Laserfiche WebLink
? Figures 11 through 17,still seem to lack several data values that are available in Geotracker/Tables in the report <br /> for MTBE and manganese, or are inaccurate (e.g. Figure 12 shows the latest data point for MTBE at below 10, <br /> but I believe the lab data around the indicated date shows a value of 14). Justification was not found in the <br /> report for omitting data in calculating time to reach WCtOs. <br /> ? Table 1: Lead was analyzed for in tank pit samples,yet the table shows"NA". ND results are shown in the site's <br /> 1997 UST removal report's lab report. <br /> ? Table 2C DGP-1 ethylbenzene value is entered as 2.2,yet the lab report shows 31. <br /> The NFAR is still pending on Geotracker and can be removed by Cardno ATC, revised, and re-uploaded without my <br /> denying it. Or perhaps I can receive the NFAR as it is an addendum could address the above? Please let me know how <br /> you would like to go forth with this. <br /> Sincerely, <br /> Gabriel Gonzalez, REHS <br /> San Joaquin County <br /> Environmental Health Department <br /> 1868 East Hazelton Avenue <br /> Stockton, California 95205 <br /> Phone: (209) 468-3442 <br /> Email: gagonzalez@sicehd.com <br /> From: Gabriel Gonzalez [EH] <br /> Sent: Monday, April 27, 2015 4:44 PM <br /> To: 'Jeanne Homsey' <br /> Subject: RE: Denial Confirmation: GEO_REPORT Submittal #4042379796 : T0607700822 Has Been Denied <br /> Hi Jeanne, <br /> I reviewed the revised mass estimates and am still having trouble following the calculations. For instance, I'm not sure <br /> why the "1,000" value included in TPH-g in groundwater calculation (interval 100 to 1,000), and why the<50 to 100 <br /> interval is divided by 2 data points when only a 50(contour)value is provided. And the soil averages still do not come <br /> out to what I'm calculating as averages using data between 10' and 16' bsg(using Table 1). For instance, MW-3 GRO <br /> value was 6,800(divide by 2=3,400), but the table shows 2,267, ect... Please ensure any changes are reflected in the <br /> corresponding site figures. <br /> Please correct or provide further explanation in the narrative. Please include how contour values are incorporated into <br /> the calculation. Please include this in a reuplaoded NFAR. <br /> Also, if the GP groundwater data will be included in the NFAR, please see the attached document with my <br /> comments/highlights and revise as necessary.The highlighted values do not match the lab report (it is preferable that <br /> lab data is not altered or rounded). <br /> In addition, I have attached Table 1 (pages 1 and 2) and Table 3.The highlighted data does not match the lab reports. <br /> Please revise. <br /> 3 <br />