Laserfiche WebLink
r7Thiss exactly what is being calculated on Page 8 of my report for the value of"I"! For example:I do an irrigation analysis for a farmer and she/he tells me they applied"36 inches last yr," <br /> she/he is referring to the height of irrigation water applied over their irrigated acres, which is <br /> easily calculated to a volume. This acre-feet/yr volume is the same volume as cu ft/yr in the <br /> equation to determine"the rate of wastewater entering the soil averaged over the gross developed area in <br /> inches per yr."Again: the numerator determines the total wastewater discharged per year in cubic <br /> feet, or could be in an equivalent volume in ac ft; cu ft are used to arrive at the units of in/yr. <br /> The denominator is determining the area. Using the numbers in the equation on Page 8,we find <br /> the following: There are 325,851 gallons in an ac-ft. Total wastewater generated was estimated <br /> to be 971,712 gals/yr or 129, 908 cu ft/yr; both are the same volume as 2.982 ac-ft/yr. We now <br /> have an equivalent ac-ft volume in the numerator, but area has to be determined in the <br /> denominator,which is equivalent to "gross developed area"or the same as "irrigated acreage." <br /> Now we have the area in sq ft in the denominator and the calculation follows with units <br /> canceling: <br /> 2.982 ac-ft/yr= 129,908 cu ft/yr = 1.157 in/yr <br /> 30.94 Ac x 43,560 sq ft/Ac= 129,896 sq ft x 0.0833 (1 ft/12 inches) <br /> The author of Attachment 1 then goes into a rainfall analysis that is incredible overkill for such <br /> an inexact science as nitrate loading. It is an inexact science because of the number of unknowns <br /> that cannot be accurately quantified and are continually changing. These unknowns should be <br /> easily recognizable by anyone with just a cursory knowledge of nitrate loading, and they total to <br /> well over a dozen. When there is this many unknowns or variables, variability is superimposed <br /> over variability, leading to greater variability! <br /> The author goes into great detail about the role a retention basin would contribute to the nitrate <br /> loading assessment, but then fails to recognize and make a judgement analysis about what <br /> contribution a retention basin would make as a dilution factor to the resultant wastewater <br /> recharge, which is readily discussed in the scientific literature. The author apparently also fails to <br /> recognize that rainfall volumes can actually be beneficial in mitigating nitrate loading by forcing <br /> denitrification in certain soils. <br /> My reports go into great detail addressing and discussing the vast majority of the variables that <br /> exist in a nitrate loading analysis. I work with assessing and quantifying nitrogen in the soil and <br /> groundwater environments almost on a daily basis and I see these variables involved. The fact <br /> remains that there are a number of viable methods to calculate, or rather guesstimate, nitrate <br /> loading from a project. <br /> a4tofessio4 <br /> Respectfully submitted, � or v �hes�� <br /> CHESNEY CONSULTING 4 <br /> � r• <br /> No.7.,s479 <br /> a <br /> * <br /> `ar Civil <br /> Don Ches ey, PE/CC7er <br /> e°f Califos� <br /> Registered Civil Engi75479 <br /> Certified Crop Advisor/CA Registered Nitrogen Management Specialist 4341829 <br /> Page 2 of 3 <br /> Chesney Consulting <br />