My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Home
Browse
Search
SITE INFORMATION AND CORRESPONDENCE_2005-CURRENT
EnvironmentalHealth
>
EHD Program Facility Records by Street Name
>
Y
>
YOSEMITE
>
2450
>
2900 - Site Mitigation Program
>
PR0506303
>
SITE INFORMATION AND CORRESPONDENCE_2005-CURRENT
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
7/23/2020 4:48:43 PM
Creation date
7/23/2020 4:30:08 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
EHD - Public
ProgramCode
2900 - Site Mitigation Program
File Section
SITE INFORMATION AND CORRESPONDENCE
FileName_PostFix
2005-CURRENT
RECORD_ID
PR0506303
PE
2965
FACILITY_ID
FA0001086
FACILITY_NAME
MANTECA PUBLIC WORKS
STREET_NUMBER
2450
Direction
W
STREET_NAME
YOSEMITE
STREET_TYPE
AVE
City
MANTECA
Zip
95336
APN
24130050
CURRENT_STATUS
01
SITE_LOCATION
2450 W YOSEMITE AVE
P_LOCATION
04
P_DISTRICT
005
QC Status
Approved
Scanner
LSauers
Tags
EHD - Public
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
142
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
Findings: A mixing zone is an area within which water qualityobjectives do not <br /> apply. The.Basin Plan provides that the Regional Board may designate mixing zones provided <br /> that the discharger has demonstrated to the satisfaction of the Regional Board that a mixing zone <br /> will not adversely impact beneficial uses. (Basin Plan, p. N-16.00.) Guidance regarding use of <br /> mixing zones and dilution credits for toxic pollutants is provided by the State Board"Policy for <br /> Implementation of Toxics Standards for Inland Surface Waters,Enclosed Bays and Estuaries of <br /> California, 2000" (State Implementation Policy or SIP). The SIP provides that allowance of <br /> mixing zones is discretionary and shall be determined on a discharge-by-discharge basis.30 Other <br /> regulatory documents applicable to establishment of mixing zones and dilution credits are <br /> summarized in the Regional Board's Information Sheet for Order No. R5-2004-0028. <br /> As mentioned above, flows in the river near the City's discharge are influenced <br /> by tidal conditions. During critical low flow periods, upstream flows occur on the flood tide,no <br /> flow occurs during the slack tide, and downstream flows occur during the ebb tide. The result is <br /> that the receiving water may receive multiple doses of effluent as tidal conditions affect the <br /> direction of flow in the river. The Regional Board's evaluation of dilution availability in the <br /> vicinity of the City's discharge included consideration of the effluent constituents in question and <br /> the complex dynamics of the flows in the river, tidal flows, and the intermittent side bank <br /> discharges from the City and from the Brown Sand outfall located 50 feet downstream." The <br /> availability of dilution for the constituents specified in the City's petition is addressed below. <br /> MBAS: The City's permit includes a monthly average effluent concentration <br /> limit of 500 ug/l for MBAS based on the secondary MCL for foaming agents and the Basin Plan <br /> narrative objective for chemical constituents which prohibits floating material in amounts that <br /> 30 The SIP defines a dilution credit as"a numerical value associated with the mixing zones for the receiving water <br /> entrained into the discharge. The dilution credit is a value used in the calculation of effluent limitations: Dilution <br /> credits may be limited or denied on a pollutant-by-pollutant basis,which may result in a dilution credit for all,some <br /> or no priority pollutants in a discharge" (SIP,p. 13.) <br /> " Order No.R5-2004-0028,pp. 12 and 13,and Regional Board Inforrmtion Sheet for Order No.R5-2004-0028, <br /> pp. 1-6. The City submitted modeling results and an analysis developed by its consultants to support the City's <br /> conclusion that the discharge would have very little effect at downstream locations. The City's modeling results <br /> focused on thermal impacts of its discharge to the San Joaquin River. The Regional Board found that the model had <br /> not been calibrated for the location in question,that dilution and plume dimensions for pollutants were not <br /> determined under critical conditions that have occurred at the outfall,that the modeling was not run for sufficient <br /> time to properly account for tidal cycles and associated recirculation, and that there was no assurance that the plume <br /> dimensions of in-stream dilution information provided by the modeling were accurate for the City's discharge. <br /> 17. <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.