My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
CORRESPONDENCE_2007
EnvironmentalHealth
>
EHD Program Facility Records by Street Name
>
T
>
TURNPIKE
>
3504
>
4400 - Solid Waste Program
>
PR0515730
>
CORRESPONDENCE_2007
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/6/2026 8:44:41 AM
Creation date
7/3/2020 10:37:55 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
EHD - Public
ProgramCode
4400 - Solid Waste Program
File Section
CORRESPONDENCE
FileName_PostFix
2007
RECORD_ID
PR0515730
PE
4430 - SOLID WASTE CIA SITE
FACILITY_ID
FA0012310
FACILITY_NAME
WORLD ENTERPRISES
STREET_NUMBER
3504
Direction
S
STREET_NAME
TURNPIKE
STREET_TYPE
RD
City
STOCKTON
Zip
95206
APN
17517018
CURRENT_STATUS
Active, billable
SITE_LOCATION
S TURNPIKE RD
P_LOCATION
99
P_DISTRICT
001
QC Status
Approved
Scanner
SJGOV\cfield
Supplemental fields
FilePath
\MIGRATIONS\SW\SW_4430_PR0515730_0 S TURNPIKE_2007.tif
Site Address
3504 S TURNPIKE RD STOCKTON 95206
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.
/
354
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
Data Evaluation Checklist--General Chemistry <br /> Location and Quarter; Sr; <br /> Reviewers Initials and Date Reviewed; '5✓ Method; J* <br /> SDG: ) <br /> Review Questions <br /> i• Were holding times met? Yes No Sample(Analytes)Affected/Comments <br /> 2 Were sample preservation requirements met? Flag <br /> 3• Was cooler receipt form completed? <br /> 4• Was method blank analyzed with each batch? <br /> s Were target analytes reported In the method blank below <br /> the MDL? If Yes, evaluate low level determinations of <br /> target analytes, <br /> �• Were target analytes reported in the method blank above <br /> the MDL? <br /> 7 Were target analytes reported in field blank or rinsate <br /> samples above the MDL? <br /> $• Was a field duplicate analyzed? Were RPDs within <br /> contract specifications? <br /> 9• Was an LCS analyzed with each batch? <br /> 10. Were LCS recoveries within contract spocificativns? <br /> 11, If applicable,was an MS/MSD pair analyzed with each <br /> batch? <br /> 11 Were MS/MSD recoveries and RPDs within contract <br /> specifications? <br /> 13. Were initial and continuing calibration standards <br /> analyzed at the contract-specified frequency for each <br /> instrument? v <br /> 14• Were these results within specifications? <br /> I5. Was a laboratory duplicate analyzed? Were RPDs within <br /> contract specifications? V1 <br /> 15. Were lab comments in report? If yes, summarize <br /> contents. v <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.