Laserfiche WebLink
CALIFORNIA REGIONAL WATER QUALITY CONTROL BOARD <br /> CENTRAL VALLEY REGION <br /> ORDER NO. <br /> REVISED WASTE DISCHARGE REQUIREMENTS <br /> For <br /> AKF DEVELOPMENT LLC <br /> FOR <br /> POST-CLOSURE OF <br /> FORMER SPRECKELS COMPANY MANTECA SUGAR PLANT LIME PONDS <br /> SAN JOAQUIN COUNTY <br /> The California Regional Water Quality Control Board, Central Valley Region, (hereafter Board) <br /> finds: <br /> 1. AKF LLC formerly Atherton Kirk Development Company, (hereafter Discharger) owns the . <br /> Former Speckels Company Manteca Sugar Plant in San Joaquin County. The Former <br /> Manteca Sugar Plant has been decommissioned and the site is currently undergoing T <br /> redevelopment. <br /> 2. The Former Spreckels Sugar Manteca Plant covers over 350 acres at the intersection of E <br /> Highways 99 and 120 in portions of Sections 3 and 4, T2S, R7E,MDB&M, as shown on <br /> Attachments A and B, which are incorporated herein and made part of this Order. The <br /> property consists of Assessors Parcel Nos. 221-140-01, 221-180-04, 243-210-56, 243-210- N <br /> 56, 243-210-64, and 243-210-65. <br /> 3. The Tracy Facility is currently regulated under Waste Discharge Requirements (WDRs) T <br /> Order No. 97-204 for closure of lime ponds that contained designated waste. New WDRs <br /> are being proposed because the lime ponds have been closed and the facility is now in post- A <br /> closure period. This revised Order prescribes post-closure requirements and revises the <br /> Monitoring and Reporting Program. 'I <br /> 4. Lime ponds on the site contained approximately 348,900 cubic yards of spent lime left from <br /> operation of the sugar plant. The spent lime was classified as a designated waste as I <br /> defined in Division 2 of Title 27, California Code of Regulations in previous WDRs. <br /> Additionally, storage of lime in the ponds caused downgradient groundwater to be degraded v <br /> with elevated concentrations of bicarbonate and total dissolved solids. WDR Order No. 97- <br /> 204 required removal of the spent lime, closure of the ponds,and evaluation of <br /> groundwater impacts. E <br /> 5. The Discharger submitted a Closure Report on 8 March 2002 documenting the removal of <br /> designated waste and closure of the lime ponds. Confirmation sampling indicated that a <br /> `hot spot' of contaminated soil had been left and staff required removal and re-closure of <br /> the `hot spot' area. On 2 August 2002 the discharger submitted a report that the `hot spot' <br /> area had been removed and the pond area completely closed. <br />