My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
SITE INFORMATION AND CORRESPONDENCE
Environmental Health - Public
>
EHD Program Facility Records by Street Name
>
W
>
WATERLOO
>
4648
>
3500 - Local Oversight Program
>
PR0545864
>
SITE INFORMATION AND CORRESPONDENCE
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/21/2020 9:08:54 AM
Creation date
7/21/2020 8:47:13 AM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
EHD - Public
ProgramCode
3500 - Local Oversight Program
File Section
SITE INFORMATION AND CORRESPONDENCE
RECORD_ID
PR0545864
PE
3528
FACILITY_ID
FA0004530
FACILITY_NAME
MARLOWE PROPERTY
STREET_NUMBER
4648
STREET_NAME
WATERLOO
STREET_TYPE
RD
City
STOCKTON
Zip
95215
CURRENT_STATUS
02
SITE_LOCATION
4648 WATERLOO RD
P_LOCATION
99
P_DISTRICT
002
QC Status
Approved
Scanner
LSauers
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.
/
220
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
i <br /> RECEIVER.,"' ' <br /> SEp o 4 1992 <br /> July 22, 1992 ENVIRONMENTAL HEALTH <br /> Chief of the Division <br /> UST Cleanup Fund Program !I <br /> State Water Resources Control Board <br /> Division of Clean Water Programs 1� <br /> P.O. Box 944212 <br /> Sacramento,. CA 94244--2120 <br /> RE: APPEAL OF FINAL STAFF DECISION ON CLAIM NUMBER 43 <br /> REQUEST FOR FINAL DECISION FROM THE CHIEF OF THE DIVISION ; <br /> Dear Chief of the Division: f <br /> In accordance with Article 5 of the Underground Storage Tank <br /> Cleanup Fund Regulations we are hereby requesting a final <br /> ! Division decision. We find that the response to our initial <br /> request for a Final Staff Decision does not directly address <br /> the issues that we raised. We would like once again to spell <br /> out the issues as we interpret them, so that)you may more <br /> f closely review them both in the interest' <br /> of fairness as well <br /> r as in the interest of upholding the intent of the fund to <br /> provide monies for clean-up to small businesses , that are <br /> without adequate funds to do so on their <br /> jiown} We would very <br /> much appreciate it if you would first review our initial <br /> letter of appeal of May 13 , 1992 directed to Deaner, <br /> since it spells out our position in some deta1 afong with <br /> documentation of our income status. Thel� following will <br /> summarize the issues which form the basis of.' our appeal. <br /> ! The first issue is an administrative one. concerning .how wide <br /> { a net your staff has cast in calculating "annual receipts" . <br /> Our basis for challenge directs itself to the Department' s <br /> position wherein it states that annual receipts "includes but <br /> is not limited to all gross - receipts. wages and pensions, <br /> interest, dividends , captial gains, rents, and royalties. " <br /> That is clearly a much broader definition ofdannual receipts <br /> than is called for by Title 2. Section 1895 of the California <br /> Code of Regulations governing the definitioni� of a Small <br /> Business, which states: "all pecuniary receipts. . . .of a <br /> business concern from whatever source derived, as entered or <br /> to have been entered on its regular books ofaccount or its }' <br /> most recently completed fiscal year. " Since-{ it has been your i <br /> department' s stated intent to categorize' and;itherefoxe <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.