My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
SITE INFORMATION AND CORRESPONDENCE 2002 - 2013
Environmental Health - Public
>
EHD Program Facility Records by Street Name
>
C
>
CHEROKEE
>
3535
>
3500 - Local Oversight Program
>
PR0544497
>
SITE INFORMATION AND CORRESPONDENCE 2002 - 2013
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/28/2019 2:57:40 PM
Creation date
5/28/2019 2:40:21 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
EHD - Public
ProgramCode
3500 - Local Oversight Program
File Section
SITE INFORMATION AND CORRESPONDENCE
FileName_PostFix
2002 - 2013
RECORD_ID
PR0544497
PE
3528
FACILITY_ID
FA0003687
FACILITY_NAME
OLD TRUCK STOP, THE
STREET_NUMBER
3535
STREET_NAME
CHEROKEE
STREET_TYPE
RD
City
STOCKTON
Zip
95205
APN
13206009
CURRENT_STATUS
02
SITE_LOCATION
3535 CHEROKEE RD
P_LOCATION
99
P_DISTRICT
002
QC Status
Approved
Scanner
SJGOV\wng
Tags
EHD - Public
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
194
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
San Joaquin County <br /> Environmental Health Department DIRECTOR <br /> ?' =�� '•9 Donna Heran, REHS <br /> 600 East Main Street <br /> Stockton, California 95202-3029 PROGRAM COORDINATORS <br /> Robert McClellon,REHS <br /> �. <br /> Jeff Carruesco, REHS, RDI <br /> Website: www.sjgov.org/ehd Kasey Foley, REHS <br /> i F o R Linda Turkatte, REHS <br /> Phone: (209) 468-3420 <br /> Fax: (209) 464-0138 <br /> March 23, 2012 <br /> Mr. Ellis Cecchini <br /> Cecchini Cecchini & Giovannoni <br /> 3000 E. 18th Street <br /> Antioch, CA 94509 <br /> Subject: Cherokee Truck (former) CUF#: 8109 <br /> 3535 E. Cherokee Road RO#: 0118 <br /> Stockton, CA 95205 <br /> Dear Mr. Cecchini, <br /> The San Joaquin County Environmental Health Department (EHD) is in receipt of your letter <br /> dated 02 March 2012, in which you describe a recent telephone conversation, your concerns <br /> regarding completing the corrective .action on your site, and your request that your case be <br /> assigned to another caseworker. <br /> In view of your concerns and request, your case has been assigned to me for future oversight. <br /> You may call, email, or write to me at anytime with questions, concerns.or requests related to <br /> your case. Let me assure you that the EHD is not, and has not been planning any enforcement <br /> action regarding this site at this time. The interest of the EHD is to move your site toward <br /> closure in an expeditious manner. <br /> In 2010 and 2011, the Five-Year Review Committee (FYRC) of the State Water Resources <br /> Control Board Cleanup Fund (CUF) recommended that the EHD .review your site for closure. <br /> Despite the EHD responses to the FYRC that it would be prudent to remediate the secondary <br /> source of contaminants to the extent practicable, to date the FYRC has not changed its <br /> recommendation. A recommendation by the FYRC for site closure (which the FYRC commonly <br /> phrases as a recommendation to review or consider site closure) has real consequences. Once <br /> a closure recommendation has been made, the CUF limits its allocation to a site to $10,000, <br /> which can be utilized only for closure-related costs, not costs related to additional corrective <br /> action. This policy has recently been put into law. If closure costs exceed $10,000, the CUF can <br /> increase the reimbursable costs beyond the $10,000. <br /> In view of the potentially severe impact an FYRC closure recommendation can have on a <br /> responsible party who conducts additional corrective action after the FYRC recommendation <br /> has been made, the EHD is very reluctant to direct or approve additional corrective action. As <br /> the CUF is the superior agency and the FYRC staff is comprised of competent professionals, <br /> the EHD must carefully weigh their professional opinions. Therefore, despite the EHD's opinion <br /> that some benefit could be derived by remediating the secondary source to the extent <br /> practicable, the EHD directed submittal of a case closure report. <br /> Change of Caseworker Letter 0312 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.