COMPLIANCE INFO_PR0440063_1990-2019

Home Browse Search

• � 3 Musco Family Olive Company,Tracy Plant Page 2 of 3 San Joaquin County 19 November 2014 initialization of the test. Photos#2 and#3 show the influent discharge pipe rail where wastewater from the olive processing facility will be discharged to Pond C. Photo#4 shows the proposed inline flow meter that would be used to monitor the flow rate from the 1000-gallon tank (Photo#5)to the LCRS injection port. The expectation is that as water is injected into the LCRS at a predefined rate after a certain amount of time one would expect recovery of the injected water at the LCRS sump. The recovery amount would be recorded relative to the amount injected and compared with previous years as required by Title 27. The Discharger began the LCRS test around 9:11 AM at a flow rate of 2.3 gpm. The flow rate was limited by the head pressure in the tank (around 4 feet) and the restriction in the line at the flow meter(I estimated 3/" diameter line size). By 9:32 AM approximately 26 gallons was injected into the LCRS. It was determined that it would take too long to run the test at this flow rate. The Discharger decided to switch to a 2" diameter line into the LCRS and limit the flow rate to around 5 gpm by throttling a shutoff valve. At 9:48 AM the test was restarted with a flow rate of approximately 4.5 gpm. The flow rate was estimated by timing how long it took to fill a 5 gallon bucket. It was understood that as the 1000 gallon tank emptied the discharge head pressure would fall and that the flow rate would accordingly decrease as well. Photo#6 shows the Pond C LCRS pumps. The two pumps were wired so that they could be manually operated separately or in tandem. The Discharger stated the pump system was not constructed to operate one pump as a backup pump to the other pump if the "primary pump" failed. I asked the Discharger what sort of failsafe mechanism was in place to ensure that there would be an indication that a pump failure had occurred such that the LCRS sump would not exceed the maximum 1-foot head pressure limitation on the secondary liner as specified in Waste Discharge Specifications D.12. The Discharger stated that a moisture sensor was installed to determine if liquid was present in the LCRS sump and that if the liquid in the sump exceeded a preset elevation an alarm would trigger. Yet it is unclear how this alarm would be read since the pump controls do not have telemetry installed to transmit the alarm condition to the plant maintenance office. As of 10:08 AM no water was recorded to be recovered from the LCRS sump. During a tour of the ponds it was noted that rainfall had accumulated on the primary liner over the sump areas indicating that the subgrade slope to the sumps was constructed properly (Photo#7). I asked Mr. Leikam how the Discharger was planning to measure whether each pond met the minimum 2-foot freeboard requirement. He stated that a scale would probably be painted on the primary liner of each pond. Realizing that it would probably take hours before any water would be recovered at the Pond C LCRS, Mr. Leikam offered to show me the wastewater distribution system that was installed to distribute water from the olive processing facility to Ponds B, C, and D. Photo#8 shows the distribution piping where piping to Pond C branches off to service Pond B. Photo#9 shows where the piping switches from plastic piping to stainless steel piping at a location by the unprocessed olive storage tanks. Photos#10 through 13 show the pumping station that receives wastewater from the olive processing facility and.pumps it to a storage tank until it is subsequently pumped to Ponds B, C, and D. There are two pumps at the pumping station. Based on a quick evaluation of the piping connected to the outlet of the pumps, it is unclear how the wastewater is ultimately distributed (e.g., what the purpose of and where the alternative wastewater flow path shown in Photos#10 and 12 goes to). After some discussion it was determined that it would take a couple of hours to drain the 1000-gallon tank and there was not much more to do until around 1:00 PM. I told Mr. Leikam that I needed to visit another site. I told him that I would return after 1:00 PM. I returned around 1:15PM and noticed that the 1000-gallon tank was empty (Photo#14). The Discharger was in the process of changing out the 1000-gallon tank. One of the Discharger's staff walked on the liner to see if she could determine how far the liquid had traveled in the LCRS. She told us that she estimates it had travelled about half way. She and other Musco staff proceeded to change out the empty 1000-gallon tank with a full tank.