Laserfiche WebLink
likelihood that supplemental treatment would also be needed to overcome soil/percolation <br /> limitations in areas impacted by years of truck traffic.Recognition of the probable future <br /> need for supplemental treatment,and where it could be located,should be included in the <br /> plans and/or pen-nit documents,as clear notice to all parties. <br /> I would also note that the projected wastewater flows associated with maximum use of the <br /> facility indicate the possibility of exceeding 10,000 gpd,which would require review and <br /> potentially waste discharge permitting by the Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control <br /> Board. <br /> 3. Nitrate Loading Analysis. The revised nitrate loading analysis is consistent with my <br /> recommendations, and includes reasonable assumptions for runoff and groundwater recharge <br /> estimates. I noted an error in the calculation of the value of"R2"near the bottom of page 2. <br /> The total site acreage (45.67 acres)was used in place of the total runoff volume(36.08 ac- <br /> ft/yr),resulting in an overestimation of rainfall-recharge. Carried through,this results in an <br /> underestimation of the final nitrate-nitrogen,nr calculation(2.5 mg-N/L instead of 3.1 mg- <br /> NIL). This does not alter the final conclusion,which shows the projected nitrate-nitrogen <br /> loading to be safely within the threshold criterion of 10 mg-N/L. <br /> 2 <br />