My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
REMOVAL_1988
Environmental Health - Public
>
EHD Program Facility Records by Street Name
>
F
>
FLORA
>
1722
>
2300 - Underground Storage Tank Program
>
PR0502921
>
REMOVAL_1988
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/11/2021 3:29:21 PM
Creation date
11/5/2018 9:46:56 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
EHD - Public
ProgramCode
2300 - Underground Storage Tank Program
File Section
REMOVAL
FileName_PostFix
1988
RECORD_ID
PR0502921
PE
2381
FACILITY_ID
FA0005616
FACILITY_NAME
PARAGON VENTURES INC
STREET_NUMBER
1722
Direction
E
STREET_NAME
FLORA
STREET_TYPE
ST
City
STOCKTON
Zip
95205
APN
14109030
CURRENT_STATUS
02
SITE_LOCATION
1722 E FLORA ST
P_LOCATION
01
P_DISTRICT
001
QC Status
Approved
Scanner
SJGOV\rtan
Supplemental fields
FilePath
\MIGRATIONS\F\FLORA\1722\PR0502921\REMOVAL 1988.PDF
QuestysFileName
REMOVAL 1988
QuestysRecordDate
5/3/2013 8:00:00 AM
QuestysRecordID
153172
QuestysRecordType
12
QuestysStateID
1
Tags
EHD - Public
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
27
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
CERTIFIED ANALYTICAL REPORT <br /> The certified analytical report generated by the laboratory is the official <br /> document in which they issue their findings. The certified analytical report <br /> should be closely reviewed when samples are taken from below waste oil tanks <br /> as any detection of the EPA halogenated and purgeable aromatic compounds may <br /> be grounds for requiring further action. The certified analytical report is <br /> included as an attachment at the close of this report. <br /> GENERAL ADVISORY ON POSITIVE RESULTS <br /> Though our firm specializes in sampling, monitoring and documentation, rather <br /> than interpretation and remediation, we have been asked by the engineering <br /> staff of the Regional Water Quality Control Board to include in our reports <br /> an advisory section outlining the general type of additional actions which <br /> may be required when contamination is found. This advisory is not intended <br /> to characterize conditions at this particular site or replace the services of <br /> a consulting firm specializing in the investigation, characterization and <br /> remediation of such conditions as may exist. Rather, it is intended to <br /> advise you that such additional actions may be required even though some time <br /> may elapse before you are contacted by one of the interested regulatory <br /> agencies. <br /> In Region 2 (which is regulated by the San Francisco Regional Water Quality <br /> Control Board), the thresholds are readily defined in the Board's <br /> publication, Guidelines For Addressing Fuel Leaks. According to this <br /> document, soil which has less than 100 parts per million total petroleum fuel <br /> hydrocarbon (TPH) contamination does not generally require immediate <br /> additional action. Board engineers emphasize that this does not mean that <br /> some action might not be required in the future. Still, the site is assigned <br /> a low priority unless it is situated in an area of high hydrogeologic <br /> concern. <br /> The detection of more than 100 ppm TPH in the native soil beneath a tank is <br /> generally considered grounds for requiring an additional investigation in the <br /> form of soil borings and installation of at least one groundwater monitoring <br /> well followed by periodic monitoring. The detection of 1000 ppm TPH is <br /> usually viewed by the Board as an unacceptable level of fuel saturation which <br /> will mandate excavation of the effected ground down to the furthest <br /> practicable reach of conventional excavating machinery followed by soil <br /> borings and installation of groundwater monitoring wells. <br /> Other regions use different standards for determining when a groundwater <br /> investigation will be required. For example benzene is often used in lieu of <br /> TPH. Even very low levels of benzene are often seen as grounds for requiring <br /> a subsurface investigation. This criteria may be relaxed or stiffened <br /> depending on the location of the site in relation to different groundwater <br /> systems, the depth to water, type of soil, and the concentrations of benzene <br /> involved. <br /> Sampling Report 88306-M-2 AL WILLIAMSON page 6 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.