Laserfiche WebLink
California Regional Water Quality Control Board <br /> Central Valley Region <br /> Robert Schneider,Chair A�nold Schwarzenegger <br /> Alan C.Lloyd Ph.D. <br /> Agency Secretary Sacramento Main Office Governor <br /> Internet Address: http://www.swreb.cagov/—mgcb5 <br /> 11020 Sun Center Drive,#200,Rancho Cordova,CA 95670-MIA j J,;i I ii I e' COUNTY <br /> Phone(916)464-3291-FAX(916)464-4780 ENVIRONMENTAL <br /> HEALTHDEPARTMENT <br /> 27 October 2005 <br /> Don Troppman <br /> Richland Planned Communities, Inc. <br /> 2220 Douglas Blvd., Suite 290 <br /> Roseville, CA 95661 <br /> CONDITIONAL APPROVAL, EFFL UENT STORAGE AND DISPOSAL SITE <br /> HYDROGEOLOGICAL INVESTIGATION,LATHROP,SAN JOA QUIN COUNTY <br /> I have reviewed the Effluent Storage and Disposal Site Hydrologic Investigation Workplan, prepared by <br /> Eco:Logic dated 24 August 2005. The plan was prepared to characterize groundwater quality prior to <br /> application of wastewater to land. <br /> After reviewing the workplan, I have the following comments: <br /> — Section 2.1 discusses the possibility of using intrawell comparisons for purposes of regulatory <br /> compliance. Intrawell comparisons are best suited to areas where waste (or other activities that <br /> might degrade groundwater quality)has not been discharged and where naturally occurring <br /> geologic conditions cause natural variation. Intrawell comparisons may be appropriate but further <br /> investigation of historic activities may be required. <br /> — The workplan refers to application of wastewater to cropped land application areas, percolation <br /> basins, and storage sites. Because the workplan does not specify where those locations would be, <br /> the number or location of the monitoring wells proposed cannot be fully evaluated. In general, <br /> impoundments are required to have upgradient and downgradient monitoring wells; any site used <br /> for a percolation basin would also require upgradient and downgradient wells. Land application <br /> areas typically are not as closely monitored and a monitoring network over the larger area is <br /> generally acceptable. <br /> — In Section 3.5 the transition seal is described as a thickness of two to five feet. Considering the <br /> shallow nature of the wells, please limit the transition seal to approximately two feet thick to <br /> maximize the amount of cement annular seal that can be installed. (A transition seal two feet thick <br /> is presented in Figure 5, Typical Monitoring Well Construction). <br /> — Section 3.8 describes the well survey that will be performed. Please perform the survey so that the <br /> location and elevation data for all the site wells (new and existing) is available. Please present a <br /> summary table of the entire monitoring well network survey data in the well installation report. <br /> California Environmental Protection Agency <br /> (d Recycled Paper <br />