Laserfiche WebLink
ASTATE OF CALIFORNIA—HEALTH AND WELFARE 4ACY * -W- GEORGE DEUKMEJIAN, Governor <br /> DEPARTMENT OF HEALTH SERVICES D '- <br /> 714/744 P STREET <br /> SACRAMENTO, CA 95814 wt\ <br /> H�AL� <br /> (916) 322-3670v�PL ACES <br /> ENVFER���(/SERV <br /> - _ July 20, 1988 <br /> Ms. Tammi Simpson <br /> Delta Plating, Inc. <br /> 818 S. Stanislaus Street <br /> Stockton, CA 95206 <br /> Dear Ms. Simpson: <br /> INCORRECTLY COMPLETED MANIFESTS, TAX REFUND <br /> The Department of Health Services (DHS) reviewed the information <br /> you initially submitted on July 9, 1986 and your subsequent letters <br /> dated September 26, 1986 (addressed to Anita Follett) ; November 13 , <br /> 1986 (addressed to David J. Leu, Ph.D. , Chief) and; May 5, 1988 <br /> (addressed to Stan Lau) regarding the correction of your 1985 <br /> hazardous waste manifests. You requested that DHS confirm that <br /> Delta Plating's hazardous waste was not a restricted hazardous <br /> waste in order to receive a tax refund from the State Board of <br /> Equalization for the period of July through December in 1985 <br /> (Account #HA HQ 36-006192) . <br /> According to your letters, Delta Plating filled out incorrect <br /> information under Item J for the following 7 manifests: 84192133, <br /> 84553590, 84192135, 84506002 , 84192160, 84192158, and 84506451. <br /> This information in Item J described the waste as containing 5% <br /> chromic acid, 5% nickel, 5% copper, and 85% water. These levels of <br /> chromic acid and nickel, assuming these metals are dissolved, would <br /> categorize the hazardous waste as a restricted hazardous waste <br /> pursuant to Section 66900 (b) , Title 22, California Code of <br /> Regulations (CCR) . Delta Plating supplied the following <br /> documentation that its information in Item J is incorrect: <br /> 1. IT Corporation analytical report on predisposal sample of Delta <br /> Plating' s wastewater indicating that nickel and chromium are <br /> each less than 10 parts per million; and <br /> 2 . Copies of the manifests, noting the handling codes in Item K <br /> indicated the wastes were hazardous and not restricted <br /> hazardous. <br /> The above documentation was insufficient for DHS to make the <br /> requested confirmation. DHS obtained additional waste analyses <br /> from IT Corporation on June 14, 1988. These analyses were <br /> performed on representative samples from each Delta Plating waste <br /> shipment received by the IT Corporation facility. <br /> Based on the analytical data from the predisposal sample and the <br /> shipment samples, we conclude that the Delta Plating wastewater <br /> shipped under the above mentioned 7 manifests was not a restricted <br /> hazardous waste. <br />