Laserfiche WebLink
Response to Written Comments Page 3 of 11 09 October 2023 <br /> Forward Landfill, Inc. <br /> that were analyzed, 42 wells saw water elevation increase by 20 to 45.4 feet. <br /> The increase in precipitation does not appear, however, to cause major changes to the <br /> plume dynamics. <br /> COMMENT NO. 3: <br /> 3.) From the 3rd paragraph of the RTC, changes have been made for cannery waste? <br /> Please describe these alterations and what type of cannery wastes are you talking <br /> about? My understanding is Class 2 waste sites are classified as "solid, non-hazardous" <br /> and Class 3 is "solid, inert". Are you describing adding biological waste to this site or <br /> surrounding area? <br /> RESPONSE: <br /> In regard to changes made for the cannery waste section of the WDR, a more robust <br /> analysis was conducted for the current cannery waste land application operation. The <br /> Discharger is allowed to land apply cannery waste on 75 acres of land to the north of <br /> the landfill footprint and within property boundary. The waste is comprised of two <br /> materials: cannery residual material and cannery rinsate. Cannery waste is a <br /> nonhazardous decomposable waste. No additional waste is being discussed. The <br /> WDRs also note that the Discharger will need to enroll into the Salt and Nitrate Control <br /> Program for further regulation and ensure that cannery waste will not degrade <br /> groundwater in regard to salinity and nitrate. <br /> COMMENT NO. 4: <br /> 4.) Comment #1 (RTC); the response simply states the Corrective Action Program, but <br /> you can see from the reports that none of these seem to be taken seriously and have <br /> failed continually and are not implemented and very little, if any mitigation is being <br /> applied, in fact at least 5 wells were removed over the new prison area, how is this <br /> acceptable? <br /> RESPONSE: <br /> The CVRWQCB Compliance and Enforcement unit are actively working with the <br /> Discharger to get the site back into compliance. <br /> COMMENT NO. 5: <br /> 5.) Comment #6 (RTC), several property water wells have needed to be shut down due <br /> to contamination and the California Regional Water Control Board cleanup and <br /> abatement order#R5-2017-0703 seems to contradict this response in several <br /> significant ways. <br /> RESPONSE: <br /> A Domestic Well Sampling Plan was required under Cleanup and Abatement Order R5- <br />