Laserfiche WebLink
San Joaquin County PW—Solid Waste Responses to Comments <br /> FR[i FAX N0. Nov, 09 2006 05:41PM P2 <br /> ENVIRONMENT AL <br /> N lONlENT1L HEALTH <br /> 1L1 EPART ENT <br /> ¢SIN SAN JOAQUIN COUNTY <br /> q yK Donna K Reran,R.E.HS. Program Coordinators <br /> r�=r tar 344 East WeberAvenue,Third Floor Cart Borgman.R.E,H.S, <br /> Laurie A.Cotutla,R.E.H.S. Stockton,California 45202-2708 Mike Huggins,R E.H.S..R.W. <br /> .a `p.. <br /> c; o Margaret Logorio,R.ERS.Asaastanz Director Telephone:(209)468-3420 <br /> Robert McClollon,R.B.tt.S. <br /> Fax:(209)464-0138 Jeff Canuesco,R E.H.S. <br /> Website:www.sjgov.org/eb(V tcasey Foley,PLEAS. <br /> November 1,2006 <br /> Ms.Claudia Gemberling <br /> San Joaquin County <br /> 1814 East Hazelton Avenue <br /> Stockton,CA 9S20S <br /> Subject: SCH No.2006062113—Draft Environmental Impact Report(DEIR)for North County <br /> Recycling Center and Sanitary Landfill(NCRC&SL)Permit Revision,SWIS Number 39-AA-0022,San <br /> Joaquin County. <br /> 'Dear Ms.Gemberling: <br /> The San Joaquin County Environmental Health Department(EHD)staff has reviewed the document and <br /> has the following comments for this proposed project as part of the California Environmental Quality Act <br /> (CEQA)process. <br /> 1. The proposed changes include an increase in the number of vehicles and tonnages that the <br /> site is allowed to accept.The number of vehicles and tonna o <br /> de o ac s c uta G fac by d es <br /> n t osid t1AG heI ty*Sigel ul o=1=. .The Draft Environmental 3.1 <br /> Impact Report(DESA)needs to ewablate the facility design to determine site capacity <br /> capability tegarding the proposed additional vehicles and tonnages.The evaluation <br /> should consider site roads,size of working face,capability of the onsite equipment, <br /> number of employees,waste handling processes,and any other attribute that would limit <br /> or affect the safe operation of the site. <br /> 2. tion will be limited.The DEM references the Sou <br /> Joaquin Count Development.Title,Chapter 94 025.9,and the proximity of sensitive <br /> receptors,but makes no direct limitations on the hours of operation.The project 3-2 <br /> description needs to limit the hours of operation or analyze for the impacts assoclated <br /> with 24-hour operations, The EM would not be able to issue a permit that allows 24- <br /> hour operations without the proper CEQA analysis. <br /> 3. The hours of operation start and extend into times when there is limited or no daylight. <br /> The document indicates that there will not be any portable lighting at the site.Light <br /> sources were not analyzed as part of the 13M.The BED would norbe able to issue a <br /> permit if the facility cannot meet local,state and Federal statues and regulations.Title 27 3.3 <br /> California Code of Regulations(T27CCR)section 20580 states,141Phere operdrioM are <br /> conducted during hours of darkness,the site and/or equipment shall be equipped with <br /> adequate lisrhtiug,M t o n rc m tars t gn_,ryxg, m i r <br /> the a ec" ss o o e f' _"The lighting provided by the equipment is not adequate <br /> to conduct safe load <br /> Page 1 of 3 <br /> Final Environmental Impact Report November 22 2006 <br /> NCRC&SL Permit Revision 2-15 <br /> J&S 06307.06 <br />