My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
SITE INFORMATION AND CORRESPONDENCE
EnvironmentalHealth
>
EHD Program Facility Records by Street Name
>
H
>
HARDING
>
140
>
3500 - Local Oversight Program
>
PR0544425
>
SITE INFORMATION AND CORRESPONDENCE
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/6/2019 3:04:15 PM
Creation date
5/6/2019 2:39:54 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
EHD - Public
ProgramCode
3500 - Local Oversight Program
File Section
SITE INFORMATION AND CORRESPONDENCE
RECORD_ID
PR0544425
PE
3528
FACILITY_ID
FA0006249
FACILITY_NAME
VILLAGE PROPERTIES
STREET_NUMBER
140
STREET_NAME
HARDING
STREET_TYPE
WAY
City
STOCKTON
Zip
95204
APN
13707051
CURRENT_STATUS
02
SITE_LOCATION
140 HARDING WAY
P_DISTRICT
001
QC Status
Approved
Scanner
SJGOV\wng
Tags
EHD - Public
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
175
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
WHIF INAW low, <br /> V%THF Environmental Consultants, Inc. <br /> Post Office Box 6729 <br /> Modesto, CA 95355-6729 <br /> (209) 579-8138 <br /> 10 July 1992 <br /> Mike Infuma <br /> San Joaquin County Public Health Services <br /> PO Box 2009 <br /> Stockton CA 95201 <br /> 1992 <br /> SUBJECT: Yellow Submarine <br /> Site Code 2514 <br /> Dear Mike: <br /> This letter and accompanying documents will serve as our response to your <br /> letter of June 22, 1992. <br /> Your first comment regarding samples to be analyzed by the DHS needs some <br /> clarification. WHF proposed to have the samples analyzed by GeoAnalytical labs in <br /> Modesto, California. Does your comment mean that your department will be taking <br /> samples and submitting them to DHS in lieu of our proposed samples? Or in addition <br /> to our proposed samples? WHF has no objection to sampling taken in lieu of; it should <br /> save our client some money. Also, is it now a policy to submit samples to DHS? If <br /> so, we were not notified and that is why it was not mentioned in our work plan. <br /> Your letter states that samples taken in the past were inconsistently selected for <br /> analysis. We dispute this contention, since all of the samples were selected on the basis <br /> of recognizable contamination in the soil by individuals experienced with excavation of <br /> hydrocarbon contaminated sites. Samples were selected on the basis of discoloration <br /> and odor. <br /> In the excavations, samples were also taken of soil believed to be clean, but <br /> which were adjacent to contaminated soil to provide a "zero line". In addition, samples <br /> were taken in areas which had high potential for contamination such as adjacent to <br /> product distribution lines and storage tanks. <br /> With regard to borehole samples, samples were collected every five feet (5'), <br /> but only those believed to be contaminated, using the criteria listed above, were <br /> analyzed. If the samples were proven, indeed, to be contaminated, the adjacent <br /> samples were then run to define the limits of contamination. This screening process <br /> has proven effective in identifying, characterizing and defining contamination while <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.