Laserfiche WebLink
REVISED CWC SECTION 13308 TIME SCHEDULE ORDER NO. R5-2002-0014-ROl 6- <br /> MUSCOOLIVE PRODUCTS AND THE STUDLEY COMPANY <br /> SAN JOAQUIN COUNTY <br /> 24. On 21 May 2001•, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS)-recommended the San,Joaquin <br /> County Community Development Department issue a building permit-for construction of a tank <br /> farm; receiving slab, and culvert which were already constructed. However, the FWS objected to <br /> issuance of a permit for the proposed wastewater storage pond because it would be in an area that <br /> had not previously been disturbed. <br /> 25. On 24 September 2001, the California Department of Fish and Game (DFG) notified the <br /> Discharger that alteration of the streambed while constructing the proposed wastewater storage <br /> pond requires notification of DFG and may require a Streambed Alteration Agreement. The <br /> Discharger applied for the permit on 15 October 2001. <br /> 26. On 2 November 2001, staff was informed by DFG.that the Discharger's wastewater system <br /> - violated water_pollution-control laws_by.allowing wastewater to discharge into the.intermittent <br /> creek. Violations of FishandGame Code Sections 1603, 5650(a)(2), and 5650(6) were cited. <br /> 27. A total of 98 process tanks exist on site presently. On 2 November 2002, the Discharger stated <br /> that they are considering expanding the facility to include 40 more process tanks. Each process <br /> tank can contain 10 tons of olives and 3,000 to 3,500 gallons of lye solution. <br /> REGULATORY CONSIDERATIONS <br /> 28. Due to plant expansions, the Discharger submitted a January 2000 Report of Waste Discharge <br /> seeking to increase both the allowable flow rate and the DIS limits for wastewater applied to land. <br /> The application seeks to increase the flow by 350,000 gpd and to increase the DIS-effluent limit <br /> by 1,116 mg/l. Ori'l 1 February 2000, staff responded in writing that the RWD is incomplete <br /> because the Discharger.has:.failed to,demonstrate that.these increases will not adversely impact <br /> surface water or groundwater quality. <br /> 29. Staff has met with the Discharger several times since a draft version of this Order was circulated, <br /> 'and the Order has been revised based on those meetings. The Discharger indicates it will not have <br /> a viable business if it is held to the flow and salt limits of WDRs No. 97-037. Therefore, it intends <br /> to submit a Report of Waste Discharge (RWD) for updated WDRs with higher flow and salt <br /> limits. In order for the Board to consider updated WDRs at its 6 September 2002 meeting, the <br /> Discharger must submit a complete RWD no later than 20 May 2002. The RWD must <br /> demonstrate how-.the proposed increase..in-discharge.volume and strength will comply with the <br /> Basin Plan and with the State Water Resources Control Board's Resolution No. 68-16. <br /> 30. As a result of the events and activities described in this Order, the Regional Board finds that the <br /> Discharger has caused or permitted waste to be discharged in such a manner that it has created, <br /> and continues to threaten to create, a condition of pollution or nuisance. The Regional Board also <br /> 1 finds that the Discharger is discharging waste in violation of WDRs Order No. 97-037 (as <br /> described in Findings 13 through 16), and in violation of C&A Order No. 5-00-717 (as described <br /> in Findings 17 through 22). <br /> 31. Surface water.drainage from the facility is to the Sacramento San Joaquin Delta: <br /> 32. The Regional Board's Water Quality Control Plan (Fourth Edition) for the Sacramento River and <br /> San Joaquin River Basins (Basin Plan) establishes the beneficial uses of the waters of the <br /> Sacramento San Joaquin Delta. These beneficial uses are municipal and domestic supply, <br /> irrigation, stock watering, industrial process and service supply, contact recreation, other non- <br />