My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
SITE INFORMATION AND CORRESPONDENCE
EnvironmentalHealth
>
EHD Program Facility Records by Street Name
>
N
>
NAVY
>
2500
>
2900 - Site Mitigation Program
>
PR0524190
>
SITE INFORMATION AND CORRESPONDENCE
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
4/3/2020 2:10:20 PM
Creation date
4/3/2020 1:50:02 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
EHD - Public
ProgramCode
2900 - Site Mitigation Program
File Section
SITE INFORMATION AND CORRESPONDENCE
RECORD_ID
PR0524190
PE
2965
FACILITY_ID
FA0016241
FACILITY_NAME
STOCKTON REGIONAL WATER CONTROL FAC
STREET_NUMBER
2500
STREET_NAME
NAVY
STREET_TYPE
DR
City
STOCKTON
Zip
95206
APN
16333003
CURRENT_STATUS
01
SITE_LOCATION
2500 NAVY DR
P_LOCATION
01
P_DISTRICT
001
QC Status
Approved
Scanner
SJGOV\sballwahn
Tags
EHD - Public
Jump to thumbnail
< previous set
next set >
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
729
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
i..i <br /> RESPONSE TO WRITTEN COMMENTS -29- <br /> City Of Stockton -Regional Wastewater Control Facility <br /> NPDES No. CA0079138 <br /> 26 April 2002 Board Meeting <br /> RWQCB Response: The 7-day median is based on Title 22 regulations, which have been <br /> recommended by DHS. Please see section 9.1 of the Fact Sheet. <br /> Stockton CommentNo. Att. II.k.: Seasonal use is appropriate,people do not swim in the <br /> receiving waters during wet weather events or periods of cold temperatures. <br /> RWQCB Response: People are not precluded from swimming during the colder months. <br /> Additionally, DHS recently sent a letter to the Board dated 12 April 2002 reiterating their <br /> recommendation for year-round Title 22 reclamation requirements. The letter also emphasizes their <br /> concern regarding the prevalence of year-round subsistence sports fishing and shellfish harvesting <br /> within the proximity of the discharge. <br /> Stockton Comment No. Att. II.1: Uniform Guidelines provide no basis for turbidity limitation. <br /> RWQCB Response: The turbidity limitation is based on Title 22 regulations, which have been <br /> recommended by DHS. Please see section 9.1 of the Fact Sheet. <br /> Stockton Comment No. Att. Il.m: The City requests that the Regional Board maintain current <br /> disinfection requirements of 23 MPN/100 ml thirty-day median and 230 MPN/100 ml daily maximum. <br /> RWQCB Response: The comment is noted. <br /> DELTAKEEPER COMMENTS <br /> DeltaKeeaer Comment No. 1: The Discharger's Late Submissions Are Seriously Flawed. <br /> RWQCB Response: Comment noted. Detailed comments by staff regarding the submissions are <br /> contained in Attachments A, B, and C. <br /> DeltaKeeaer Comment No. 2: The Proposed Permit Fails To Consider Cumulative Effects. <br /> RWQCB Response: The permit recognizes that the river is impaired for a number of constituents, <br /> and takes steps to address the issues. It does not provide any dilution credits except for human <br /> carcinogens, and in that instance requires a study to address the cumulative impacts. It requires <br /> significant capital investment in new treatment processes, requires source control for several <br /> pollutants, and a mercury offset program. It also requires the initiation of a toxicity reduction <br /> evaluation to address chronic whole effluent toxicity issues. <br /> Keeper Comment N,): 3: The Permit Is Not Protective Of Enda ed Specie.. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.