My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
CORRESPONDENCE_2006-2007
Environmental Health - Public
>
EHD Program Facility Records by Street Name
>
H
>
HARNEY
>
1831
>
PR0440058
>
CORRESPONDENCE_2006-2007
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
12/21/2023 1:57:00 PM
Creation date
6/14/2021 4:06:53 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
EHD - Public
ProgramCode
4400 - Solid Waste Program
File Section
CORRESPONDENCE
FileName_PostFix
2006-2007
RECORD_ID
PR0440058
PE
4433
FACILITY_ID
FA0004518
FACILITY_NAME
NORTH COUNTY LANDFILL
STREET_NUMBER
17720
Direction
E
STREET_NAME
HARNEY
STREET_TYPE
LN
City
LODI
Zip
95240
APN
06512004
CURRENT_STATUS
01
SITE_LOCATION
17720 E HARNEY LN
P_LOCATION
99
P_DISTRICT
004
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.
/
425
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
Ms. Claudia Gemberling <br />July 21, 2006 <br />Page 6 of 6 <br />CIWMB California Environmental Quality Act Review <br />California Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) compliance is required for the establishment, expansion, <br />or change in operation(s) of a Solid Waste Facility (SWF) requiring the issuance or revision of a full Solid <br />Waste Facility Permit (SWFP). <br />Under CEQA Guidelines, CCR Section 1.5096, the CIWMB acting as a Responsible Agency, is required <br />to use the environmental document (ED) prepared by the Lead Agency in the CIWMB permit approval or <br />concurrence process. Once the ED is completed by the Lead Agency, CIWMB staff, as a Responsible <br />Agency, must determine whether or not the evaluation of potential environmental impacts assessed in the <br />ED is adequate for CIWMB use in the permitting process. <br />The purpose of CIWMB staff s review of an ED, during the preparation of the document, is to help <br />decision -makers 1) identify potential impacts from proposed projects, 2) determine whether any such <br />impacts are significant, and 3) ascertain whether significant impacts can be mitigated to a level of <br />insignificance in compliance with the CEQA statutes and guidelines. In order for <br />CIWMB staff to ascertain that the ED is adequate for our use in the permitting process, the proposed <br />project must be described in sufficient detail and the potential environmental impacts that may result from <br />the proposed project must be identified and evaluated clearly in the environmental assessment and offer <br />"mitigating measures, if any, included in the project to avoid potentially significant effects" (CEQA <br />Guidelines, Article 6, Section 15071 [e]). <br />If the Lead Agency identifies a potential significant environmental impact but finds that the impact is less <br />than significant or that no mitigation is available or necessary, supporting documentation and/or studies <br />should be specifically referenced and be made available for review or included in the ED to support such <br />analysis. <br />CEQA Analysis and SWFP Conditions <br />CEQA Guidelines (CCR) Section 15063(a)(1) states that: "All phases of project planning, <br />implementation and operation must be considered in the Initial Study of the project." This consideration, <br />when evaluating for a SWFP revision, should consider the potential environmental impacts of any <br />changes in design and operation of the facility that were not specifically considered in the existing SWFP. <br />When determining the adequacy of an ED for purposes of SWFP concurrence, CIWMB staff will <br />compare the design and operation of the facility as described in the SWFP with the project as described <br />and evaluated in the ED. <br />The first question is: does the CEQA evaluation for potential impacts resulting from the project <br />thoroughly assess the potential primary and secondary impacts to the environment and/or public health <br />and safety? The second question is: does the CEQA evaluation in the ED support the conditions of the <br />proposed permit? For instance, does the ED also assess the potential traffic, noise, dust, vector and other <br />impacts that can be associated with a significant increase in permitted waste throughput requested in a <br />SWFP? When this type of information is included and addressed in the ED, the CEQA process is greatly <br />facilitated. When this type of information is not included in the project description or elsewhere in the <br />ED, it becomes very difficult for CIWMB staff to determine the adequacy of the ED for purposes of our <br />environmental evaluation. <br />U:\Allstaff\CEQA\2006 DOCS\COUNTIES\San Joaquin-39\Comment Letters\2006062113 North County Recycling & SLF NOP.doc <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.