Laserfiche WebLink
Modification of IRM4PRs -2- • 29 March 1993 <br /> DDRW, Tracy <br /> Disposal Alternative Analysis in the Report of Waste Discharge (RWD) , a <br /> monthly water balance for the period of one year, for the ponds to asses <br /> available capacity throughout the year. This analysis should consider a <br /> scenario for average rainfall as well as one/or the wettest winter on record. <br /> Based on the amount of available capacity year round, we can consider a <br /> revision of your IRM requirements. <br /> In the meantime, in order to allow the groundwater IRM to start up again, DDRW <br /> Tracy may discharge its effluent to the stormwater pond. Since there is <br /> sufficient capacity, there should not be any threat to water quality by <br /> starting the discharge now, one month early, and continue through October. <br /> During this period, groundwater effluent may also be discharged, on a <br /> temporary basis, to the evaporation-percolation ponds 1 and 2. Both the <br /> stormwater pond and the evaporation-percolation ponds must be operated to <br /> provide sufficient capacity for their intended use as respectively stormwater <br /> and waste water effluent ponds. <br /> As stated in our 17 February 1993 letter to DDRW, Tracy, in order to issue the <br /> WDRs prior to the Final ROD, currently scheduled for 4 September 1993, you <br /> will need to complete a RWD for the disposal of the treated ground water from <br /> OU-1 . To accomplish our objective of adopting the revised WDRs prior to the <br /> Final ROD for OU-1, the RWD must be submitted as soon as possible, but no <br /> later than 15 May 1993. <br /> The RWD must include a disposal alternative analysis and must identify all <br /> disposal options including reuse, industrial or irrigation uses, and <br /> discharges to land. The RWD should include recommendations for several <br /> disposal options, to maintain operational flexibility. Discharge to the <br /> stormwater pond should be evaluated in this context. A discharge to surface <br /> water is the least preferred alternative. The RWD should also address any <br /> changes to the current IRM permit, such as treatment capacity, anticipated <br /> influent/effluent characteristics and injection well rehabilitation needs, in <br /> order for us to prepare Draft Revisions. <br /> If you have/any questions, please call James Taylor at (916)255-3065. <br /> WA . <br /> V J. VORSTER <br /> Senior WRC Engineer <br /> JDT:jt <br /> cc: Mr. Marshall Cloud, Defence Distribution Region West, Tracy, Tracy <br /> Mr. Steve Light, U. S. Army Corps of Engineers, Huntsville, Alabama <br /> Mr. Michael Work, U. S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region IX, San <br /> Francisco <br /> Mr. Jim Pinasco, Department of Toxic Substances Control , Region 1 , <br /> Sacramento <br /> Ms. Dianne Hinson, Public Health Services of San Joaquin County, <br /> Environmental Health Department, Stockton <br />