Laserfiche WebLink
Page 1 of 3 <br /> Vicki McCartney [EH] <br /> From: Vicki McCartney [EH] <br /> Sent: Thursday, August 11, 2011 4:23 PM <br /> To: 'Joseph Krohn' <br /> Subject: RE: 3105 E EI Dorado - California Tank Lines <br /> Joseph, <br /> I denied the CAP/FS that was uploaded to GeoTracker in June 2011. 1 also reviewed the CAP/FS that was <br /> included as an attachment to your email. Please correct Figurel2 to indicate that 1.2-DCA was <1, not 122 ug/L, <br /> for MW-4 and upload the revised CAP/FS. <br /> Just to let you know, I have prepared a draft letter in response to the CAP/FS and it is currently going through the <br /> review process. <br /> How is Tom Ballard doing? <br /> Vicki McCartney, Senior REHS <br /> San Joaquin County <br /> Environmental Health Department <br /> 600 East Main Street <br /> Stockton,California 95202 <br /> Phone: (209)468-9852 <br /> Fax: (209)468-3433 <br /> Email: vmccartney(O>sjcehd.com <br /> From: Joseph Krohn [mailto:JKrohn@taberconsultants.com] <br /> Sent: Thursday, August 11, 2011 12:17 PM <br /> To: Vicki McCartney [EH] <br /> Subject: RE: 3105 E EI Dorado - California Tank Lines <br /> I noticed that the CAP/FS was posted on Geotracker on June 15, 2011. Per your comments below, a <br /> revised report was prepared that included the February 2011 monitoring data and included updated <br /> figures and tables. At this point, do you still want the report resubmitted on Geotracker? <br /> Joseph Krohn, PG <br /> Taber Consultants <br /> 707 365 5843 <br /> jkrohn@taberconsultants.com <br /> From: Vicki McCartney [EH] [mailto:vmccartney@sjcehd.com] <br /> Sent: Wednesday, June 29, 2011 1:24 PM <br /> To: Joseph Krohn <br /> Subject: RE: 3105 E EI Dorado - California Tank Lines <br /> Joseph, <br /> I'm sorry to hear about Tom Ballard. Please send my best wishes to him. <br /> Since I don't have the laboratory raw data report, I can not confirm the results for groundwater samples <br /> collected in February 2011 from MW-1 through MW-4. In addition to Table 5, Table 1 will also have to be <br /> revised as well as Figures 9 and 10, the TPH-D and TPH-MO results for MW-4 should be NA instead of <br /> ND; and Figure 12, the 1,2-DCA result for MW-4 should be <1 instead of 122 ug/L. <br /> 8/11/2011 <br />