My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
SITE INFORMATION AND CORRESPONDENCE
EnvironmentalHealth
>
EHD Program Facility Records by Street Name
>
M
>
MADISON
>
423
>
3500 - Local Oversight Program
>
PR0544428
>
SITE INFORMATION AND CORRESPONDENCE
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/6/2019 5:18:43 PM
Creation date
5/6/2019 4:59:56 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
EHD - Public
ProgramCode
3500 - Local Oversight Program
File Section
SITE INFORMATION AND CORRESPONDENCE
RECORD_ID
PR0544428
PE
3528
FACILITY_ID
FA0004581
FACILITY_NAME
CHASE CHEVROLET*
STREET_NUMBER
423
Direction
N
STREET_NAME
MADISON
STREET_TYPE
ST
City
STOCKTON
Zip
95203
CURRENT_STATUS
02
SITE_LOCATION
423 N MADISON ST
P_LOCATION
01
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.
/
197
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
Steven Sasson, Senior REHS <br /> February 23, 1995 <br /> Page 2 <br /> 1. In regards to page 7, section 3, you pointed out that USEPA Method <br /> 8260 will cover 8015 and 8020 and that USEPA Method 8240 will cover 8010. <br /> 2. In regards to page 7, section 3, you wished to clarify that, if the results <br /> of the CAM 5 metals test is greater than 10 times the STLC, then a DI wet extraction will be <br /> performed. <br /> 3. In regards to page 9, you requested clarification as to the sentence <br /> "Preference will be given to bidders who propose to 'daisy-chain' several evacuated BAT vials <br /> together . . . " <br /> 4. In regards to our proposal on page 10 to place Monitoring Well No. 10 <br /> in the street, you noted that the City of Stockton does not like to grant permits for the drilling <br /> and placement of monitoring wells in their streets. When I responded that our only other <br /> alternative would be to place the monitoring wells on someone's private property, you stated <br /> that was a viable alternative. You explained that receiving permission from private <br /> landowners is usually not difficult when their alternatives are explained to them. <br /> 5. In regards to page 11, paragraph 3, you pointed out that Section 2649 <br /> captioned "Well Construction and Sampling Requirements" should also be referenced. <br /> 6. In regards to page 12, figure 6, you stated that there is no need for CPT <br /> penetrations in the known area of the plume. Specifically, you requested that the CPT <br /> penetrations between Monitoring Well Nos. 15 and 16 be moved to the locations of proposed <br /> Monitoring Well Nos. 15 and 16. In addition, you requested that the CPT penetration <br /> =upgradierit that-is within the plume°be moved to'the-outside'of the known plume area. <br /> } <br /> 7. In regards to page 12, figure 6, you requested that a Monitoring Well be <br /> placed upgradient. <br /> 8. In regards to page 14, section F, first paragraph, you stated that we do y <br /> not need to conduct the penetrations called for in that paragraph because adequate sampling <br /> will have been conducted via CPT and monitoring well installation. <br /> Finally, I informed you that Raney Geotechnical has chosen not to bid on this job and, <br /> as a result, we may be delayed in awarding the contract. You stated that you are willing to <br /> grant us an extension, if we are required to submit the IFB to another firm. <br /> HAIL$TMANN & SETNESS <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.