My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
ARCHIVED REPORTS_XR0012756
Environmental Health - Public
>
EHD Program Facility Records by Street Name
>
N
>
NOWELL
>
26200
>
3500 - Local Oversight Program
>
PR0545614
>
ARCHIVED REPORTS_XR0012756
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
5/18/2020 8:56:43 AM
Creation date
4/27/2020 4:00:57 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
EHD - Public
ProgramCode
3500 - Local Oversight Program
File Section
ARCHIVED REPORTS
FileName_PostFix
XR0012756
RECORD_ID
PR0545614
PE
3528
FACILITY_ID
FA0009531
FACILITY_NAME
UFP Thornton LLC
STREET_NUMBER
26200
STREET_NAME
NOWELL
STREET_TYPE
Rd
City
Thornton
Zip
95686
CURRENT_STATUS
02
SITE_LOCATION
26200 Nowell Rd
P_LOCATION
99
P_DISTRICT
004
QC Status
Approved
Scanner
SJGOV\sballwahn
Tags
EHD - Public
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
345
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
PI SASE ADDRESS REPLY TO: <br /> 7R� ENVIRONWINTAL SERVICES <br /> VALLEY POST OFFICE BOX 1211 <br /> GROWt=RS MODEST(),CALIFORNIA 95353 <br /> IWOctober 9, 1991 <br /> Ms,Laurin Cotulla <br /> San Joaquin County Public Health Services 0 C T 1 + _ <br /> Environmental Health Division <br /> ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH <br /> P.O,Box 2009 PERIMIT/SERVICES <br /> Stockton,CA 95241 <br /> (Dear use Coto& <br /> ` I am enclosing RF.SNWs response to Sari Joaquin County Public Health ServicoEnvironmental <br /> Health Division(PHS/UM)letter of September 10,1991. I would like to add additional comments to item <br /> numbers 5,7 and 8, <br /> The open pit was a safety hazard and I wrote a letter to the San Joaquin Local Health District <br /> (SJLHD) in 1987 requesting a decision and instruction from SJM to .return the excavated soil if the <br /> analytical analysis show no contamination. I received no response. EPISCO Eaviranmeatal Services followed <br /> up with a letter to ifs.Gordon Boggs,CVRWQCB,on July 1,1988,outlining a proposal to called eight sail <br /> samples from the pile and to have the laboratory composite the eight samples and rua an analysis on the <br /> composite sample. We received no response. As stated in REVA's response, ,at the time and rurmdy in <br /> some areas,one composite sample was/is considered adequately representative for a volume of soil considerably <br /> Iess than 50 cubic Yards". 7 he eight samples were drawn,composited and aaalyzD& The result of the analysis <br /> shoved no contamination, The results were reported to CVRWQCB and PHS/EHD and we reol no <br /> comments. the piled soil was returned to the pit in I990. <br /> I have been involved with this project from its iacepidon and have mads every s'ffort to comply with <br /> PHSM requirements for the remediation of this contamination. I fail to understand why additional <br /> sampling and eaplana�;arY is accessary every tame whew stuff member is assigned to the project Msamp e <br /> is It=7. If there was a problem,it should have been addressed at the time and not four years later. <br /> P.O.Box 7114, 1255 Buttery St.,San Frdncisco,Califortria 94120-7714 Phone:(415)445-1500 Telex:27.9046 FAX.f415)445.1623 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.