Laserfiche WebLink
California Regional Water Quality Control Board <br /> Central Valley Region <br /> Steven T.Butler,Chair i.__ <br /> Winston H.Hickox S <br /> Secretary for C:': Gray Davis <br /> Environmental Sacramento Main Office Governor <br /> Internet Address: http://wwwswrcb.ca.gov/—rwgcb5 ryl <br /> Protection 3443 Routier Road,Suite A,Sacramento,California 95827-3003 T <br /> Phone(916)255-3000•FAX(916)255-3015 <br /> ID <br /> 7 September 2000 <br /> Mr. Mike Owens cry <br /> Fox River Paper Company, Ripon Milli '-- <br /> 942 South Stockton Avenue <br /> Ripon, CA 95366 <br /> REVIEW OF GROUND-WATER MONITORING RESULTS FOR THE FOX RIVER PAPER <br /> COMPANY FACILITY, RIPON, SAN JOAQUIN COUNTY(Case File No. 449) <br /> Staff has completed reviewing the 2nd-Quarter 2000 Ground-Water Monitoring Results for Fox River <br /> Paper Company's Ripon Facility, Ripon, California, letter with attachments dated 17 July 2000 from <br /> Mr. David Kirk (Lawrence and Associates). Additionally, the monthly reports for the effluent discharge, <br /> dated 17 July and 7 August 2000 and submitted by Mr. Pat Mickelson, Mill Manager, have also been <br /> reviewed and are found to be in compliance with the Waste Discharge Requirements. <br /> The Monitoring Report Compliance Checklist for the above referenced groundwater monitoring report is <br /> attached. Please review the checklist and the comments. Following is a summary of comments <br /> regarding 2nd-Quarter 2000 Ground-Water Monitoring Results for Fox River Paper Company's Ripon <br /> Facility, Ripon, California: <br /> 1. The well recovery times have not been indicated in the field sampling notes. Your letter of 20 <br /> June indicates that previously conducted aquifer tests and groundwater modeling obviates the <br /> need for continuing to collect the recovery time data. However, by checking the well recovery <br /> time every time sampling occurs, changes over time may be noted. Changes in well recovery <br /> may be due to a number of reasons, including deterioration of the well screen due to biofouling <br /> or clogging with sediment, permeability changes within the aquifer itself(as may occur, for <br /> instance, with addition of treatment compounds, or settlement of the soil that reduces pore <br /> volume), or damage to the well casing itself. As indicated in the WDRs, the Standard Provisions <br /> and Reporting Requirements are incorporated into the WDR Order. The Standard Provisions are <br /> not specific to the Fox River site, but are imposed on every Discharger with WDRs in the Central <br /> Valley. Other Dischargers within the Central Valley region easily achieve compliance with the <br /> provision to record well recovery times by measuring the depth to water in each well <br /> immediately after sampling and perhaps one more time approximately 5 or 10 minutes later. <br /> This gives an estimate of the recovery time and is not intended to substitute for pump tests or <br /> longer term aquifer tests. The cost incurred by this type of monitoring is much less than what <br /> would be incurred by the repetition of aquifer tests on a more routine basis. <br /> 2. Only one casing volume was purged prior to sampling each well. Your letter of 20 June 2000 <br /> written in response to my 1 June comment letter indicates that during future sampling events, <br /> wells will be either purged of three casing volumes or purged until field parameters stabilize. <br /> Three casing volumes is considered an"industry standard", but represents a minimum purge <br /> volume prior to sampling. The field parameters should be checked for stabilization after the <br /> California Environmental Protection Agency <br /> C4 Recycled Paper <br />