SITE INFORMATION AND CORRESPONDENCE_1985-2004

Home Browse Search

REGIONAL BOARD RESPONSE (SWRCBIOCCFILEA-1634) - 13 - PETITION 13 - PETITION FOR REVIEW OF WASTE DISCHARGE REQUIREMENTS ORDER NOS. R5-2004-0028 AND R5-2004-0029 CITY OF MANTECA WATER QUALITY CONTROL FACILITY the Petitioner would inappropriately provide for expansion without further facility upgrade,by allowing segregation of industrial flows that utilize land disposal capacity, and then increasing discharges to the receiving water up to the design capacity of the wastewater treatment plant. TWELFTH BASIS: FAILURE TO CONSIDER COSTS Manteca requests that the State Board modify,or order the Regional Board to modify, Order No. R5-2004-0028 and Order No. R5-2004-0029 as necessary based on an appropriate evaluation of costs in accordance with the Water Code. (Note-no eleventh basis submitted) The Regional Board properly applied existing water quality objectives, including consideration of costs,where appropriate, in compliance with CWC Sections 13241 and 13263. The Regional Board must adopt NPDES permits consistent with the Clean Water Act. Where the Regional Board is implementing adopted water quality objectives to comply with the Clean Water Act, it may not consider economic and technological issues. See, e.g.,Ackels v. EPA (9`h Cir. 1993) 7 F.3d 862, and State Board Water Quality Order 2002-0015 at page 63. The Regional Board considered the factors in CWC Section 13263, including the provisions of CWC Section 13241,when adopting water quality objectives in the Basin Plan. As such, effluent limitations based on existing water quality objectives in the Basin Plan do not require further economic considerations. The establishment of tertiary limitations has not been previously required for this discharge. The tertiary limits are included in the permit to protect beneficial uses, but are not based entirely on existing water quality objectives. Therefore, consistent with CWC section 13263, the Regional Board considered the factors specified in CWC Section 13241 (including costs) in adopting the disinfection and filtration requirements under Title 22 (see permit findings 57 and 58). The Regional Board found that these requirements were necessary to protect the beneficial uses of the San Joaquin River, including water contact recreation and irrigation uses. Please refer to the 19 March 2004 response to comments document for more information(pages 5-6 and 35, Item No. 4, Binder No. 1). CONCLUSION The Regional Board requests that the State Board deny the petition because the action of the Regional Board was appropriate and proper. The Regional Board applied applicable laws and regulations and addressed past directives from the State Board in adopting Waste Discharge Requirements Order Nos. R5-2004-0028 and R5-2004-0029.