Laserfiche WebLink
(f) The need to develop and use recycled water. <br /> (Emphasis supplied.) <br /> The Regional Board has failed to consider the economic burden on the.Lodi <br /> community in rendering its decision. In the case of WS/BC/DC, it has become apparent <br /> that the proposed limitation will not reduce the risk to public health at all, let alone justify <br /> the expenditure of millions of dollars by a financially burdened community. The <br /> Regional Board's failure to relate the costs to reasonable benefits from meeting the 2.2 <br /> MPN/100 nil effluent limitation applied as a 7-day average as required by the Porter- <br /> Cologne Act renders this action patently unlawful. <br /> The California Water Code requires the Regional Board to consider the site- <br /> specific characteristics of the receiving waters and the discharge in light of the beneficial <br /> uses to be protected. Water Code § 13241(b) (objectives demonstrated reasonable though <br /> an evaluation of the "environmental conditions of the hydrographic unit under <br /> consideration, including the water quality thereof'). Since the City is not aware of any <br /> evidence in the record that the Regional Board has conducted a site-specific evaluation of <br /> risk, the imposition of the more restrictive 2.2 MPN limitation without a demonstration <br /> that such a limit is reasonable and necessary for the protection of public health specific to <br /> WS/BC/DC is unlawful. Coordination Proceeding Special Title (Rule 1550(b)), Superior <br /> Court, County of Sacramento Proc. No. JC2610 at 22 (March 23, 1994) ("SWRCB in <br /> establishing objectives was required to consider the factors set forth in Water Code <br /> section 13241, that such factors include the beneficial uses and environmental <br /> characteristics of individual hydrographic units, and that the SWRCB failed to do so.") <br /> 8. 7-Dav Variabilitv is Not a Concern <br /> Imposing a 2.2 MPN permit limitation as a 7-day average is not reasonable, as it <br /> would force the engineers to eliminate all effluent variability to ensure permit <br /> compliance, even though DHS' own risk analysis shows that such severe discharge <br /> restrictions are not intended. See generally, DHS Response to Comments at Attachment <br /> 5. Clearly, changing the permit limit to be monitored on a 7-day median basis will <br /> NPDESPermitComments Exhibit 2 Page 18 12/17/99 <br />