Upload
others
View
6
Download
0
Embed Size (px)
Citation preview
The Morning Star Company
Administrative Civil Liability Complaint R5-2015-0549
Presentation to Central Valley RWQCB
February 18, 2016
[DAY, DATE • CITY]
le: Subhead
1
Map of Facility
2
Timeline
Jan. 1995: Submit ROWD
June 1995: WDRs
Adopted
Jan. 2005: CDO
Issued
Dec. 2005: Submit New
ROWD
2005-2012: No Action on
WDRs
July 2012: Settling
Pond Expanded
Sept. 2013:
Receive Tent. WDRs
Dec. 2013: WDRs
Adopted
3
Settling Pond Expansion Does Not Violate 1995 WDRs
• 1995 WDRs, Standard Provision A.4 “Before making a material change in the character, location, or volume of discharge, the discharger shall file a new Report of Waste Discharge with the Regional Board. A material change includes, but is not limited to: a. An increase in area or depth to be used for solid waste disposal beyond that specified in WDRs.
b. A significant change in disposal method, location or volume, e.g., change from land disposal to land treatment.
c. The addition of a major industrial, municipal or domestic waste discharge facility.
d. The addition of a major industrial waste discharge to a discharge of essentially domestic sewage or the addition of a new process or product by an industrial facility resulting in a change in the character of the waste.”
4
1995 WDRs, Attachment B
5
Settling Pond Expansion Does Not Violate 2013 WDRs
• 2013 WDRs, Prohibition A.3
“Discharge of waste at a location or in a manner different from that described in the Findings is prohibited.”
• 2013 WDRs, Standard Provision A.4
– No material change
– During hearing on 2013 WDRs, staff suggested expanding Settling Pond as an option to address stormwater
– No water quality degradation
6
1995 WDRs Cannot Be Basis For Enforcement
• 2013 WDRs, p. 1
“WDRs Order 95-160 be rescinded and replaced with this Order.”
• 2013 WDRs, p. 28
“WDRs Order 95-160 is rescinded…”
7
1995 WDRs Cannot Be Basis For Enforcement
• 2013 WDRs do not say:
– Rescinded “except for enforcement purposes” or
– “This action in no way prevents the Central Valley Board from taking enforcement action for past violations of the previous Order”
(See, e.g., Order No. R5-2009-0009, R5-2012-0034, R5-2014-0104)
• Prosecution seeks fines for 2 seasons that predate 2013 WDRs
8
Cooling Pond Expansion Does Not Violate WDRs
• WDRs, Standard Provision A.4
“Before making a material change in the character, location, or volume of discharge, the discharger shall file a new Report of Waste Discharge with the Regional Board.”
• WDRs, Prohibition A.3
“Discharge of waste at a location or in a manner different from that described in the Findings is prohibited”
9
Cooling Pond Expansion Was Contemplated
• Morning Star comments on Tentative WDRs:
“The facility has plans to expand the processing operations by 65% in the future. The expansion is not anticipated to change wastewater characteristics or cause flow limits to be exceeded.” (30 Oct. 2013)
• 2013 WDRs Finding 28:
“The Discharger plans to increase production by up to 65% in the future…” (WDRs, p. 12.)
10
Cooling Pond Expansion Was Contemplated
• Cooling Pond is part of processing operations
• Fully disclosed 65% expansion in processing operations
• Expanded pond not put into service until July 24, 2015
– Prosecution assumes expansion complete for entire 2015 season
11
No Basis for Penalty
• Settling Pond expansion
– Not prohibited by 1995 WDRs
– Predates 2013 WDRs
– Reflects oversight in permit drafting
• Cooling Pond expansion
– Clearly communicated to Regional Board and contemplated in 2013 WDRs
12
Penalty Calculation Is Not Supported
• Improperly includes 2 seasons before 2013 WDRs
• Improperly includes days before Cooling Pond placed in service
• Seepage calculation assumptions are arbitrary
• No water quality degradation
• No potential to harm beneficial uses
13
14
Cooling Pond Expansion
ACL Cooling Pond Seepage Calculations Not Based On Actual Hydrogeological Data
5’
K1
K2
ignores mounding, deeper restrictions, horizontal flow
ACL Calculations
?
? (unrealistic simplifications)
CDO says 1.7 to 3.2 feet
(w/o mounding)
mounded profile
Reality
• Insufficient hydrogeo data
to calculate seepage.
• Mounding likely reduces
seepage.
• Seepage captured and returned by interceptor
drain. 16
Cooling Pond Seepage is Captured and Returned
Monitoring
Well 6
Back to Cooling Pond
17
Evidence Indicates No Net Increase in Seepage after Expansion
2013 WDRs Acknowledge Cooling Pond Improves Groundwater Quality
Finding 40
40. Groundwater beneath the Facility and
associated LAAs is relatively shallow… The
unlined Cooling Pond also recharges the
shallow groundwater immediately upgradient
of the LAAs with relatively low salinity water
year-round.
19
Facility Monitoring Wells
20
Cooling Pond Expansion Improves Groundwater Quality -
Salinity and Manganese at Well 6
Cooling Pond Expansion Does Not Adversely Impact Groundwater-
Chloride
0
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
160
180
200
Ch
lori
de
Co
nce
ntr
atio
n (
mg/
L)
Sample Date
MW-6 MW-5
Cooling Pondexpansion -
May/June 2015
22
Cooling Pond
Expansion July
24, 2015
Settling Pond
23
Facility Monitoring Wells
24
Settling Pond Expansion Does Not Adversely Impact Groundwater-
TDS
25
0
100
200
300
400
500
600
700
800
900
1000
TDS
Co
nce
ntr
atio
n (m
g/L)
Sample Date
MW-2 MW-3 MW-5
Settling Pond expansion -
May/June 2012
Settling Pond Expansion Does Not Adversely Impact Groundwater-
EC
26
0
200
400
600
800
1000
1200
1400
1600
1800
Ele
ctri
cal C
on
du
ctiv
ity
(µm
ho
s/cm
)
Sample Date
MW-2 MW-3 MW-5
Settling Pond expansion -
May/June 2012
No Evidence Of Manganese Pollution from LAAs
• Background wells – Highly variable manganese concentrations both in space
and time
• Downgradient wells (MW- 7, 8 & 9) – Increasing concentrations since 2013 – BOD overapplication occurred in 2015
• Only for 15% of field applications • Site-wide average within requirements
– Increasing concentrations can be related to: • Drought-Show Drought related impacts • Rice Farming- Show Rice Field map
• Recent results consistent with previous reports
27
27
23
20
12
7 8
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
0 - 25 25 - 50 50 - 75 75 - 100 100 - 125 >125
Nu
mb
er
of
Irri
gati
on
Cyc
les
BOD Loading Rate Range (lbs/ac/d)
2015 Irrigation Cycle BOD Loadings Frequency
Season Average = 58 lbs/ac/d
Drought Effects
0.00
0.50
1.00
1.50
2.00
2.50
12
/1/2
00
3
4/1
/20
04
8/1
/20
04
12
/1/2
00
4
4/1
/20
05
8/1
/20
05
12
/1/2
00
5
4/1
/20
06
8/1
/20
06
12
/1/2
00
6
4/1
/20
07
8/1
/20
07
12
/1/2
00
7
4/1
/20
08
8/1
/20
08
12
/1/2
00
8
4/1
/20
09
8/1
/20
09
12
/1/2
00
9
4/1
/20
10
8/1
/20
10
12
/1/2
01
0
4/1
/20
11
8/1
/20
11
12
/1/2
01
1
4/1
/20
12
8/1
/20
12
12
/1/2
01
2
4/1
/20
13
8/1
/20
13
12
/1/2
01
3
4/1
/20
14
8/1
/20
14
12
/1/2
01
4
4/1
/20
15
8/1
/20
15
12
/1/2
01
5
Man
gan
ese
Co
nce
ntr
atio
n (
mg/
L)
Sample Date
MW-7 MW-8
MW-9 Limitation (MW-2,3,6,9)
Limitation (MW-7) Limitation (MW-8)
WY 2005 (AN)
WY 2004 (BN)
WY 2006 (W)
WY 2007 (D)
WY 2008 (C)
WY 2009 (D)
WY 2010 (BN)
WY 2011 (W)
WY 2012 (BN)
WY 2013 (D)
WY 2014 (C)
- Red squares indicate value reported as "ND"- Black circles indicate value reported as "<RL"
Sacramento Valley Water Year Types:Wet (W) - BlueAbove Normal (AN) - Light BlueBelow Normal (BN) - GreenDry (D) - OrangeCritical (C) - Red
29
Rice Farming
30
Rice fields are outlined in red.
Morning Star property is outlined in yellow.
The Gobel field is outlined in red in the
Northwest corner of the Morning Star property.
Property boundaries and groundwater well
locations provided by Morning Star.
Imagery date 7/10/2013.
CH2MHILL, Plantierra, July 2013. Rice-Specific
Groundwater Assessment Report. Prepared for the
Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board. On
behalf of the California Rice Commission.
Map of Facility
31
Settling Pond
• Expansion allows Morning Star to clean out pond at end of season, rather than cleaning out during processing season
32
Cooling Pond
• Part of processing facility
• Expanded Cooling Pond most environmentally sound cooling option considering:
– Power consumption
– No or little chemical use vs. water towers
– Water quality
33
Closing
34
No Basis For Penalty
• No violation of 1995 WDRs
• No violation of 2013 WDRs
• Penalty calculation is flawed
– Assumed number of days is incorrect
– Seepage calculation uses unsubstantiated hydrogeologic data, ignores recapture
• No degradation of receiving waters
• Potential to harm = 0
35
Economic Benefit Stipulation
• Prosecution Team and Morning Star Stipulate:
– $205,577
– Approx. 80% less than Prosecution Team’s original estimate
36
Penalty Calculation is Inconsistent with other Enforcement Actions
37
Order No. R5-2010-0501
Rogers
Trucking
Order No. R5-2015-0039
Athwal, Sarbjit
& Satwant
Order No. R5-2011-0538 Revision No. 1 Lake Berryessa
Resort Impr. Dist.
Order No. R5-2010-0504
City of Isleton
Order No. R5-2013-0095
Henry Tosta
Dairy
Ammonia spill that killed fish
No ROWD for 900 acres ag
Raw sewage spills into lake
Raw sewage spill to surface
water
Manure discharge to
groundwater & violation of
cleanup order
$30,000 $56,628 $375,000 $390,000 (with $375,000
satisfied w/projects
$685,000
Cooling Pond – BOD Loading Rates
• BOD loading rates for unaerated ponds (i.e. reflects natural aeration rates):
• Adequate natural aeration and positive dissolved oxygen protect against odors and low soil redox
Reference Range (lbs/ac/d)
Adjusted for Cooling Pond Temp. (lbs/ac/d)
Adjusted Max Concentration
(mg/L)
EPA Pond Design Manual
40 - 80 28 - 57 69 - 138
Tchobanoglous and Burton
60 - 120 43 - 85 104 - 209
Cooling Pond – Organics Were Anticipated
• The only rational reason for existing odor monitoring requirements for the Cooling Pond is anticipation of some amount of organics.
• Staff contends that odor monitoring is typically required for all ponds, and organics were not anticipated.
Industrial Municipal
Granite, Lake County Stockton
Bear River Aggregates Orland
Ford Construction Company Thornton
Morris Ravine Quarry, Butte
Teichert Esparto
Crystal Creek Aggregates Shasta
Nearby Pond Permits without Odor Monitoring