My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
SITE INFORMATION AND CORRESPONDENCE
Environmental Health - Public
>
EHD Program Facility Records by Street Name
>
M
>
MAIN
>
419
>
3500 - Local Oversight Program
>
PR0545347
>
SITE INFORMATION AND CORRESPONDENCE
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
2/6/2020 6:04:04 PM
Creation date
2/6/2020 3:25:20 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
EHD - Public
ProgramCode
3500 - Local Oversight Program
File Section
SITE INFORMATION AND CORRESPONDENCE
RECORD_ID
PR0545347
PE
3528
FACILITY_ID
FA0003685
FACILITY_NAME
DBA CIRCLEK, REFUEL PETROLEUM INC.
STREET_NUMBER
419
Direction
S
STREET_NAME
MAIN
STREET_TYPE
ST
City
MANTECA
Zip
95336
APN
21938610
CURRENT_STATUS
02
SITE_LOCATION
419 S MAIN ST
P_LOCATION
04
P_DISTRICT
005
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.
/
175
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
r� <br /> FISCH <br /> ENVIRONMENTAL <br /> CONSTRUCTION SERVICES s'01? <br /> San Joaquin County <br /> Environmental Health Dept. <br /> 304 East Weber Ave. Third Floor <br /> Stockton, CA. 95202 <br /> December 30, 1998 <br /> Attn: Jeffrey Wong, REHS <br /> Re:Response to Tetter Dated Dec."23, 1398 <br /> Boyett Petroleum,Manteca site, Site code1433 <br /> Dear Mr. Wong: <br /> As per our telephone conversation on December 30, 1998 and in response to your letter,I <br /> would like to take this time to rebut some of your points and statements contained within. <br /> Point number one, we as the environmental drilling contractor have no way to know <br /> what the work plan contains, or any subsequent changes that may arise between the <br /> consultant and regulator. We also have no control of the sampling locations or <br /> sampling intervals these items are dictated by the consultant to us and not left up to <br /> our interpretation of the situation. So as I have explained, your statement written in <br /> your letter dated December 23, 1998 is incorrect,that we had no jurisdiction in such <br /> matters as depths or locations of said borings. My understanding is you left the site <br /> and with only a RECOMMENDATION to advance the borings to 30 feet with my <br /> driller standing in attendance and once left with the consultant alone could only go by <br /> his direction and can not be held responsible for there direction in this matter. <br /> Point number two,is the situation pertaining to the grouting of the two borings at the <br /> site location in question. The consultant WHF, INC. performed the grouting while <br /> the driller was deconing his equipment, unknown to the driller. Once the driller <br /> realized what had happen,that the holes were grouted and the cores placed back in <br /> their respective holes. The driller expressed concern over the situation and was told <br /> that WHF had done this before and would be all right. The driller then inquired if he <br /> should stay until regulator arrived, he was told that WHF had to sample the soil stock <br /> pile out back of the property and if he should arrive he would explain the situation <br /> and call if anything needed to be done different. Although it is the responsibility of <br /> the drilling contractor to insure that the grouting goes according to the County <br /> regulation, we sometimes can't account for an over zealous consultant trying to get <br /> done early. <br /> 1040 W.KETTLEMAN LANE • SUITE IB-156 9 LODI,CALIFORNIA 95240 • PHONE(209)367-4563 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.