My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
FIELD DOCUMENTS_1982-1985
EnvironmentalHealth
>
EHD Program Facility Records by Street Name
>
W
>
WAGNER
>
200
>
2900 - Site Mitigation Program
>
PR0009002
>
FIELD DOCUMENTS_1982-1985
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/17/2020 3:05:54 PM
Creation date
6/17/2020 1:48:37 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
EHD - Public
ProgramCode
2900 - Site Mitigation Program
File Section
FIELD DOCUMENTS
FileName_PostFix
1982-1985
RECORD_ID
PR0009002
PE
2960
FACILITY_ID
FA0004040
FACILITY_NAME
SPX COOLING TECHNOLOGIES INC
STREET_NUMBER
200
Direction
N
STREET_NAME
WAGNER
STREET_TYPE
AVE
City
STOCKTON
Zip
95215
APN
14331007
CURRENT_STATUS
02
SITE_LOCATION
200 N WAGNER AVE
P_LOCATION
99
P_DISTRICT
002
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.
/
150
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
. .C+;lifornia Deportment of Health Services <br /> • 1 <br /> -emorandum <br /> Dote : June 7, 1985 <br /> To Anthony J. Landis, P.E. <br /> Chief, Site Mitigation Unit Subject: Marley Cooling Tower <br /> Northern California Section-TSCD Company's Progress Report <br /> and other Comments <br /> From Marge Rouch <br /> Waste Management Engineer <br /> Northern California Section-TSCD <br /> The following are my comments on Marley's May 9, 1985 Progress Report: <br /> 0 off-Site Sampling Plan <br /> of the twenty-three well sites investigated, samples were obtained from <br /> only five wells. Three of these wells are in the upgradient direction, <br /> two were downgradient. Two samples are not adequate to determine if <br /> there are contaminated domestic wells downgradient from the facility. <br /> More wells need to be found for sampling purposes. off-site monitoring <br /> wells will also need to be installed. <br /> o Groundwater Assessment Plan <br /> Item 4 discusses data obtained from the exploration boreholes. That <br /> data must be submitted to this office. In addition to the hydrogeologic <br /> data (electric logs) , results from samples taken during the drilling of <br /> the two boreholes must be submitted. <br /> o Soil Assessment Plan <br /> Soil analyses were not submitted with the Progress Report. I spoke <br /> to Jack Lundberg, from Envirologic Services, regarding soil samples. He <br /> said that Canonie's lab has not finished analyzing the samples and that <br /> they had a problem with the arsenic portion of the analysis. <br /> Item l.D. There is a discrepancy between the Progress Report and the <br /> Soil Assessment Plan regarding the number of Lysimeter nests. The <br /> report states there are three nests, the Plan (Figure 2) shows four <br /> proposed nests. <br /> o Stormwater Retention Pond <br /> It has been almost a month since the meeting with MCTC regarding the <br /> closure of the pond. A request was made -for a prompt plan to eliminate <br /> the pond before the next rainy season (at best) , or to mitigate con- <br /> taminants through next winter (at worst) . This plan has not been received. <br /> Marley stated that they have met with Black and Veatch to explore what <br /> might be done to the pond. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.