SITE INFORMATION AND CORRESPONDENCE_1985-2004

Home Browse Search

REGIONAL BOARD RESPONSE (SWRCB/OCC FILE A-1634) - 10 - PETITION 10 - PETITION FOR REVIEW OF WASTE DISCHARGE REQUIREMENTS ORDER NOS. R5-2004-0028 AND R5-2004-0029 CITY OF MANTECA WATER QUALITY CONTROL FACILITY CTR. As such, an effluent limitation for cyanide is required and was included in Order No. R5- 2004-0028. Regarding Water Code Sections 13241 and 13242 issues,please see the response to the first basis. The validity and applicability of the Basin Plan numeric objective for cyanide versus the CTR were previously addressed in the 19 March 2004 Response to Comments,page 3 and pages 5-6. The City states that the Basin Plan objective has been superseded by the CTR criteria. This statement is incorrect. General Note (c)in the CTR states: "The [CTR] criteria. . .apply concurrently with any criteria adopted by the State, except when State regulations contain criteria which are more stringent for a particular parameter and use. . . ." The availability of acute dilution is addressed in pages 27-28 of the 19 March 2004 Response to Comments, in Finding 31 of the permit, and in Section 2 of the Information Sheet. The Regional Board properly adopted effluent limitations for cyanide based on the numerical water quality objective in the Basin Plan. All effluent limitations are supported by substantial evidence in the record. Please refer to permit finding 33, information sheet section 11.1,permit tables 9 and 11 and the 19 March 2004 response to comments document(pages 3 and 18, Item No. 4, Binder No. 1) for more information. EIGHTH BASIS: IMPROPER IMPOSITION OF EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS FOR MANGANESE Manteca requests that the State Board modify, or order the Regional Board to modify, Order No. R5-2004-0028 to remove the effluent limitations for manganese and Order No. R5-2004-0029 to account for the removal of the inappropriate effluent limitations for manganese. The discharge of manganese was found to have a reasonable potential to cause or contribute to an in-stream excursion above the Basin Plan numerical water quality objective. As such, an effluent limitation for manganese is required and was included in Order No. R5-2004-0028. The response to the first basis for review regarding the adoption of effluent limitations,the use of numerical and narrative water quality objectives,the protection of the MUN beneficial use, and the translation of dissolved concentration water quality objectives also apply to manganese in this eighth basis for review. The Regional Board properly adopted effluent limitations for manganese based.on the numerical water quality objective in the Basin Plan. All effluent limitations are supported by substantial evidence in the record. The numeric water quality objective for manganese in Table III-1 of the