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
11/13/2024 3:17:12 PM
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: Method: �rX JO <br /> Reviewers initials and Date Reviewed:' SDG: O k �/X t <br /> Review Quest ons Yes No Sample(Analytes)Affected/Comments Flag <br /> 1. Were holding times met? <br /> 2. Were sample preservation requirements met? <br /> 3. Was cooler receipt form completed? V <br /> 4. Was method blank analyzed with each batch? ✓ <br /> 5. Were target analytes reported in the method blank below <br /> the MDL? if yes, evaluate low level determinations of S/ <br /> target analytes. <br /> 6. Were target analytes reported in the method blank above <br /> the MDL? V <br /> 7. Were target analytes reported in field blank or rinsate <br /> samples above the MDL? {I/� <br /> 8. 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 specifications? <br /> 11, if applicable,was an MS/MSD pair analyzed with each <br /> batch? <br /> 12. Were MS/MSD recoveries and kPDs within contract <br /> specifications? <br /> 13. Were initial and continuing calibration standards <br /> analyzed at the contract-specified frequency for each <br /> instrument? N� <br /> 14. Were these results within specifications? <br /> 15. Was a laboratory duplicate analyzed? Were RPDs within <br /> contract specifications? V <br /> 16. Were lab comments in report? I yes,summarize <br /> contents. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.