My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
SITE HISTORY
EnvironmentalHealth
>
EHD Program Facility Records by Street Name
>
E
>
EL DORADO
>
1700
>
2900 - Site Mitigation Program
>
PR0543510
>
SITE HISTORY
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/24/2019 9:10:57 AM
Creation date
7/24/2019 9:03:29 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
EHD - Public
ProgramCode
2900 - Site Mitigation Program
File Section
SITE HISTORY
RECORD_ID
PR0543510
PE
2952
FACILITY_ID
FA0005117
FACILITY_NAME
EL DORADO SENIOR APARTMENTS
STREET_NUMBER
1700
Direction
S
STREET_NAME
EL DORADO
STREET_TYPE
ST
City
STOCKTON
Zip
95206
APN
16703326
CURRENT_STATUS
02
SITE_LOCATION
1700 S EL DORADO 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.
/
50
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
i <br /> EM c Pok of DIANE HINSON <br /> RAS <br />� <br /> Tcr.` Gordon Boggs <br /> 4 V, <br /> Date: March 6, 1992 <br /> Subject: 1700 S. ELDORADO STREET; STOCKTON i <br /> UST REMOVAL - HIGH LEAD LEVELS IN SOIL <br /> Attached are lab results from the recent tank removal; BTEX, TPH-G were all non- <br /> detectable for volatfles. The total lead concentration was 250 mg/kg. We asked that the <br /> WET be performed on the lead concentration and the results are: 1.5 mg/l. The sample . <br /> was taken under a floor of an apartment building where piping from the tanks terminated. <br /> The soil sample was collected 26 inches beneath the floor surface; 14 inches below the end <br /> points of the piping. <br /> I followed Jon Ma.rshack's document, 'Designated Level Methodology for Waste <br /> Classification and Cleanup Determination", October 1986 (updated June 1989), to evaluate <br /> whether this value was a potential threat to groundwater. If my assumptions are correct (my <br /> calculations are included), I believe this lead concentration is and may have been a threat <br /> to groundwater. Therefore, should we require a groundwater investigation based upon the <br /> potential threat of lead contamination, or refer the site to Regional Board for lead? If we <br /> should refer it, to whom should this site be sent? <br /> The City of Stockton currently owns the property and I believe it is going through property <br /> transfer. The prospective buyer is awaiting our direction. Please respond <br /> attachments (5) -. <br /> r <br /> i <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.