My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
COMPLIANCE INFO
EnvironmentalHealth
>
EHD Program Facility Records by Street Name
>
C
>
CENTER
>
916
>
2200 - Hazardous Waste Program
>
PR0220091
>
COMPLIANCE INFO
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
12/5/2018 10:43:28 AM
Creation date
11/6/2018 8:38:20 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
EHD - Public
ProgramCode
2200 - Hazardous Waste Program
File Section
COMPLIANCE INFO
RECORD_ID
PR0220091
PE
2228
FACILITY_ID
FA0002862
FACILITY_NAME
R V CIRCUITS INC
STREET_NUMBER
916
Direction
S
STREET_NAME
CENTER
STREET_TYPE
ST
City
STOCKTON
Zip
95206
APN
14714036
CURRENT_STATUS
02
SITE_LOCATION
916 S CENTER ST
P_LOCATION
01
P_DISTRICT
001
QC Status
Approved
Scanner
SJGOV\rtan
Supplemental fields
FilePath
\MIGRATIONS3\222IAError\IAError\C\CENTER\916\PR0220091\COMPLIANCE INFO\COMPLIANCE INFO.PDF
Tags
EHD - Public
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
900
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
RV Circuits <br /> Page 2 <br /> 9. No decision-making criteria are presented for selecting additional soil samples for <br /> analysis, nor for when samples that are analyzed for total metals may be analyzed for <br /> soluble concentrations. In addition, the analytical methods for additional procedures, must <br /> be specified, e.g., for soluble analysis. <br /> 10. The first column of"TABLE 2 REGULATORY GUIDELINES FOR VARIOUS <br /> METALS" should be labeled "Regulatory Guideline" or"Regulatory Standard." <br /> Health and Safely Plan Comments <br /> 11. The health and safety plan, in general, is inadequate. For example, it lacks any <br /> recognizable criteria for monitoring the potential hazards at the site. Examples include no <br /> heat stress monitoring protocol, and no discussion of how personal protection level <br /> upgrades and downgrades will occur. The entire plan should be reviewed and revised by <br /> an industrial hygienist with experience in hazardous substances investigations. <br /> 12. The "HAZARD EVALUATION" section of the health and safety plan should be revised <br /> to include a discussion of occupational exposure levels in relation to contamination levels <br /> known or suspected to be found at the site. <br /> 13. The health and safety plan should be revised to include a discussion about the <br /> decision-making protocols that will be used to upgrade or downgrade personal protection <br /> levels. Simply saying that it is the decision of the health and safety officer is inadequate. <br /> Each level of protection should be defined and the criteria for when that level of <br /> protection will be used based on health and safety monitoring for each hazard must be <br /> included. <br /> 14. The table discussing "Exposure systems" is incomplete. For example, the information <br /> presented about dust does not address the fact that the dust may contain toxic metals. <br /> Also, the plan lacks any criteria for deciding how dust will be measured/monitored in <br /> terms of what levels of personal protection will be used. Additionally, the plan lacks any <br /> information about adequate dust control procedures. <br /> 15. The table discussing"First aid" is also inadequate. For example, donning a respirator is <br /> not a means of first aid and would in fact result in greater pulmonary difficulty for <br /> someone who needs first aid due to a dust exposure. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.