My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
SITE INFORMATION AND CORRESPONDENCE FILE 3
Environmental Health - Public
>
EHD Program Facility Records by Street Name
>
C
>
COUNTRY CLUB
>
2705
>
3500 - Local Oversight Program
>
PR0544595
>
SITE INFORMATION AND CORRESPONDENCE FILE 3
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/24/2019 10:55:23 AM
Creation date
6/24/2019 10:04:02 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
EHD - Public
ProgramCode
3500 - Local Oversight Program
File Section
SITE INFORMATION AND CORRESPONDENCE
FileName_PostFix
FILE 3
RECORD_ID
PR0544595
PE
3528
FACILITY_ID
FA0002048
FACILITY_NAME
TESORO (Shell) 68221(WRR 6290)
STREET_NUMBER
2705
STREET_NAME
COUNTRY CLUB
STREET_TYPE
BLVD
City
STOCKTON
Zip
95204
APN
12121008
CURRENT_STATUS
02
SITE_LOCATION
2705 COUNTRY CLUB BLVD
P_LOCATION
01
P_DISTRICT
003
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.
/
112
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
Page 1 of2 <br /> r <br /> Mike Infurna [EH] <br /> From: Mike Infuma [EH] <br /> Sent: Friday, January 02,2009 9:17 AM ' <br /> To: 'gkowtha@stratusinc.net' <br /> i <br /> Cc: 'sbittenger@stratusinc.net' <br /> pwr Yeo <br /> Subject: Palisades Gas, 2705 Country Club Stockton <br /> / 1'1 <br /> Hello Gowri, Scott <br /> hope all is well. <br /> I got a chance to look at the Geotracker submittal for 3rd Quarter - 2008 for this <br /> site. <br /> I wasn't very happy with the 'empty' feeling I got after reading it. <br /> The report did not include any discussion of the site or the site's contamination <br /> plume and NO recommendations for future plans other than sampling were <br /> included. Why? <br /> The site does not qualify for NFA with the elevated concentrations of the petroleum <br /> COCs in the gw and without a discussion of the extent, migration, and status of the <br /> gw plume I have NO idea what Palisades or Stratus is thinking for this site. If I were <br /> to assume, I would think you were noVianning anything. NOT good. <br /> I need to see a "Conclusions" and a "Recommendation" section in the next QMR <br /> that clearly and completely address the site and the concurrent status and <br /> immediate future plans. <br /> What are your plans for the site this year? let me know if this is a problem for <br /> you. <br /> just so you know where I'm coming from, I'll be clear with my intent. <br /> NO more just monitoring on sites NOT qualified for NFA. If the site is NOT <br /> considered laterally and vertically defined, be prepared to submit a work plan to <br /> gather the data needed to support delineation. If the plume is defined, and for this <br /> site, exceeds COC concentrations for NFA, be prepared to submit a Feasibility <br /> Study to the EHD soon. If approved and you want to conduct a pilot study/test, be <br /> prepared to submit this work plan. Based on pilot results and plume stability, be <br /> prepared to submit an IRAP or RAP soon thereafter. I will be closely monitoring <br /> this site this year. <br /> Please continue to call and advise me of ALL field work at this site. I'll need NLT 2- <br /> working days notice to confirm inspection appointments. <br /> 1/2/2009 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.