My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
ARCHIVED REPORTS_MONTHLY STATUS REPORT - APRIL 2013
Environmental Health - Public
>
EHD Program Facility Records by Street Name
>
L
>
LINCOLN
>
1444
>
2900 - Site Mitigation Program
>
PR0527031
>
ARCHIVED REPORTS_MONTHLY STATUS REPORT - APRIL 2013
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
2/28/2020 11:37:44 AM
Creation date
2/28/2020 8:44:36 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
EHD - Public
ProgramCode
2900 - Site Mitigation Program
File Section
ARCHIVED REPORTS
FileName_PostFix
MONTHLY STATUS REPORT - APRIL 2013
RECORD_ID
PR0527031
PE
2957
FACILITY_ID
FA0018318
FACILITY_NAME
FORMER COLUMBO / TOSCANA BAKERY
STREET_NUMBER
1444
Direction
S
STREET_NAME
LINCOLN
STREET_TYPE
ST
City
STOCKTON
Zip
95206
APN
16503005
CURRENT_STATUS
01
SITE_LOCATION
1444 S LINCOLN ST
P_LOCATION
99
P_DISTRICT
001
QC Status
Approved
Scanner
SJGOV\sballwahn
Tags
EHD - Public
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
80
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
Is Data V (circle) Preservation Temperature <br /> ( If Known ) <br /> YES ) <br /> Unknown (°C) <br /> Stantec Lab Validation Form <br /> Project/Client : Chevron 92033 - Stockton Charter Way Commingled Plume <br /> Project No . : 211602057 <br /> Lab Work Order No . . 84721 <br /> Date of Validation : 04/29/2013 <br /> Date of Analysis : 04/26/2013 <br /> Date of Sampling . 04/26/2013 <br /> Completed By : Jose Yan <br /> Circle/Highlight <br /> Signature : Yes or No <br /> 1 . Was the analysis the one requested ? es No <br /> 2 . Do the sample number(s) on the chain- of- custody (COC) match the one (s) that appear on es No <br /> the laboratory data sheet? <br /> 3 . Were samples prepared (extracted , filtered , etc . ) within EPA holding times? Yes No <br /> 4 . Once prepared/extracted , were the samples analyzed within the EPA holding times ? Yes No <br /> 5 . Were Laboratory blanks performed , if so , were they below non-detect? No <br /> 6 . Are the units correct? (i . e . , soil samples in mg /kg or pg/g , water samples mg /L , pg/L , and air Yes No <br /> samples in volume mg/m^3 , etc . ) <br /> 7 . Were appropriate Matrix Spike ( MS ) and Matrix Spike Duplicate ( MSD) samples included in Yes No <br /> the laboratory batch sample? <br /> 8 . In lieu of MS/ MSD , were surrogate spike (SS ) or surrogate spike duplicate ( SSD) samples es No <br /> included in the laboratory batch samples ? <br /> 9 . Were MS/ MSD (or SS/SSD ) within the acceptable range of % recovery ( i . e . , approx 80- es No <br /> 120 % depending on analyte) ? <br /> 10 . Were MS/MSD (or SS/SSD) values used to calculate Relative Percent Difference (RPD ) ? es No <br /> 11 . Were RPD values within the acceptable range ( i . e . ± 25 %) ? <br /> es No <br /> If any answer is no , explain why and what corrective action was taken : <br /> Lab Validation Form . doc Stantec <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.