My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
COMPLIANCE INFO_2025
EnvironmentalHealth
>
EHD Program Facility Records by Street Name
>
P
>
PACIFIC
>
6131
>
1900 - Hazardous Materials Program
>
PR0519508
>
COMPLIANCE INFO_2025
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/28/2025 1:20:06 PM
Creation date
1/28/2025 1:12:30 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
EHD - Public
ProgramCode
1900 - Hazardous Materials Program
File Section
COMPLIANCE INFO
FileName_PostFix
2025
RECORD_ID
PR0519508
PE
1920 - HMBP-Common Materials
FACILITY_ID
FA0002324
FACILITY_NAME
PACIFIC AVE
STREET_NUMBER
6131
STREET_NAME
PACIFIC
STREET_TYPE
AVE
City
STOCKTON
Zip
95207
APN
09746418
CURRENT_STATUS
Active, billable
QC Status
Approved
Scanner
SJGOV\kblackwell
Supplemental fields
Site Address
6131 PACIFIC AVE STOCKTON 95207
Tags
EHD - Public
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
23
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
reports to meet this requirement but having this written record and having DO reports meet all <br />requirements area ctualLy two separate things. So yes, there are issues with the DO reports —but <br />ultimately, the separate issue is that now the facility is not meeting the requirement to have a <br />written record of alarms/responses. It might be a good idea to create a template with days 1-31 <br />for each month with space to write in alarms and responses that you can stick on a clipboard or <br />in a binder or wherever. Every morning Mohammad or whoever is on site that day can write down <br />any alarms that printed out overnight and then write down anythat occur during their shift. To be <br />clear, this is NOT something the DO would fill out — it would be your employees. This would <br />ensure that you all know if/when alarms are happening so that you don't rely so heavily on your <br />DO to fulfill this requirement. It would allow you to easily identify if alarms are being missed by <br />the DO and also serve as great training for your staff on appropriate responses to alarms. They <br />may not know what to do the first time they write down a Fuel alarm or a PLLD shutdown alarm, <br />but after they see it 2-3 times and they can easily look at the previous month to see what the <br />appropriate response was last time this alarm came up, it'll become routine. We've seen other <br />sites do this and have it work very smoothly after the first few months of the learning curve. <br />0 1 also spoke with the program lead about this since you sent all the work orders you have, and a <br />few alarms are still unexplained. This ties in heavily with my note above. Having that alarm log <br />that your staff is responsible for maintaining would make it much simpler to tie work orders to <br />alarms to ensure that all alarms are being responded to appropriately. Your RTC statement for <br />this one could indicate that you aren't able to locate documentation of responses to all alarms <br />but that you have a plan now and describe your plan. Thank you for that suggestion. After we got <br />off the phone, I spoke to both Nik (owner of Eco-Chek) and Felix (DO Inspector) and Felix did <br />confirm he did make notes of the alarms, but the version of the reports sent to us did not include <br />Ithese notes, so moving forward he will make sure that all alarms are appropriately logged on the <br />version of the DO reports that are sent over to us. Additionally, they also suggested that the staff <br />monitor the veeder root alarms through the use of an alarm log, which I was able to locate and <br />send to the owner to have print out for both of his sites and to review with staff expectations <br />around this log. They will be expected to document any alarms and what actions were taken. <br />This will help us determine the appropriate course of action and will allow to ascertain if there is <br />an ongoing issue, especially if the same error message continues to pop up on the veeder root. <br />0 <br />o Here is the public records linkwe talked about: https•//lfweb sjgov.org/EHD/Welcome.asl2x - If it <br />helps, here's a quick step-by-step for navigating the public records. Start by clicking the link to <br />"Browse EHD Program Records by Address" link. Then click the second folder labeled "EHD <br />Program Facility Records by Street Name". This is where it gets weird —You first look for the <br />street name, then the street number. Since this facility's address is 6131 Pacific you would start <br />by scrolling down and clicking the linkfor "P", then scroll down until you see "Pacific". Click the <br />link for "Pacific" and then scroll down untilyou see 6131. It's strange because all address that <br />start with 1 come first (everything in the 100's and everything in the 1000's) before going to <br />addresses that start with 2 (everything in the 200's and everything in the 2000's). So, you have to <br />scroll all the way past every address that starts with 1-5 to find 6131. Thank you, I was able to <br />navigate through the site and found all of the required reports except for the overfill prevention <br />from 03/29/22. 1 checked all three years (2021, 2022 and 2023) and still could not locate it. All <br />other reports have been downloaded and placed into the appropriate folder and are available <br />electronically onsite. <br />• #69 —Resolved <br />D <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.