Laserfiche WebLink
�� <br /> , ��� <br /> Hi Stacy, <br /> Attached are the revised reports for HO'M Kwik Serve. <br /> T1100k WD�� <br /> � <br /> 1�.0bK i=raNk <br /> La-senArx-S <br /> 3297 N, VWiWe�KtAVe. <br /> aA._93722 <br /> 9 <br /> ���l �������� r��De <br /> »~`�// —" — ^- \ '- <br /> /«�5�\ <br /> +~��/ 444Fax <br /> From:Stacy Rivera [EH] <br /> Sent: Friday, May 2S, ZO1D3:59PM <br /> To: 'Bobbie Frank'« > <br /> Subject: HO'K4 - 8VV#98, 2SU1Jackson Ave, Esca|on <br /> Hi Bobbie, <br /> Here isalist ofthe items xvediscussed regarding the test resu|ts... <br /> Secondary containment test results from the 8/30/17 testing(received 4/16/28): <br /> -The summary page, Part 3, did not include tank annu|arsorpiping. <br /> -Parts 6 and 7 stated hydrostatic testing was used, but did not include test equipment. <br /> -The page numbers were left blank and several extra (possibly duplicate) pages were included. <br /> Monitoring system certification test results for 8/30/17 (received 4/16/18): <br /> -The results incorrectly state in Section B,that all leak detectors are Red Jacket.The 91 leak detector isVM|. <br /> -In Section B, leak detector information does not include models. <br /> -Section Ddid not include the software version installed. <br /> -Section D has marked that monitoring equipment was replaced, but does not state which equipment. <br /> -No setup tape oralarm history was included. <br /> -The UST Monitoring Site Plan onpage 4was left blank. <br /> -Spill bucket test results for all three buckets were not included. Onthe date uftesting all three buckets were <br /> tested. The O7passed, the 91and diesel failed. <br /> Spill bucket test results for 10/6/17 (received 4/16/18): <br /> -A|| three spill buckets are listed on the test results, but only the diesel spill bucket was tested on 10/6/17. The 91 and <br /> diesel buckets were tested on 9/1/17. the 91 passed,the diesel failed. <br /> No spill bucket test results were received for 9/1/l7testing. <br /> 4 <br />