My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
SITE INFORMATION AND CORRESPONDENCE
EnvironmentalHealth
>
EHD Program Facility Records by Street Name
>
O
>
120 (STATE ROUTE 120)
>
17000
>
2900 - Site Mitigation Program
>
PR0523467
>
SITE INFORMATION AND CORRESPONDENCE
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
11/19/2024 4:01:10 PM
Creation date
4/2/2020 4:34:16 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
EHD - Public
ProgramCode
2900 - Site Mitigation Program
File Section
SITE INFORMATION AND CORRESPONDENCE
RECORD_ID
PR0523467
PE
2965
FACILITY_ID
FA0007060
FACILITY_NAME
WINE GROUP, THE
STREET_NUMBER
17000
Direction
E
STREET_NAME
STATE ROUTE 120
City
RIPON
Zip
95366
APN
24506030
CURRENT_STATUS
01
SITE_LOCATION
17000 E HWY 120
P_LOCATION
99
P_DISTRICT
005
QC Status
Approved
Scanner
SJGOV\sballwahn
Tags
EHD - Public
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
44
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
CLEANUP AND ABATEMENTS s ER NO.R5-2004-0704 J 2 <br /> THE WINE GROUP,INC. <br /> FRAN21A WINERY <br /> SAN JOAQUIN COUNTY <br /> 9. All process area stormwater and facility wastewater drains to two sumps, from which it is pumped <br /> to the vineyards for land application. The waste is treated passively by the land and/or taken up by <br /> the crop. <br /> 10. From 1935 through 1995,process wastewater was discharged to a series of percolation/ <br /> evaporation (P/E)ponds located south of the paved portion of the facility. <br /> 11. In 1995, the Discharger began discharging the wastewater directly to the vineyard. At that time, <br /> the P/E ponds were filled in and planted with grapes. <br /> 12. In 2002, a portion of the former P/E pond area was converted into a 12.6 acre-foot emergency <br /> discharge reservoir where process wastewater and storm water can be diverted during high-flow or <br /> emergency situations. <br /> 13. Wastewater is currently applied in an alternating fashion to a network of 3-foot wide by 2-foot <br /> deep furrows that are plowed between the rows of vines. Between applications, the furrows are <br /> allowed to dry and are then disked and reconstructed prior to the next wastewater application. <br /> 14. During the irrigation season, the volume of wastewater applied to the vineyard is typically <br /> augmented with well water in order to meet the irrigation demands of the crop. The well water is <br /> applied through a drip system. <br /> SOIL AND GROUNDWATER CONDITIONS <br /> 15. Site topography is flat and level, and site soils are predominantly sandy loams. Soil permeabilities <br /> range from moderately-rapid to rapid,with rates of water intake ranging from 1.5 inches to 3.0 <br /> inches per hour. <br /> 16. Three groundwater monitoring wells(MW-1, MW-2, and MW-3) have been constructed on the <br /> site. The total depth of MW-1 and MW-2 is reportedly approximately 80 feet below ground <br /> surface (bgs), with screened intervals between 50 and 80 feet bgs. The total depth of MW-3 is <br /> approximately 56 feet bgs, with a screened interval between 35.5 and 55.5 feet bgs <br /> 17. The first encountered groundwater below the site ranges from approximately 40 to 45 feet bgs. <br /> Groundwater flow direction is generally to the northwest, with an average gradient ranging from <br /> 0.001 to 0.005 ft/ft. MW-1 and MW-3 are considered to be hydraulically downgradient of the <br /> process water land application area and MW-2 is considered to be the most upgradient of the <br /> wells. However,because MW-2 is within the land application area, it may not be completely <br /> representative of true background conditions. <br /> 18. The groundwater monitoring data collected to date indicate that concentrations of dissolved solids <br /> often associated with winery wastewater are elevated in the two downgradient monitoring wells as <br /> compared to concentrations in the upgradient monitoring well. The average electrical <br /> conductivity, total dissolved solids, fixed dissolved solids, sodium, magnesium, chloride, and <br /> sulfate concentrations in the downgradient wells range from two to fifteen times higher than in the <br /> upgradient well. The data also indicate that nitrate concentrations in one downgradient well, <br /> MW-1, are approximately eight times the upgradient concentrations and five times higher than the <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.