SITE INFORMATION AND CORRESPONDENCE

Home Browse Search

ORDER NO.R5-2002-0148 - 14 - INFORMATION SHEET MUSCO FAMILY OLIVE COMPANY AND THE STUDLEY COMPANY WASTEWATER TREATMENT AND LAND DISPOSAL FACILITY SAN JOAQUIN COUNTY APPLICABILITY OF WATER RECLAMATION REQUIREMENTS Musco has requested that the Regional Board should consider Musco's discharge under the "Water Recycling Law", beginning with Section 13500 of the Water Code. This request was contained in the Discharger's 8 August 2002 Comments to the Tentative Waste Discharge Requirements. Musco believes that its wastewater should be declared"reclaimed water" and as such, water reclamation requirements, not waste discharge requirements, should be issued. Musco further states "a Regional Board may not deny issuance of water reclamation requirements to a project which violates only a salinity standard in a basin plan." Staff have considered this issue and have consulted with the State Board Office of Chief Counsel. It is our understanding that it is not appropriate to regulate Musco's discharge under the Water Recycling Law and that the most appropriate vehicle for regulation is these waste discharge requirements. Although not expressly described in the this section of the California Water Code, "recycled water" typically applies to domestic wastewater which is treated to an extent that it can be beneficially reused, replacing a use of potable water. Musco's wastewater does not meet either of these criteria. First, the discharge is industrial wastewater, with no domestic component. Section 13523 of the CWC states that water reclamation requirements are to be established in conformance with the uniform statewide recycling criteria established by the California Department of Health Services (DHS). These criteria are found in Title 22 of the California Code of Regulations. Section 60302 of Title 22 states that"the requirements in this chapter shall only apply to recycled water from sources that contain domestic waste, in whole or part." Therefore, Title 22 does not apply to Musco's waste stream, and it is inappropriate to issue water reclamation requirements in lieu of waste discharge requirements. In regard to CWC Section 13523.5, the salinity standard does not apply to waste discharge requirements. A 7 February 1985 memorandum from the Office of Chief Counsel to the Executive Officer of the San Diego Regional Board concludes that CWC Section 13523.5 "does not create an exception to a Regional Board's responsibility to implement the applicable basin plan through waste discharge requirements." In addition, CWC Section 13527(b)provides that"Nothing in this chapter prevents the appropriate regional board from establishing waste discharge requirements if a discharge is involved." Therefore, waste discharge requirements are both appropriate and necessary for this discharge. SPECIFIC DISCHARGE SPECIFICATIONS AND LIMITATIONS Discharge Prohibition A.2 The prohibition of discharge within 100 feet of a surface water drainage course is intended to prevent irrigation tailwater or overspray from entering the drainage course that runs through the land application area. The Discharger has asked that this prohibition be removed as it is constructing a tailwater return system adjacent to the surface water course. However, despite requests, the Discharger has not submitted the plans and specifications for the tailwater return system. If the Discharger submits the information, and the Executive Officer finds that the system is appropriate to protect the surface water drainage course, then the Executive Officer may allow discharge within 100 feet of the drainage.