us? 13 Every Monday? Every Thursday? Something like that? We 14 are not sure the date is right on the camera. 15 A If my mother-in-law was working it, it 16 won't be right. And I would not know how to set dates 17 and times myself. 18 Q But so if they are at akido, does that 19 mean it was a Monday? That type of thing. Can I ask 20 that? 21 A It doesn't necessarily mean it was a 22 Monday. They do offer that class five days a week. 23 Q So sometimes if they are on a schedule, 24 just like my kids gymnastics, they can do make-ups twice 25 a week? 2066 1 A Exactly. Yes, sir. 2 Q You can't actually look at the video and 3 say that was May 28th, not May 21st? 4 A I do not know. 5 Q Sometimes it all looks the same? 6 A It does. They are all in the same 7 outfits. 8 Q Okay. So your mother-in-law took some 9 pictures at akido? 10 A I believe so. 11 Q Were you present when she did that? 12 A I believe I was at work. 13 Q So it's akido class is during the daytime? 14 A Yes, right after school. 15 Q And it's right down here? I saw a 16 building that says akido. Is that -- 17 A Correct. 18 Q Do you know the owner or whatever of the 19 school? There is a guy who runs it or a gal who runs it? 20 A It's, I think, a husband and wife. 21 Q Before your mother-in-law took that video, 22 because we may have had someone earlier testify that -- I 23 don't remember one way or the other -- that your 24 mother-in-law had given the video to you or to Roland to 25 videotape. 2067 1 Are you sure it wasn't you that took the 2 videotape? 3 A You know, I don't recall. There was -- 4 you know, she does like to go watch. And when she can, 5 she goes. I don't recall. 6 Q Okay. Do you recall ever videotaping your 7 kids with your mother-in-law or father-in-law's camera? 8 A Oh, at some point, yes. They are real 9 involved in motorcross. You know, dates and times, I am 10 not good at. 11 Q So it's your husband and your sons are all 12 involved in motorcross? 13 A Correct, mm-hmm. 14 Q And that's motorcycles or -- 15 A Just little motor bikes. 16 Q Okay. And that's where you were that 17 weekend? 18 A Yes. 19 Q On your way to Las Vegas? Or you flew to 20 Las Vegas? 21 A Yes. 22 Q Drove or flew? 23 A I think we flew. 24 Q And that was sometime that evening or that 25 day? 2068 1 A Night. 2 Q Night? Because this paperwork was signed 3 on 5/1. Do you remember if that was in the morning or 4 afternoon? 5 A I can't even tell what you day of the week 6 that was. So I do not know. 7 Q If it was a Friday, do you remember if you 8 went in the morning or afternoon to sign papers? 9 A It would probably be around noon possibly. 10 Q The office closes. You run over to Mr. 11 Ryan's and take care of the paperwork? 12 A Yes. 13 Q Okay. So again, back to the videotape. 14 You earlier testified that you think that 15 your mother-in-law took the pictures. Do you remember 16 whether or not she said whether she taped over part of 17 the underground storage tank tape? 18 A I do not know. But she is not great at 19 working a camera. She possibly could have. I don't 20 know. 21 Q Okay. Prior to that, did you ever see the 22 videotape? 23 A I was at our house, I think it was put in 24 the machine. They were going to start watching it. I 25 was busy cooking dinner. It's something I did not watch. 2069 1 Q Does your tape player show the small 8 2 millimeter tapes? Or just the regular VCR tapes? 3 A I don't know. 4 Q This is the standard size, Grand Jury 5 Exhibit 76. Was it a tape this size? Or Grand Jury 6 Exhibit 3, this size? 7 A I am not sure. I didn't see the tape 8 even. 9 Q Have you seen -- 10 A At some times it could run through the 11 camera onto the TV. 12 Q You have seen it done that way, where you 13 connect it up to the back of the TV with the camera? 14 A Yeah. In the past, I have seen it done. 15 I did not sit and watch, like I say, on that certain day. 16 Q And how do you know this was before the 17 akido? Or do you know? 18 A I do not know. 19 Q Okay. And who was present when this 20 videotape was shown? 21 A Mmmm... I believe it was just my 22 husband. The kids were playing. We were starting to eat 23 dinner. And they shut it off. I don't even know that 24 they watched the whole thing. 25 Q Okay. Bounce around a little bit. 2070 1 On the date of the search warrant, you 2 received a phone call at work? 3 A Yes, I did. 4 Q That's a search warrant of your 5 father-in-law/KRL's house? 6 A KRL's, yes, office, yes. 7 Q And what time of day did you receive that 8 phone call? 9 A About 11:45. 10 Q From Investigator Hall? Or that's who he 11 said it was? 12 A Mr. Hall, yes. 13 Q He said, We are at the front door. We 14 would like to come in. How did that go? 15 A No. He said that they have a search 16 warrant and they have been there searching the premises. 17 Someone would be allowed on the property to sign a 18 receipt for things being taken. 19 Q Okay. And then you contacted your 20 husband? 21 A Yes. I pulled him away from patients. 22 And he did go over so he could sign or whatever he needed 23 to do. He assisted in telling them where a KRL, whatever 24 they were after, because it was something on the warrant 25 showed and described the house. And whatever was marked 2071 1 on the warrant, he was assisting them with. 2 Q Okay. And he -- you weren't there, so 3 it's your understanding that he is the one that opened up 4 the safe? 5 A I was not there. I am sorry. 6 Q When was the last time you signed a KRL 7 check from the Bank of Amador, if you recall? 8 A I don't recall. 9 Q You think it was this year? 10 A I believe so. 11 Q And the most recent past, like in the last 12 month or prior to that? 13 A I don't recall. 14 Q Okay. Have you been present when Roland 15 signed a KRL check? 16 A I have seen him sign many checks. 17 Q This year? 18 A I have seen him sign some, I believe, this 19 year. 20 Q Okay. Does KRL have more than one 21 checking account, to your knowledge? 22 A I believe -- I'm unsure. I think it's the 23 one at Amador, Bank of Amador, is the account. 24 Q Okay. So if this file from Western Title, 25 Grand Jury Exhibit 18, lists KRL and Masons as the 2072 1 purchaser of the property, then that would be -- that 2 would be wrong, correct? 3 A At this point, it would be incorrect for 4 the fact we have signed and written checks out of our 5 personal to add that into our office land. I believe at 6 the beginning, I have seen the KRL on some documents 7 regarding that parcel. 8 And then like I say for all the reasons 9 that it has to do with our dental office, it has to read 10 just like our property tax bill does. And at the point 11 where we are right now with all the notes through David 12 Mason and my husband and myself, that is how -- 13 Q Today, November 23rd? 14 A -- it should have been from the start, as 15 well. But I understand from Western Land, seeing my 16 father-in-law there from quite a few past purchases, they 17 have been KRL Partnership. 18 Q Right. I mean, this whole package, the 19 KRL document, KRL document, KRL document. 20 A Sure. 21 Q Actually listing Kimberly, Roland, Luke 22 and Larry as -- 23 A And so what we are looking at here is now 24 been updated to be correct under mine and my husband's 25 name. 2073 1 Q Right. And I guess the question is: Did 2 that happen on May 29th or May 1st? 3 A I believe it should have been May 1st. 4 Q Okay. So on May 1st -- 5 A May 1st is-- 6 Q -- you -- not you, I am sorry. Your 7 husband signed a contract. Is it your understanding 8 that, on May 1st, you signed any documents, other than 9 your check for 5,000? 10 A Yes. My check, I feel, is a document. So 11 that, you know, under our personal account, is what I do 12 feel, you know, shows that things were finally on the 13 right track at that point. 14 Once the money started changing hands just 15 for the purchase of that piece, that's what I feel, you 16 know, binded us, as Roland and myself. 17 Q This is a copy of a document that -- I 18 will find the exhibit that matches it in a couple 19 minutes. This is the original or, hypothetically, this 20 is the original agreement of purchase of the improved 21 property. 22 A Mm-hmm. 23 Q I think it's a ten-page document. We will 24 see in a minute. Lists KRL. The second page, it doesn't 25 say KRL, but it talks about the 5,000, the 55,000. 2074 1 A Okay. 2 Q Conditions are who is actually going to do 3 the work, who is going to get the permits. 4 A Mm-hmm. 5 Q They didn't hear you back there. Is that 6 your understanding? Have you seen this contract before? 7 A Mmmm... I know. Go ahead. Continue. 8 Q Okay. Page 8 has a right to inspect. 9 Environmental assessment. Talks about during the term of 10 the agreement buyer has a right to complete an 11 environmental assessment. 12 Do you remember if you signed this 13 document? 14 A I don't recall. 15 Q Okay. Then it's the right to remove the 16 building prior to escrow. This is a pretty important 17 paragraph. Do you remember if you signed a document that 18 has the right to remove building prior to close of 19 escrow? 20 A I don't recall. 21 Q Okay. Paragraph 1 under Article 10 on 22 page 10. Could you read that into the record, please. 23 A Well, "Buyer and seller agree that buyer 24 at own cost may remove existing building and do all acts 25 necessary to remove underground tanks and perform all 2075 1 testing necessary for environmental purposes and clear up 2 debris prior to the close of escrow." 3 Q So if you signed a contract that had that 4 paragraph in it, as the buyer, who do you think was 5 responsible to do all acts necessary to remove the 6 underground tanks and perform all testing necessary for 7 environmental purposes? 8 A I guess I don't understand your question. 9 Q Okay. If you are the buyer -- 10 A Mm-hmm. 11 Q -- of a piece of property, and you signed 12 a contract, which included this paragraph that you just 13 read into the records, who do you think is responsible to 14 do all acts necessary to remove the underground tanks and 15 perform all testing necessary? You as the buyer? 16 A It was agreed between, I guess, both Mason 17 and ourselves, that if the grounds did not test clean, we 18 at that time would not be obligated to purchase the land. 19 Q And that's your understanding from Bob 20 Womack? Or from George Ryan? Or from reading a 21 contract? 22 A I believe from Mr. Ryan. He was 23 interested in making sure that all of the land would, you 24 know, test clean, I think at one point, so we would not 25 be locked in. 2076 1 Q To cover you -- 2 A Just to be able to back away from the 3 agreement. 4 Q Okay. And at any time up through today's 5 date, have you chatted with Environmental Health about 6 whether or not the property was contaminated? 7 A I believe there was two tests and we are 8 in the middle of another. And at my understanding, 9 everything is being tested clean. I brought one more 10 paper that I received from Mr. Mason regarding the tank 11 as being tested clean. 12 Q The November 12th letter? 13 A Uh... I have it here. Yes, sir. 14 Q Okay. That's already been marked in 15 evidence. I can probably show that to you before you are 16 done. 17 So you haven't looked at the binder -- 18 A No, sir. 19 Q -- at Environmental Health that indicates 20 that the property is substantially contaminated? 21 A No, sir. 22 Q Have you ever spoken with Mr. Mason and 23 asked him if the property was contaminated? 24 A We were waiting for all test results. 25 Q If you have this much 1998 data and this 2077 1 much 1991 through 1998 data, how do you make your 2 decision without looking at the -- the 1991 through 1998 3 data just on a little bit of 1998 data? Just a 4 question. 5 A Well, I don't understand it. 6 Q If all of these documents in my hand, 7 which appear to be 50 cards -- kind of like Ronald Reagan 8 does things -- say it's contaminated and you are saying 9 someone told you it wasn't contaminated, who are you 10 going to believe? 11 A I would be waiting for all the current 12 reports. 13 Q As opposed to looking at anything about 14 past problems? 15 A Correct. Because past problems would be 16 cleaned up and everything as to date could be testing out 17 fine. 18 Q Especially if you overexcavated the 19 contaminated soil. Would that be true? 20 A If -- I do not know. 21 Q If you dug up all the bad soil? 22 A I don't think so. I know -- think that 23 ground is -- as far as I know, is almost like slate. 24 It's very hard. 25 Q Do you know that from Bob Womack or being 2078 1 present? 2 A I know from being down and looking at that 3 site. It is like concrete. Just the wall, itself, that 4 is exposed. And it is -- I have talked to neighbors who 5 have been there for many years saying how hard that 6 ground is and whatnot. 7 Q Okay. So you haven't looked at the 8 County's reports that claim it's contaminated, but you 9 went ahead and agreed to purchase it. Correct? 10 A Because we were safe with a safety net in 11 my opinion of, if the current test did not come out 12 clean, we would no longer be obligated, yes. 13 Q And that was drafted into the contract so 14 you could walk away -- 15 A Correct. 16 Q -- from anything over and above the 17 $5,000, plus whatever it cost you to demo the building? 18 I mean, if that's your understanding. I am not trying 19 to -- 20 A That possibly, yes. 21 Q Okay. And so Roland and Nadine do all of 22 this work one weekend when they are not there. And who 23 pays for that, all of the work? 24 A I have bill that we did pay to Mr. 25 Sherrill. For us not being there, Robert Womack was able 2079 1 to pay some of those that would be reimbursed at the end 2 of the year on a draw from Roland as KRL partner. 3 Q Has that happened in the past? Because 4 that was -- 5 A Excuse me? 6 Q Hypothetically, if that is was your 7 husband's story, have you and your husband talked about 8 his testimony last week? 9 A No, sir. Not indoors here. 10 Q I mean, any time, anyplace. Have you 11 talked about his Grand Jury testimony? 12 A Not his testimony, no, sir. 13 Q Just about the facts of the case, as you 14 understand them, correct? 15 A No. We have pretty much got a busy life 16 with the dental and our children to kind of just not be 17 so -- you know, he took or signed, and said he can't 18 discuss. So some of this. 19 Q Okay. So back to Article 10, the 20 paragraph, it says: "Do all acts necessary to remove 21 underground storage tanks. " 22 If you were the buyer, who do you think is 23 responsible for doing all acts necessary for underground 24 storage tanks? You? 25 A This -- I guess I am still looking at 2080 1 it -- says it's an agreement between the buyer and the 2 seller. 3 Q That buyer, at his own cost, may remove 4 existing building and do all acts necessary to remove the 5 underground tanks. So that's, buyer is supposed to do 6 all acts necessary to remove the underground storage 7 tanks, correct? Is that the way you read it? 8 A That's the way I read it, yes. 9 Q Tell us all of the steps you took to 10 remove the underground storage tanks prior to closing 11 escrow. Every single step that Nadine Womack took. 12 A I have a father-in-law who was looking in 13 our best interests. I, you know, helped my husband in 14 the dental practice. He was able to get the ball rolling 15 with talking to Mr. Sherrill and Mr. Wolin and certified 16 contractors in the field of demolition of stations or 17 excavating whatever is needed. I don't -- 18 Q He told you that? Or do you know that he 19 did that? 20 A Quite understand. 21 I know that Mr. Sherrill and the Wolins 22 were, you know, in the demolition of the station. 23 Q They were the ones that actually did the 24 work, because you have been told? Or spoke with them and 25 they said, Yeah, we are the ones that took it out? 2081 1 A I have written checks to Mr. Sherrill. 2 Q For 2,500 and some change or 2,400 and 3 some change, correct? 4 A Correct. 5 Q Did you actually pay him for his labor? 6 A You know, I wrote regarding to his 7 receipts, so the labor and whatever is in the receipt. 8 Q Okay. Page 11 appears to be the last page 9 of the contract. If you could go ahead and read the date 10 and who signed for both the buyer and the seller, please. 11 A I see my husband's signature at the 12 bottom, under buyer. And my name is not on this one. 13 So I can see this -- 14 Q And the date? 15 A This was on 4/30/98. 16 Q Okay. And the buyer is listed under KRL 17 Partnership? 18 A He did not sign under -- well, okay. He 19 has got Roland E. Womack. 20 Q Underneath KRL Partnership? 21 A Yeah, dropped below KRL Partnership. 22 Q Okay. Then Exhibit A attached appears to 23 be signed on 4/30 by possibly Dave Mason? 24 A Okay. 25 Q And then there is an addendum which 2082 1 matches the addendum that you have in Grand Jury Exhibit 2 71, except for it doesn't have the signatures. 3 A Okay. 4 Q Does that appear to be similar? 5 A Yes, sir. 6 Q But it's an unsigned one, correct? 7 A Correct. 8 Q And it says, "Buyer and seller further 9 extend the time for close of escrow to May 29th, 1999." 10 And that's basically the one year loan, correct? 11 A Yes. 12 Q Okay. "Agreed on this date May of '98." 13 But it's unsigned, correct? 14 A This looks like the generic version, yes. 15 Q Okay. And then you had -- or your husband 16 brought in a file labeled 505 Sutter. Is this your 17 handwriting on the file, gives the date? 18 A Yes. Or that's just the address. 19 Q And inside the document is actually a 20 signed copy of that addendum dated May 29th, 1998, 21 correct? 22 A Yes. This is when I called. Because I 23 was still seeing KRL Partnership on this document. And I 24 placed a call to Evelyn. I discussed it with her. She 25 said, You need to talk to Chris again. So I talked to 2083 1 Chris. And then everything was coming to my husband and 2 myself's name. 3 Q At your dental office? 4 A Mmmm... 5 Q Or is it still going up to Ridge Road? 6 A I think I'm not sure at this point. 7 Q Okay. So -- 8 A But it is under our correct names. 9 Q Currently. 10 A Yes. 11 Q So you actually have a seen a document 12 entitled Addendum to Agreement of Purchase of Sale with 13 your name in here where it says KRL on the first page and 14 your name in here where it says KRL on the first page 15 also? 16 A Well, I believe Chris explained that it 17 wouldn't matter, as long as, you know, the final 18 documents were in our names. And this would just be in 19 the packet still going. 20 Q Except the question is, who pulled the 21 tank without permits? Nadine and Roland, thereby 22 committing felonies? Or KRL? Who pulled the tanks 23 without permits? 24 It sounds like your testimony is, until 25 after May 29th, it was still -- there was still some 2084 1 serious confusion whether it was KRL. 2 A No, sir. It was not KRL. It was Roland 3 and my purchase. And then there was a permit received 4 through the County and -- 5 Q Through the City or the County, if you 6 know? 7 A That was through the City. 8 Q Okay. And that permit had Roland's name 9 on it? 10 A That did, yes, sir. 11 Q Okay. And so the first demolition permit 12 was in Roland's name, it's your understanding? 13 A My understanding, yes. 14 Q And that was not filled out by Roland, 15 correct? Is that your understanding? 16 A I do not know. I don't believe that he 17 was able to get away from his practice to go get the 18 permit. Robert could have attained the permit for us. 19 Q Okay. And has he obtained your -- have 20 permits in your name before? 21 A I do not know. 22 Q Did you give him permission to go out and 23 get permits in your name? 24 A I do not know. I believe so. I... 25 Q Does Roland Womack have a contractor's 2085 1 license, if you know? 2 A We have done owner builder before. 3 Q Did you own this property? 4 A This is something we were working on, yes, 5 sir. 6 Q On May 2nd, 1998, did you own the property 7 at 505 Sutter? 8 A It was a note at that time. 9 Q Did you own the property? 10 A No. That was what the contract was 11 supposed to be for, is for the demolition for the 12 purchase of the property, if everything tested fine. 13 Q So you weren't the owner, but your 14 father-in-law, to the best of your knowledge, got a 15 permit that said you were the owner? 16 A That was agreed upon, I believe, Mason and 17 the contract -- signed it, giving authority for such 18 thing to happen. 19 Q So I think my question was, does Roland 20 have a contractor's license? 21 A No. We have always done owner builder. 22 Q Even on property that you don't own? 23 A We were intending to purchase. That was 24 what the contract was for, I believe. 25 Q Okay. Does KRL have a contractor's 2086 1 license? 2 A I do not know. 3 Q Did you attempt to gather any paperwork to 4 comply with the subpoena for paper that Roland was given 5 to a week ago? Or you actually were handed that? 6 A Yes, I did go to the KRL office. 7 Q Okay. 8 A And there was nothing corresponding to 9 your wants. Everything on there was already taken as 10 evidence. 11 Q According to Robert Womack or according to 12 your review of the records? 13 A According to review of what was asked for 14 on that warrant or subpoena for records. 15 Q This has been marked Grand Jury Exhibit 16 114. 17 A Yes, sir. 18 Q Under a list of all records, it also 19 indicates all documents, records, paperwork, deeds, 20 bylaws, articles of incorporation, employee timecards, 21 employee draws. 22 A So are you wanting this as our dental 23 office employee timecards? 24 Q It's to the custodian of records for KRL. 25 A Okay. KRL Partnerships does not need to 2087 1 have the timecards. 2 Q Because they have no employees? 3 A Mmmm... It is a on a year-end -- it's a 4 partnership. 5 Q Okay. So when KRL paid Nick Hernandez by 6 the hour to do work on the gas station demolition, who in 7 reality was paying Nick Hernandez? Nadine and Roland? 8 A It would, yes, at the end of the year 9 possibly be Nadine and Roland a draw from KRL. 10 Q Does Nadine and Roland have Workers' 11 Compensation insurance? 12 A Yes, we do. 13 Q That covers the removal of underground 14 storage tanks? 15 A Well, he -- I don't know at this time if 16 he is independent contractor who would have to carry it 17 himself. I do not know. 18 Q Who is your Workmen's Compensation 19 insurance carrier? 20 A I would have to check all my records. 21 Q So there is a file cabinet of paperwork on 22 KRL at Ridge Road, correct? 23 A Correct. 24 Q And out of that entire file cabinet, only 25 the 1998 records were taken. Is that your understanding? 2088 1 A Mmmm... Quite a bit. I have seen the 2 receipt. Quite a bit that was in there was not listed as 3 to exactly everything that was taken. 4 Q Okay. Did you check to see if 1997 KRL 5 paperwork was at Ridge Road? 6 A 1997. I was going off of current work 7 that was asked for here. 8 Q Does it have a date and a year there? 9 A No, sir. 10 Q Okay. If you could take a moment to 11 review that document, I will ask you a couple of 12 additional questions, please. 13 MR. IREY: At this time, Ms. Womack, we go until 14 12:30. If we could take a five-minute break. That way 15 the Grand Jurors can stretch their legs. We will come 16 back at 10 minutes to 12:00. 17 You can read that document, as long as you 18 bring it back. 19 THE WITNESS: Sure, thank you. 20 MR. IREY: Thanks. 21 THE FOREPERSON: Before you go, I have an 22 admonition to read to you. 23 You are admonished not to reveal to any 24 person except as directed by the Court what questions 25 were asked or what responses were given or any other 2089 1 matters concerning the nature or subject of the Grand 2 Jury's investigation that you learned during your 3 appearance before the Grand Jury. 4 This admonition continues unless and until 5 such time as a transcript of this Grand Jury proceeding 6 is made public. Violation of this admonition is 7 punishable as contempt of court. 8 This does not prevent you from discussing 9 the matter with your attorney if you have an attorney 10 advising you with respect to your appearance before the 11 Grand Jury. 12 What I have here is this exact same 13 admonition I just read to you. Could you just date and 14 acknowledge that I did read that to you. 15 THE WITNESS: Okay. Is this something we have 16 to sign? 17 MR. IREY: You don't have to sign it. 18 THE WITNESS: Oh, okay. Because at this point, 19 is that what you are saying, is I need an attorney. 20 MR. IREY: You could read it again if you want 21 to, Mr. Foreman. 22 THE FOREPERSON: Okay. Why don't you follow 23 along there. 24 THE WITNESS: Do I go ahead and read it to 25 myself? 2090 1 THE FOREPERSON: I will read it out loud. 2 You are admonished not to reveal to any 3 person except as directed by the Court what questions 4 were asked or what responses were given or any other 5 matters concerning the nature or subject of the Grand 6 Jury's investigation that you learned during your 7 appearance before the Grand Jury. 8 This admonition continues unless and until 9 such time as a transcript of this Grand Jury proceeding 10 is made public. Violation of this admonition is 11 punishable as contempt of Court. 12 This does not prevent you from discussing 13 the matter with your attorney if you have an attorney 14 advising you with respect to your appearance before the 15 Grand Jury. 16 MR. IREY: So hypothetically, the most occurring 17 question that Grand Jurors -- witnesses are asking is, 18 can I talk to my spouse? 19 And then what I would say at that point 20 was, we will give you a copy of it. Write Copy. 21 You can bounce it off of an attorney. You 22 probably want to do that before you chat with your spouse 23 about that. We are not going to give you legal advice 24 one way or the other. 25 THE WITNESS: Yeah, I would like a copy. 2091 1 MR. IREY: We will write across the face Copy in 2 big red ink. 3 THE FOREPERSON: Would you at this time like to 4 date and sign that I read that to you? That's all that 5 is saying, is that I read it to you. 6 THE WITNESS: That you read it to me? Certainly, 7 sure. 8 So what is the day? 9 THE FOREPERSON: Today is the 23rd. 10 THE WITNESS: Okay. 11 THE FOREPERSON: And then just if you could like 12 to sign that right there or wherever you would like to 13 sign it. I will give you this copy here. It's the same 14 thing. 15 THE WITNESS: I am just taking this as a copy. 16 THE FOREPERSON: I will give you this copy here. 17 THE WITNESS: Okay. 18 THE FOREPERSON: Thank you. Then you want to go 19 until five till? Okay. So you are excused to go. And 20 if you could be back here at five to 12:00. 21 THE WITNESS: Sure. Okay. And I am reading 22 this? Is that right? 23 MR. IREY: You can, sure. Please bring it back 24 in or I will get in a lot of trouble. 25 THE WITNESS: Okay. 2092 1 MR. IREY: I am sorry. He has one more thing he 2 reads to the Grand Jury. 3 THE FOREPERSON: You are free to go until five to 4 12:00. 5 MR. IREY: One more step. 6 THE WITNESS: Okay. 7 THE FOREPERSON: Okay. And the same admonition 8 that I read to you earlier applies to our recess. If you 9 could be back here at five to 12:00. 10 And we are off the record. 11 (Recess taken from 11:47 to 11:57 a.m.) 12 THE FOREPERSON: We are on the record. 13 MR. IREY: Judge Harlan is absolutely making sure 14 that Monday and Tuesday are okay at this time. So we 15 will know by -- we are going to do it somewhere in Amador 16 County on Monday and Tuesday if it's not in this very 17 courtroom. 18 THE FOREPERSON: Ms. Womack, I will remind you, 19 you are still under oath. 20 THE WITNESS: Thanks. 21 Q BY MR. IREY: Ms. Womack, did you have an 22 opportunity to review Grand Jury Exhibit 114? 23 A Yes. 24 Q Okay. Did you find any specific dates on 25 there that bracketed the time in which the request was 2093 1 made? 2 A No. Are you -- 3 Q So all records from KRL is what the 4 subpoena was for. Is that your understanding? 5 A Oh, no. 6 Q Okay. So after reading this document, 7 something on this document indicates that it's -- 8 A Well, anything that I have that 9 corresponds with this, I did bring. 10 Q That you have at Ridge Road? 11 A Either location. 12 Q So does that mean that Robert Womack 13 tossed all the KRL records or that they are somewhere 14 else? 15 A I -- I don't -- I'm not talking about 16 anything -- what are you asking? I see here, you know, 17 the -- what you are asking. I brought everything related 18 to the 505 property. 19 Q Okay. But did you bring all documents, 20 records, paperwork, deeds, bylaws, articles of 21 incorporation for KRL? 22 A I do not have those. I do not have those. 23 Q Did you check at Ridge Road for those 24 records? 25 A I did. And I -- I did not get any of 2094 1 these -- I believe everything that was asked in here had 2 been taken. And what was not taken, I produced, to the 3 best of my knowledge. 4 Q So a more specific subpoena might be 5 necessary, one that is more specific than all documents, 6 records, paperwork, deeds, bylaws, articles of 7 incorporation without a date? 8 A Well, that I believe that you have in your 9 possession already. 10 Q Okay. But if we don't, are there more 11 records, documents, paperwork, deeds, bylaws and articles 12 of incorporation for KRL Partnership? 13 A Not that I know of. 14 Q Are there any records of payments to 15 Roland Womack and/or Nadine Womack? 16 A Those are done at the end of the year in a 17 draw situation, but... 18 Q Did you find any records at any time over 19 the last ten years for payments to Roland and/or Nadine 20 Womack? 21 A Payments -- are you -- I am getting 22 confused. 23 Q I can ask a more generic question. If I 24 had written the date, all records from 1990 forward up, 25 and then this paragraph. 2095 1 A All payments, the tank, related to 2 property 505. 3 Q Related to Mason Oil. 4 A Mason Oil. 5 Q Related to deeds and bylaws. 6 A I brought those. I brought everything I 7 had, sir. 8 Q It's my understanding from speaking with 9 my investigators that there is an entire file cabinet 10 full of KRL records, all of which I think that subpoena 11 means you should have broughten today -- you should have 12 brought today. 13 Is there an entire file cabinet of KRL 14 records at Ridge Road, to your knowledge? 15 A To my knowledge, I just -- I guess I do 16 not understand. I am sorry. I thought we were here for 17 the removal of the tank. And I am getting a little 18 sidetracked on your questions for the matter of why we 19 should be here. 20 I am sorry. I don't understand. 21 Q Okay. Do you have knowledge one way or 22 the other whether there is additional KRL paperwork at 23 Robert Womack/KRL's house on Ridge Road? 24 A I will take the Fifth at this time. I 25 don't find that that is to do with this situation with 2096 1 the tank. So I will take the Fifth. 2 Q When you fly to Las Vegas for motorcross 3 in May, do you fly out of Sacramento or Reno, if you 4 know? Or Oakland or San Francisco? 5 A Do we continue even if I am taking the 6 Fifth? 7 Q Oh, let's read what it says. 8 A Is this just per question? 9 Q It can be done either way. I will give 10 you all of the options I currently know about. 11 A Thank you. 12 Q You do not have to answer any questions 13 that may tend to incriminate you or subject you to 14 punishment for a crime. So that's a question by question 15 basis. And you can refuse to answer any such question by 16 stating that your answer may tend to incriminate you. 17 So you can basically say, I want to talk 18 to an attorney. I invoke my Fifth Amendment and that 19 covers everything. 20 Or you can say, Go ahead. Give me your 21 question and I will make a decision whether or not I want 22 to state that it may tend to incriminate me. 23 Or you can answer a bunch and then, if one 24 question concerns you, say that question may tend to 25 incriminate you. 2097 1 I can't give any legal advice. I always 2 lean towards being as cautious as possible. So if you 3 have thought about it and want to consult with someone, I 4 think that's perfectly reasonable and certainly 5 constitutional to do. 6 So I guess that's my statement. We could 7 keep asking you questions and you could refuse KRL. That 8 won't get us very far. I could require to you testify by 9 granting you immunity, but I am not inclined to do so. 10 So at this point, we can do question by question or you 11 can just say, I would like to chat with an attorney, 12 which may be -- okay. 13 Does that help explain what your options 14 are? 15 A Right. So on your question of my 16 transportation to Las Vegas, I will take the Fifth. We 17 will leave it there. 18 Q Okay. How about my question regarding 19 Grand Jury Exhibit 78, a copy of a demolition permit? 20 A I was going to go ahead and stop there. 21 Q Okay. 22 A Yes. 23 Q Then I won't ask you any questions. 24 A Okay. Thank you. 25 MR. IREY: At this time, the Foreman will have 2098 1 the same admonition exactly, except read 20 minutes 2 later. He has to do that for the record. And then we 3 will be done. 4 THE WITNESS: Okay. 5 MR. IREY: However, I am going to go ahead and 6 put this on the record, because you may or may not be the 7 custodian of records for KRL. That is absolutely still a 8 valid Grand Jury subpoena for records. Best case 9 scenario, there was some confusion, although on the face 10 of it, it currently can be read as what it says. And so 11 it is up to you to bounce that off of counsel or other 12 people who are in KRL and try to comply with the 13 subpoena. 14 At this time, all remedies allowed by law 15 will be considered in effort to obtain the appropriate 16 records that were required pursuant to the subpoena. 17 I think earlier you testified that you did 18 not bring any additional paperwork and that might 19 parallel what your husband testified to. So with that 20 said, I probably am not going to be able to answer your 21 question, other than the subpoena needs to be followed. 22 And we hope that we are able to obtain all of the records 23 as quickly and expeditiously as required by law. 24 So with that said, thank you for your time. 25 A Well, I did bring the receipts on what was 2099 1 taken from the house and the letter from the tank showing 2 that it was clean. 3 Q Okay. I will show you that. And you let 4 me know if that's the exact same or a copy of the letter. 5 A Those were the only additional records I 6 could come up with according to your subpoena. 7 Q Ms. Womack, I can assure you that the 8 November 12th letter is in evidence, based on a couple of 9 people's testimony. I will not quickly able to find it 10 at this time. 11 However, if you could -- if that is a copy 12 in your file, you could leave that with me, and I will -- 13 A And also then the two-page property taken 14 at the KRL office. 15 Q Okay. Do you have a copy of that with you 16 today? 17 A Yes, sir. 18 Q Okay. We will mark that and I will move 19 that into evidence. And I will go ahead and attach this 20 fax of the November 12th Jim Thorpe Oil, so it will be a 21 three-page document. 22 A Thank you. 23 Q And you have a copy of these three pages? 24 A Yes, sir. 25 Q Okay. This has been marked Grand Jury 2100 1 Exhibit 115. Are these the three -- 2 A Yes. 3 Q -- pieces of paper, two of which are 4 property reports, one of which is a November 12th letter 5 from Jim Thorpe Oil? 6 A Yes. 7 Q And you would like these entered into 8 evidence? 9 A Yes. 10 Q Okay. Thank you, Ms. Womack, for your 11 time. I am sure it's not very he easy to be here. But 12 the Foreman has an admonition for you at this time. 13 THE FOREPERSON: You are admonished not to reveal 14 to any person except as directed by the Court what 15 questions were asked or what responses were given or any 16 other matters concerning the nature or subject of the 17 Grand Jury's investigation that you learned during your 18 appearance before the Grand Jury. 19 This admonition continues unless and until 20 such time as a transcript of this Grand Jury proceeding 21 is made public. Violation of this admonition is 22 punishable as contempt of court. 23 This does not prevent you from discussing 24 the matter with your attorney if you have an attorney 25 advising you with respect to your appearance before the 2101 1 grand jury. 2 And what I am having done, just put your 3 initials underneath the name. 4 THE WITNESS: I am not going to sign it. No, 5 sir. 6 THE FOREPERSON: That's fine. 7 THE WITNESS: Is that it? 8 MR. IREY: Yes. 9 THE WITNESS: Thank you. And about Friday, I am 10 sorry. I know I deal with scheduling. And that was 11 something Mr. Hall was supposed to call us on. So I 12 talked to him out front and he said that he didn't know 13 we were coming back. So I feel -- I apologize for your 14 Friday time. 15 GRAND JUROR: Thank you. 16 MR. IREY: Just remember the eight days we were 17 on a roll before it kind of got choppy. Mr. Hall or Mr. 18 Fourt will be here at 1:30 to continue for the rest of 19 the day. Mr. Hall and/or Mr. Fourt. But that's as early 20 as I can get the next witness here. 21 THE FOREPERSON: Okay. If there is nothing else 22 then, I will go ahead and admonish my fellow Jurors and 23 we will take a lunch break until 1:30. 24 So I admonish -- I ask you to recall the 25 same admonishment that we had earlier this morning, and 2102 1 we will take a recess until 1:30 p.m. Thank you. 2 We are off the record. 3 (Luncheon recess taken at 12:13 p.m.) 4 ---oOo--- 5 (Whereupon, pages 2103-2115 were reported and transcribed, but are under separate 6 confidential cover.) 7 ---OOO--- 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 2116 1 MR. IREY: May I call a witness? 2 THE FOREPERSON: Yes, you may. 3 MR. IREY: Bob Fourt. 4 THE FOREPERSON: Mr. Fourt, if you could remain 5 standing, please, and raise your right hand. 6 You do solemnly swear that the evidence 7 you shall give in this investigation now pending before 8 this Grand Jury shall be the truth, the whole truth and 9 nothing but the truth, so help you God. 10 THE WITNESS: I do. 11 THE FOREPERSON: Thank you. You may be seated. 12 (TIME NOTED: 2:01 P.M.) 13 ---oOo--- 14 ROBERT FOURT 15 Called as a witness herein by the People, 16 having been duly sworn to tell the truth, was examined 17 and testified as follows: 18 19 EXAMINATION 20 BY MR. IREY: 21 Q Could you state your full legal name for 22 the record and spell your last name, please. 23 A Okay. Can you hear me? Is this okay? 24 Let's get up close enough here. 25 Robert Fourt, F-O-U-R-T. 2117 1 Q And who is your current employer? 2 A Amador County. 3 Q And in what capacity are you so employed? 4 A I am hired as an environmental health 5 specialist. 6 Q And do you have any technical 7 background -- what was your job before you came to Amador 8 County? 9 A I worked for Stanislaus County as a 10 hazardous materials specialist, senior hazardous 11 materials specialist. 12 Q For how many years? 13 A Eight. Approximately eight. 14 Q Okay. Do you have any education, 15 including classes you have taken since you have been RHS? 16 A Let's see. Bachelor's degree in geology, 17 Master's degree in geology. I have several licenses in 18 various types of geology. 19 Q Such as? 20 A I am registered geologist; I am a 21 certified engineering geologist; and I am a certified 22 hydrogeologist, all in the State of California. I am 23 also a licensed geologist in North Carolina. 24 Let's see. I have gone through a good 25 portion of the CSTI, California Specialized Training 2118 1 Institute, for hazardous materials response. I have gone 2 through Department of Health Services Hazard Awareness 3 Response Planning, HARP, which is a State safety training 4 course; development of toxic substance control 5 respiratory protection course; numerous other safety 6 courses through University of California Davis and other 7 institutions, basically related to hazardous materials, 8 hazardous waste management and emergency response. 9 Q And what is your current assignment in 10 Amador County? 11 A Well, I am a generalist. I do general 12 Environmental Health duties. And then I also am 13 administering the underground storage tank program. 14 Q For Amador County? 15 A That's correct. 16 Q Earlier this year, did you learn of an 17 underground storage tank removal from 505 Sutter? 18 A Yes, I did. 19 Q And, if you recall, was it early May of 20 this year? 21 A Yes, it was. 22 Q And if you could answer in narrative, that 23 would help the Members of the Grand Jury. 24 A Okay. 25 Q What do you remember about the underground 2119 1 storage tank from 505 Sutter Street? And what have you 2 reviewed before you came here today to help refresh your 3 recollection? 4 A Well, nothing today. But in the past, I 5 have reviewed my notes and the file at 505 Sutter 6 Street. 7 Can I go into a little detail on that 8 whole site? 9 Q Absolutely. 10 A Just walk through it. Okay. 11 This was just -- when I joined the County 12 in February of '87 -- '97, about a year and a half ago, 13 one of the gasoline stations I was responsible for -- it 14 was called Jackson Exxon at the time. When I started 15 working on it, it appeared to be abandoned, wasn't in use 16 at the time. I started talking to the owner of the 17 property, Mr. Mason, trying to determine what kind of 18 compliance state it was in. I had several letters to 19 him, had a couple phone calls, but no real action. 20 Finally convinced him to meet me on the 21 site. We needed to do an inspection on the property. 22 Determined he had double-walled tank with older 23 electronic monitoring system, which is electronic probes 24 in between the two tanks to tell if there has been a 25 leak. We convinced him he needed to actually permit the 2120 1 tank, bring the monitoring system up to speed. 2 When I first got there, the power had been 3 turned off. All his electronic sensors weren't working 4 because the power was turned off. We had one of Mr. 5 Tallia's employees come out and basically do an 6 inspection with me on the facility. We verified, in 7 fact, the leak detection system was -- what do I say? -- 8 was in repair and was able to work, if the power had been 9 turned on. 10 I also evaluated the system for compliance 11 with 1998, December 1998, requirements. At the end of 12 this year, all tanks are going to be required to have 13 double-walled construction or be lined, just -- in 14 addition to the additional spill containment measures on 15 it, just to make sure they are in better shape than some 16 of the older tanks. 17 This system was in good shape. The piping 18 was steel and needed to have some rust protection, 19 corrosion protection installed on it; but it was probably 20 at 90 percent of being in compliance with December of 21 1998 requirements. 22 Q This was fall of '97? 23 A Fall of '97. That's right. 24 So I figured we were in pretty good shape 25 on the site. He needed to do a little bit of work to be 2121 1 kind of up to speed for December. I know he had it for 2 sale. I figured, with the tank being in that good of 3 shape and that new of tank, he would probably end up 4 selling the property. 5 Q What caused you to require that he get the 6 tank permitted? 7 A Well, he had to either have it permitted 8 or close it, one or the other. We are doing that to all 9 facilities. 10 He informed me at the first site visit, in 11 fact, he still had product in the tank and was fueling 12 his vehicles or some other vehicles on an occasional 13 basis. 14 Q So in late '97, the tanks were still being 15 used? 16 A Yes. That was his representation to me. 17 And I believed him. 18 Q Okay. 19 A I then kind of put this tank out of my 20 mind and went on to worry about other problems, other 21 facilities. 22 And then I think it was May -- you have 23 the dates. I believe it was May 4th; is that correct? 24 Q Monday was May 4th. 25 A Monday, May 4th, about 8:30, Mr. Womack 2122 1 came to the counter. I was summoned out of the back from 2 my office. He informed me that they had pulled the tank 3 and he needed to arrange for sampling under the tank. 4 At which point, I kind of informed him 5 that, Well, that's not how it is done and we needed to do 6 all these other procedures. There was a lot of forms to 7 be filled out. He kind of explained that, you know, this 8 has been done. His impression was we just needed to do 9 some sampling. 10 Q Did he state that the tanks were removed 11 Saturday afternoon during a rainstorm? 12 A That's correct. 13 Q Did he state anything about talking to 14 Gary Clark? 15 A He mentioned that Gary Clark had told him 16 he didn't need a permit to demolish the building and 17 remove the tanks. 18 Q Did you at that time check to see if an 19 application for removal of an underground storage tank 20 had been received by Amador County? 21 A Well, it would have come to me. 22 Q Always? 23 A Always. I am the one who has been doing 24 that work. I had the file. And there had been no 25 communication with me on this. This was a total 2123 1 surprise. 2 Q Did Mr. Womack at the 8:30 meeting mention 3 dry ice or who had taken the tank out? 4 A I think he mentioned Wolin had done the 5 work on it and he had a City permit. 6 Q Did he state that the tanks had been 7 inerted with dry ice? 8 A No, he did not. 9 Q You don't recall that or you -- I am 10 reading from your 8:30 a.m. notes. "Mr. Womack stated 11 that the tanks were inerted with dry ice and removed by 12 Wolin Constructions." 13 A My notes would be what is correct. 14 Q How do you actually go about making your 15 notes? This document is dated -- Chronology and 16 Description of Events. 17 A Okay. 18 Q Dated May 18th. 19 A Right. Basically, that is a compendium of 20 earlier notes I had scribbled as I went. Usually, when 21 he is talking to me, I have to scribble notes as I go. I 22 believe there was handwritten notes from that particular 23 meeting, since it was so unusual. 24 Q Okay. And so by May 18th, you had written 25 this chronology? 2124 1 A Yes, that's correct. 2 Q And that was at the request of Linda Van 3 Vleck? 4 A Yes. That's correct. 5 Q Okay. And so did he make any comments 6 about where the material, the demolition debris, had gone 7 from the service station? 8 A He told me they had gone to the County 9 dump in Buena Vista. And at that point, I said, Well, we 10 need documentation on all these items. And he said that 11 would be provided. 12 Q While you were having that chat with Mr. 13 Womack, did Mr. Israel come to the counter? 14 A Yes, he did. 15 Q Could you briefly describe the 16 conversation. Without saying he said, she said, if you 17 could say what was the tenor of the conversation? 18 A The tenor was that he mentioned that -- 19 Mr. Womack mentioned he had talked to Mike earlier, and 20 that there had been some discussion. He wasn't aware the 21 tanks needed to be sampled or a permit required. 22 Mike was walking by. I snagged him and 23 said, Mike, here is Mr. Womack. This is what he is 24 saying. Help me out here. I wasn't involved in that 25 conversation. 2125 1 And Mike's comment was, Don't you remember 2 talking to me three weeks ago about how you had to do a 3 closure in place, you had to sample under the tanks and 4 you needed to get a permit from us to do that? 5 And Mr. Womack said something: No. You 6 didn't tell me that. 7 Q Okay. And then between 8:30 and noon, you 8 actually went to the site; is that correct? If you 9 remember? 10 A If I remember -- I don't really recall. I 11 may have. 12 Q Okay. And then around noon, did you meet 13 with David Mason? 14 A Yes. This was an outcome of the earlier 15 meeting with Mr. Womack. Since Mr. Womack was not, to my 16 knowledge, the owner of the tank or the property, he was 17 not the one to take out the permit. So I had him send in 18 Mr. Mason, who was the owner of the property and the 19 tank. 20 Q And do you remember anything about Mr. 21 Mason coming in? 22 A Mr. Mason. Well, we got out the form and 23 he started to fill it out. And there were lots of 24 incomplete pieces on the form. I started asking him, 25 Well, what about this? What about that? And his comment 2126 1 is, he wasn't there. He wasn't aware that the tank was 2 coming out. 3 Q Okay. 4 A Some of the points that came out were, 5 Where is the tank? Kind of simple, obvious ones. When 6 we do a tank pull, try to again document where all this 7 stuff goes. We want to know where the tank goes. We 8 want to know, when you clean the tank, where the rinsate 9 goes. We want to know, if there's contaminated soil, 10 where it goes. We want to keep track of all this stuff 11 so it doesn't end up in the creek. 12 Usually, if you tell people we want to 13 know where it's going to go ahead of time, they know we 14 are watching and everything works out. It's a very 15 simple system. 16 Q Other than stating that he was unaware the 17 tanks were being removed on Saturday, did he know where 18 the piping, soil, debris, rinsate had gone? 19 A No, he did not. 20 Q Even the tanks? 21 A No, he did not. 22 Excuse me. I take that back. He did tell 23 me it was his understanding they went to Owens Illinois. 24 Q Okay. This has been marked Grand Jury 25 Exhibit 32. Do you recognize this document? 2127 1 A Yes, I do. 2 Q And briefly, in 30 seconds or so, could 3 you describe what it is. 4 A This is the standard underground storage 5 tank removal permit for Amador County. And it's been -- 6 the face sheet shows that $100 was paid for a -- the plan 7 check fee and the permit removal. That's $50 per tank 8 for two tanks. 9 It shows the facility was Mason Oil on 10 Sutter Street. And the owner's name of the facility is 11 David Mason. 12 And again, it shows work to be performed, 13 tank removal, date 5/2. Tank destination, unknown. Tank 14 condition procedure, unknown. 15 Q Okay. On pages -- on page 4, Paragraph 3, 16 is any of that handwriting yours? 17 A No, it is not. 18 Q Do you remember who filled that 19 information out? 20 A Mason filled it out at the counter. 21 Q In your presence? 22 A Yes. 23 Q It's not as if you handed him a file, went 24 away for 20 minutes, came back, and this is what you had? 25 A No. He filled it out right in front of me 2128 1 while we were talking. 2 Q Mr. Mason is the one that put Wolin and 3 Sons as tank, piping -- 4 A Yes. 5 Q -- tank, piping disposal site? 6 A Same as above, yes. 7 Q Contaminated soil hazardous waste hauler? 8 A Yes, he wrote that, too. 9 Q In your presence? 10 A In my presence. 11 Q He signed it in your presence? 12 A That's correct. 13 Q The rest of it, he couldn't tell you what 14 happened because he said he wasn't there? 15 A He wasn't there, right. 16 Q Okay. Have you gotten, received a 17 subsequent permit application where more of this 18 information was filled in? 19 A No, I have not. 20 Q Okay. So $50 per tank is what it costs to 21 get a permit to pull an underground storage tank in 22 Amador County? 23 A That's correct. 24 Q That's the same it cost in May of '98? 25 A Yes. 2129 1 Q Okay. At any point that first day, had 2 you been told -- okay. 3 Is it true that the morning at 8:30 when 4 Womack was at the counter, he told you he got the permit 5 from the City? 6 A Yes, he mentioned he had a permit from the 7 City. 8 Q And then did you call the City later that 9 day? 10 A I did. 11 Q Who did you speak to? 12 A I spoke to Gary Rouse. 13 Q You can't testify to what Mr. Rouse told 14 you. You can testify to the tenor. 15 Did you ask Mr. Rouse if he had given a 16 permit to pull underground storage tanks? 17 A I asked Mr. Rouse if he had issued a 18 demolition permit and permit for the tanks for 505 19 Sutter. 20 Q And he told you? 21 A He said yes, he had. 22 I mentioned to him, Gary, they pulled a 23 tank at the same time. And he got kind of quiet. 24 Q Okay. And did -- at any time, did he 25 assure you Environmental Health had been contacted? 2130 1 A That was his comment to me, yes: You guys 2 were supposed to know all about this. 3 Q Because of the conversation he had with 4 Womack? 5 A He didn't say how he knew that. 6 Q Then the next day, did you talk to Womack 7 or Mason on Tuesday, May 5th? 8 A I believe I probably talked to both of 9 them at one time or another. 10 Q Did you bring this chronology, mine is 11 handwritten on it. I don't -- 12 A I didn't bring it in. It's out in my 13 truck. 14 Q Two minutes? 15 A To get to, yeah. 16 MR. IREY: Could we read the admonition and get 17 this, because it has been several months, and I would 18 rather -- 19 THE FOREPERSON: Let me read you an admonition 20 before you depart. 21 THE WITNESS: Sure. 22 THE FOREPERSON: You are admonished not to reveal 23 to any person except as directed by the Court what 24 questions were asked or what responses were given or any 25 other matters concerning the nature or subject of the 2131 1 Grand Jury's investigation that you learned during your 2 appearance before the Grand Jury. 3 This admonition continues unless and until 4 such time as a transcript of this Grand Jury proceeding 5 is made public. Violation of this admonition is 6 punishable as contempt of court. 7 This does not prevent you from discussing 8 the matter with your attorney if you have an attorney 9 advising you with respect to your appearance before the 10 Grand Jury. 11 THE WITNESS: Okay. 12 THE FOREPERSON: You may -- I tell you. We will 13 do this right now, get this out of the way. I need you 14 to date and sign that I read you that admonition. 15 THE WITNESS: Sure. 16 THE FOREPERSON: That's exactly what I read to 17 you. The 23rd. 18 THE WITNESS: The 23rd, right? 19 THE FOREPERSON: Yes. Okay. Great. 20 MR. IREY: Just take two quick minutes and come 21 right back. 22 THE WITNESS: Sure. 23 THE FOREPERSON: With the chronology. 24 THE WITNESS: Do you want the rest of the files, 25 too? 2132 1 MR. IREY: Sure. 2 THE WITNESS: I will just bring you the box. 3 GRAND JUROR: Can we use -- 4 THE FOREPERSON: Why don't we give Mr. Rouse five 5 minutes then. 6 MR. IREY: Mr. Fourt. 7 THE FOREPERSON: We will take a five-minute 8 break. 9 And I remind the Jurors of the previous 10 admonition. 11 We are off the record. 12 (Recess taken from 2:18 p.m. to 2:22 p.m.) 13 THE FOREPERSON: We are back on the record. 14 Mr. Fourt, I remind you, you are still 15 under oath. 16 THE WITNESS: Yes. 17 Q BY MR. IREY: Mr. Fourt, were you able to 18 find your chronology and description of events? 19 A Yes. 20 Q And again, you wrote these notes on or 21 before May 18th, 1998? 22 A That's correct. 23 Q Okay. Your first entry under the 24 chronology of events, do you recognize these as being the 25 notes that you -- as you typed up? 2133 1 A Yes, those are my notes as I prepared 2 them. 3 Q Okay. Were there telephone calls with 4 Dave Mason and Robert Womack -- 5 A Yes. 6 Q -- that you typed in under your chronology 7 for May 5th? 8 A That's correct. And again, there was 9 several calls. 10 Q Okay. And what were you -- what was the 11 sum and substance of what you learned? 12 A Well, I was trying to reconstruct what 13 went on, more from perspective of trying to fill in the 14 gaps on the permit and to see if we couldn't almost 15 retroactively make this removal hold. A lot of things 16 went on that weren't correct and there was some dangers. 17 But at this point, my intention was to try and capture 18 the data to try to figure out what went on and how we 19 could basically finalize the permit after the fact, if 20 you will. 21 Q And what had you determined regarding what 22 had happened on Friday, May 1st? 23 A Demolition permit was obtained from the 24 City of Jackson Building Department. Equipment was 25 transported to 505 Sutter and dispensers removed and 2134 1 transported to the Bossi Ranch, which is owned by Robert 2 Womack. 3 Q You got that from conversations with 4 Womack and Mason? 5 A That's correct. 6 Q What did you determine happened on 7 Saturday? 8 A The building and foundation material were 9 demolished by Wolin and Sons. Excavator operated by 10 Billy Wolin. Demolition debris was hauled to Buena Vista 11 Landfill by trucks belonging to Mr. Sherrill. Two trucks 12 used in off-hauling of construction debris, red truck 13 operated by Nick Hernandez and gold truck driven by Mark 14 Sherrill. 15 6:00 p.m., the underground storage tank 16 was uncovered. 6:30, during rainstorm, removed from 17 ground and placed on truck or trailer. Couldn't get a 18 straight answer to what exactly it was. Billy Wolin was 19 operator of the excavator. He removed the tanks. Mr. 20 Wolin placed the tanks on the truck trailer, question 21 mark. At that time, Mr. Womack tipped the tanks to one 22 end and did not hear any fluid moving in the tanks. Mr. 23 Womack then secured the tanks to the truck trailer. 24 After tanks secured, dry ice placed in the 25 tanks. There's some question as to whether he said they 2135 1 put it into one or both of the compartments. I tried to 2 follow up on that several times and never got a straight 3 answer. I am not sure they are aware there was a 4 two-compartment tank. 5 It doesn't say who put the tank on. 6 Again, they did not test the tanks to determine if it was 7 an explosive atmosphere. There is an instrument called a 8 combustible gas indicator which measures the 9 concentration of flammable vapors in a space to determine 10 if it's in a range that would explode if there was an 11 ignition source. 12 Q What does dry ice do to help make that 13 determination? 14 A Well, dry ice doesn't help make the 15 determination. Dry ice evaporates and forms carbon 16 dioxide, same stuff that bubbles. That carbon dioxide 17 displaces the oxygen. 18 Q Because it's heavier than oxygen? 19 A It's heavier than oxygen, fills up the 20 space. When oxygen has been displaced, you don't have 21 material to cause an explosion. You need heat, ignition 22 source, you need substance to burn and oxygen to cause 23 fire and an explosion. 24 Q Okay. 25 A Okay. Again, that was not determined. 2136 1 And as a result of the rainstorm and 2 possible groundwater infiltration tank excavation filled 3 in water being in contact with possibly contaminated 4 soils, we knew from earlier work in our files that, in 5 fact, there had been contamination identified at that 6 site at an earlier time. Whether the -- again, we go to 7 the possiblility of water being contaminated. Decision 8 was made to determine what the -- if any contamination 9 was in the water before it was discharged. 10 Q Okay. So then at any time, Mason or 11 Womack say where the underground storage tanks had gone? 12 Again, this was Tuesday, May 5th. 13 A Right. They indicated that they had gone 14 to the Owens Illinois facility in Ione. Owens Illinois 15 was interested in using the tanks. 16 I asked Mr. Mason who at Owens Illinois 17 would be a good person to contact to verify this. Again, 18 still looking on the idea of: Let's find out where it 19 went. Let's see if we can kind of make this whole, if 20 after the fact. He referred me to Mr. Phil Joses. I 21 wasn't able to contact him, left a message for him to 22 return my call. 23 Q By the morning of May 5th, before your 24 first meeting with the Board and/or Ms. Connie Sherrill, 25 had you been told that there was no contaminated soil 2137 1 off-hauled, that it was just debris? 2 A I was told there was no contaminated soil, 3 period. Because that's again part of the form here to 4 fill out. 5 Q And everything else went to the landfill? 6 A What was there, it was all pea gravel, all 7 pea gravel still on the site. Everything off-hauled was 8 debris. 9 Q Okay. And then midmorning on May 5th, 10 that's Board of Supervisor day, correct? 11 A Yes. 12 Q Tuesdays? 13 A Tuesdays, right. 14 Q They meet at 9:00? 15 A 9:00. 16 Q At, 10:00 there is a break. If you can 17 remember this meeting, that would be important, because I 18 think a couple of other people had a very vague 19 recollection of an actual meeting before a noon meeting 20 that same day. 21 Was there a meeting at 10:00 on May 5th? 22 And who attended it? 23 A Yes, there was. 24 Q Okay. 25 A Supervisor Bamert, Escamilla and Connie 2138 1 Sherrill was there as Planning Commissioner. 2 Q And Gary Clark? 3 A Gary Clark was there. Mike Israel was 4 requested to be there, but was not available. 5 Q Do you have that in Board chambers or 6 adjacent to Board chambers? 7 A No. I was -- you got me thinking here. 8 It was a small conference room, Conference Room A. 9 Q Okay. What was discussed? 10 A Well, just the -- just the discussion of 11 the removal and what the problems were with the removal, 12 and also some of the concerns we had of the pit full of 13 water that was right there by the street and how to deal 14 with it. 15 Again, the concern of the Board was that 16 we attempt to after the fact resolve all our issues and 17 see if we could come to an easy solution to the problem 18 while addressing all our concerns. 19 Q And the Board actually instructed you to 20 do that? 21 A Mmmm... Yeah, to continue to investigate 22 the removal and to attempt to resolve all the issues. 23 Q Okay. Did you then contact the landfill? 24 A I did. And again, I left a message with 25 Mr. Dennis Grady, requesting confirmation that material 2139 1 was deposited at the landfill; and particularly, I was 2 concerned about the piping related to the tanks, because 3 that would conceivably be hazardous waste and I didn't 4 want it disposed of in the landfill. The landfill wasn't 5 permitted for that. Or off-hauled somewhere else. 6 Q At that point, you were missing tank 7 piping onto the landfill? 8 A Right. Well, that was the representation 9 to me, that everything except the tank went to the 10 landfill. 11 Q That's why you contacted the landfill? 12 You were looking for the pipe? 13 A Exactly. 14 Q You didn't think the tank was there? 15 A No. 16 Q Okay. At that morning meeting, were 17 either David Mason or Robert Womack present? 18 A I don't believe so, no. 19 Q Why did you have a meeting again at noon 20 with similar parties, plus Mr. Mason and Mr. Womack, if 21 you know? 22 A Well, I think they wanted -- there was 23 concern that they wanted more assurances that what was 24 going to be done, how this was going to be handled. 25 Q Okay. 2140 1 A And also, I think, just to get their side 2 of things. 3 Q And who was present at that meeting? 4 A Again, it was Supervisors Bamert, 5 Escamilla, Gary Clark, myself, Mr. Mason, Mr. Womack and 6 Mr. Israel. 7 Q And no Connie Sherrill this time? 8 A No Connie Sherrill. 9 Q And did Mr. Mason or Mr. Womack make any 10 statements during this 12:00 meeting? 11 A Well, the question came up, what was Mr. 12 Womack doing removing Mr. Mason's tank? And Mr. Mason 13 said that he had had approval -- permission to remove -- 14 demolish the building and remove the tanks. He said he 15 was unaware the tanks were going to be removed on 16 Saturday. 17 Mr. Womack indicated he was unaware of the 18 closure requirements and that he had required -- inquired 19 of both Mr. Clark and Mr. Israel of closure procedures. 20 Q At that time, noon, May 5th, which was 21 Tuesday, Womack told the Board of Supervisors, Yes, I 22 talked to Israel about this? 23 A Right. 24 Q He didn't recall that Israel said, You 25 need permits. 2141 1 A No. And again, I think, in fairness to 2 Mike, I know Mike would have said he needed to talk to me 3 as far as getting permitting. Since I run the program, I 4 would be issuing the permit. That's the logical thing to 5 do. 6 Q Okay. Did you discuss any of the safety 7 hazards? 8 A Yeah, we talked at length, in fact, about 9 the dangers of pulling tanks that had not been cleaned 10 and/or inerted. We discussed in great detail, in fact, 11 there had been several recent explosions of underground 12 tanks that had not been properly inerted. 13 Q These are real examples? 14 A Real examples. 15 Q Not Chicken Little, The sky is falling 16 stuff? 17 A These are real examples. There is one in, 18 I believe, Lincoln, and one down south that happened and 19 in the last six months. And people have been seriously 20 injured. Mr. Clark related a story where he had a gas 21 tank, small one, blow up on him years earlier. He had 22 some personal experience with the dangers of those gas 23 tanks. 24 Q Did you discuss the physical hazards of 25 leaving an open pit? 2142 1 A Yeah. I particularly was concerned about 2 this, in that we had a pit full of water. It was an 3 opaque color. Couldn't see the bottom of it. Possibly 4 contaminated fluids at this time. We didn't know. Right 5 by a sidewalk. And this is a major route for children 6 going to school. We had temporary plastic fencing up 7 there. 8 Q So both pedestrians, as well as vehicles? 9 A As vehicles, right. 10 I was more concerned with the small 11 children. Conceivably, one could fall in there, be 12 knocked unconscious and sit on the bottom of that pit. 13 And you wouldn't even know they were there. 14 Q Did it have plastic fence around it? 15 A It had plastic fencing. It was not that 16 secure. Even plastic fencing is not a good solution. 17 You need to have the hole filled in. That really is the 18 way to solve the problem. 19 Q Did you discuss whether or not sampling 20 had been done or requested by either Mason or Womack? 21 A I think I talked -- we talked about it. 22 And Mr. Womack stated it would take two weeks to get 23 sample results back. He said he talked to a laboratory, 24 a Sparge laboratory. I wasn't sure what he meant by 25 that. And it could take two weeks. 2143 1 Again, we talked about other 2 alternatives. Supervisor Escamilla suggested I attempt 3 to see if there is another method of sampling the fluid 4 at a more timely manner. 5 I was able to locate a Sparger 6 Laboratories in the yellow pages and called them up and 7 determined they could get a courier out that day to get a 8 sample, and we could get results back the next day. 9 Q Did Mr. Womack or Mr. Mason make any 10 comments regarding, around noon on the 5th, the location 11 of the underground storage tanks and/or where the 12 dispensers and other types of underground storage tank 13 equipment had been taken? 14 A Right. Well, Mr. Womack indicated that 15 the dispensers were disposed of at the Bossi ranch. He 16 invited us up to take a look, said they were there. He 17 said he was sure whoever took the tank -- excuse me. 18 That is later. Getting ahead of myself. 19 Mr. Mason indicated that the tanks were 20 transported to Owens Illinois. He said Mason indicated 21 they were interested in using the tanks since there is a 22 bad tank at Owens Illinois. 23 I only know of one tank at Owens 24 Illinois. It's under permit. It's a double-walled 25 tank. It's doing just fine. 2144 1 Q Later that day, did you -- were you 2 present when sampling was done? 3 A Yes, I was. 4 Q And that sampling would have been at 505 5 Sutter? 6 A 505 Sutter, right. 7 Q And again, Sparger came out? 8 A Yes, by courier from Sparger Laboratories 9 came out and took a sample. 10 Q Was Mason on site? 11 A I don't recall. I don't think so. I 12 think it was just Mr. Womack. 13 Q And in here, you made a note that Mr. 14 Womack paid for the sampling. Did you see him pay for it 15 with a check? 16 A Yes, I did. I saw him write what appeared 17 to be a check. I did not actually see the check. 18 Q At that time, did he provide you any 19 weight tags for debris to the landfill? 20 A Yes, he did. Again, this is a follow-up 21 on our earlier conversations, Where did all this material 22 go? I was attempting to kind of after the fact acquire 23 the documentation to determine where it went. And he did 24 provide me with tags. 25 Q And he said, Look, here are the weight 2145 1 tags. All of it went to the landfill. 2 A All of it went to the landfill. That's 3 all I have. 4 Q I'm sorry. Did you get that? 5 A I am talking fast, too. I know. 6 Q Did he actually say all of the material 7 went to the landfill? Or did he say some of it went to 8 the landfill, some of it went to Sherrill, some of it 9 went to Georgia Pacific? 10 A No. It was more, Here are the weight tags 11 for the material that went to the landfill. There were 12 no statements to the effect, you know, that's all the 13 material. The implication was clear that everything went 14 to the landfill. Here are the weight tags for it. But I 15 don't think it was, like, really declarative. 16 Q This has been marked Grand Jury Exhibit 17 116. 18 Mr. Fourt, do you recognize this binder? 19 A I don't know if I recognize the binder. 20 Q The materials inside the binder? 21 A I recognize the materials inside the 22 binder, yes. 23 Q Everybody is a lawyer. 24 A You scare me. 25 This looks like -- just off the top of my 2146 1 head, it looks like the -- a copy of the Jackson Exxon 2 files from our office. 3 Q Okay. And Amador Environmental Health, 4 505 AEHD, pages 01 through 445, minus any pages that we 5 have taken out for the Grand Jury up to this date. Is 6 that your understanding? 7 A That -- 8 Q Close? 9 A Close, yes. It appears to be a copy of 10 the... 11 Q A couple months ago or so we asked for 12 your entire file on 505, correct? 13 A Right. 14 Q And to the best of your knowledge -- 15 A Right. 16 Q -- during this week of May 2nd, 3rd, 4th 17 and 5th, did you review that file to see if there was 18 known contamination at that site? 19 A Yes, I did. 20 Q Okay. And you knew there was 21 contamination at the site and results came back from 22 Sparger? 23 A That's correct. 24 Q And those were preliminary reports? 25 A It was a faxed copy; it was not a hard 2147 1 copy. But I believe the data, itself, was finalized. 2 They had done the analysis and interpretation. 3 Q That's from the water in the pit on May 4 5th? 5 A That's correct. 6 Q Not the water in the pit May 2nd, because 7 you weren't present on May 2nd to know what happened to 8 that water? 9 A That's true. And in fairness, I don't 10 know firsthand what amount of water was in the pit on May 11 2nd. 12 Q Correct. Because you weren't there? 13 A Because I wasn't there. This is from May 14 5th. 15 Q A normal underground storage tank pull, 16 what part of the underground storage tank pull are you 17 present on? 18 A I like -- ideally, I am present for the 19 inertion of the tank, verification that tank has been 20 inerted and is not a safety hazard; removal of the tank; 21 inspection of the tank after removal to see if there is 22 obvious holes; manifesting of tank; placing tank on a 23 bed. I direct the permit number sprayed on the back of 24 the tank in a couple locations so it's obvious, in fact, 25 this tank has been pulled under permit. 2148 1 I also like at that point to direct a soil 2 sampling, soil and/or groundwater sampling, of the 3 material below the tank to determine, in fact, if there 4 has been a release. 5 And then I also document the chain of 6 custody, that the samples are properly preserved. Need 7 to be kept cold. There is history of people taking 8 samples and letting them sit in the sun for a couple 9 hours, at which time, if there is any contamination, you 10 are not going to see it. This is to make sure everything 11 is handled properly. Typically, driven in a brass 12 sleeve, Teflon coating put over the sleeves, cap put on 13 them, properly labeled, and immediately put into an ice 14 cooler so they stay cold. And then they are transferred 15 to the laboratory. 16 Q Okay. And you have seen a couple of 17 videos regarding the underground storage tank pull at 18 505, correct? 19 A That's correct. 20 Q The way the waste water was handled, was 21 that pursuant to standard operating procedures? 22 A No, that's not -- you don't try to make 23 more of a problem than you have. 24 Q Okay. 25 A If you know you have a problem, you don't 2149 1 kind of spread it around until you increase the mass of 2 material you going to have to deal with. You try to keep 3 it as localized as you can. 4 Q Same thing with the width of the bucket 5 and overexcavation? 6 A Exactly. 7 Q You have a second job, correct? 8 A That's correct. 9 Q And that's as a consultant? 10 A That's correct. 11 Q And some of the things you consult in -- 12 or all you consult in the environmental field? 13 A 90 percent of them. I do some water 14 quality or water supply issues. 15 Q Okay. And so preliminary reports come 16 back with concentrations of gasoline, volatile aromatic 17 hydrocarbons, MTBE. The volatile aromatic hydrocarbons, 18 are those called BTEX? 19 A Benzene, Toluene, Ethyl benzene and 20 Xylene. 21 Q MTBE oxygenates added to reduce amount 22 of -- 23 A That's correct. 24 Q Did these results come back from Sparger? 25 A They did. 2150 1 Q Did that preclude you from disposing of 2 this water from May 5th in Jackson Creek? 3 A Yes, it did. There were -- typically, you 4 have got a pristine -- you have got a pristine creek 5 here. The Regional Board water quality standards would 6 not allow anything that would be detected as far as 7 artificial contaminant to go into that creek. We were -- 8 we would not be allowed to put that kind of material in 9 the creek. 10 Q And Fish and Game Code? 11 A And Federal Clean Water Act. 12 Q No petroleum? 13 A No petroleum. 14 Q And gasoline, volatile aromatic 15 hydrocarbons, MTBE, all considered petroleum-based? 16 A Petroleum-based, right. 17 Q Did you contact Public Works at the City 18 to decide if you could run it through the treatment 19 plant? 20 A I did. 21 Q And? 22 A They were reluctant to accept it because 23 they didn't have a large holding area and their discharge 24 is directly into Jackson Creek. 25 Q So they are a tertiary treatment plant 2151 1 directly into Jackson Creek, so their permit wouldn't 2 allow -- 3 A Not at all. The concern was, they weren't 4 sure they would be able to completely eliminate it going 5 into the creek. 6 Q Again, the Grand Jurors are going to have 7 a question on this, Mr. Fourt. 8 A Sure. 9 Q At some point, because of what types of 10 concerns, did you decide to go ahead and ask the County 11 septage ponds to take the waste water? 12 A Well, I was trying to find a home for it, 13 someplace it would be treated and not cause a problem. 14 The septage pond is a lined pond. It's part of a Class 2 15 facility with a liner. I knew it was treated -- and then 16 once it had been treated there, in fact, it was run over 17 to Sutter Creek treatment plant. 18 There is at least two stages of treatment. 19 The pond, itself, is quite large. There's going to be a 20 large dilution factor. Also, very high biologic activity 21 and certain amount of aeration going on so the compounds 22 would break down. 23 Q Okay. Did you then get permission from 24 Amador Solid Waste to go ahead and take the waste water? 25 A Yes, I did. 2152 1 Q At that time -- 2 A Okay. 3 Q -- did you speak to Mr. Dennis Grady about 4 what happened with the piping? 5 A Yes, I did. 6 Q And that's if the piping ever went there? 7 A They indicated they had -- as soon as I 8 called them, they got rather upset and they attempted to 9 isolate what they thought was the piping. And they 10 indicated it's -- at one time, they had something set 11 aside. It did not turn out to be the piping. But they 12 were really concerned about it. And they were -- they 13 attempted to determine what was possibly the piping. It 14 was set aside. 15 Q Okay. Although you have been to the site 16 numerous occasions, you are not sure as of today's date 17 that the -- or are you sure today that the piping from 18 the dispenser island to the tank has been removed? 19 A No, I did not see it removed. It's 20 possible that it's still there. 21 Q Okay. Because you have seen the video 22 where they are cutting the underground storage tank 23 piping off? 24 A Right. 25 Q Late in the evening of Saturday, May 2nd, 2153 1 correct? 2 A Right. And when I have seen the site 3 physically, it was covered with pea gravel. There were 4 no pipes sticking out. I did not witness the removal of 5 the piping, so I can't say. 6 Q But it appears from the video that the 7 piping was still in the ground at the point the tank was 8 coming out of the ground? 9 A Exactly. Whether they went out and pulled 10 it out later, I can't say. 11 Q Okay. Did you ever try to get ahold of 12 Owens Illinois to determine if the underground storage 13 tank was present at the Owens Illinois facility? 14 A I mentioned it, yes. I called Mr. Joses 15 I think the next day or so. He did call me back and say 16 he had no knowledge of the tank. 17 Q If you could check your notes May 6th 18 around noon and 1:00. 19 A Okay. Let's see. May 6th. Yeah. He 20 said -- again, 1:00 p.m., Mr. Joses called back and 21 stated there had not been any underground tanks moved 22 onto the Owens Illinois property. Again, earlier, he 23 said he was out sick and he was unaware and he was going 24 to check. 25 Q Okay. Again, now we are at May 6th in the 2154 1 afternoon. 2 Did you arrange with Mr. Womack or Mr. 3 Mason to have the pit water hauled off and the pit 4 filled? 5 A That was Mr. Womack. 6 Q Okay. And you personally were in contact 7 with Mr. Robert Womack? 8 A Yes. 9 Q Okay. And sometime that afternoon, did 10 the contaminated waste water get pumped off and hauled 11 off? 12 A Yes, it did. I wasn't totally comfortable 13 with how it was done; but I was more concerned about 14 solving an immediate problem in as safe a manner as 15 possible. 16 Q Okay. And so how -- 17 A The water was pumped into a Sherrill 18 watering truck, I guess, that handles the water for 19 providing dust control at construction sites. And that 20 was pumped using a trash pump up into the truck and then 21 the truck was hauled off to the landfill. The truck went 22 to the landfill and discharged the water into the septage 23 pit. 24 Q Was someone present who was a third party 25 sampler? 2155 1 A Yes, there was. 2 Q And who would that have been? 3 A Mr. Steve Buckley, geological -- 4 Geotechnical Research and Development. 5 Q Okay. And if you remember, about how many 6 truckloads were hauled off to the septage pond that 7 afternoon? 8 A Yeah, I am looking here. Seems to me it 9 was like two or three, and another one done the next 10 morning. But my notes would tell me better. I wrote -- 11 I recall that the first load left before I got there, 12 and then we pumped a second load. Actually, then took a 13 sample and then another load was pumped, and then they 14 did another load the next morning. Looks like three 15 loads, according to my notes. 16 Q Okay. Were you having conversations with 17 Mr. Womack that day? 18 A Yes. 19 Q Okay. Did he mention where the 20 underground storage tank had been? Or was? 21 A No. Again, after I had informed him that 22 Mr. Joses did not know where the tank was, Mr. Womack 23 stated he did not know who had the tanks. He stated an 24 unknown truck had driven up to the side of the station. 25 Mr. Wolin had loaded the truck. Mr. Womack had secured 2156 1 the truck. 2 Q Just a minute. If you could speak a 3 little more slowly for the court reporter? I have been 4 doing that to her for two weeks. 5 I need to know that afternoon if Mr. Mason 6 was also present. 7 A Yes, he was. He was present. 8 Q So you informed both Mr. Mason and Mr. 9 Womack at the same time that Mr. Joses says -- 10 A I can't find the tank, you know. What's 11 going on? Again, I am still trying to, you know, 12 retroactively fill in the pieces here and see if we can 13 kind of go forward on this. 14 Then I got the story of the truck drove 15 off in the rain and nobody knew who it was. 16 Q Was Mr. Sherrill present when this story 17 was being told, if you recall? 18 A He was on site. I don't know if he was 19 actually right there at that time. But he was he 20 definitely on site. He was -- he may have not actually 21 heard the story at that time since he was running the 22 backhoe. 23 Q Okay. So Mr. Womack is telling you about 24 the unknown truck at the side of the station? 25 A Right. Exactly. He loaded -- Mr. Wolin 2157 1 loaded the tank onto the truck. Mr. Womack secured the 2 loads. Someone put dry ice in. The truck drove off. 3 He didn't recognize the truck or the 4 driver. It was dark. It was raining. They didn't use 5 combustible gas indicator to determine if the tank was 6 explosive. That was all the information he had on the 7 truck. It was, you know, somebody came and picked it up. 8 Q Okay. At that time, was something going 9 awry with the water at the Amador County landfill? 10 A Yeah. I actually -- things were going 11 good. This is kind of like I hoped things would go. I 12 had written brief scope of work saying, This is what we 13 are going to do. This is how we are going to do it. 14 My intent was to give a copy to the driver 15 before he left with the first load to hand it to the 16 people at the landfill. The driver took off before I got 17 there. He got to the landfill. They wouldn't accept it 18 because they didn't have my letter. 19 Q Okay. 20 A So at that point, I got a call -- Tim Hall 21 from our office drove up and said, The landfill has been 22 calling back here to us wanting to know what is going 23 on. 24 And we were able to get through on his car 25 phone to indicate that, yes, this was an acceptable 2158 1 disposal for that material. Go ahead and let them 2 dispose of it. 3 Q Did anyone else drive up -- 4 A Connie Sherrill drove up at this time. 5 And apparently -- I didn't know who she was. I had met 6 her for the first time as Planning Commissioner the day 7 before. She drives up. And apparently, she is related 8 to the people working on the site and she inquires what 9 is going on. 10 The truck is held up at the landfill. And 11 I was kind of taken aback by all this and kind of said, 12 Here is where we are. Here is how we are handling it. 13 Things are moving forward. 14 Q Okay. So you have one load of water gone. 15 Is the water coming back in because it's groundwater? 16 A The level was down. It was being pumped 17 down. That doesn't mean it wasn't groundwater, but we 18 were pulling it out faster than it was coming in. 19 Q Did you attempt to take a sample? 20 A We did. We were hoping to get down below 21 the pea gravel and with the backhoe. And we were unable 22 to do that. 23 Q Could you describe to the Members of the 24 Grand Jury your observations of the sample event. 25 A Oh, okay. We were trying to -- again, we 2159 1 dug down there to see if we could take -- when we dug 2 down into what appeared to be bedrock below it, there was 3 kinds of a boil that would come up. It was kind of a 4 dark brown oily sheen that would roil up through the 5 water. 6 Again, the water is kind of a pale green 7 opaque. You can't see through it. It's there. And we 8 would dig down. You get this kind of a brown oily 9 material that would kind of bubble up through it behind 10 the backhoe bucket. 11 Q When the backhoe struck -- 12 A When it struck it and came back up. When 13 we disturbed it, a boil of what appeared to be 14 contamination. 15 Q Did everybody -- were you standing next to 16 or near Mr. Womack when this -- 17 A Oh, yes. Everybody saw it. Everybody saw 18 it. 19 Q Did Mr. Womack make -- 20 A Mr. Womack saw it. 21 Q -- comments? 22 A No, he didn't say much. He just kind of 23 ignored it. Mr. Buckley certainly commented on it and 24 was aware of it. 25 Q Okay. And then after you took the 2160 1 second -- or after you had them take the second 3,000 2 gallon loads, were they actually bringing in crushed rock 3 at that point? 4 A Yes. That was kind of the intent, was -- 5 that is why we went through the exercise in the first 6 place. I didn't want to put a bunch of crushed rock to 7 displace the water so it flows out of the pit into the 8 storm drain into the creek. That was my other worry. I 9 don't want the water coming into the creek. 10 The idea was to pump water down, bring in 11 crushed rock at the same time, build the level of the 12 rock up above the level of the water. Eliminate the 13 safety hazard; at the same time, not put water into the 14 creek. 15 Q That's what was done? 16 A That's what was done, right. 17 Q Okay. And then the pit was full. The 18 best sample that could have been taken was taken? 19 A Right. 20 Q It wasn't actually a soil sample? 21 A No, it wasn't. We improvised. That was 22 not clearly the intent. There was no soil down there 23 that we could find. 24 Q Okay. So you took a surface water sample? 25 A Surface water sample, right. 2161 1 Q That would have been GRD? 2 A GRD took that, that's correct. 3 Q And that was May 6th afternoon. 4 Between May 6th afternoon and the next May 5 13th, were there other series of meetings or anything 6 related to finding the underground storage tank that you 7 recall? 8 A Not that I was -- there was a certain 9 amount of in-house meetings. This is very strange what 10 is going on. But there was nothing that I was really 11 following up on at this time. 12 Q Then the next meeting on May 13th? 13 A Yes. Again, Mr. Womack, Mr. Israel, 14 myself, discussed the site. We had the GRD report back 15 in. And I mentioned that, since there was -- appeared to 16 be a groundwater impact, the case was being referred to 17 the Regional Board for oversight. Amador County is 18 responsible for the tank program and kind of minor 19 spillage. If it's just soil contamination and doesn't 20 appear to be affecting groundwater, we will address it 21 and kind of oversee the cleanup. 22 If it appears to be affecting 23 groundwater -- and most cases up here are -- we refer to 24 it the Regional Board. They have the time and expertise 25 to oversee it. And they have the ultimate final 2162 1 authority on how clean is clean as far as groundwater 2 cleanups. And we are a small county, only limited 3 resources. So we try to limit as to what areas we can 4 best effect and cover. 5 Q During that meeting at 9:00 a.m. on May 6 13th, it was just you, Michael Israel and Robert Womack? 7 A That's correct. 8 Q No Dave Mason? 9 A No Dave Mason. 10 Q Okay. Did Mr. Womack let you know what he 11 had learned about the missing underground storage tanks? 12 A He indicated that he had not determined 13 the location of the tanks, and he was also -- just 14 expressed his bewilderment as to why there was any 15 concern about the tanks. He didn't consider it a big 16 deal. 17 And then Mr. Israel mentioned that the 18 fact that the fate of the tanks is covered by State law. 19 You can't just haul them out and leave them anywhere. We 20 were also concerned about the fact that the tanks would 21 be reused without permit. 22 Q Reused, including above ground or below 23 ground? 24 A Above ground or below ground, that's 25 correct. And being unpermitted, you know, the potential 2163 1 was there to create a whole new contamination site. You 2 put these tanks somewhere not being permitted and not 3 being properly handled, they could have been damaged in 4 transit. There is no oversight to see that they -- 5 weren't properly tested -- weren't leaking. We were 6 afraid they would go back in the ground or be used above 7 ground somewhere and we would have another contamination 8 site we wouldn't know anything about. It would be a way 9 to have a bag, bad problem and make it worse. 10 Q At that time, did you inform Mr. Womack 11 the case was being referred to the Land Use Committee? 12 A Yes. There was a concern, since we were 13 unable to recover the tank. And we were looking for 14 direction on the next step to go forward. We took it to 15 the Land Use Committee, which is an arm of the Board of 16 Supervisors, for direction on how to proceed with any 17 kind of enforcement action or additional investigation. 18 Q And that was the next day? 19 A That's correct. 20 Q Okay. And did you bring the Land Use 21 meeting minutes with you today? 22 A I have them here, yes. 23 Q Were you present at that meeting? 24 A Yes, I was. 25 Q Members of the Grand Jury have gone 2164 1 through this once. But essentially, you have reviewed 2 this document recently? 3 A Well, when I was first scheduled to 4 testify about a week and a half ago. 5 Q Okay. At that time, did you think it was 6 a fair representation of who was present and what was 7 discussed? 8 A Yes. 9 Q Okay. Did you actually give a brief 10 presentation to the Land Use Committee? 11 A Yes, I did. Just as kind of reviewing the 12 events of early May. 13 Q Did you talk about that it was done not 14 only without a permit, but that it created a potential 15 for explosion next to a school? 16 A Yes, potential explosion. And again, I 17 discussed the issue of the open pit full of water and the 18 threats there. 19 Q And the sheen of petroleum? 20 A Yes. 21 Q Okay. And then did you discuss that you 22 had actually met with Mr. Mason to discuss the specific 23 site in the not so distant past? 24 A Yes, I did. And I reviewed the whole 25 history, just like I did here, on how we had attempted to 2165 1 permit the tank and the status of the tank and the fact 2 that we had been working toward permitting it and 3 achieving compliance with the December '98. 4 Q If you remember, at this point, did you 5 know that Tallia had bid the job three weeks before the 6 tank was pulled? 7 A No, I did not. 8 Q You learned a lot of the information 9 subsequent to the referral to the District Attorney's 10 Office? 11 A Yes, right. 12 Q Were you present when Mr. Womack gave his 13 version of what the -- what happened that night? 14 A Yes, I did. 15 Q Okay. 16 A I was there, yes. Do you want me to 17 review? You have heard this, you know, the same -- he 18 indicated that he was interested in buying the site. And 19 part of the concern on buying it was that the tank had to 20 be removed. He was under the impression that he had no 21 responsibilities. Mr. Mason was the owner. And that his 22 attorney had drafted up an agreement relieving him of any 23 responsibility to the problem. He said he was going to 24 leave the tanks in the ground until it was determined 25 that they couldn't be filled with cement. And I guess 2166 1 there was a structural problem with building on top of 2 it. 3 He was then asked about checking the 4 soils. He said Dave Mason did not want to do that. 5 He was asked about the current location of 6 the tanks. And he said he didn't know. He said the 7 pumps were out at the Bossi Ranch and the piping and 8 building materials were taken to the County landfill. He 9 said he gave the tanks to someone, and he was sure that 10 person would come back for the pumps, at which point, he 11 could talk to them and we would find out where the tank 12 went. 13 Q Did he actually say Fred Graves from the 14 Highway Patrol was on site when the truck hauled off the 15 tank? 16 A I don't remember hearing the name Fred 17 Graves. I certainly remember he said there was CHP on 18 site, as well as city police. 19 Q Okay. And then a decision was made by the 20 Land Use Committee to refer the case to the District 21 Attorney's Office? 22 A That's correct. 23 Q And since May 18th or so, you have worked 24 closely with Ron Hall and myself to try and determine 25 location of the soil, location of the tank, location of 2167 1 the piping? 2 A Yes. 3 Q And to work this case up to try to 4 determine what actually happened on May 2nd through May 5 8th? 6 A Right, that's correct. Again, I still -- 7 you know more than I do. I just have bits and pieces of 8 this. I have just done my small part of this. 9 Q Okay. Recently, you had a discussion with 10 David Sterling Mason III, correct? 11 A I have had several, yes. Mr. Mason works 12 as the area manager for Toms Sierra and they have several 13 other facilities in the county that are currently either 14 going through the tank lining and upgrading process I 15 talked about or in the process of being closed. So yes, 16 I do deal with Mr. Mason. 17 Q And on the 505 site recently, some sample 18 locations have been discussed for the remediations? 19 A Yes. The GRD submitted a work plan to the 20 Regional Board which was approved, which involved the 21 drilling of three monitoring wells to determine the 22 direction of groundwater flow and possibly the extent of 23 the contamination. 24 I met with Mike Flynn of GRD and -- 25 actually, I met with Mr. Flynn of GRD at the site to kind 2168 1 of evaluate locations. There is some power lines the 2 drill rig has to stay away from. I also wanted to locate 3 the wells where they would provide the most information. 4 Amador County does provide permitting of 5 wells for the City of Jackson. So they were in the 6 process of getting an Amador County well permit, water 7 treatment permit. And my inspection was part of that 8 well application. 9 Q The work plan that was approved was the 10 one submitted by GRD in June of '98. Is that your 11 understanding? 12 A That's correct. To the Regional Board. 13 Q Grand Jury Exhibit 34. 14 A Right. 15 Q Okay. And so while you were on site that 16 day, did you have any conversations with Mr. Mason? 17 A Yes. We were again discussing the 18 locations with Mr. Flynn. Mr. Mason drove up and joined 19 the discussions. 20 Two of the wells have been relocated on 21 that property. The third one is going to be across the 22 street toward the creek. 23 And as a generalization, groundwater flows 24 downhill. We were looking to put a well downhill from 25 the point of the tank and the point of release, but 2169 1 before the creek. And we were kind of discussing where 2 that location would be. The intent was to put it in the 3 Swenson Shoes parking lot across the street over there. 4 And we were discussing that with Mr. Swenson and Mr. 5 Mason, Mr. Flynn and myself. And as part of that 6 conversation, the whole process that we are now 7 undergoing kind of came up in the discussion. 8 Q Go ahead. 9 A Okay. And Mr. Mason kind of indicated 10 that this was all very bad and that there would probably 11 be repercussions to County staff. I think he was 12 referring to Mr. Clark, Mr. Israel and myself. And he 13 even stated that I would probably -- I shouldn't say 14 "probably" -- may lose my job. I can't remember the 15 direct words, somewhere between probably and may, lose my 16 job as a result of this. Which kind of shocked me a 17 little bit. It was done not as a real threat, but more 18 like: You have already done it, and now this is going to 19 happen. 20 Q He was outlining the repercussions of your 21 past bad acts to you? 22 A Yes, of past actions. 23 Q Has he apologized for pulling tanks on the 24 weekend yet? 25 A No, he has not. But again, you got to 2170 1 remember, he didn't know anything about it. He wasn't 2 there. 3 Q This is what he told you? 4 A Yes, as far as I know. 5 Q But you have seen the Tallia bid 6 subsequent, haven't you? 7 A Yes. 8 Q That was three weeks before? 9 A That was three weeks before. 10 Q Has he ever explained that one to you? 11 A No. We have not talked about it. 12 Q You didn't take it as a threat, just a 13 words of wisdom type of thing? 14 A I didn't know quite how to take it. I 15 kind of looked at it like, It's too late now. You know, 16 I don't think I am going to change how I do things. I 17 don't know that he expected me to change my behavior in 18 any way; just, you know, Look what you have done. 19 Q He wanted to let you know? 20 A Yeah, exactly, that there would be 21 repercussions. 22 Q But he didn't outline what those would be? 23 A No. And I -- in fairness, I was making an 24 effort not to discuss this case or site with him in any 25 kind of detail. 2171 1 Q Do you remember if Mr. Mason made the 2 check on the after the fact permit? 3 A Yes, I do. 4 Q Do you remember if it was a check? 5 A I believe it was a check. 6 Q Okay. 7 A You know, that's something we haven't 8 checked out. We probably could. We probably have some 9 records on that. 10 Q This has been marked Grand Jury Exhibit 11 28. It has been referred to as the street file for the 12 City of Jackson. 13 The first document in the file, as it so 14 sits now, is a letter. Do you recognize the letterhead? 15 A Yes. It's the Amador County Health 16 Department, 108 Court Street. 17 Q Okay. 18 A Which was a precursor of the Environmental 19 Health Division. 20 Q Okay. 21 A And it is a County permit application for 22 a new installation of underground storage tank. 23 Q For 1988? 24 A 1988, That's correct. 25 Q Okay. In fairness to Mr. Mason and Mr. 2172 1 Womack, I haven't checked. Do you know if there was a 2 parallel removal permit from 1988? Or have you checked 3 your files for that? 4 A Mmmm... I believe there was. I would 5 have to -- again, I have to check. The file is here. It 6 should be. 7 Q We will take a break in a few minutes. 8 Maybe you could look for that. 9 What happens is, I will finish asking 10 questions. I will ask the Foreman to take a short break. 11 And then each Member of the Grand Jury can ask you 12 questions in writing. Okay? 13 A Okay. 14 Q Were you present with Jake Strom's 15 underground storage tank pull? 16 A Yes, I was. 17 Q Could you basically describe how that tank 18 pull played out and if you had any conversations with Mr. 19 Womack? 20 A Yes. Again, there was a fire at the 21 Dorado theater. I was called by Larry White the next 22 morning. They were doing some of the preliminary -- 23 starting to do the demolition and he said they had found 24 a suspicious looking pipe coming out of the ground. He 25 thought it might be related to an underground storage 2173 1 tank. 2 I said, That's a good observation. Go 3 ahead with the demolition of the billing, but kind of be 4 real careful and stay away from this area here and see if 5 we can determine whether it's a tank or not. They 6 proceeded to do that. 7 When it was determined it was a tank, a 8 closure permit was taken out. And we arranged for a 9 licensed contractor -- this was Robertson Enterprises 10 who, has an A and Haz Mat license -- to come in and 11 oversee the removal of the tank. 12 The material around the tank was pulled 13 off. We found out it was a tank. We lowered a stick 14 down into the tank to determine it was about half full, 15 between half and third full of fuel oil. And at that 16 time, we decided to be very careful in how we exposed the 17 tank. We arranged to have a truck come in and pump the 18 fuel off and then clean the tank. So the fuel was 19 removed from the tank. The tank was cleaned. 20 Q By Ramos? 21 A By Ramos Oil, correct. 22 Q Who is licensed? 23 A Licensed waste oil hauler. They are big 24 company out of West Sacramento. They do refinery recycle. 25 The tank was then further exposed and dry 2174 1 ice was brought in, put into the tank. And we put a lot 2 of dry ice into it. Some of the -- there was a little 3 bit of water was starting to come into the bottom from 4 the creek bed. Some of the dry ice was falling into the 5 water. We are getting bubbling fumes coming out of it. 6 It was quite exciting. 7 We then tested the interior of the tank 8 with the combustible gas indicator, indicated that the 9 oxygen had been driven out of the tank. The tank was 10 then pulled out of the -- removed by an excavator and 11 placed onto a flatbed truck and secured. We looked at 12 the tank for holes. There were a lot of holes inside the 13 top third of the tank. It looked like, in the winter, 14 Jackson Creek came halfway up the tank. The area above 15 where the oil was had holes inside it. The area below 16 did not. The oil was still there. But there were holes 17 inside the tank. 18 Again, the tank was placed on a flatbed 19 truck, strapped down. The permit number was sprayed on 20 the back and sides of the tank to indicate, in fact, it 21 was a permitted removal. And the tank was removed to a 22 licensed scrapping yard in Sacramento. 23 Q Okay. Were you present when Mr. Womack 24 came to the site? 25 A Yes. He was there with Larry White from 2175 1 City of Jackson. We were across the street. It was the 2 middle of the day. And he had a few comments. 3 Q To you and Mr. White? 4 A Yes. Basically, on how it was done and 5 the fact that Thorpe Oil could do the job for six, $700. 6 Q The whole thing? 7 A The whole thing. And he had offered that 8 service to Jake Strom. And he didn't understand, you 9 know, why he was doing it the hard way, and Thorpe could 10 give 'em a better deal. 11 Q This was his fault? 12 A This was his fault. 13 Q After all of this -- 14 A Right. 15 Q -- he was explaining to you and Mr. White 16 how you could do it the easy way? 17 A Thorpe knew what they were doing. Because 18 he knew Thorpe, he could get a good price on it. 19 Q He gave a number? 20 A Yes. Six, $700 is my memory. 21 Q Prior to the May incident, have you had 22 conversations with Mr. Mason regarding any of his other 23 properties? 24 A Oh, many, many conversations. 25 Q Compliance-related issues? 2176 1 A Compliance-related issues. 2 In fairness to Mr. Mason, at this time, he 3 was an employee of Toms Sierra, all the facilities except 4 this one. We were still sending letters. When I started 5 here, the tanks were not in compliance. They were 6 operating, but they had not been tested. 7 Typically, single-wall tests, you have to 8 do precision test on them every year to determine they 9 are not leaking. That means filling them up plus a 10 little more, seeing if it drops down, seeing if there is 11 a leak. They need to be tested every year. All of his 12 facilities were out of compliance being tested. 13 The other way you check for leaks, older 14 tanks, is, you do inventory reconciliation. You measure 15 very carefully the amount of material in the tank every 16 day, the amount that you are dispensing and the amount 17 that you bring in. And you come to a balance. 18 Q You are required by law -- 19 A These are all required by law. 20 Q Were they doing all of these things? 21 A No, they were not. 22 Q In fact, you have an interesting story 23 about the Ione station/card lock? 24 A Well, the first phase in getting the 25 program up was, we did a lot of talking over the phone 2177 1 and in letters on how they needed to do all these 2 things. Then we started going around and doing 3 inspections. And we would inspect the facilities. 4 One of the things you need to do in order 5 to do these accurate calibration of the amount of fuel, 6 you have to have a stick that has really fine-lined so 7 you can you measure down to a 16th of an inch so you can 8 determine exactly how much product you have at any one 9 time. You also need to have charts there. 10 Q Slow down, please. 11 A You also have to have charts so you can 12 take your measurement that you have made very precisely 13 and get a direct gallonage reading. That was a problem 14 on most of these facilities. They did not have the 15 correct sticks or the correct charts. 16 At the same time, also, we just go out and 17 inspect the facilities, see, How many tanks do you really 18 have? You know, do you have shut-offs? And at the Ione 19 facility, these were all underground tanks. Only way you 20 can tell they are there by vented pipes and fill pipes, 21 which have a metal cap in the grounds. 22 We were going around popping caps and 23 saying, Okay. Here is this one. It goes this way. It's 24 so long. And kind of figuring out the depth of it. And 25 there were a couple other little metal caps out there in 2178 1 the facility. And I asked -- I think it was one of the 2 Masons, What's this over here? And I was told it's an 3 electrical conduit. I said, Oh, okay, went on and did 4 something else. And kind of came back to it and popped 5 the top. It was a fill for another tank. It turns out 6 there were two additional tanks in the ground at the 7 facility that were not in use, as far as I know. We 8 stuck one of them. It was about six inches or more of 9 kind of a gooey liquid, you know, water-gas mixture at 10 the bottom of it. 11 Q Hazardous waste storage under California 12 law? 13 A Yeah. Yeah, that's probably how would it 14 be. Definitely hazardous waste. It's not a product. 15 Yeah, you are right. 16 Q Did you mention to them earlier that they 17 had told you it was just electrical? Or did you just 18 not -- 19 A I didn't push it too hard. I was trying 20 to get them to do things. I didn't want to get them mad 21 at me. That was there. I wrote it up. I made notes on 22 it. I wrote a letter saying: You got two abandoned 23 tanks there you need to take care of. 24 Q They got permits to pull them out? 25 A No. Still there. The existing tanks, as 2179 1 part of the upgrade requirement, were going to be pulled 2 at the end of the year. At that time, they would take 3 care of the other tanks. 4 Q Told you in writing or over the phone? 5 A Just verbally. No, there has been no 6 action on those tanks yet. 7 Q When the tanks showed up at Jim Thorpe 8 Oil, if the tanks showed up at Jim Thorpe Oil, did Mr. 9 Mason or Mr. Womack call you and ask you how Amador 10 County wanted that tank dealt with? 11 A No, they did not. 12 Q Did they ever tell you they were 13 instructed by Ron Hall and/or myself to call Bob Fourt? 14 A I never heard anything at all on the tank. 15 Q Does it surprise that you that, four 16 months after the tank had been pulled out of the ground, 17 that there would be an LEL of almost non-detect in a tank 18 that had been pulled without a permit May 2nd? 19 A No. Again, I have no idea what's been 20 done to that tanks since then. They may have been rinsed 21 several times and sitting in the hot sun all summer 22 baking somewhere. 23 Q Combination of above? 24 A Combination of both. No. No, it doesn't 25 surprise me. In all fairness, I would like to know who 2180 1 took the LEL readings. 2 Q Oh, we have a letter. 3 A Oh, we have a letter? Okay. I wasn't 4 aware of this. 5 Q We can't tell you what the Grand Jury 6 learns, Mr. Fourt. 7 A I understand that. Hence, my surprise. 8 But an LEL, even though a reasonably 9 sensitive instrument, it's possible to make mistakes and 10 misread them, too. 11 Q Grand Jury Exhibit 14. 12 A Okay. My only comment on this is that I 13 would have liked to see, in addition to the -- the -- it 14 says undetectable hydrocarbons. No, that doesn't tell me 15 what the LEL -- that doesn't tell me what the LEL is. It 16 tells me what total hydrocarbons and oxygen is. It 17 doesn't tell me LEL. 18 Q That letter is dated what? 19 A November 12th. 20 Q Over six months -- 21 A And again, just looking at it, I would 22 have liked to see what the LEL is on each compartment. I 23 would have liked to see what the oxygen content of each 24 compartment is. I would have liked to see what the parts 25 per million. To me, even six months later, still 2181 1 incomplete. 2 Q Hypothetically, you would have liked to 3 have been called before? 4 A Oh, yeah. 5 Q Maybe when Ron Hall and myself told -- 6 A If nothing else, I would have liked a call 7 saying, We are going to be testing the tank. What would 8 you like to see? 9 Q So in a perfect world, if you were to 10 receive a call on April 30th from Bob Womack or David 11 Mason, what procedures would you have told them to follow 12 before they pulled the underground storage tank at 505 13 Sutter? 14 A Come in. Get a permit. Tell us again how 15 you are going to be handling -- who is going to be 16 rinsing the tank? How are you going to handle the 17 rinsate? Where is it going to go? Who is going to be 18 pulling the tank? Are they licensed to do this? 19 Q Everything in your permit application? 20 A Everything in the permit application. 21 Q Prior to pulling the tank. 22 A Prior to pulling the tank. 23 The goal is not to get into these 24 situations like we had on Monday, where we have pits full 25 of water. The idea is to pre-plan all this in 2182 1 excruciating detail, so that if anything doesn't go quite 2 according to, you know, how you plan it, it's not a big 3 deal. We are ready for it. 4 The Strom tank pull was not perfect. It 5 was actually kind of ugly. But because we had kind of 6 pre-planned for everything, we were able to still muddle 7 through. I don't know if you have gone through there and 8 seen, there is a large black tank sitting over there. 9 The same kind of thing. We had water in a pit next to a 10 creek. It wasn't right in a public walkway where we had 11 kids falling into it. We still couldn't pump it into a 12 creek. 13 In this case, because we had done a lot of 14 pre-planning and we had a contractor who was skilled in 15 dealing with these kind of problems, he was able to 16 arrange to have that water pumped into a tank and then 17 tested. We haven't gotten the test results back yet. At 18 that time, we will determine what to do with it. 19 Q As opposed to spreading it all over the 20 soil? 21 A Yeah. And/or have a problem. 22 We have got it now in a tank. It's safe. 23 It's not going anywhere. It's behind a cyclone fence. 24 We have got time. There is no emergency here. You know, 25 we have got 90 days, if it's hazardous, to deal with it. 2183 1 We have got time, you know, to plan how we are going to 2 handle it. We can shop around and find the best place to 3 treat it, if it needs to be treated. 4 Q So $100 permit and licensed tank remover 5 company and this thing would have gone away in May of 6 '98? 7 A Probably, the contamination would still be 8 there and have to be dealt with. But other than that, 9 no. It would have been a relatively straightforward 10 procedure. 11 Q So $400,000 and the closing the highway 12 for a month -- that's probably not accurate? 13 A No, not at all. With the way they did it 14 on the highway, I couldn't see why the City of Jackson 15 wouldn't have allowed them to do that for a couple of 16 hours, which is all they would have needed to pull the 17 tank. 18 Q So in your opinion, it probably wouldn't 19 have cost around $400,000 and had one lane of Highway 49 20 closed for a month? 21 A No, not at all. 22 It you could have exposed the tank, rinsed 23 the tank, had your truck parked on Rex for the rinsate, 24 pulled that off, inerted the tank, pulled it, set it on 25 the ground to look at it. Again, bring your truck that 2184 1 you are going to load it on down on Rex, load it on there 2 and pull it out of there. Minimal disruption. 3 Q I probably don't need to do this. But a 4 few weeks ago, I asked you for cost up through the date, 5 whatever it was, September. And that number, if you 6 recall? 7 A It was in the range of $5,000. 8 Q So it's not $100,000? 9 A No, not at all. And there has been some 10 work since then. Obviously, I haven't spent a lot of 11 time preparing for this. 12 Q Do you know of any other illegal 13 underground storage tank pulls since you have been in 14 Amador County? 15 A No, not a one. 16 Q Do you know of any other missing 17 underground storage tanks since you have been in Amador 18 County? 19 A No. Now, in fairness, if you drive around 20 on the back roads, there are several tanks sitting up on 21 the ground. I have no idea how they got there. 22 Q They may have once been underground? 23 A They may have been at one time. I don't 24 have any idea where they came from. 25 I found one place down on Blue Sky Drive 2185 1 underground tank being used for fire suppression. I 2 wrote the owner a letter month and a half ago: Where did 3 the tank come from you are using? He hasn't responded 4 back. 5 It's okay to use tanks for fire 6 suppression if they are properly cleaned and you know 7 where they are going to. We need to track 'em. You 8 know, I mean, there is -- it's okay to reuse these tanks 9 if they are in condition to be reused. But we have to 10 know where they are. I don't want to have somebody 11 come -- if somebody calls up and says, Where was this 12 tank? I found a tank. I want to be able to go back: 13 Here it is. Here is where it went. Here is the history. 14 Q It was triple rinsed, things along those 15 lines? 16 A Exactly. 17 Q Did Amador County Environmental Health 18 give Mr. Womack or Mr. Mason a permit to pull the 19 underground storage tanks? 20 A Well, the application was filled out. A 21 permit was never issued. Permission was never granted. 22 Q That was after the fact? 23 A After the fact. 24 Q At this time -- oh, here is a question. 25 Did you ever see a posted reward for the return of the 2186 1 underground storage tank? 2 A No, I did not. 3 Q You did see it in the newspaper? 4 A Yes, I did. But then I was looking for 5 it. 6 Q September -- did you figure that out? We 7 have a calendar here? You said it was the Tuesday Gold 8 Mine? 9 A It comes out Tuesday night, at least, to 10 my house, Sutter Creek. That's where it comes in Tuesday 11 night. 12 Q And that was September 9th Gold Mine? 13 A Yes. 14 Q We will mark this since you saved it. 15 Okay. You have heard that the underground 16 storage tank was returned before the ad came out in the 17 paper for the first time? 18 A I think you had mentioned it turned up 19 Tuesday morning. 20 Q The 8th of September? 21 A Right. 22 Q If that was the 8th. 23 A I believe that's correct. 24 Q And this is the Gold Mine article that you 25 cut out of the paper? 2187 1 A Yes. 2 Q Dated September 9th, Wednesday? 3 A September 9th, yes. 4 Q And you think Wednesday, September 9th, 5 papers come out Tuesday? 6 A They -- they are delivered at my house in 7 Sutter Creek. And I have a delivery. It comes in 8 Tuesday evening, usually about 9:00. 9 Q And the date on this check on Grand Jury 10 Exhibit 5? 11 A Is the 7th. 12 Q Of? 13 A Of -- September 7th, 1998. 14 MR. IREY: At this time, I have no further 15 questions for Mr. Fourt. Again, if we could take a short 16 break, Mr. Fourt could skim through his records. But 17 also, the Grand Jurors could come up with their 18 questions, and I would be happy to ask those of Mr. 19 Fourt. 20 THE FOREPERSON: Okay. That's fine. 21 Mr. Fourt, I will remind you, you are 22 still under the same admonition I read to you earlier. 23 So at this time, you are excused. We will -- about 24 3:35? Twelve, thirteen minutes. Is that sufficient 25 time? 2188 1 THE WITNESS: I need to leave? 2 THE FOREPERSON: Yes. 3 Okay. The same admonition applies for 4 this recess. We will meet back here again at 3:35. 5 We are off the record. 6 (Recess taken from 3:22 to 3:35 p.m.) 7 THE FOREPERSON: We are on the record. 8 MR. IREY: Mr. Robert Fourt. 9 Mr. Fourt, could you read your box of 10 records into the record? 11 THE FOREPERSON: Mr. Fourt, I will remind you, 12 your still under oath. 13 Q BY MR. IREY: Mr. Fourt, were you able to 14 find any 1988 underground storage tank closure permits? 15 A Yes, I was. I think I flagged them in the 16 binder. 17 Q You have the original in your County file? 18 A Yes, I do. 19 Q And that's for 505 Sutter? 20 A Yes. 21 Q These County files are public record? 22 A Yes, they are. 23 Q And public records requests -- or you just 24 can come and say, Can I see your file? 25 A Pretty much, you can come and see 'em. 2189 1 They are available. If you are going to be requiring a 2 lot of County time and/or copies, we sometimes will 3 charge a fee to recover our costs. 4 Q Okay. And so, to your knowledge, has Mr. 5 Mason or Mr. Womack come in to review those files? 6 A No, they have not. 7 Q And would you be the person that actually 8 answers the public record requests? 9 A I am the primary person that would answer 10 the public records request. I am certainly not the only 11 one. 12 Q Okay. Would there be notations in the 13 file if someone made a public records request? 14 A Not necessarily. 15 Q So have you checked around work and made a 16 determination whether or not there was a public records 17 request made for the 505 file at any time up to today's 18 date? 19 A No, I have not. However, if there was, I 20 am sure I would have been told about it. Just since 21 people know I am working on the file. 22 Q And you have not to this date been told -- 23 A I have not. 24 Q -- that either Mr. Mason or Mr. Womack has 25 requested to review the file? 2190 1 A That's correct. I have not been so 2 informed. 3 Q The file for a 505 Sutter Street has 4 information regarding the contamination that exists at 5 site, correct? 6 A That's correct. 7 Q It would be apparent to anyone who 8 reviewed the file there were some past problems at the 9 site? 10 A Yes. 11 Q That's basically the green binder that I 12 have previously marked Grand Jury Exhibit 116? 13 A Yes. That information is in there. Not 14 only have there been tank removals and soil samplings 15 conducted with those removals, but I believe also 16 additional soil borings conducted. 17 Q Both of these 1988 tank closure documents 18 that you have handed to me bear some signature for David 19 S. Mason. Is that your understanding? 20 A That's my understanding, yes. 21 Q One of them for the removal of 1,000 22 gallon underground storage tank dated July 19th, '88. 23 That's 505 Sutter? 24 A Yes, that's correct. 25 Q The owner of the tank, Mason Oil Company? 2191 1 A Yes. 2 Q And an owner signature says David S. 3 Mason III? 4 A That's correct, yes. 5 Q And then the County approval is indicated? 6 A Yes. 7 Q Do you recognize those two signatures? 8 A The one is Willy Shite, who used to run 9 the program. The other signature is Robin Hook, who was 10 a state sanitarian who was doing general duties, but 11 apparently he also worked in the tank removal on 12 occasion. Willy Shite was the manager of the program at 13 the time. 14 Q That Grand Jury Exhibit is 118? 15 A 118. 16 Q That is actually the original? 17 A That is the original. 18 Q And this is Grand Jury Exhibit 119. Who 19 is the owner of the tank? 20 A It's Mason Oil Company. 21 Q And the date on there? 22 A Is the closure plan -- let's see. 23 Submitted December 30th, 1987. The closure plan was 24 approved February 1st, 1998. And the actual closure was 25 completed on February 11th, 1988, signed by Willy Shite. 2192 1 Q That's an actual original again? 2 A Yes. 3 Q Signed by David Mason? 4 A Yes. 5 Q So it's two tank closure permits taken out 6 by the County of Amador in 1988? 7 A Yes, that's correct. 8 Q By David Mason? 9 A Mason. 10 Q For 505 Sutter? 11 A Yes. 12 MR. IREY: Okay. Any Members of the Grand Jury 13 have any questions at this time, i would be happy to ask 14 them. 15 Q Mr. Fourt, what good did it do to get a 16 permit filled out after work had been done? 17 A Well, again, we are still -- you know, 18 even though the tank had been removed, that wasn't the 19 end of the concern. To pull a permit is going to cover, 20 if nothing else, our time in kind of reconstructing 21 things. Even though philosophy of this Board of 22 Supervisors is that we are not supposed to be prosecuting 23 people and, as far as getting -- we are trying to solve 24 problems, at this point, we had a problem. And the way 25 to solve it is to kind of go through that permit process, 2193 1 and even after the fact identify all the steps that in a 2 perfect world would have been taken beforehand, but we 3 are going to try to do it retroactively after the fact, 4 including, where is the tank? Was there any contaminated 5 soil removed? If so, where did it go? Was the tank 6 properly closed? 7 I mean, conceivably, when we had them fill 8 out the permit, they could have done everything right and 9 didn't get a permit and didn't tell us about it, but did 10 everything right. 11 Q You would have known where the soil was? 12 A They would have: We had Ramos Oil come 13 out and they triple rinsed it and here is the paperwork. 14 Q For the rinsate? 15 A For the rinsate. 16 Here is the receipts for the dry ice. 17 Here, we have 100 pounds. Here is the receipts from the 18 dry ice manufacturing company. 19 Q Slow down. 20 A Sorry. We took the tank to Triangle in 21 Sacramento. They took the tank. They properly destroyed 22 it. 23 Conceivably, except for the risk, you 24 know, they could have done everything right except for 25 telling us about it and having us oversee it. We try to 2194 1 give people the benefit of the doubt. And that's a way 2 to kind of go after the fact, kind of pick up all the 3 pieces. 4 Q Why was this done? 5 A Why was -- why was what done? I don't 6 understand the question. 7 Q It followed the question, What good did it 8 do to get a permit filled out after work had been done? 9 Maybe you already answered it. Why was this done? 10 A I think I already have. 11 Q Is this a common practice? 12 A No. This is first time we had an 13 underground tank removed. In other programs, we will get 14 a well driller who drills a well and does a seal without 15 us. We try to be there. In which case, we require 16 paperwork and documentation to retroactively approve the 17 work. It's not a perfect world. We try to give 18 everybody every chance to do it right and provide proper 19 documentation. 20 Never in underground tanks though. It 21 still wouldn't have addressed our concerns, was it 22 properly inerted and the sampling done? But conceivably, 23 if everything had been done right and they had the proper 24 documentation, we might have gone forward with it. And 25 if we had everything in a row and we knew where the tank 2195 1 was, we had all our paper trail was complete, we wouldn't 2 be happy about it, but we probably would have 3 retroactively gone forward with it. 4 Q If you know, why was the tank destroyed, 5 given all the controversy concerning this tank? 6 A Well, the tank was hazardous waste at that 7 point. And I believe Thorpe Oil isn't permitted to 8 handle hazardous waste and store it. So it needed to be 9 properly dealt with. You can only store hazardous waste 10 on the site it's generated 90 days, in which case, it has 11 to be properly treated and/or disposed. 12 Q What site was this generated on? 13 A This being 505 Sutter. In time it was 14 beyond there, illegal accumulation and storage. 15 Q You know where it was? 16 A Except if it had been transported under 17 manifest to a permitted facility to handle and treat and 18 dispose of hazardous wastes. 19 Q What is commonly referred to as TSD? 20 A TSD, yes. And I do not believe Thorpe Oil 21 is a permitted TSD facility. 22 Q So although by the time it may have gotten 23 to Thorpe Oil in early September, '98, there were no 24 tracking documents, such as a hazardous waste manifest, 25 to indicate that it was no longer hazardous waste under 2196 1 California law? 2 A I have not seen any. None have been 3 submitted. I have never been told any exist or that 4 whoever generated it. As far as I know, none of those 5 things exist. 6 Again, I haven't seen it, but it was my 7 understanding it was transported to its final disposal 8 site under the correct manifest, though I have not seen 9 that manifest or any documents on the actual disposal of 10 the tank. 11 Q What happened after the brown, oily boil 12 came up out of the hole? 13 A We took the next water sample, and it 14 settled back down. And then the sheen was there, but the 15 sheen didn't stay at the surface. 16 Q Did all work stop? 17 A No. We still continued, went backfilling 18 the hole with the gravel. 19 Q Were samples taken of that water? 20 A Well, just the one, the one -- I'm 21 sorry. I guess I don't understand the question. 22 Q Were samples taken of that water? 23 A The water with the oily sheen? That 24 was -- that was when the sample was taken, the GRD sample 25 was taken. 2197 1 Q Was this treated as an emergency 2 contamination situation? 3 A I certainly treated it that way. Again, I 4 have a lot of background in emergency response. Again, 5 my -- again, I have several concerns. One is, we have a 6 real hazard to pedestrians, vehicles, particularly small 7 children on the way to school by this pit full of water 8 that we can't just dispose of into a creek. Again, that 9 was a concern that needed to be, you know, dealt with. 10 I did treat it almost as an emergency 11 response. It's something we couldn't wait on. I was 12 also concerned, if we had a lot more rainfall, a whole 13 lot, the level could rise up and flow over into the storm 14 drains. 15 Q And thus into? 16 A Jackson Creek. 17 Q Is this site still contaminated? 18 A Yes. 19 Q Is it your understanding that Rouse felt 20 he had given a permit for demolition of building and tank 21 removal? 22 A No. My understanding -- again, this is 23 again, my subjective opinion on this, I don't have any 24 facts, is that Gary thought he was issuing a permit for 25 the demolition of the building. And the tank may have 2198 1 been part of the building. But my feeling is that Gary 2 thought that we were going to be overseeing the tank 3 removal. 4 Q Have you ever spoken with Gary Urzik? And 5 has he passed on information related to what he heard 6 Rouse tell Womack and what Womack told Rouse at the City 7 counter that day? 8 A No. I have heard fourth-hand indications 9 of what went on. I have not talked to Gary Urzik. 10 Q Okay. This is back to the question: Is 11 it your understanding that Rouse felt he had given a 12 permit for demolition of building and tank removal? If 13 so, do you feel this created the confusion on the part of 14 Robert Womack? 15 A Again, you are asking for a subjective 16 opinion? No. I think Mr. Womack was trying to use that 17 as a cover to avoid getting a permit so that -- because 18 if you got a County permit, then he knows he would have 19 tested the soil and would know he had a contamination 20 problem. 21 Q Continues to this day? 22 A Yes. Again, that's an opinion. 23 Q So there were problems with tank handling, 24 correct? 25 A Correct. 2199 1 Q Rinsate handling? 2 A Rinsate handling. 3 Q Piping handling? 4 A Piping handling. 5 Q Soil handling? 6 A Soil handling. 7 Q Water in the groundwater, the way it was 8 handled? 9 A Yes. 10 Q As well as failure to get a permit? 11 A As well as failure to get a permit. 12 As well as creating a hazardous condition 13 in the removal of the tank. And as well as creating 14 hazardous condition after removal of the pit of water. 15 Q Violations of Fire Code? 16 A Violations of Fire Code. 17 Q Where the soil went after the fact? 18 A Yes. 19 Q Contaminated soil can't go to Mark 20 Sherrill's property on Highway 88, can it? 21 A Certainly not. 22 Q What about to Georgia Pacific without 23 being tested? 24 A No, not without being tested. Certainly 25 not without the property owner's permission. 2200 1 Q Did you ask Womack why he didn't use 2 Thorpe to remove the tank at 505 Sutter? 3 A No, I did not. Basically, in any of the 4 conversations after the fact with Mr. Womack, I have 5 really tried to keep my mouth shut. Basically, he will 6 tell me the same story again, you know, and I will 7 basically try -- try to say as little as possible. I am 8 not trying to, again, reveal anything or, you know, 9 trying to get in the way or cause any problems. I am 10 just trying to stay invisible, let him talk to me, not 11 make any admissions that would come back to harm me. I 12 was really worried I would say something and, two weeks 13 later, say; Fourt said this is okay. And I am in 14 trouble. 15 Q Like it's okay to drink the water out of 16 the hole? 17 A Exactly. I don't know where that came 18 from. 19 Q Did it come from your lips? 20 A No, certainly did not. Obviously, why 21 would I take it and go to the trouble of hauling it off 22 to a septage pond if I thought I could drink it? Or make 23 such a big deal about testing it multiple times? 24 Q B.J. Collins drank malathion. 25 A He is dead, too. 2201 1 Q How often are samples taken from drill 2 holes at 505 Sutter? 3 A Standard procedure is every five feet out 4 of drill holes. When you get into solid rock, it's a 5 little harder to get samples. But if it's in soils, you 6 usually take sample every five feet or major changes in 7 lithology. You take usually most contaminated ones in 8 bottom hole sample for laboratory analysis. When you get 9 into solid rock, it's really hard to take samples, so 10 typically, you are looking at not contamination in the 11 rock, itself, but in the cracks in the rock, where the 12 water is. In which cases, you usually just complete this 13 monitoring well. It's a difference between hard rock and 14 soils. 15 Q If you can answer slowly, what have the 16 results been? 17 A I'm sorry? 18 Q If you can answer slowly, what have the 19 results been? 20 A We have -- I have to refer to the reports 21 here. We have a couple reports on the soil borings 22 through soil that I can certainly -- 23 Q Prior years? 24 A Yes. Prior investigations. 25 Q Not since the tank came out in May of 2202 1 '88 -- '98? 2 A '98. No, we have had no soil samples 3 taken as a result of this tank removal. 4 Q We have heard the owners are awaiting 5 results of a third, I believe, test. Exactly what is 6 being tested, if you know? 7 A I don't know of any additional tests. 8 Q Once a sample is taken, what will they be 9 testing for? 10 A Typically, we try to test for what we 11 think the contents of the tanks were. You have a tank 12 and it's spilled, you want to know what to look for. You 13 look for what's spilled. In this case, it would be 14 gasoline, total petroleum hydrocarbons, gasoline range, 15 it would be the aromatic compounds, Benzene, Toluene, 16 Ethyl benzene, Xylene. And oxygenates, MTBE and several 17 other oxygenates that would be looked for if it appears 18 there's oxygenates present. 19 Q Please listen to this complete question. 20 Did I understand you to say that Mr. Rouse 21 said that he had given a permit to Mr. Womack to demolish 22 and remove the tank? 23 A I'm not sure if he, Gary, had intended to 24 actually remove the tank. But there is a certain area of 25 overlap between the City and the County. Even if a tank 2203 1 removal, the City is going to ensure that the power is 2 cut and removed. The City also has certain 3 responsibilities that the piping is removed. 4 But I am quite clear that Gary was not 5 going to be supervising the removal of the tank as far as 6 the areas that I have talked about, as far as inertion of 7 the tank, cleaning of the tank, handling of the hazardous 8 waste, disposal of the tank and confirmation soil 9 sampling. The City does not do that. 10 The City, again, does do electrical 11 connections, piping connections and other areas. So 12 there is a certain amount of overlap. 13 Q Are the underground tank laws in 14 California very strict? Or are they close in comparison 15 to other states? If you know? 16 A Yeah. In general, all tank laws are based 17 on the Federal tank laws. California's are slightly 18 stricter in some areas, as far as inventory control and 19 testing. California's pollution laws, as far as what is 20 in the ground and in the groundwater, are a little more 21 strict than in some other states. 22 Again, part of that just comes to 23 California, since we have a heavy reliance on 24 groundwater. 25 Q Taking into consideration your experience 2204 1 in underground storage tank removals, what did you think 2 when Mr. Womack told you he could not ID the truck or 3 driver? 4 A I kind of found it hard to believe. Even 5 at night. You don't just put tanks on trucks and have 6 them magically disappear. I have done a lot of tank 7 removals and pretty much you always know, you know, what 8 the truck is, and at least to see it. You should be able 9 to describe it, describe the driver. 10 Q Could the tank have been taken to Jim 11 Thorpe, knowing it would have to be destroyed because of 12 the 90-day requirement? 13 A I am not sure. You want to repeat that? 14 Q Could the tank have been taken to Jim 15 Thorpe knowing it would have to be destroyed because of 16 the 90-day requirement? 17 A Okay. This is assuming after the ad came 18 out and it was found? 19 Q You can answer the question however you 20 choose. 21 A Let's go a couple ways. 22 If the tank had been triple rinsed at the 23 time of the removal and the tank pumped out and cleaned, 24 it would not be considered a hazardous waste. At that 25 time, it could have been transferred to Thorpe Oil and 2205 1 destroyed or taken to another place to be destroyed. 2 Since it was not, at that point, it 3 becomes hazardous waste. And my understanding is that 4 Thorpe is not permitted to handle that. 5 Q So how do you know or what information do 6 you have that it had not been triple rinsed? 7 A None. I have no evidence either way. I 8 have seen -- and I just have to make a presumption that, 9 if it had been triple rinsed and documents indicating it 10 had been triple rinsed and the rinsate disposed, it would 11 have been submitted to us. 12 Q If a tank had been triple rinsed, there 13 would be rinsate tracking documentation? 14 A That's correct. 15 Q Have you at any point asked Mr. Womack or 16 Mason if they triple rinsed the tank? 17 A At the time the initial permit application 18 was filled out, those questions were asked. 19 Q Do you remember the response? 20 A I believe it was, Don't know. Or again, 21 that's in the file here. 22 Q In the underground storage tank 23 retroactive permit? 24 A Yes. Which you have up here. And it was 25 section on Describe Method to Purge Tanks -- and Rinsate 2206 1 Hauler and Hauler EPA Number is left blank. There's no 2 answer. 3 Q Blank completely? Or is there a not 4 applicable? 5 A No, there's nothing put on there. 6 Q And Mr. Mason is the one that filled out 7 that permit? 8 A That's correct. 9 Q In your presence? 10 A In my presence. 11 Q Would it surprise you if you were to hear 12 that Womack is the one who drove off with the tank? 13 A No, it would not. Again, I have no 14 first-hand information on that, but he seems quite 15 capable. The video shows him climbing on the roof. I 16 would not be surprised if he could operate a truck and 17 haul it off. 18 Q Did you find it unusual how that tape 19 ends? 20 A Yes. 21 Q What did the County -- why did the County 22 file the 1988 permit if the site was not cleaned at that 23 time? 24 A The site wasn't cleaned. The tank removal 25 was complete, as far as the tank was removed and all the 2207 1 procedures taken. That doesn't mean that the site is 2 clean. In fact, there is additional paperwork that is 3 filled out called Unauthorized Release Report. That 4 tank was in -- I think at that time, the County kept a 5 lead on it and did direct Mr. Mason to do additional 6 work. So the tank part of the permit was finaled. The 7 contamination story was not over. 8 Q It's completely different statutory 9 scheme, correct? 10 A Yes. 11 Q One is Chapter 6.7 Health and Safety Code. 12 A 1076.785. There is certain amount of 13 overlap. Yes. It's kind of the next phase of the work. 14 And you kind -- it's kind of a natural proceeding. You 15 step from one to the other. 16 Q If you know, when will 505 Sutter be 17 cleaned? 18 A I don't know. If you want to hear my 19 speculation on -- and I have had talks, again, with 20 several people on how to approach this. The approach is 21 that, put in three wells, one again downslope from the 22 existing two, to see how far the contamination has 23 moved. 24 If the contamination has not moved that 25 far across the street, they may not have to do a whole 2208 1 lot more work except watch it and let it break down. 2 Gasoline contamination, over time, breaks down. MTBE 3 does not. Gasoline components will break down over 4 time. It's possible the site will naturally take care of 5 itself. The key thing is, you have to watch it. Make 6 sure you define the extent of the contamination and watch 7 it to make sure it continues to break down. If we get a 8 lot of rain, more groundwater, gets into the ground and 9 flushes it out, it might push it water further. This 10 needs to be watched. 11 The Regional Board is going to make the 12 final decision on this. I don't really know, as far as 13 how long it will take. If they can show that it's not 14 going very far and it's stable and it's slowly 15 decreasing, they may be able to close it in a couple 16 years. 17 Q Were these the types of things that were 18 asked of Mr. Mason in 1991? 19 A Yes. 20 Q Has he done any of those to date? 21 A No, he has not. 22 Q Will the County just forget about 505 23 Sutter like in '88? 24 A No. But again, we are -- at this point, 25 we are not the lead agency. This is a Regional Board 2209 1 lead. It's really their responsibility. 2 We won't forget about it. I happen to 3 know several of the people at the Regional Board, and I 4 do remind them on various sites to work on to clean up. 5 The goal -- the goal is to clean these up. At the same 6 time, the goal is not to spend a whole lot of money if 7 you don't want to. There is a fine line to walk on 8 cleaning them up; at the same time, not spending a whole 9 lot of money. 10 Q The plume was X in 1988. Is it normally X 11 plus ten years later? Or X minus? 12 A That really depends on the site and the 13 plume and the amount of contamination remaining. It can 14 be X plus or it can be X minus. As I mentioned, these 15 plumes do biologically degrade. If there is a large 16 source area, they can continue to move. 17 Q What has changed between 1988 and 1998 as 18 per the cleanup? 19 A We don't know. The only thing is that 20 some -- it appears some of the contaminated soil that was 21 possibly continuing to flush contamination into the 22 groundwater has been removed. I don't know to where. 23 The last possible source of contamination is gone, the 24 tank. The tanks are no longer on the site. The 25 dispensers are not there. It's not an active station. 2210 1 One of the other areas where can you get 2 contamination is overspillage. If you are pumping gas 3 into your car and you overfill a little bit and it spills 4 into the ground, some of that can work into the 5 groundwater. Those particular problems aren't there 6 anymore. 7 Q If found dirty, who cleans under Sutter, 8 i.e., Highway 49/88? And could that be from 1988 or 1998 9 or both? 10 A Probably good question. Possibly both. 11 That would be the responsibility of the tank owner. 12 Q If a construction project required 13 installation of either conduit or underground storm water 14 piping in front of that site, who is responsible for 15 dealing with the contaminated soil, if any? 16 A It would be combination of the contractor 17 who exposed it and the tank owner property owner. 18 Typically, the -- whoever is doing the construction is 19 hopefully aware of this ahead of time and taking proper 20 precautions that he encounters to deal with it. 21 Ultimately, it will be -- 22 Q 40-hour employees? 23 A Employees, monitoring. Again, combustible 24 gas indicators we talked about. Gasoline-saturated soils 25 can still explode if you get the vapors in a confined 2211 1 space. 2 Q Such as a trench? 3 A Such as a trench. 4 You also want to protect your employees so 5 they don't get exposed to gasoline. Exposure to benzene 6 can cause leukemia. 7 Q Carcinogen? 8 A Yes. 9 Q In the beginning of your testimony, I 10 thought I heard you say during your phone call with Rouse 11 that he felt he issued a permit for demolition and 12 removal of tank. Is that true? 13 A I think we have -- I think I have already 14 answered that. 15 GRAND JUROR: Hm-mmm. 16 Q BY MR. IREY: You can answer it one more 17 time. 18 A Okay, fine. 19 I think he was aware that part of the 20 activities of the demolition included removal of the 21 tank. I don't think he was, in his mind, permitting the 22 removal and assuming the role of the County. Like I 23 mentioned, there's a certain amount of overlap. 24 Q When you called him at 3:30 on May 4th, 25 did he indicate that he was -- 2212 1 A Yes. They were in communication with us 2 and everything was fine with us. 3 Q And you are sure that's what he indicated 4 to you? 5 A Yes. 6 Q You called him specifically to find out 7 what was up? 8 A I found out what was going on. 9 Q Did you chew his ass, as many people have 10 testified to? 11 A No, I don't think so. I said, Gary, 12 what -- they pulled the tank. What is going on? I was 13 more, like, in shock. 14 Q Conversation two minutes? Three minutes? 15 A Two minutes. Very short. 16 Q Okay. Are you aware Mr. Womack is an 17 advocate and has donated money to ban MTBE as gas 18 additive? 19 A No, I wasn't aware of that. 20 Q Do you think -- if you know, do you think 21 that his feelings on these issues played into his 22 disregard of environmental laws and permits? 23 A No. Mmmm.. I think being anti-MTBE is 24 kind of unrelated to -- that's just one component in 25 gasoline. These issues kind of transcend that. I think 2213 1 he was just trying to -- I think -- again, I will 2 speculate. 3 I think he was aware there was possibly 4 some contamination there. I think he had been told by 5 his attorneys, if you buy property and assume title to 6 it, you buy into the contamination. I think he was 7 looking for a way that, hopefully, the County would 8 sample and demonstrate, in fact, there wasn't any 9 contamination and he would end up with a clean piece of 10 property and the County would sign off. 11 Q Hypothetically, you normally sample two 12 feet below the tank, correct? 13 A Yes. 14 Q So if you overexcavated and put clean fill 15 in and then sample two feet down into clean fill, you 16 could get a non-detect, correct? 17 A That's correct. 18 Q So if you did this pretty slick, then you 19 could pull the wool over the eyes of the regulator, come 20 in, come out and sample, hit clean, hit a non-detect, and 21 close the site? 22 A Yes. And that's why we wanted to be 23 there. Again, when the tank comes out of the ground, 24 that kind of eliminates that possibility. 25 Q Is this 505 Sutter being used for parking 2214 1 at this time, if you know? 2 A That's my understanding. I think there 3 are cars there. The City is allowing parking at this 4 time. 5 Q If so, why, if it is a contaminated site? 6 A At this point, the contamination is down 7 about four or five feet. It's not right at the surface. 8 So parking cars on top of it is not going to be impacting 9 it. 10 As far as the contamination. I guess, 11 worst case, in the middle of summer, you may get some 12 small amount of vapors coming up through into -- out of 13 the contamination through the pea gravel. It's a 14 reasonably open area. I don't see anybody getting a huge 15 accumulation of vapors to cause a problem. There is a 16 lot of sites that are contaminated that are being reused 17 at this time. If the contamination is in the ground at 18 ten feet or so, that doesn't mean you can't use the 19 surface, depending on what the use is. 20 I don't think I would want to put a day 21 care center on top of it. But for a parking lot, where 22 you have, you know, people getting in and out of their 23 cars and not staying there for any long periods of time, 24 there probably isn't that great a risk. 25 Q However, hypothetically, if the mean 2215 1 annual rainfall in Jackson, California, is 24 inches, 2 what does that 24 inches of rain do to that particular 3 site and/or the head pressure on the excavated tank pit? 4 A That is possibly a concern. If we are 5 getting a lot of runoff into that tank pit, it's going to 6 be flushing materials there down further. I don't know 7 if it's been done. I certainly have suggested that the 8 runoff around that area be diverted away from the tank 9 pit to minimize runoff coming down Rex Avenue. 10 Q So instead of being full all winter long, 11 it's only the actual rainfall? 12 A Hopefully, yes. 13 The other option is to pave the surface. 14 But again, I don't know. That's something for the City 15 to get involved with, too. We also did that at the Strom 16 building, as far as attempting to divert the runoff away 17 from the area of the contamination. 18 Q Better to have 300 gallons of contaminated 19 water instead of 30,000? 20 A Exactly. We talked about this when you 21 are digging up and spreading the contaminated water over 22 the soils. This goes back to, again, emergency response, 23 too. You want to minimize the amount of material you 24 have to deal with. Because it gets more expensive and 25 more elaborate, the more you have. 2216 1 Q Once the Central Valley Regional Water 2 Quality Control Board has made its determination, will 3 the County be responsible for regular monitoring? Or 4 will the owner be required to make sure that it is done? 5 A Okay. The County basically is going to be 6 kind of the third party on this. We try to keep our 7 records, keep copies of all the records of correspondence 8 for our files, just in case there are questions. But we 9 would not be in a direct role on this. 10 The Regional Board would be reviewing the 11 work and approving the work plans and directing the 12 work. The owner of the property and/or the tank owner 13 and/or tank operator is responsible for cleaning up the 14 contamination and paying for it. 15 Q If you follow the rules, everything but 16 $10,000 is paid for by the State? 17 A Actually, 5,000, if you are a C. 18 So actually, yes, there is an underground 19 storage tank cleanup fund, which we all pay into when we 20 buy fuels at the pump. And it's something like 6 mils 21 now. It generates $40 million a quarter. 22 It goes into this fund for tank owners 23 that have leaks that are in compliance. They have been 24 doing everything correctly. They have been doing their 25 monitoring. They find they have a leak. These things 2217 1 happen. People put tanks in the grounds a long time 2 ago. The fire department said, if you put them above the 3 ground, they are going to explode. Put them under the 4 ground, below ground. A lot of them leak. It wasn't a 5 deliberate act, people deliberately trying to cause 6 pollution. 7 So the Legislature set up a fund to pay 8 for the majority of the cleanup. Again, there is $5,000 9 deductible now. If you are in compliance and you have 10 been doing everything right and you show that, you know, 11 you found -- you do your monitoring and you found the 12 leak as soon as you could because you have been watching 13 for it, pretty much all of your costs except, again, like 14 $5,000 deductible, if you are a small business, is 15 reimbursed by the State. 16 Q All your costs of cleanup? 17 A Cleanup. Not tank removal, but cleanup, 18 yes. 19 Q So in this scenario, if Mr. Tallia's bid 20 included $100 county permit and his bid was $5,500, and 21 then the first 5,000 is paid for out of Mr. Mason's 22 pocket, the maximum he would have been out on this site 23 would have been $10,500, if he had done it right? 24 A That's correct. And even though, again, 25 there is some history of noncompliance back with the '88 2218 1 and '91 pulls, we probably could have gotten him back 2 into compliance on this. We have been very successful, 3 even on people been kind of marginal about doing 4 everything right. If we kind of -- we talk to the State 5 and we work with them and we say, Yes, they didn't do 6 everything right. Here is what they have been doing 7 right lately and they are going to continue to do it. We 8 have been successful in getting people funded, even 9 people kind of on the borderline. It's one of the things 10 we really work hard on doing. 11 Q Remember the Grand Jury is asking very 12 pointed questions and they are trying to determine what 13 violations of the law may or may not have occurred. 14 Don't you think allowing use of 15 contaminated site for any reason is sending a double 16 message to all concerned, i.e., why clean it up if it's 17 usable? 18 A Well, that's not the point. Why clean it 19 up is because there is a risk of this material and 20 contamination in the groundwater getting into Jackson 21 Creek. 22 Q And underneath the easement on ninety -- 23 49? 24 A 49. There is an ongoing potential for, 25 again, if you have construction under there, there is -- 2219 1 it's a risk. It's a threat. You know, it needs to be 2 addressed. That, again, we try to be creative in these 3 things. Also, if it is possible to reuse part of the 4 site at the same time you are cleaning it up, we try to 5 do that. Kind of look at it as, if people can stay in 6 business and make money, it gives them more money to 7 clean it up. If it can be done safely. 8 Q Is the County going to let 505 Sutter 9 continue to be a parking lot? If so, will the County 10 also give a building permit? 11 A Neither of those. That would be decisions 12 for the City of Jackson. 13 Q If you know, if the County and owner waits 14 long enough, how many years before it is clean? 15 A I don't know. That's something that they 16 need to find out. 17 Q In geological time, not very long? 18 A I don't know. Fifteen, twenty years. I 19 don't know. That's still very site specific. 20 Q That is the Lawrence Livermore study? 21 A I mean, my own personal experience, I have 22 had some sites where tanks were probably removed in the 23 early '50s and it's still very contaminated. And others, 24 it breaks down quite quick. It really depends. That's 25 why we need to put the well inside and actually see. You 2220 1 can't just guess. 2 Q Understand the geology? 3 A Understand the geology, understand the 4 groundwater. 5 Q Understand whether it's aerobic or 6 anaerobic? 7 A Exactly, yes. There's a lot of 8 conditions. And you can't just -- you actually have to 9 do a study on it to determine. 10 Q Could be twenty years, could be 500 years? 11 A Could be, yes. 12 Q Apparently, it's more than seven years, 13 because -- 14 A It's still there, yes. Still there. 15 Though, in fairness, some of that might have been 16 recent. Even though they had double-walled tanks, could 17 have been spillage under the dispensers. We will never 18 know. They didn't have pans under the dispensers. So 19 conceivably, some of these dispensers have a filter 20 inside that has to be changed on a regular basis. It is 21 possible to lose, like, a quart of gas every time you 22 change a dispenser. And in this case, there wasn't a pan 23 there. It could have gone into the ground. So there 24 could have been more recent spills. 25 Again, that's something that would have 2221 1 been nice to have been there to see at the time. Now we 2 will never know. 3 Q Because if you were there, you would have 4 seen the dispensers -- 5 A -- removed. And we probably would have 6 taken a sample there. 7 Q The piping? 8 A Exactly. Every 20 feet of piping. Piping 9 leaks, too. Particularly at joints. These were suction, 10 so probably not as dangerous as pressurized piping. 11 Q So if it was constant pressure at a joint, 12 that is much more likely to leak than suction pump? 13 A With suction, if you have a leak, it will 14 pull air in, it will sputter. With pressure, it will 15 continually go out. 16 Q Do you have any doubt Mr. Mason knew he 17 had to have a permit to pull an underground storage tank? 18 A I am quite clear in my mind he knew. We 19 had many discussions on the whole underground permitting 20 program, including the rules. 21 Q Does it seem as if he was acting as an 22 ostrich putting his head in the sand when he chose to 23 walk away on a weekend and allow Bob Womack to pull the 24 tank? 25 A Mr. Mason is a pretty hands-on guy. It 2222 1 kind of surprises me he wasn't there being involved if he 2 knew about it or was -- he made a decision. Because he 3 typically likes to oversee his operations pretty 4 directly. 5 So by not overseeing it, I don't know. 6 It's not typical for his behavior, as I know him. 7 MR. IREY: Other questions? 8 THE FOREPERSON: Mm-hmm. 9 Q BY MR. IREY: Would this ever have -- if 10 you know, would the City ever have told a contractor 11 that, because of the location at 505, it would have been 12 impossible to pull the tank Monday through Friday? 13 A I don't have any idea of that. I don't 14 have a way to answer that one way or the other, as far as 15 whether the City would do that or not. 16 Q Does the County ever participate in 17 underground storage tank pulls on weekends? 18 A No. And I suppose if we knew about it in 19 advance, and there really was a good reason as to why to 20 do it that way, we would probably accommodate them. We 21 don't like to -- the County does not like to pay 22 overtime. 23 Q The City, County and State are waiting. 24 The waste is still going towards Jackson Creek. How can 25 this be the answer? 2223 1 A Mmmm... Okay. Well, again, we are -- 2 let's go back. Let me give you the next step, as far as 3 the cleanup. And we are working on this. We are 4 involved. This is part of what we do at the County. We 5 are not the lead agency, but we still try to facilitate 6 getting things done. That's why I was out there picking 7 monitoring well locations. 8 The one in front of Swenson's Shoes, 9 apparently, we did get reach an agreement on a good 10 location. Apparently, Mr. Swenson has required a certain 11 level of insurance out of the driller and the local 12 driller who was going to do that the work did not have 13 that insurance. So we are now waiting on GRD and Jim 14 Mason to come up with another driller to do the work. 15 Again, my understanding, it's still going forward. They 16 are still working on it. 17 But County permits have not been issued, 18 partly due to the fact they we don't have a driller. 19 Q You have to have permits to drill wells? 20 A Yes. 21 Q Everything over three feet? Or is there a 22 number? 23 A Any -- I think the ordinance in the 24 California Code requires any hole designed to extract or 25 inject water is the definition of a well. 2224 1 MR. IREY: Okay. Other questions of the Grand 2 Jurors? 3 Well, Mr. Fourt, we stopped and started a 4 few times in the last two weeks. I appreciate your 5 testimony here today. 6 At this time, the Foreman has an 7 admonition, which will be the same as the earlier one. 8 And we are going to keep those two originals. 9 THE WITNESS: This is yours, too, I think. 10 MR. IREY: We will keep everything that is marked 11 Grand Jury exhibit. 12 And Mr. Foreman. 13 THE FOREPERSON: Okay. Mr. Fourt, you are 14 admonished not to reveal to any person except as directed 15 by the Court what questions were asked or what responses 16 were given or any other matters concerning the nature or 17 subject of the Grand Jury's investigation that you 18 learned during your appearance before the Grand Jury. 19 This admonition continues unless and until 20 such time as the transcript of this Grand Jury proceeding 21 is made public. Violation of this admonition is 22 punishable as contempt of Court. 23 This does not prevent you from discussing 24 the matter with your attorney if you have an attorney 25 advising you with respect to your appearance before the 2225 1 Grand Jury. 2 I have been having people just initial 3 underneath here, showing I read it to them twice. Okay. 4 Thank you very much. 5 THE WITNESS: Okay. Thank you. 6 THE FOREPERSON: If he has more questions? Or 7 you are free to go. 8 MR. IREY: Thank you very much. 9 I have no more witnesses today, Members of 10 the Grand Jury. I don't think Mr. Hall would have 11 finished. 12 However, the tentative schedule is 13 essentially another Deputy District Attorney in the 14 office is preparing information related to Vehicle Code, 15 Workers' Comp. and Contractors Licensing Board to assist 16 me in preparing what's called an Amended Proposed 17 Indictment. We will present any information we have on 18 that Monday. Maybe I will be able to get ahold of Mr. 19 Hall and have him come in Monday afternoon. That will be 20 my goal. Possibly read the jury instructions Monday 21 afternoon or first thing Tuesday morning, with no 22 scheduled witnesses except, worst case scenario, Ron Hall 23 on Tuesday morning, first thing. 24 I appreciate everybody's courtesy in 25 allowing us to go forward into next week. I guess it's 2226 1 nice to have an early week this week, but it is a full 2 ten days after I thought we would finish. We are going 3 as fast with as much quality as we can put together, but 4 as you see our volumes of documents to both go through 5 and make decisions on. 6 So with that said, do I need to step out? 7 Are we okay? 9:00 next Monday? 8 THE FOREPERSON: 9:00 next Monday. I will reread 9 the admonition and call the adjournment. 10 The Grand Jurors are admonished that they 11 are not to form or express any opinions about this case 12 or discuss it among themselves until the Grand Jury 13 receives the case for deliberation. In addition, no 14 inspection of evidence should be conducted without the 15 permission of the Foreperson and on the advice of the 16 prosecuting attorney. 17 A violation of this rule could result in a 18 charge of contempt against a Grand Juror who would 19 investigate or view any matters with regard to this case 20 without the entire body of the Grand Jury. 21 And we stand adjourned until Monday, 22 November 30th, at 9:00 a.m. 23 (Whereupon, the proceedings recessed at 4:24 p.m.) 24 ---oOo--- 25 2227 1 REPORTER'S CERTIFICATE 2 3 STATE OF CALIFORNIA ) ) ss. 4 COUNTY OF TUOLUMNE ) 5 6 I, JAN L. BENEDETTI, CSR, hereby certify that I 7 was duly appointed and qualified to take the foregoing 8 matter; 9 That acting as such reporter, I took down in 10 stenotype notes the testimony given and proceedings 11 had; 12 That I thereafter transcribed said shorthand 13 notes into typewritten longhand, the above and 14 foregoing pages being a full, true and correct 15 transcription of the testimony given and proceedings 16 had. 17 18 19 20 21 22 _____________________________ 23 JAN BENEDETTI-WEISBERG 24 25