Laserfiche WebLink
• • Page 1 of 3 <br /> ,,,yet the inspection reports for the past few years show: <br /> 409 WTs on the July 2012 report <br /> 150 WTs on the July 2013 report <br /> 93 WTs on the July 2014 report <br /> 162 WTs on the July 2015 report <br /> At the very least there should probably be 1 or more CTLs in the system for 57 WTs... <br /> the difference between July 2013 and 2014. <br /> Where do all their WTs come from? where do they go? how do they leave? <br /> The inspection should focus solely on CTLs, but they need to pay particular attention to <br /> CTLs. <br /> , c I <br /> From: Strough, Barbara@Ca1Re ycle <br /> Sent: Monday, February 08, 2016 9:25 AM <br /> To: Emery, Kyle@CalRecycle <Kyle.Emery@calrecycle.ca.gov> <br /> Subject: FW: Complaint TPID 1302407, San Joaquin Co <br /> I <br /> Under "inspection type" at the top of the report they would choose "referral" and then <br /> choose "complaint" as type of referral. Nothing else needs to be written in the report <br /> about the referral. They should do a complete inspection,not just a tire count. <br /> L <br /> file:///C:/Users/bescotto/AppData/Local/Microsoft/Windows/Temporary%20... 2/9/2016 <br />