My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
SITE INFORMATION AND CORRESPONDENCE_FILE 2
EnvironmentalHealth
>
EHD Program Facility Records by Street Name
>
P
>
PERSHING
>
4444
>
2900 - Site Mitigation Program
>
PR0540885
>
SITE INFORMATION AND CORRESPONDENCE_FILE 2
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
4/10/2020 9:16:19 AM
Creation date
4/10/2020 9:06:46 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
EHD - Public
ProgramCode
2900 - Site Mitigation Program
File Section
SITE INFORMATION AND CORRESPONDENCE
FileName_PostFix
FILE 2
RECORD_ID
PR0540885
PE
2960
FACILITY_ID
FA0023381
FACILITY_NAME
FORMER EXXON SERVICE STATION NO 73942
STREET_NUMBER
4444
Direction
N
STREET_NAME
PERSHING
STREET_TYPE
AVE
City
STOCKTON
Zip
95207
APN
11022017
CURRENT_STATUS
01
SITE_LOCATION
4444 N PERSHING AVE
P_LOCATION
01
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.
/
189
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
1 <br /> INSTRUCTIONS ON EVALUATION OF ENVIRONMENTAL IMPACTS: <br /> 1) A brief explanation is required for all answers except "No Impact" answers that are adequately supported <br /> by the information sources a lead agency cites in the parentheses following each question. A "No Impact" answer <br /> is adequately supported if the referenced information sources show that the impact simply does not apply to <br /> projects like the one involved (e.g.,the project falls outside a fault rupture zone). A "No Impact" answer should <br /> be explained where it is based on project-specific factors as well as general standards (e.g., the project will not <br /> expose sensitive receptors to pollutants, based on a project-specific screening analysis). <br /> 2) All answers must take account of the whole action involved, including off-site as well as on-site, <br /> cumulative as well as project-level, indirect as well as direct, and construction as well as operational impacts. <br /> 3) Once the lead agency has determined that a particular physical impact may occur,then the checklist <br /> answers must indicate whether the impact is potentially significant, less than significant with mitigation,or less <br /> than significant. "Potentially Significant Impact" is appropriate if there is substantial evidence that an effect may <br /> be significant. If there are one or more "Potentially Significant Impact" entries when the determination is made, <br /> an FIR is required. <br /> 4) "Negative Declaration: Less Than Significant With Mitigation Incorporated" applies where the <br /> incorporation of mitigation measures has reduced an effect from "Potentially Significant Impact"to a"Less Than <br /> Significant Impact." The lead agency must describe the mitigation measures, and briefly explain how they reduce <br /> the effect to a less than significant level (mitigation measures from Section XVII, "Earlier Analyses," may be <br /> cross-referenced). <br /> 5) Earlier analyses may be used where,pursuant to the tiering,program EIR, or other CEQA process, an <br /> effect has been adequately analyzed in an earlier FIR or negative declaration. Section 15063(c)(3)(D). In this <br /> case, a brief discussion should identify the following: <br /> a) Earlier Analysis Used. Identify and state where they are available for review. <br /> b) Impacts Adequately Addressed. Identify which effects from the above checklist were within the <br /> scope of and adequately analyzed in an earlier document pursuant to applicable legal standards, <br /> and state whether such effects were addressed by mitigation measures based on the earlier <br /> analysis. <br /> C) Mitigation Measures. For effects that are "Less than Significant with Mitigation Measures <br /> Incorporated," describe the mitigation measures which were incorporated or refined from the <br /> earlier document and the extent to which they address site-specific conditions for the project. <br /> 6) Lead agencies are encouraged to incorporate into the checklist references to information sources for <br /> potential impacts(e.g., general plans, zoning ordinances). Reference to a previously prepared or outside document <br /> should, where appropriate, include a reference to the page or pages where the statement is substantiated. <br /> 7) Supporting Information Sources: A source list should be attached, and other sources used or individuals <br /> contacted should be cited in the discussion. <br /> 8) This is only a suggested form, and lead agencies are free to use different formats; however, lead agencies <br /> should normally address the questions from this checklist that are relevant to a project's environmental effects in <br /> whatever format is selected. <br /> 9) The explanation of each issue should identify: <br /> a) The significance criteria or threshold, if any, used to evaluate each question; and <br /> b) The mitigation measure identified, if any,to reduce the impact to less than significance <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.