My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
COMPLIANCE INFO
EnvironmentalHealth
>
EHD Program Facility Records by Street Name
>
T
>
TRETHEWAY
>
18247
>
2900 - Site Mitigation Program
>
PR0545762
>
COMPLIANCE INFO
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
9/10/2020 11:01:46 AM
Creation date
9/10/2020 10:51:49 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
EHD - Public
ProgramCode
2900 - Site Mitigation Program
File Section
COMPLIANCE INFO
RECORD_ID
PR0545762
PE
2965
FACILITY_ID
FA0025908
FACILITY_NAME
R & G SCHATZ WINERY
STREET_NUMBER
18247
Direction
N
STREET_NAME
TRETHEWAY
STREET_TYPE
RD
City
LOCKEFORD
Zip
95237
CURRENT_STATUS
02
SITE_LOCATION
18247 N TRETHEWAY RD
QC Status
Approved
Scanner
SJGOV\sballwahn
Tags
EHD - Public
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
46
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
• DRAFT Staff Report -3- <br /> Administrative Civil Liability Complaint <br /> Rodney and Gayla Schatz dba Mokelumne Rim Vineyards <br /> San Joaquin County <br /> WDRs and stormwater requirements. <br /> 3. The Discharger has not complied with the groundwater monitoring portion of the WDRs. Staff has <br /> commented on workplans for the groundwater well installation in correspondence dated 27 August <br /> 2004, 5 May 2005, 21 July 2005, 29 August 2005, and 20 October 2005. The 20 October 2005 <br /> workplan, with a minor addendum, has been found acceptable. <br /> Submittal of Technical Reports Required by WDRs Provisions <br /> The Discharger has failed to submit technical reports or the technical reports that were submitted were <br /> incomplete. Staff has spent considerable time working with the Discharger's consultant but the effort <br /> has not resulted in acceptable documents in many cases. For example, staff has provided four reviews <br /> of incomplete groundwater monitoring workplans, a relatively simple document to prepare for <br /> experienced consultants. <br /> A number of technical reports were required in the Provisions section of the WDRs. A summary of the <br /> report status is presented in the table below: <br /> Submittal Comment <br /> Report Title Due Date Dates Dates Comments <br /> Water Balance and 6/17/04 6/24/04 8/30/05 NOV, Inadequate Report <br /> Treatment Report 6/7/05 8/23/05 NOV, Inadequate Report <br /> GW Characterization 6/17/04 6/28/04 8/27/04 Conditional Approval <br /> Workplan 3/14/05 5/5/05 Conditional Approval No. 2 <br /> 5/23/05 7/21/05 Conditional Approval No. 3 <br /> 8/18/05 8/29/05 Not Acceptable <br /> 10/20/05 10/26/05 Acceptable Report <br /> Land Application Area 7/13/04 2/14/05 8/23/05 NOV, Inadequate Report <br /> Improvement Report <br /> ---_..........._......_.....___.._......_ —-- – — -- ----.._.._ .__...._..... <br /> Operation and 7/13/04 2/14/05 8/23/05 NOV, Inadequate Report <br /> Management Plan <br /> GW Well Installation 9/15/04 Not Submitted <br /> Report <br /> Salinity Reduction Study 4/5/05 Not Submitted <br /> __..—._............ <br /> ...._._— <br /> Background GW 12/15/05 Not due yet but can't be <br /> Quality Report submitted on time as wells <br /> weren't submitted on time. <br /> W1StafltObricnMw JoaquinNokelm—Rim VineymdsV+CL Sept 0%ta f Repon.DOC <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.