SITE INFORMATION AND CORRESPONDENCE_CASE 2

Home Browse Search

REGIONAL WATER BOARD RESPONSE (SWRCB/OCC File A-1846(a) and " 1846(6)) -25- PETITIONS FOR REVIEW OF V,..,e -E DISCHARGE REQUIREMENTS `/ ORDER NO R5-2007-0036 (NPDES NO. CA0079154)AND TIME SCHEDULE ORDER NO. R5-2007-0037 CITY OF TRACY, WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT to that required by CDPH's reclamation criteria because the receiving water is used for irrigation of agricultural land and for contact recreation purposes. The stringent disinfection criteria of Title 22 are appropriate since the undiluted effluent may be used for the irrigation of food crops and/or for body-contact water recreation. Coliform organisms,are intended as an indicator of the effectiveness of the entire treatment train and the effectiveness of removing other pathogens. The method of treatment is not prescribed by the Order; however, wastewater must be treated to a level equivalent to that recommended by CDPH. CSPA also contends, "By directly requiring compliance with Title 22 requirements, the Order would appear to be vulnerable to legal challenge in applying Title 22 requirements to surface water discharges." It is unclear what vulnerability this references. The Order requires compliance with tertiary treatment requirements "or equivalent." The tertiary-or-equivalent requirements are necessary to protect beneficial uses, as discussed above. The State Water Board has upheld this requirement in other permits. (See, City of Woodland, State Water Board Order 2004-0010, p. 10.) CSPA — CONTENTION S: The Order illegally allows an unpermitted discharge to Sugar Cut Slough CSPA contends that the City of Tracy's industrial ponds are discharging to Sugar Cut Slough and the City is required to submit a report of waste discharge (ROWD) because the ponds are discharging to surface water. This contention is factually inaccurate. Nothing in Order No. R5- 2007-0036 allows discharges to Sugar Cut Slough. The groundwater discharges from the industrial ponds are addressed in separate waste discharge requirements (Order No. R5- 2007-0038), which CSPA did not petition. Order No. R5-2007-0038 prohibits surface water discharges from the industrial ponds (see Discharge Prohibitions A.1.). Order No. R5-2007- 0036, the subject of this petition, only regulates the surface water discharge to Old River and prohibits all other discharges (See Prohibition III.A; Table 2, Discharge Locations; see also, map of Outfalls 001 and 002, page E-3.). If the State Water Board elects to examine this issue, we request the opportunity to supplement this Petition response with the record of the adoption of Order No. R5-2007-0038. CSPA — CONTENTION T. Regional Board Authority to Issue Compliance Schedules under the CTR Has Now Lapsed. The Regional Water Board has no authority to issue compliance schedules for CTR constituents and the proposed compliance schedules and interim effluent limits are illegal. CSPA states that the CTR provisions in 40 CFR 131.38(e) allowing compliance schedules and interim effluent limitations for CTR constituents have expired. Specifically, CSPA cites 40 CFR 131.38(e)(8) which states, "[t]he provisions in this paragraph (e), Schedules of compliance, shall expire on May 18, 2005." Therefore, CSPA concludes that the compliance