Laserfiche WebLink
1 Based upon a review of the applicable statutory and regulatory provisions, <br /> 2 RadioShack believes that 17 CCR § 20919-10937 prescribe regulatory requirements for <br /> 3 <br /> the control of landfill gases at Municipal Solid Waste Landfills ("MSWLA"). Section <br /> 4 <br /> 20164 of Title 17 of the CCR defines the term"MSW landfill"to expressly exclude any <br /> 5 <br /> 6 facility which did not receive any waste after October 9, 1991. Since the World <br /> 7 Enterprises Site ceased receiving any wastes no later than 1978, RadioShack does not <br /> 8 believe that the provisions of sections 20919-20937 are applicable to the facility. <br /> 9 Accordingly,the Department was without legal authority to order Tandy or RadioShack <br /> 10 to comply with the requirements established by those regulations. <br /> 11 <br /> 2. Whether Any Wastes Were Received or Disposed At <br /> 12 The World Enterprises Site After October 9, 1991? <br /> 13 In the event that the Department contests when solid wastes were received <br /> 14 at the World Enterprises Site, RadioShack requests a hearing regarding the date that solid <br /> 15 <br /> wastes were last received at the site. This issue must be determined in order to determine <br /> 16 <br /> 17 whether the site is subject to the requirements of 17 CCR §§ 20919-20937. <br /> 18 3. Whether The Department's Rejection of the Remediation Plan Submitted <br /> by RadioShack Was Arbitrary, Capricious, or Otherwise Unreasonable? <br /> 19 <br /> In response to requests by the Department, RadioShack employed a <br /> 20 <br /> 21 national environmental consulting firm, URS Corporation,to install monitoring wells <br /> 22 and to prepare a Remediation Plan to monitor and control landfill gases at the World <br /> 23 Enterprises Site. On behalf of RadioShack, URS Corporation submitted a Remediation <br /> 24 Plan to the Department, dated October 25, 2004 (Exhibit C). The Department rejected <br /> 25 the Remediation Plan in a letter dated November 15, 2004. Exhibit B. In particular,the <br /> 26 <br /> Department rejected the Remediation Plan on the grounds that it did not meet the <br /> 27 <br /> 28 <br /> 1-SF/7170386.1 3 <br /> Notice of Appeal,Request for Administrative Hearing& Initial Statement of Issues <br />