SU0004324 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Ernie Schenone,Jr. August 19,200.3 Schenone Specialty Foods, Inc. Page 4 concerns about the CVRWQCB review process and its.effect on your project. You stressed that your operation would have insignificant wastewater discharge and should not be subject to stringent requirements. You felt that Mr. Huggins had said something to the CVRWQCB to cause them to closely scrutinize your project. ➢ In a telefaxed letter to me,dated July S,2003,you requested assistance in completing the CEQA information portion of the WDR application. In my subsequent phone call to you I explained that the CDD is responsible for the CEQA aspect of you project and you indicated that you would contact them for assistance. The following are the EHD responses to the specific issues listed in your correspondence of July 24, I 2003. 1. Paragraph 1: You state that you have requested that the EHD assist you in communicating and coordinating with the CVRWQCB. • The EHD will continue to communicate, coordinate and attend meetings with you and the CVRWQCB concerning your project. The EHD will try to express any questions or. concerns you may have,but the ability or authority to set or change CVRWQCB conditions rests with the CVRWQCB. Paragraph 2: You state that you feel the CVRWQCB requirements are excessive and the information requested has already been provided "by the consultant hired upon recommendation of EHD staff, Don Chesney."You further state that you feel that their agency is not treating.your project in the same way it usually handles projects of this size and scope. You again mention ` your desire that the EHD help you "in coordinating a satisfactory response"to the CVRWQCB "that would be less onerous. " • The statement that the EHD"recommended" a specific consultant is not departmental practice. When a client requests the name of a consultant, contractor or other service provider, a minimum of three names is provided for the client to choose from. In this particular instance, the EHD was informed that your land use attorney,Michael Hakeem, recommended Mr. Chesney. • The EHD does not determine CVRWQCB policy regarding the RWD or WMR requirements. As has been discussed with you, other commercial industries of similar scope have been subject to the same CVRWCB requirements. Parapra h 3: You state that you feel the CVRWQCB initially had little interest in your project, but became inordinately concerned about it after conversations with Mike Huggins of my staff. • You contend that the CVRWQCB is placing more stringent requirements on your project because of EHD staff involvement. I refer you to the CVRWQCB response to the initial CDD agency referral in October 2002(Attachment 2),which states that WDRs will be required and a RWD must be submitted. • After meeting with you on June 12`h, I contacted Wendy Wyels,CVRWQCB,by phone on June 13,2003. 1 asked her if Mike Huggins had said something to her that caused the CVRWQCB to place more stringent conditions on your project. She said that Mr. Huggins had not said or done anything to affect the requested information. She said the requested RWD and preparation of WDRs or granting of a waiver are standard requirements for a project of this type. She indicated that once the requested RWD is submitted,then staff would be able to evaluate your operation. Paragraph 4: You again express your dissatisfaction with what you perceive as our department's lack of assistance to you. In addition,you pose the following direct questions about the regulatory role of the EHD in your project.