My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
COMPLIANCE INFO_2007-2015
EnvironmentalHealth
>
EHD Program Facility Records by Street Name
>
E
>
EIGHTH
>
717
>
2300 - Underground Storage Tank Program
>
PR0522448
>
COMPLIANCE INFO_2007-2015
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
2/6/2024 2:00:07 PM
Creation date
6/23/2020 6:59:48 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
EHD - Public
ProgramCode
2300 - Underground Storage Tank Program
File Section
COMPLIANCE INFO
FileName_PostFix
2007-2015
RECORD_ID
PR0522448
PE
2371
FACILITY_ID
FA0015274
FACILITY_NAME
SHELL I-5
STREET_NUMBER
717
Direction
W
STREET_NAME
EIGHTH
STREET_TYPE
ST
City
STOCKTON
Zip
95206
APN
16314045
CURRENT_STATUS
01
SITE_LOCATION
717 W EIGHTH ST
P_LOCATION
01
P_DISTRICT
001
QC Status
Approved
Scanner
SJGOV\rtan
Supplemental fields
FilePath
\MIGRATIONS\UST\UST_2371_PR0522448_717 W EIGHTH_2007-2015.tif
Tags
EHD - Public
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
438
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
mod on site to all sump sensors. The manufacturer recommends the sensors be mounted in a true <br />vertical position and would take a nominal height of 1" liquid to trip off the sensor (see attached copy <br />from Veeder-Root). From engineering standpoint by tilting the sensor the outside case edge would <br />raise the sensing point higher on top of the 1" minimum nominal height thus would make it harder to <br />detect liquid (see hand drawn diag). I believe the Inspector had jeopardized the integrity of the liquid <br />detectability of the monitoring system. What has changed in installation requirement since the last 7 <br />years that now made the position in violation? <br />Also from engineering stand point, there is very tiny gain (almost zero) in height difference in relation to <br />side way movement of few inches on top of the big UST tank. <br />403. The original vent sump cover is a bad design since the get go. The cover, made out of thin sheet <br />metal, seats flat on top of the vent box. It tends to collect water and water gets leaked into the sump <br />every raining season. To make things worse over time the sump nuts get damaged and/or loosed no <br />longer allow the bolts to tighten. The original cover is also a bit too thin so over time it gets warped. I <br />removed the original cover and I had a local shop made a new cover in the shape of the roof slanted <br />downward to allow the rainwater to run-off. This whole rain season not a drop of water could intrude <br />in. Due to the requirement from the Inspector I had the shop made a cover same size as the original but <br />much thicker. I secured it down with original bolts but I still cover it with the slanted cover for extra <br />protection from water intrusion. <br />404. Liquid water is normally condensed whenever there is a temperature change. The condensation <br />even happens in car gas tanks. This is also true for any UST sumps. Water condensation is not water <br />intrusion. The top lids are sealed and further protected by top rubber mats. Sensors cannot detect and <br />alarm liquid when the height is less than 1". If there were alarms the station would have responded <br />properly. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.