My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
CORRESPONDENCE_1970-2004
Environmental Health - Public
>
EHD Program Facility Records by Street Name
>
T
>
TURNPIKE
>
3504
>
4400 - Solid Waste Program
>
PR0515730
>
CORRESPONDENCE_1970-2004
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
1/5/2026 3:55:53 PM
Creation date
6/27/2024 2:07:06 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
EHD - Public
ProgramCode
4400 - Solid Waste Program
File Section
CORRESPONDENCE
FileName_PostFix
1970-2004
RECORD_ID
PR0515730
PE
4430 - SOLID WASTE CIA SITE
FACILITY_ID
FA0012310
FACILITY_NAME
WORLD ENTERPRISES
STREET_NUMBER
3504
Direction
S
STREET_NAME
TURNPIKE
STREET_TYPE
RD
City
STOCKTON
Zip
95206
APN
17517018
CURRENT_STATUS
Active, billable
SITE_LOCATION
S TURNPIKE RD
P_LOCATION
99
P_DISTRICT
001
QC Status
Approved
Scanner
SJGOV\cfield
Supplemental fields
Site Address
3504 S TURNPIKE RD STOCKTON 95206
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.
/
306
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
1 requirements of 17 CCR §§ 20919 and 20937(a) and on the ground that passive venting <br /> 2 of landfill gas is not suitable remediation for the site. <br /> 3 <br /> RadioShack submits that the Department's rejection of the URS <br /> 4 <br /> Remediation Plan was arbitrary, capricious or otherwise unreasonable for several <br /> 5 <br /> 6 reasons. First, as discussed in Issue No. 1,the requirements of sections 20919-20937 of <br /> 7 Title 17 of the California Code of Regulations are not legally applicable to the World <br /> 8 Enterprises Site since no wastes were disposed at the site after October 9, 1991. <br /> 9 Secondly, a passive venting system will adequately control landfill gases at the site and <br /> 10 prevent any risk of fire or explosion. Third, the Department has not provided any <br /> 11 <br /> technical or scientific explanation in support of its conclusion that passive venting of <br /> 12 <br /> 13 landfill gas is not suitable remediation for the site. Fourth, it is not reasonable for the <br /> 14 Department to require submission of a final remedial plan prior to a full investigation of <br /> 15 the extent of any landfill gas plume at the site. Without completing an investigation of <br /> 16 the extent of any plume,the installation of active remediation system could either be <br /> 17 ineffective or could even lead to further migration of landfill gas. <br /> 18 <br /> 19 <br /> 20 <br /> 21 <br /> 22 <br /> 23 <br /> 24 <br /> 25 <br /> 26 <br /> 27 <br /> 28 <br /> 1-SF/7170386.1 4 <br /> Notice of Appeal,Request for Administrative Hearing& Initial Statement of Issues <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.