SU0004324 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

Ernie Schenone,Jr. August 19,200.3 Schenone Specialty Foods, Inc- Page 3 Alternative/Engineered Septic System be provided for review. Condition#2 stated that,prior to EHD approval for the issuance of Building Permits,the individual parcels involved in the project must be merged with a recorded easement to the parcels where the reserved replacement wastewater disposal areas will be Iocated. Condition#3 stated that,prior to Occupancy Permit " approval by the EHD,the approved Alternative/Engineered Septic System with a flow meter be installed to accurately measure the amount of effluent discharge. Condition#4 required that the facility obtain a permit to operate an Alternative/Engineered Septic System,prior to EHD approval of the Occupancy Permit. Conditions#5 and#6 identified the monitoring program required to verify that the septic system operates as designed. This letter also referenced a phone conversation between Mike Huggins of my staff and Wendy Wyels of the CVRWQCB. Ms. Wyels had indicated that she would be sending a letter requesting submission of a Report of Waste Discharge(RWD) for your facility and had no objection to the issuance of grading and building permits for the facility- You were advised to contact the CVRWQCB prior to construction.' > On May 2, 2003,the EHD received a telefax in which you asked whether the addition of more i toilet fixtures in the restrooms would affect the proposed septic system design. In a response dated May 6,2003,the EHD stated that effluent flow into the septic system will be monitored (see Conditions#3,#5 and#6 above) and that modification may be required if the wastewater quantity exceeds the system design. The EHD requested documentation from your consultant regarding the effect of the proposed changes. > On May 7,2003,the EHD received a copy of a letter sent to you by the CVRWQCB, F acknowledging receipt of the RWD for the Chocoholics facility. The letter further stated that it was anticipated that WDRs would need to be prepared for both the proposed `food processing wastewater discharge to a septic tank, and the cooling water discharge to undisclosed location. The letter also agreed that the county could proceed with its permitting process as long as you complied with requests for additional information and complied with any WDRs issued. The EHD received a copy of a letter sent to you by the CVRWQCB dated May 30,2003, notifying you that WDRs must be obtained prior to discharge of... 'food processing and cooling water waste to land..."The letter described the RWD information required including a technical report prepared by a California registered civil engineer. > On June 9,2003,the EHD received a copy of a letter to you from Wendy Wyels of the CVRWQCB dated June 5, 2003. Ms. Wyels referenced her letter of May 30 1h and the request for E additional information needed to complete your RWD and discussions between you and CVRWQCB staff regarding the need for this information. She reiterated that any decision about the level of regulation required by her agency would be based upon the technical information requested and that there was not a mechanism for exempting your facility because the quantity of waste discharge to land was "too small.X10 > On June 12,2003,the EHD received a copy of your telefaxed letter to Wendy Wyels dated June 11,2003,in which you reiterated your desire to have CVRWQCB staff visit your current facility and observe your current operation. Included with the telefax were your responses to the CVRWQCB request for"Additional Information Requirements, Chocoholic Manufacturing Facility"required for the technical report. > At your request,Mike Huggins, Supervising RENS,RDI; Al Olsen,REHS,EH Program Manager; and 1 met with you in our office on June 12`h. During this meeting you expressed See Attachment 7: EHD letter of April 30,2003. s See Attachment 8: CVRWQCB letter of May 5,2003. 9 See Attachment 9: CVRWQCB'letter of May 30,2003. 10 See Attachment 10: CVRWQCB letter dated June 5,2003.