Laserfiche WebLink
Cary Keaten • - 3 - • 9 August 2004 <br /> 9. The RWD lists a number of street median areas to which wastewater will be applied as land <br /> application areas. However,because no tailwater control measures are provided in the report, <br /> staff has removed the areas from consideration. This results in less land application area <br /> available to the Discharger. The Discharger must address the issue of tailwater runoff at all land <br /> application sites. This is an issue that is not confined to the median areas but may be more <br /> problematic in small land application areas. Please describe how tailwater will be controlled, <br /> reapplied, or returned to the wastewater storage pond. Removal of a portion of the land <br /> application area requires resubmittal of the water balance. <br /> 10. The RWD identifies 40-mil HDPE as the synthetic liner material. Please describe how that <br /> material was selected and quality assurance measures that will be implemented to ensure the liner <br /> functions as intended. In particular, show whether the wastewater that percolates beneath the <br /> liner will impact groundwater. <br /> 11. The issue of inflow and infiltration is not presented in the RWD. Although the collection system <br /> will be new,the inflow and infiltration evaluation should address the system as it ages. Please <br /> provide more information on the River Island pumping station. Staff notes the plans call for a <br /> peak wet weather pumping capacity of only 0.48 million gallons per day (mgd)while Mossdale <br /> Landing's pumping station is designed for a peak flow of 2.3 mgd. Staff notes that much of the <br /> collection system is likely to be below groundwater for significant portions of the year, which can <br /> result in significant infiltration. <br /> 12. Please reevaluate the water balance with the comments above in mind. In the 26 January 2004 <br /> Incomplete Draft Report of Waste Discharge correspondence staff requested a single water <br /> balance. The July 2004 RWD contained two water balances. Please consolidate the two water <br /> balances into one. The Discharger must present the RWD as a means to treat and discharge of <br /> wastewater in accordance with the requirements of the Regional Board. Staff should not be <br /> relied upon to reconcile differing approaches between developers and their consultants. Staff <br /> intends to prepare the tentative WDRs with an interim flow rate of 250,000 gpd and a final flow <br /> rate of 750,000 gpd, unless you justify otherwise. Please submit a water balance for the interim <br /> flow rate and the final flow rate. <br /> 13. Please submit a technical report that describes the installation of all the groundwater monitoring <br /> wells. The RWD indicated some of the wells might have been damaged by construction <br /> equipment. The Discharger shall also submit a Groundwater Monitoring Well Investigation and <br /> Repair or Destruction workplan that addresses all potentially damaged wells. The workplan shall <br /> be consistent with the first section of the attached groundwater well installation guidance <br /> document. Any additional groundwater monitoring wells planned for installation related to this <br /> project shall be installed consistent with a workplan submitted and approved by Regional Board <br /> staff. <br /> 14. The groundwater data is incomplete. In some areas such as the River Islands Phase I (Howland <br /> Road) land application area no groundwater investigation has been performed. This conflicts <br /> with the statement in the 26 January 2004 Incomplete Draft Report of Waste Discharge <br /> correspondence that stated, "At a minimum, groundwater monitoring wells must be present at all <br /> land application areas and storage ponds." In other areas (Crescent Park, The Green, River Park, <br /> WISut dcni Joe wnLLa p�R PM1 N Wn6Aug NMC <br />