My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
CORRESPONDENCE_1990 - 1992
EnvironmentalHealth
>
EHD Program Facility Records by Street Name
>
C
>
CORRAL HOLLOW
>
31130
>
4400 - Solid Waste Program
>
PR0440003
>
CORRESPONDENCE_1990 - 1992
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
6/28/2024 2:28:57 PM
Creation date
2/2/2021 2:07:17 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
EHD - Public
ProgramCode
4400 - Solid Waste Program
File Section
CORRESPONDENCE
FileName_PostFix
1990 - 1992
RECORD_ID
PR0440003
PE
4434
FACILITY_ID
FA0003698
FACILITY_NAME
CORRAL HOLLOW LANDFILL
STREET_NUMBER
31130
STREET_NAME
CORRAL HOLLOW
STREET_TYPE
RD
City
TRACY
Zip
95376
APN
25303010
CURRENT_STATUS
01
SITE_LOCATION
31130 CORRAL HOLLOW RD
P_LOCATION
99
P_DISTRICT
005
QC Status
Approved
Scanner
SJGOV\cfield
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.
/
244
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
permit require the County to file documentation on every <br /> load delivered to the site. This seems severe and overly <br /> restrictive. This is a policy that you might require of a <br /> site that consistently accepted hazardous and designated <br /> waste, not of a site operated as well as the Corral Hollow <br /> Landfill. <br /> Do you really intend to require the County to provide <br /> documentation on every load received? <br /> 2 . Records - Monthly Tonnage Reports: The County was cited for <br /> submission of monthly tonnage reports to your office. The <br /> monthly reports have been and are continuing to be submitted <br /> to your office within the 30-day period that you requested. <br /> Therefore, why was the County cited for a records violation <br /> for this site when there was no violation? <br /> 3 . Weeds as Area of Concern: The inspection report said that <br /> weeds on the slopes are high and that they should be cut by <br /> the next inspection. The only reason given for requiring <br /> vegetation to be cut is that it is too high. <br /> The vegetation on the slopes is there for a purpose - it <br /> provides protection against wind and soil erosion and <br /> through evapotranspiration, inhibits moisture from entering <br /> the landfill. The County does not cut the vegetation <br /> because the equipment used would damage the vegetation, <br /> loosen the soil, and cause erosion, thereby allowing <br /> moisture infiltration into the site to increase. <br /> If fire protection is your true concern, it should have been <br /> noted that fire breaks were installed around the base of the <br /> slopes and that no vegetation was present at the top of the <br /> slopes. <br /> The County believes that it is unreasonable and against good <br /> landfill practices to cut the vegetation on the slopes, and <br /> requests that you reconsider requiring the County to cut the <br /> vegetation. <br /> It was a great disappointment to me to find that such a well-run, <br /> well-operated, and clean landfill received these types of <br /> citations. Please let me know if you would like to meet with me <br /> to discuss the subject further, or you may call me at 468-3066. <br /> TH:GK:vj <br /> R: \VIRGINIA\INSPECT.CH <br /> FILE NO. LA 21103 <br /> Attachments <br /> 2 <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.