My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
SITE HISTORY_CASE 2
EnvironmentalHealth
>
EHD Program Facility Records by Street Name
>
W
>
WASHINGTON
>
2201
>
3500 - Local Oversight Program
>
PR0545660
>
SITE HISTORY_CASE 2
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/12/2020 4:16:12 PM
Creation date
5/12/2020 2:59:02 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
EHD - Public
ProgramCode
3500 - Local Oversight Program
File Section
SITE HISTORY
FileName_PostFix
CASE 2
RECORD_ID
PR0545660
PE
3528
FACILITY_ID
FA0003909
FACILITY_NAME
PORT OF STOCKTON
STREET_NUMBER
2201
Direction
W
STREET_NAME
WASHINGTON
STREET_TYPE
ST
City
STOCKTON
Zip
95203
APN
14503001
CURRENT_STATUS
02
SITE_LOCATION
2201 W WASHINGTON ST
P_LOCATION
01
P_DISTRICT
001
QC Status
Approved
Scanner
LSauers
Tags
EHD - Public
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
170
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
Pg 3 <br /> Chronology: Port Rd. 21 & M SITE CODE: 1237 <br /> 11/02/88 Al Hoslett notified SJLHD of the ruling received <br /> from Department of Health Services, Toxic <br /> Substance Control Division (DHS/TSCD) which <br /> indicates property owner cannot be held liable for <br /> UST's. Office hearing canceled. <br /> 11/07/88 SJLHD provided copies of file correspondence to Al <br /> Hoslett. <br /> 12/08/88 SJLHD received a copy of letter written to San <br /> Joaquin County Deputy District Attorney from the <br /> Port of Stockton' s attorney, Mr. Allen. The <br /> letter concurs with the DHS 's finding that the <br /> Port is not the owner of the UST' s. The letter <br /> further emphasizes that the Health District should <br /> issue an order to all parties involved who may be <br /> responsible and let the parties decide how to <br /> allocate liability among themselves. <br /> 02/10/89 Al Hoslett, Health District Attorney, directs <br /> correspondence to attorney' s for the Port of <br /> Stockton; Bank of Stockton; Energy Petroleum; San <br /> Joaquin Deputy District Attorney; and Trustee for <br /> Energy Petroleum, requesting mutual meeting to <br /> resolve the UST issue. <br /> 02/21/89 Mr. Hoslett corresponds with the aforementioned <br /> attorneys to confirm meeting date of 3/8/89 at the <br /> offices of SJLHD. Mr. Hoslett enclosed a copy of <br /> correspondence from attorney for Energy <br /> Petroleum's trustee, Jack Ulrich. <br /> 03/08/89 Meeting held at SJLHD. All of the aforementioned <br /> attorneys present except trustee for Energy <br /> Petroleum. The outcome was that the Port would <br /> arrange for the removal of the UST' s which would <br /> resolve the issue of compliance. As long as the <br /> Port continued to comply with the removal, the <br /> District Attorney' s office would not initiate <br /> legal action against the Port. <br /> 04/20/89 SJLHD received closure plan for UST removals. <br /> 05/02/89 The Port of Stockton confirms meeting outcome in <br /> correspondence to Lisa Brown, copy to SJLHD. <br /> 05/11/89 SJLHD witnessed the removal of 4 UST. Slight <br /> petroleum odors observed during removal at 14 feet <br /> below grade. <br /> 06/09/89 SJLHD received laboratory results from tank <br /> removal. Minor contamination noted from tank <br /> samples. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.