Laserfiche WebLink
Forward, Inc. began filling pond #2. From that time on, there <br /> were two leaky ponds Instead of one, because, as BAX understands <br /> it, the filling of pond #2 is accomplished through a system of <br /> overflow pipes which simply allow the brine to flow Into pond #2' <br /> when #1 is full. If one assumes that pond #2 leaks as badly as <br /> #1 (and there is -no good reason to assume otherwise) then a simple <br /> calculation indicates that during 1981, enough brine silently <br /> seeped into the groundwater system to ruin a year's water supply <br /> for an additional 7,600 persons. This process will continue until <br /> the lining of the ponds is properly conditioned. <br /> 2. Forward, Inc. has violated the Discharge Requirements of the <br /> Regional Board by failing to properly report quantities of leach- <br /> ates in the Grade I Trenches, and by failing to submit any analyt- <br /> ical data on the quality of the leachate in the Grade 1 Trenches. <br /> Item 6 of the Discharge Requirements for Forward, Inc. under <br /> the heading "Provisions," states: "The discharger shall comply with <br /> the Monitoring and Reporting Program No. 73-193 as specified by the <br /> executive officer." That Monitoring and Reporting program states: <br /> "Leachate controls shall be installed for the purpose of monitoring <br /> quality and rate of product-ton of leachate from the fill. The fol- <br /> lowing information shall be obtained manth2y:" fthe information to be <br /> obtained amounts to quantities, and certain chemical characteristics.) <br /> Forward, Inc. reports to the Regional Board indicate the pres- <br /> ence of leachates in the Grade I Trenches on three occasions. These <br /> are the reports of May 4, 1979, January 15; 1980, and May 10, 1980. <br /> (the November 12, 1980 report gives additional information about the <br /> leachates that are reported first in May) In spite of the clear lan- <br /> guage of the Discharge Requirements, Forward, Inc. made no report of <br /> the quality of the leacbates, and made inadequate reports of the quan- <br /> tity in that no record was made of the amounts In the trenches on a <br /> monthly basis. Perhaps more distuxbdng is the apparent indifference <br /> of the Regional Board staff. It appears that nobody on the Regional <br /> Board staff had read the report carefully enough to see that there <br /> were leachates In the Grade I Trenches. The Area Engineer in charge <br /> of the Forward, Inc. case was unaware of this violation until it was <br /> 9 <br />