My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
COMPLIANCE INFO_PRE 2019
Environmental Health - Public
>
EHD Program Facility Records by Street Name
>
N
>
NAVY
>
3505
>
2200 - Hazardous Waste Program
>
PR0513831
>
COMPLIANCE INFO_PRE 2019
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/6/2020 5:02:39 PM
Creation date
1/6/2020 4:55:34 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
EHD - Public
ProgramCode
2200 - Hazardous Waste Program
File Section
COMPLIANCE INFO
FileName_PostFix
PRE 2019
RECORD_ID
PR0513831
PE
2220
FACILITY_ID
FA0002052
FACILITY_NAME
NuStar Terminals Operations Partnership L.P.
STREET_NUMBER
3505
STREET_NAME
NAVY
STREET_TYPE
DR
City
STOCKTON
Zip
95206
APN
16203004
CURRENT_STATUS
01
SITE_LOCATION
3505 NAVY DR
P_LOCATION
01
P_DISTRICT
001
QC Status
Approved
Scanner
SJGOV\dsedra
Tags
EHD - Public
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
158
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
where the bulk of BPO's hazardous waste is generated and collected in the <br /> underground sump. <br /> We completed both the UST and hazardous waste generator inspection back in <br /> the BPO office with the paperwork review. Mr. Trevena reviewed BPO's <br /> contingency plan and asked Mr. Krebsbach if the facility had utilized this plan <br /> since the last inspection. Mr. Krebsbach indicated that they had not. Mr. <br /> Trevena and I reviewed BPO's personnel training records, Biennial Report, and <br /> their waste *minimization plan. We were furnished with a copy of BPO's waste <br /> minimization plan. <br /> While reviewing the five manifests generated for 1992, Mr. Trevena and I noted <br /> that land disposal restriction notifications and/or certifications were not <br /> accompanying any of the manifests. The wastes were designated as D018 on <br /> three of the manifests, and as D018/D001 or just D001 on the other two. Mr. <br /> Trevena and I discussed this with Ms. Sue Norton of BPO headquarters on the <br /> telephone. She indicated it was her understanding that LDR <br /> notification/certification was not required for those wastes for which treatment <br /> standards are not available, i.e., D018 is for Benzene for which there is no <br /> current treatment standard. Mr. Trevena informed both Ms. Norton and Mr. <br /> Krebsbach that he would discuss this matter with Cal-EPA, DTSC and get back to <br /> them with a determination. <br /> DI. DISCUSSION WITH MANAGEMENT: <br /> Mr. Trevena and I discussed the findings from both the UST and the hazardous <br /> waste generator inspection with Mr. Krebsbach. We informed him of the <br /> potential for the LDR violations pending consultation with Cal-EPA, DTSC. Mr. <br /> Krebsbach was told that he would be contacted with the outcome. Mr. <br /> Krebsbach indicated he had no questions. With the inspection completed, Mr. <br /> Trevena and I left the premises at 2:45 p.m. <br /> 3L ADDENDUM: <br /> November 9, 1993: <br /> Mr. Trevena spoke with Mr. Alan Ito of Cal-EPA, DTSC who clarified the LDR <br /> requirements as follows: For wastes for which no treatment standard exists, a <br /> LDR notification is required, e.g., DO18. For wastes that have a treatment <br /> standard, both a LDR notification and certification are required to accompany the <br /> manifest to the treatment, storage, and disposal facility. <br /> I telephoned Mr. Krebsbach and informed him of this conclusion. As a result, all <br /> manifests are in violation since none possessed either a certification or <br /> notification. <br /> c: Tim Naprawa, Cal-EPA, Department of Toxic Substances Control <br /> 4 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.