SITE INFORMATION AND CORRESPONDENCE

Home Browse Search

j • Chronology 515 Charter Way, Stockton Page 3 12/14/04 Date of SJC/EHD correspondence notifying RP that he is out of compliance with regulatory directives and if a work plan is not submitted within 14 days of the letter, the site will be referred to the Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board (CVRWQCB) or the San Joaquin County District Attorney's Office. 04/06/05 Date of SJC/EHD correspondence notifying RP of a meeting scheduled for 04/21/05 to discuss his non-compliance with regulatory directives. 04/21/05 Meeting date, Mr. Rodgers, the RP did not appear. RP's consultant previously informed SJC/EHD that Mr. Rodgers had called them and requested they attend the meeting with him. 05/20/05 Date of SJC/EHD correspondence notifying RP of a meeting set up at his request for 05/31/05. He was directed to have a work plan with him to submit, or be prepared to give us a date prior to 07/01/05 that the work plan will be submitted. 05/31/05 Meeting held this date at SJC/EHD office that RP attended with his consultant. It was agreed that a site investigation work plan would be submitted by 06/30/05, it would be reviewed prior to 07/31/05 and implemented within one month of approval. 07/26/05 Date of SJC/EHD correspondence approving part of the work plan but requesting an addendum to the work plan be submitted by 09/02/05. The work plan had proposed conducting another air sparge test but it was too vague to be approved. 08/31/05 Site investigation work plan addendum submitted this date. The proposal to conduct another air sparge test had been removed from the plan. 09/16/05 Date of SJC/EHD correspondence responding to the work plan addendum. RP was directed to submit all required permits and to proceed with implementation; a report of findings was due within 60 days following completion of the fieldwork, and was to include an updated site conceptual model and proposal for further remedial feasibility testing. 12/14/05 Date of SJC/EHD correspondence reminding RP that he had agreed to implement the work plan within one month of approval. RP was directed to submit permit applications and fees by 01/03/06; implement the work plan by 01/27/06; submit a report of findings by 03/24/06. 12/29/05 Fees for one well permit were submitted by RP this date, but no permit application was submitted with it, and more than one permit is needed for the scope of work. 01/27/06 Permit applications still have not been submitted and work has not begun.