Laserfiche WebLink
• • 3 <br /> STAFF REPORT <br /> MUSCO FAMILY OLIVE COMPANY AND THE STUDLEY COMPANY <br /> CONSIDERATION OF WDRS AND A C&A ORDER <br /> 6 September 2002 Regional Board Agenda <br /> The Regional Board adopted California Water Code Section 13308 Time Schedule Order(TSO) <br /> No. R5-2002-0014 at its 25 January 2002 meeting. The Order includes technical report submittal <br /> requirements, specific compliance requirements, and specific administrative civil liabilities that <br /> may be imposed for noncompliance. In meetings prior to the 25 January 2002 Regional Board <br /> meeting, and during the Regional Board meeting, the Discharger stated it will not have a viable <br /> business if it is limited by the flow and DIS limits of WDRs No. 97-037. As part of the TSO, <br /> Regional Board staff recommended interim higher wastewater flow and DIS limits to allow the <br /> Discharger to operate until improvements at the facility could be constructed and the Regional <br /> Board could consider adoption of updated WDRs. These interim limits are in place until 7 <br /> September 2002. <br /> On 5 April 2002, the Discharger requested a flow limit increase for the time period from April <br /> 2002 to 6 September 2002. The Discharger stated that it made improvements to the land <br /> application areas that allowed higher hydraulic application rates during the summer months when <br /> evapotranspiration is higher than what was allowed by the TSO No. R5-2002-0014. However, <br /> staff remained concerned about loading rates of dissolved solids, nitrogen compounds, and BOD. <br /> The Regional Board adopted the Revised TSO No. R5-2002-0014-ROI on 6 June 2002. The <br /> revised TSO allowed increased flow during the period from 6 June to 6 September 2002, allowed <br /> the use of wastewater for dust control measures at the active pond construction area, required a <br /> report describing additional steps to minimize odors, required a report to evaluate the adequacy <br /> of monitoring well MW-9, and required an additional groundwater monitoring event. <br /> In May 2002, the Discharger submitted the RWD for use in preparing updated WDRs that are <br /> scheduled for consideration at the 6 September 2002 Regional Board meeting. On 12 June 2002 <br /> staff informed the Discharger that the RWD was incomplete. The Discharger submitted <br /> additional information on 24 June 2002. Regional Board staff have met with the Discharger and <br /> participated in telephone conference calls in an attempt to resolve outstanding technical issues. <br /> Staff have carefully considered the Discharger's submittals and have made many minor <br /> clarifications and changes in the tentative WDRs. However, there appear to be two remaining <br /> technical issues: the wastewater flow limitation and the determination of background water <br /> quality. <br /> WASTEWATER FLOW LIMITATION <br /> As part of the RWD,the Discharger was required to submit a water balance to demonstrate that it <br /> has adequate treatment, storage, and disposal capacity for its requested flow rate. The current <br /> WDRs contain an implied flow rate of 500,000 gpd, while the revised TSO allow a weekly flow <br /> limit of 820,000 gpd. The RWD contained a water balance with a flow rate of 1,000,000 gpd. <br /> Staff carefully reviewed the initial water balance, and spent many hours talking with the <br /> Discharger's consultants about our concerns. The consultants have since submitted several <br /> revised water balances. One major revision had to do with the capacity of the storage pond <br /> (which is currently under construction). The original water balance used a storage capacity of <br /> 114 million gallons, but the Discharger now estimates that the pond's actual capacity will be <br /> only 84 million gallons. <br />