Laserfiche WebLink
+ Ernie Schenone,Jr. August 19,2003 <br /> Schenone Specialty Foods, Inc. Page 6 <br /> completion of RWD review and the WDRs process. The paragraph quoted above is <br /> standard language used to allow initial construction of a project to proceed on the <br /> condition that the applicant will comply with all waste discharge requirements. This <br /> statement also provides notice to the applicant that approval of the issuance of <br /> construction permits does not constitute approval of the proposed wastewater disposal <br /> method. <br /> e. Can you provide details of the above-mentioned conversation between Mike Huggins and <br /> Wendy Wyels? <br /> The details of this conversation are contained in the second to the last paragraph on <br /> Page 2 of the April 30`h letter to you from the EHD," <br /> 2. You ask who in the EHD will be involved with or influence decisions affecting the construction <br /> and operation of your facility. <br /> At Olsen,Environmental Health Program Manager,administers the EHD Land Use, <br /> Liquid Waste, Well Construction and Dairy Programs supervised by Mike Huggins, <br /> Supervising RENS,RDI,and Ray Borges,Lead Senior REHS,RDI. In addition;' <br /> Laurie Cotulla,Environmental Health Program Manager, supervises the Lead Senior <br /> RENS P <br /> staff operate the EHD public counter and assists with land use projecis..:Mr. <br /> Olsen and Ms. Cotulla are available to assist or respond to inquiries concerning-your <br /> project, in addition to the Land Use and Liquid Waste Program supervisory and field <br /> staff. Both the construction and on-going inspection and monitoring of the <br /> Alternative/Engineered Septic System will be performed by REHS field staff assigned <br /> to the Liquid Waste Program. When you proceed with the retail phase of your,project, <br /> the plan review,permit issuance and routine inspection activities will be performed by <br /> the REHS field staff assigned to the Food Program,supervised by Mark Barcellos, <br /> Supervising REHS. <br /> 3. The following issues relate to the letter to you from the EHD dated April 30, 2003: <br /> a. In Point#3 Mr. Huggins requires a Flowmeter on the ouy7ow of our septic system pumps. <br /> We request that this meter be omitted. We will have two water services to our property. <br /> The existing water supply will supply the existing building and irrigation system. The new <br /> water main will supply only the new manufacturing building. We will already be supplying <br /> a water meter for water into the building. The flow of water into the septic system will be <br /> easily calculated by subtracting the water used in ourproduct as an ingredient(from our <br /> production records)from the County water meeting[sic]readings. We have concerns <br /> about the additional expense of the meter and of its reliability in such an application. <br /> As stated in the Nitrate Loading Study, Soil Suitability Study and Septic System <br /> Design report submitted by Chesney Consulting, the volume of wastewater discharged <br /> is critical to proper function of the disposal system.Using the calculation method you <br /> propose would grossly overstate the actual amount of water discharged to the septic <br /> system, since irrigation and outside water usage would be included in the total metered <br /> y e <br /> In addition flow meters <br /> with only the portion ingredients deducted.used as in , <br /> amount po $ <br /> are commonly used in industry and are readily <br /> designed for wastewater applications y <br /> gn Pp <br /> available. <br /> b. In point#4 Mr. Huggins states we will be on a yearly septic permit instead of a one-time <br /> fee. <br /> i3 See Attachment 7: EHD letter of April 30,2003. <br /> i <br />