Document ID: s3://data.kl3m.ai/documents/govinfo/USCOURTS/USCOURTS-caed-2_06-cv-01464/USCOURTS-caed-2_06-cv-01464-1/pdf.json

Parties Involved:
George Brasil
Defendant
Victor Brasil
Defendant
Brasil and Sons Dairy, Inc.
Defendant
Brasil and Sons Dairy, Inc. #1
Defendant
Brasil and Sons Dairy, Inc. #2
Defendant
Deltakeeper Chapter of Baykeeper
Plaintiff
Sierra Club
Plaintiff
United States
Amicus
Waterkeeper Alliance, Inc.
Plaintiff

Document Text:

Stipulated Dismissal and Settlement; [Proposed] Order 1 Case. No. CV 06-01464 OWW (DLB) 

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

Layne Friedrich (Bar No. 195431) 

 layne@lawyersforcleanwater.com

Drevet Hunt (Bar No. 240487) 

Lawyers For Clean Water, Inc. 

1004A O’Reilly Avenue 

San Francisco, California 94129 

Telephone: (415) 440-6520 

Facsimile: (415) 440-4155 

(Additional Counsel on Next Page) 

Attorneys for Plaintiffs Deltakeeper Chapter 

of Baykeeper, Mother Lode Chapter of Sierra Club, 

and Waterkeeper Alliance, Inc. 

Eric E. Bronson - State Bar No. 110279 

 eb@birdmarella.com 

BIRD, MARELLA, BOXER, WOLPERT, 

 NESSIM, DROOKS & LINCENBERG, P.C. 

1875 Century Park East, 23rd Floor 

Los Angeles, California 90067-2561 

Telephone: (310) 201-2100 

Facsimile: (310) 201-2110 

Attorneys for Defendants Brasil and Sons Dairy, Inc., 

Brasil & Sons Dairy, Inc. #1, Brasil & Sons Diary, Inc. #2, 

George Brasil and Victor Brasil 

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT 

EASTERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA 

DELTAKEEPER CHAPTER OF BAYKEEPER, a 

California non-profit corporation, MOTHER LODE 

CHAPTER OF SIERRA CLUB, a California nonprofit corporation, and WATERKEEPER 

ALLIANCE, INC., a New York not-for-profit 

corporation, 

 Plaintiffs, 

 v. 

BRASIL AND SONS DAIRY, INC.,a California 

corporation, BRASIL AND SONS DAIRY, INC. 

#1, a California business, BRASIL AND SONS 

DAIRY, INC. #2, a California business, GEORGE 

BRASIL, an individual, VICTOR BRASIL, an 

individual, MARIE AZEVEDO, an individual, and 

ART AZEVEDO, an individual, 

 Defendants. 

Civil Case No.: CV 06-01464 DLB 

STIPULATION TO DISMISS 

PLAINTIFFS’ CLAIMS AGAINST 

DEFENDANTS WITH PREJUDICE; 

REQUEST FOR DISTRICT COURT TO 

RETAIN JURISDICTION TO 

ENFORCE SETTLEMENT 

AGREEMENT; 

And ORDER 

Case 2:06-cv-01464-DLB Document 19 Filed 06/27/07 Page 1 of 75
Stipulated Dismissal and Settlement; [Proposed] Order 2 Case. No. CV 06-01464 OWW (DLB) 

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

CENTER ON RACE, POVERTY AND THE ENVIRONMENT 

Brent Newell (Bar No. 210312) 

450 Geary Street, Suite 500 

San Francisco, CA 94102 

Telephone: (415) 346-4179 

Facsimile: (415) 346-8723 

Email: bjnewell@igc.org

Attorney for Plaintiffs Deltakeeper Chapter 

of Baykeeper, Mother Lode Chapter of Sierra Club, 

and Waterkeeper Alliance, Inc. 

Case 2:06-cv-01464-DLB Document 19 Filed 06/27/07 Page 2 of 75
Stipulated Dismissal and Settlement; [Proposed] Order 3 Case. No. CV 06-01464 OWW (DLB) 

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

WHEREAS, the Deltakeeper Chapter of Baykeeper, Mother Lode Chapter of the Sierra Club, 

and Waterkeeper Alliance, Inc., (hereinafter collectively referred to as “Plaintiffs”) and George Brasil, 

Victor Brasil, and Brasil and Sons Dairy, Inc., Brasil and Sons Dairy, Inc. #1, and Brasil and Sons 

Dairy, Inc. #2 by and through their attorneys of record, hereby enter into this stipulation to dismiss with 

prejudice Plaintiffs’ claims against Brasil and Sons Dairy, Inc., Brasil and Sons Dairy, Inc. #1, Brasil 

and Sons Dairy, Inc. #2, George Brasil, and Victor Brasil (hereinafter collectively referred to as 

“Defendants”) as set forth in Case No. CV 06-01464 OWW (DLB) and to request the Honorable Dennis 

L. Beck, United States District Court Magistrate Judge, retain jurisdiction to enforce the terms of the 

settlement agreement, incorporated herein and attached hereto as Exhibit A; 

WHEREAS, Defendants represent that Brasil and Sons Dairy, Inc., George Brasil and Victor 

Brasil have sometimes used Brasil and Sons Dairy, Inc. #1 or Brasil and Sons Dairy #1 as the name(s) of 

the business entity that owns or operates the dairy operation at 20623 E. Lone Tree Road, Escalon, CA 

95320 (“Brasil CAFO #1”) and have sometimes used Brasil and Sons Dairy, Inc. #2 or Brasil and Sons 

Dairy #2 as the name(s) of the business entity that owns or operates the dairy operation at 21768 E. Lone 

Tree Road, Escalon, CA 95320 (“Brasil CAFO #2”) (collectively, Brasil CAFO #1 and Brasil CAFO #2 

are referred to as the “Brasil CAFO”). Currently, George Brasil and Victor Brasil are owners of Brasil 

and Sons Dairy, Inc., which owns or operates the Brasil CAFO, sometimes under the name(s) Brasil and 

Sons Dairy, Inc. #1, Brasil and Sons Dairy #1, Brasil and Sons Dairy, Inc. #2 and/or Brasil and Sons 

Dairy #2. Brasil and Sons Dairy, Inc., Brasil and Sons Dairy, Inc. #1, Brasil and Sons Dairy #1, Brasil 

and Sons Dairy, Inc. #2, Brasil and Sons Dairy #2, George Brasil and Victor Brasil (collectively referred 

to herein as the “Brasil CAFO Owners/Operators”) hereby stipulate and agree to comply with the terms 

of the Settlement Agreement; 

WHEREAS, on or about April 13, 2007, Plaintiffs and Brasil CAFO Owners/Operators 

(collectively referred to as the “Settling Parties”) entered into a settlement agreement (“Settlement 

Agreement”), which achieves a full and final settlement of all of Plaintiffs’ claims; 

 WHEREAS, on or about April 16, 2007, the Settling Parties also filed their consent to proceed 

before Magistrate Judge Beck for all purposes; 

Case 2:06-cv-01464-DLB Document 19 Filed 06/27/07 Page 3 of 75
Stipulated Dismissal and Settlement; [Proposed] Order 4 Case. No. CV 06-01464 OWW (DLB) 

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

 WHEREAS, Plaintiffs hereby voluntarily dismiss Marie Azevedo and Art Azevedo, who have 

not been served in this action, with prejudice; 

 WHEREAS, the Settling Parties now enter into this stipulation to dismiss with prejudice 

Plaintiffs’ all claims against Defendants and to request Judge Beck retain jurisdiction to enforce the 

terms of the Settlement Agreement. 

NOW THEREFORE, the Settling Parties jointly stipulate as follows: 

 1. Plaintiffs’ claims against Defendants as set forth in Case No. CV 06-01464 OWW 

(DLB), are hereby dismissed with prejudice. The Settling Parties specifically agree that there is no 

prevailing party or substantially prevailing party, whether under 33 U.S.C. §1365(d), 28 U.S.C. 

§2412(d) or any other statute or law and that, except as set forth in the Settlement Agreement, each party 

shall bear its own attorneys’ fees and costs. 

 2. The Settling Parties respectfully request that the Honorable Dennis L. Beck retain 

jurisdiction over Case No. CV 06-01464 OWW (DLB) for the purpose of resolving any disputes 

between the Settling Parties with respect to enforcement of any provision of the terms of the Settlement 

Agreement. 

Dated: _______________, 2007 

____________________________________ ____________________________________ 

By: Layne Friedrich By: Eric Bronson 

Lawyers For Clean Water, Inc. Bird/Marella 

Attorneys for Plaintiffs Attorneys for Defendants 

// 

// 

Case 2:06-cv-01464-DLB Document 19 Filed 06/27/07 Page 4 of 75
Stipulated Dismissal and Settlement; [Proposed] Order 5 Case. No. CV 06-01464 OWW (DLB) 

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

ORDER 

 Good cause appearing, and based on the stipulation of the parties, 

 IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that Plaintiffs’ claims against Defendants, as set forth in Case No. 

CV 06-01464 OWW (DLB), are hereby dismissed with prejudice. 

IT IS FURTHER ORDERED that this Court shall retain jurisdiction over Case No. CV 06-01464 

OWW (DLB) for the purpose of resolving any disputes between the parties with respect to enforcement 

of any provision of the terms of the Settlement Agreement. 

IT IS SO ORDERED. 

Dated: June 26, 2007 

 ____/s/ Dennis L. Beck___________________ 

 Magistrate Judge Dennis L. Beck 

 United States District Court 

Eastern District Of California 

Case 2:06-cv-01464-DLB Document 19 Filed 06/27/07 Page 5 of 75
Stipulated Dismissal and Settlement; [Proposed] Order 6 Case. No. CV 06-01464 OWW (DLB) 

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

EXHIBIT A

SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT 

This Settlement Agreement (or “Agreement”) is entered into between Plaintiffs Deltakeeper 

Chapter of Baykeeper, Mother Lode Chapter of the Sierra Club, and Waterkeeper Alliance, Inc., 

(hereinafter collectively referred to as “Plaintiffs”) and Brasil and Sons Dairy, Inc., George Brasil and 

Victor Brasil, who Defendants represent have sometimes used the name(s) Brasil and Sons Dairy, Inc. 

#1, Brasil and Sons Dairy #1, Brasil and Sons Dairy, Inc. #2 and/or Brasil and Sons Dairy #2, 

(hereinafter referred to as “Brasil CAFO Owners/Operators”). Plaintiffs and Brasil CAFO 

Owners/Operators are hereinafter collectively referred to as the “Settling Parties” and enter into this 

Settlement Agreement with respect to the following facts, objectives, and commitments: 

WHEREAS, Baykeeper is a regional non-profit public benefit corporation organized under the 

laws of the State of California. Baykeeper’s mission is to protect and enhance the water quality of the 

San Francisco Bay-Delta estuary and its watershed for the benefit of its ecosystems and human 

communities. The Deltakeeper Chapter of Baykeeper carries out this mission on the Sacramento – San 

Joaquin River Delta (“Delta”) and its tributaries in California’s Great Central Valley. The Deltakeeper 

Chapter of Baykeeper is dedicated to the preservation, protection, and defense of the environment, 

wildlife, and the natural resources of the Delta and other area receiving waters; 

WHEREAS, Mother Lode Chapter of the Sierra Club is a chapter of Sierra Club, a national, nonprofit environmental protection organization. The purposes of Sierra Club and its chapters are to 

explore, enjoy, and protect the wild places of the earth; to practice and promote the responsible use of 

the earth's ecosystems and resources; to educate and enlist humanity to protect and restore the quality of 

the natural and human environment; and to use all lawful means to carry out these objectives; 

WHEREAS, Waterkeeper Alliance, Inc. is an international not-for-profit organization with a 

mission to connect and support local Waterkeeper programs, and to provide a voice for waterways and 

communities worldwide. Each of these programs, in turn, is an independent, locally based advocacy 

group working to protect and restore watersheds in their home communities. Both Baykeeper and the 

Deltakeeper Chapter of Baykeeper are member programs of the Waterkeeper Alliance; 

Case 2:06-cv-01464-DLB Document 19 Filed 06/27/07 Page 6 of 75
Stipulated Dismissal and Settlement; [Proposed] Order 7 Case. No. CV 06-01464 OWW (DLB) 

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

WHEREAS, Defendants represent that Brasil and Sons Dairy, Inc., George Brasil and Victor 

Brasil have sometimes used Brasil and Sons Dairy, Inc. #1 or Brasil and/or Sons Dairy #1 as the name(s) 

of the business entity that owns or operates the dairy operation at 20623 E. Lone Tree Road, Escalon, 

CA 95320 (“Brasil CAFO #1”) and have sometimes used Brasil and Sons Dairy, Inc. #2 and/or Brasil 

and Sons Dairy #2 as the name(s) of the business entity that owns or operates the dairy operation at 

21768 E. Lone Tree Road, Escalon, CA 95320 (“Brasil CAFO #2”) (collectively, Brasil CAFO #1 and 

Brasil CAFO #2 are referred to as the “Brasil CAFO”). Currently, George Brasil and Victor Brasil are 

owners of Brasil and Sons Dairy, Inc., which owns or operates the Brasil CAFO, sometimes under the 

name(s) Brasil and Sons Dairy, Inc. #1, Brasil and Sons Dairy #1, Brasil and Sons Dairy, Inc. #2 and/or 

Brasil and Sons Dairy #2. 

WHEREAS, on April 21, 2006, Plaintiffs served Brasil and Sons Dairy, Inc., Brasil and Sons 

Dairy, Inc. #1, Brasil and Sons Dairy, Inc. #2, George Brasil, Victor Brasil, Marie Azevedo and Art 

Azevedo (hereinafter collectively referred to as “Defendants”) with a notice of intent to file suit (“Notice 

Letter”) under Sections 505(a)(1) and (f) of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act (“Clean Water 

Act”), 33 U.S.C. § 1365(a)(1) and (f). The Notice Letter alleged that Defendants have been and 

continue to be in violation of Sections 301(a) and 402(p) of the Clean Water Act, 33 U.S.C. §§ 1311(a) 

and 1342(p), for failure to obtain a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (“NPDES”) Permit 

for alleged discharges containing pollutants from the Brasil CAFO to waters of the United States; 

WHEREAS, on June 29, 2006, Plaintiffs filed a complaint in the United States District Court, 

Eastern District of California (Civil Case No. CV 06-01464 DFL (DAD), which is now Civil Case No. 

06-01464 OWW (DLB)) alleging violations of the Clean Water Act (“Complaint”); 

WHEREAS, Brasil and Sons Dairy, Inc., Brasil and Sons Dairy, Inc. #1, Brasil and Sons Dairy, 

Inc. #2, George Brasil and Victor Brasil have filed answers denying the claims asserted in the 

Complaint; 

WHEREAS, George Brasil and Victor Brasil own Brasil and Sons Dairy, Inc., which owns 

Brasil CAFO #2, including the land on which it operates, and Brasil CAFO #1 (except for the land on 

which it operates, which is now owned solely by Marie Azevedo since the passing of Art Azevedo); 

Case 2:06-cv-01464-DLB Document 19 Filed 06/27/07 Page 7 of 75
Stipulated Dismissal and Settlement; [Proposed] Order 8 Case. No. CV 06-01464 OWW (DLB) 

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

WHEREAS, the Settling Parties have agreed that it is in the Settling Parties’ mutual interest to 

resolve their disputes through settlement in the form of this Settlement Agreement without further Court 

proceedings; 

WHEREAS, the Settling Parties have further agreed that entry into and compliance with this 

Settlement Agreement shall not be construed as an admission by any party of any fact, issue of law, or 

violation of law, and that nothing in this Settlement Agreement shall prejudice, waive or impair any 

right, remedy, or defense in any other or future legal proceedings, except that it shall be binding in any 

proceedings between the Parties related to any claims which were raised in the Complaint based on the 

facts alleged therein; 

WHEREAS, the Settling Parties without admitting any liability or wrongdoing have agreed to 

settle their disputes and resolve this action as set forth herein; 

WHEREAS, the Settling Parties have further agreed that there is no prevailing party or 

substantially prevailing party, whether under 33 U.S.C. §1365(d), 28 U.S.C. §2412(d) or any other 

statute or law, and that except as set forth herein, each party shall bear its own attorneys’ fees and costs. 

WHEREAS, this Court has jurisdiction over this action and over the Settling Parties; 

WHEREAS, pursuant to Section 505(c)(1) of the Clean Water Act, 33 U.S.C. §1365(c)(1), the 

proper venue for this action is the United States District Court for the Eastern District of California since 

the Brasil CAFO is located within this judicial district. 

II. DEFINITIONS 

1. Best Management Practices or BMPs. “Best Management Practices” or “BMPs” as 

used herein refers and relates to schedules of activities, prohibitions of practices, maintenance 

procedures, and other structural and non-structural management practices to prevent or reduce the 

pollution of waters of the state and/or the United States. 

2. CAFO Waste. “CAFO Waste” as used herein refers to the many types of waste material 

located at the Brasil CAFO, such as liquid and solid manure, bedding, spilled or spoiled feed, animal 

hair, wastewater, wash water, cleaning compounds, contaminated sediment and dirt, and pollutants 

associated with concentrated animal feeding operations. 

Case 2:06-cv-01464-DLB Document 19 Filed 06/27/07 Page 8 of 75
Stipulated Dismissal and Settlement; [Proposed] Order 9 Case. No. CV 06-01464 OWW (DLB) 

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

3. Clean Water Act. “Clean Water Act” as used herein refers to the Federal Water Pollution 

Control Act, 33 U.S.C. §§ 1251 et seq. 

4. Discharge. “Discharge” as used herein means any intentional or accidental release or 

uncontrolled flow of CAFO Waste and/or water that either leaves the Brasil CAFO and reaches a surface 

water or reaches a ditch, or lateral, which is connected to a surface water. Discharge does not include 

agricultural storm water runoff as that term is defined under the Clean Water Act and interpreted by the 

courts such as in Waterkeeper Alliance et al. v. EPA, 399 F.3d 486 (2nd Cir. 2005). 

5. Draft WDR. “Draft WDR” as used herein refers to the draft “Waste Discharge 

Requirements General Order For Existing Milk Cow Dairies, Order No. _______,” which is attached as 

Exhibit 1.

6. Lagoons. “Lagoons” as used herein refers to the open pits, ponds, or other surface 

impoundments used for storage of liquefied CAFO Waste either before or after it is applied to a Land 

Application Field. 

7. Land Application Field. “Land Application Field” as used herein refers to any parcel 

owned or under the control of the Brasil CAFO Owners/Operators that is used for the land application 

and/or disposal of CAFO Waste and the growing of crops. 

8. Monitoring and Reporting Program. “Monitoring and Reporting Program” as used 

herein refers to the draft “Monitoring and Reporting Program No. _____, General Order for Existing 

Milk Cow Dairies.” A copy of the Monitoring and Reporting Program is attached as Exhibit 2. 

9. Regional Board. “Regional Board” as used herein refers to the California Regional Water 

Quality Control Board, Central Valley Region. 

10. Brasil CAFO. “Brasil CAFO” as used herein refers to the all of the land, structures and 

animal housing, and solid or liquid manure management and application systems used by the Brasil 

CAFO Owners/Operators at the properties located at 20623 E. Lone Tree Road, Escalon, CA 95320 

(“Brasil CAFO #1”) and 21768 E. Lone Tree Road, Escalon, CA 95320 (“Brasil CAFO #2”) 

(collectively, Brasil CAFO #1 and Brasil CAFO #2 are referred to as the “Brasil CAFO”), which 

include, but are not limited to, the corrals, barns, Lagoons, other structures, and Land Application Fields. 

Case 2:06-cv-01464-DLB Document 19 Filed 06/27/07 Page 9 of 75
Stipulated Dismissal and Settlement; [Proposed] Order 10 Case. No. CV 06-01464 OWW (DLB) 

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

11. State Board. “State Board” as used herein refers to the California State Water Resources 

Control Board. 

12. Waste and Nutrient Management Plan or WNMP. “Waste and Nutrient Management 

Plan” or “WNMP” as used herein refers to the plan containing the waste management and pollution 

prevention measures required by the Regional Board, the Clean Water Act, and this Settlement 

Agreement and includes, but is not limited to, those measures developed and implemented to control and 

prevent the release of CAFO Waste at the Brasil CAFO. 

III. COMMITMENTS OF DEFENDANT

A. NPDES Permit Application Submittal. 

13. Within five (5) days of the Effective Date of this Settlement Agreement, the Brasil CAFO 

Owners/Operators shall submit an application to the Regional Board for an NPDES permit regulating 

the Brasil CAFO. The form of the application to be submitted is attached hereto as Exhibit 3. The 

Brasil CAFO Owners/Operators are currently preparing a Waste and Nutrient Management Plan 

(“WNMP”), as set forth below in Paragraphs 14 and 15, and shall submit this WNMP to the Regional 

Board at which time the complete NPDES permit application(s) shall be considered submitted to the 

Regional Board. The Brasil CAFO Owners/Operators agree to send the permit application and 

associated documents to Plaintiffs concurrently with their submission of these documents to the 

Regional Board. Once the Brasil CAFO Owners/Operators submit the permit application to the 

Regional Board, the Brasil CAFO Owners/Operators shall respond in a reasonably prompt and complete 

manner to any and all future requests by the Regional Board for additional or supplemental information 

related to the Brasil CAFO Owners/Operators’ NPDES permit application. The Brasil CAFO 

Owners/Operators will not be under any obligation to institute any legal or judicial proceeding to force 

the Regional Board to act upon the Brasil CAFO Owners/Operators’ NPDES permit application, but the 

Brasil CAFO Owners/Operators understand that Plaintiffs may decide to bring such a proceeding. 

B. Waste and Nutrient Management Plan and Best Management Practices. 

14. Develop a Waste and Nutrient Management Plan. No later than forty-five (45) 

days from the Effective Date of this Agreement, the Brasil CAFO Owners/Operators shall 

prepare, and submit to Plaintiffs and the Regional Board, their draft WNMP for the Brasil 

Case 2:06-cv-01464-DLB Document 19 Filed 06/27/07 Page 10 of 75
Stipulated Dismissal and Settlement; [Proposed] Order 11 Case. No. CV 06-01464 OWW (DLB) 

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

CAFO. The draft WNMP that is submitted to the Regional Board shall include an 

implementation schedule for each aspect of the WNMP and shall address and include the 

requirements of this Settlement Agreement, of the Regional Board, including the attached Draft 

WDR, and the Environmental Protection Agency’s (“EPA”) regulations, including those listed at 

40 C.F.R. § 412.4. If the requirements of the Regional Board, the State Board and/or the EPA 

change and require revisions to the Brasil CAFO WNMP, the Brasil CAFO Owners/Operators 

shall revise their WNMP (whether still in draft form or after final approval by the Regional 

Board) and resubmit it to Plaintiffs and to the Regional Board for approval. 

15. As set forth above, the Brasil CAFO Owners/Operators shall provide Plaintiffs 

with a copy of the WNMP as soon as possible but within at least forty-five (45) days from the 

Effective Date of this Settlement Agreement. As soon as is reasonably possible, Plaintiffs shall 

provide comments on the draft WNMP to the Brasil CAFO Owners/Operators. The Brasil 

CAFO Owners/Operators are not bound by Plaintiffs’ comments but agree to make good faith 

efforts to either incorporate Plaintiffs’ comments into the WNMP or, in any instance in which 

they disagree with Plaintiffs’ comments, provide a written basis for not incorporating those 

comments. Notwithstanding Plaintiffs’ provision of comments on the draft WNMP, Plaintiffs 

reserve the right to submit comments to the Regional Board on the final WNMP. The Settling 

Parties acknowledge that the final WNMP, as well as any of the terms or conditions regarding 

any NPDES permit that results from the Brasil CAFO Owners/Operators’ submission of the 

application referenced in Paragraph 13 above, shall be determined by the Regional Board after 

the public process authorized by the Clean Water Act and other applicable law has been followed 

to completion. The Brasil CAFO Owners/Operators shall notify Plaintiffs if the Regional Board 

has an issue or concern over the Brasil CAFO Owners/Operators’ WNMP that relates to the 

requirements of paragraph 14, and Plaintiffs will have the burden of addressing and resolving 

this concern with the Regional Board. The Brasil CAFO Owners/Operators agree to revise and 

implement the WNMP as necessary and/or as required by the Regional Board and to provide 

Plaintiffs a copy of any revised WNMP within seven (7) days of its revision. 

Case 2:06-cv-01464-DLB Document 19 Filed 06/27/07 Page 11 of 75
Stipulated Dismissal and Settlement; [Proposed] Order 12 Case. No. CV 06-01464 OWW (DLB) 

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

16. Employee Training. Within sixty (60) days of the Effective Date, the Brasil CAFO 

Owners/Operators shall provide appropriate training to all individuals, including but not limited 

to employees, contractors, sub-contractors, and/or agents, working at the Brasil CAFO. This 

initial training shall be provided by a private consultant familiar with the WNMP, the NPDES 

permit applied for by the Brasil CAFO, and the state and federal regulations and requirements 

applicable to the Brasil CAFO and shall include training on the WNMP requirements, BMP 

implementation and maintenance, and the monitoring and sampling required by the WNMP and 

this Settlement Agreement to all individuals then working at the Brasil CAFO. Any individuals 

hired after the initial training shall be trained by either a private consultant as above or by 

individuals who have already been trained by a private consultant as set forth above in the 

particular endeavor for which the newly-hired individual will be engaged. The Brasil CAFO 

Owners/Operators also agree to provide additional training as necessary to ensure compliance 

with this Settlement Agreement and/or applicable requirements, as well as provide additional 

training within fourteen (14) days subsequent to any amendment and/or revision to the WNMP. 

Training shall be repeated as necessary to ensure that all such employees are familiar with and in 

compliance with these requirements, and at a minimum training shall be repeated on an annual 

basis. All individuals will receive this training prior to assuming responsibilities for compliance 

with this Settlement Agreement and/or state and federal requirements. 

 C. Action Plan for Discharges 

17. The Brasil CAFO Owners/Operators agree to develop and implement an action 

plan for Discharge(s) occurring after the Effective Date of this Agreement. The action plan will 

include: (i) an assessment and identification of the activities at the Brasil CAFO that cause or 

contribute to the Discharge(s); (ii) identification of modifications to existing BMPs and/or the 

development of new BMPs designed to prevent future Discharge(s), and; (iii) a schedule to 

implement the BMPs by the earliest practicable time; and, (iv) the revision of the WNMP as 

necessary. 

18. The Brasil CAFO Owners/Operators agree to submit each action plan to Plaintiffs 

within fourteen (14) days of receipt of sampling results of any Discharge, or if no sample of the 

Case 2:06-cv-01464-DLB Document 19 Filed 06/27/07 Page 12 of 75
Stipulated Dismissal and Settlement; [Proposed] Order 13 Case. No. CV 06-01464 OWW (DLB) 

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

Discharge was collected within seven (7) days of the Discharge. Plaintiffs shall have twenty-one 

(21) days upon receipt of the Brasil CAFO Owners/Operators action plan to provide the Brasil 

CAFO Owners/Operators with comments. The Brasil CAFO Owners/Operators shall respond to 

Plaintiffs within fourteen (14) days of receipt of Plaintiffs’ comments. The Settling Parties will 

meet and confer if there are any disagreements regarding any action plan as set forth in Section 

VII below. The Brasil CAFO Owners/Operators shall notify Plaintiffs in writing when an action 

plan has been implemented. Compliance with a mutually-agreed upon action plan shall be 

considered compliance with the required actions for the Discharge(s). The Brasil CAFO 

Owners/Operators’ obligation to prepare a written action plan under this Paragraph will expire at 

the termination of this Settlement Agreement. Any of the Settling Parties may submit 

correspondence, reports, sampling results, proposed actions plans or comments thereto with 

regard to any future Discharge(s) to the Regional Board or its staff. 

D. Monitoring and Reporting 

19. Reporting. During the life of this Settlement Agreement, the Brasil CAFO 

Owners/Operators agree to provide Plaintiffs with a copy of all documents or data generated as required 

or contemplated by this Settlement Agreement and/or which are submitted to the Regional Board, EPA, 

and/or any regulatory agency, which refer or relate to the Brasil CAFO, at the same time the documents 

are sent to the regulatory agency. The Brasil CAFO Owners/Operators shall provide Plaintiffs with all 

results of sampling analyses within seven (7) days of the Brasil CAFO Owners/Operators’ receipt of 

such information 

20. Site Inspections. For the term of this Settlement Agreement, Plaintiffs and/or their 

representatives, and Plaintiffs’ consultant, who is currently Mr. Alan Gay of U.S.K.H, may conduct up 

to two (2) yearly site inspections at the Brasil CAFO (“Site Inspections”). It is the Settling Parties’ 

intent that the Site Inspections will consist of one rainy season inspection (“Rainy Season Inspection”) 

and one inspection when liquid and/or solid CAFO waste is being applied to the Land Application Fields 

(“Land Application Inspection”). Each inspection shall be scheduled for a mutually convenient date and 

time. Plaintiffs and/or their representatives, and Plaintiffs’ consultant, may also conduct additional 

inspection(s) of the Brasil CAFO in the event of a Discharge(s), which shall be scheduled at a mutually 

Case 2:06-cv-01464-DLB Document 19 Filed 06/27/07 Page 13 of 75
Stipulated Dismissal and Settlement; [Proposed] Order 14 Case. No. CV 06-01464 OWW (DLB) 

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

convenient date and time. If requested in advance the Brasil CAFO Owners/Operators shall schedule a 

mutually convenient time for Plaintiffs to conduct a Land Application Inspection when solid and/or 

liquid CAFO Waste is going to be applied to Land Application Field(s). 

a. During the Site Inspections, the Brasil CAFO Owners/Operators shall provide 

reasonable access to the Brasil CAFO and the WNMP, and to all relevant records, reports and data for 

the Brasil CAFO. 

b. During the Site Inspections, Plaintiffs or their representatives may collect split 

samples of any media, including but not limited to CAFO Waste, soil, and/or storm water discharges 

whenever possible. A certified California laboratory shall analyze storm water samples collected by 

Plaintiffs and any and all results of any testing shall be provided to the Brasil CAFO Owners/Operators 

within seven (7) days of Plaintiffs’ receipt of such results. 

 c. Plaintiffs and their representatives agree to abide by applicable health and 

safety plans, bio-security protocol, and/or other necessary protocol. Plaintiffs agree to indemnify 

and hold the Brasil CAFO Owners/Operators harmless or any liability, loss, damage or other 

injury suffered or sustained as a result of any action or inaction by Plaintiffs, their legal counsel 

and/or any of their representatives during any Site Inspection. 

E. Supplemental Environmental Project 

21. The Settling Parties, recognizing the value of collecting data and monitoring CAFO 

operations agree that the Brasil CAFO Owners/Operators shall develop and implement a 

monitoring and reporting program at the Brasil CAFO as set forth herein. Specifically, the Brasil 

CAFO Owners/Operators agree to develop and implement a Monitoring and Reporting Program 

that meets the requirements of this Settlement Agreement and the requirements set forth in 

Exhibit 2. Sampling reductions sought by the Brasil CAFO Owners/Operators from the Regional 

Board will not impact or change the Brasil CAFO Owners/Operators’ obligations to conduct the 

sampling as set forth in paragraph 21(a) – (c). In addition, during the life of this Settlement 

Agreement, the Brasil CAFO Owners/Operators shall also conduct the following additional 

monitoring and reporting: 

Case 2:06-cv-01464-DLB Document 19 Filed 06/27/07 Page 14 of 75
Stipulated Dismissal and Settlement; [Proposed] Order 15 Case. No. CV 06-01464 OWW (DLB) 

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

a. Each year during the life of this Settlement Agreement the Brasil CAFO 

Owners/Operators shall collect and analyze a total of four (4) samples of storm water runoff from each 

Land Application Field(s). The Brasil CAFO Owners/Operators will sample 4 storm water runoff 

events unless less than 4 storm water runoff events occurs. If less than 4 storm water runoff events 

occur the Brasil CAFO Owners/Operators will sample the storm water runoff events that do occur up to 

collecting 4 storm water runoff samples per year. 

 b. During the life of this Settlement Agreement the Brasil CAFO Owners/Operators 

shall collect and analyze soil samples in the first year after the Effective Date and at least once more 

during the life of this Settlement Agreement. 

 c. If the Brasil CAFO Owners/Operators’ groundwater monitoring, as 

required by Monitoring Provision A.15, detects ammonia (using a detection limit of 1.5 mg/L or 

less) in any concentration on two (2) or more occasions or any sample result of nitrate at or 

above 15 mg/L on two (2) or more occasions or any sample result of nitrate above 20 mg/L on 

any occasion, the Brasil CAFO Owners/Operators agree to conduct additional groundwater 

testing or monitoring. If the Brasil CAFO Owners/Operators must conduct additional 

groundwater testing or monitoring, the Settling Parties shall meet and confer within ten (10) days 

of the Brasil CAFO Owners/Operators’ receipt of data indicating additional groundwater testing 

or monitoring is required to discuss a practical solution. If no agreement can be reached on an 

appropriate response, the Settling Parties will meet and confer as set forth in Section VII below. 

F. Litigation Fees and Costs and Settlement Payment

22. Fees Incurred as of the Effective Date of this Decree. The Settling Parties agree 

that each is to bear its own attorneys’ fees and costs incurred as of the Effective Date of this 

Settlement Agreement. However, in recognition of the expense incurred by Plaintiffs in bringing 

this action, the Brasil CAFO Owners/Operators agree to pay Plaintiffs the sum of $20,000.00 

within thirty (30) days of the Effective Date of this Settlement Agreement. Payment shall be 

made to “Lawyers for Clean Water Attorney Client Trust Account” and addressed to: Lawyers 

for Clean Water, Inc., 1004 O’Reilly Avenue, San Francisco, CA 94129. 

Case 2:06-cv-01464-DLB Document 19 Filed 06/27/07 Page 15 of 75
Stipulated Dismissal and Settlement; [Proposed] Order 16 Case. No. CV 06-01464 OWW (DLB) 

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

23. To help defray the costs and fees of Plaintiffs’ consultant’s review of the WNMP and 

related documents, and conducting one Site Inspection per year, the Brasil CAFO Owners/Operators 

agree to pay Plaintiffs’ consultant, who is currently Mr. Alan Gay, up to $2,000.00 annually for each of 

the three years under the term of this Settlement Agreement, but in no case shall the Brasil CAFO 

Owners/Operators pay more than $6,000.00 during the life of this Settlement Agreement. For the first 

year only, the $2,000 maximum shall be for Plaintiffs’ consultant’s actual costs and fees incurred in the 

review of the WNMP and related documents and for one Site Inspection. During the second and third 

years of the Settlement Agreement, the $2,000 annual maximum shall be limited to the actual costs and 

fees of Plaintiffs’ consultant incurred in attending and conducting one Site Inspection, designated in 

advance by Plaintiffs. However, Plaintiffs’ consultant can review WNMP and related documents if no 

additional costs are incurred beyond those that would be incurred by Plaintiffs’ consultant conducting 

the Site Inspection. Plaintiffs’ consultant shall invoice the Brasil CAFO Owners/Operators directly for 

the costs and fees incurred pursuant to this Paragraph and the Brasil CAFO Owners/Operators agree to 

reimburse Plaintiffs’ consultant within 15 days of receiving such invoice. 

IV. COMMITMENTS OF PLAINTIFFS

24. Filing Form Consenting to Proceed Before Magistrate Judge Beck: Provided Plaintiffs 

have received a consent form from the Brasil CAFO Owners/Operators, Plaintiffs will file the forms to 

consent to proceed before the Honorable Magistrate Judge Beck for all parties within one (1) day of the 

Effective Date of this Settlement Agreement. 

25. Filing Settlement Agreement. Within 2 days of the Effective Date, Plaintiffs shall file this 

Settlement Agreement and Proposed Order with the Court. 

26. Review by Federal Agencies. Plaintiffs shall submit this Settlement Agreement and 

Proposed Order to EPA and the U.S. Department of Justice (“DOJ”) within 2 days of the Effective Date 

for review consistent with 40 C.F.R. § 135.5. The review period expires forty-five 45 days after receipt 

of this Settlement Agreement by both agencies. In the event that EPA or DOJ comments negatively on 

the provisions of this Settlement Agreement, the Settling Parties agree to meet and confer to attempt to 

resolve the issue(s) raised by EPA or DOJ. 

// 

Case 2:06-cv-01464-DLB Document 19 Filed 06/27/07 Page 16 of 75
Stipulated Dismissal and Settlement; [Proposed] Order 17 Case. No. CV 06-01464 OWW (DLB) 

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

V. DURATION OF SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT 

27. This Settlement Agreement shall remain in effect for three (3) years from the Effective 

Date. 

VI. PERFORMANCE OF SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT

28. Force Majeure. The Brasil CAFO Owners/Operators shall notify Plaintiffs pursuant to the 

terms of this Paragraph, where implementation of the steps set forth in this Settlement Agreement, 

within the deadlines set forth in those paragraphs, becomes impossible, despite the timely good-faith 

efforts of the Brasil CAFO Owners/Operators or any of them, due to circumstances beyond the control 

of the Brasil CAFO Owners/Operators or their agents, and which could not have been reasonably 

foreseen and prevented by the exercise of due diligence by the Brasil CAFO Owners/Operators. 

Circumstances beyond the Brasil CAFO Owners/Operators’ control include, but are not limited to, 

delays or changed conditions occasioned by changes to statutory, regulatory, or other applicable state or 

federal law. Delays due to unanticipated or increased costs or expenses associated with the completion 

of any work or activity under this Settlement Agreement, changed financial circumstances, or the Brasil 

CAFO Owners/Operators’ failure to make timely and bona fide applications and to exercise diligent 

efforts to obtain permits, or normal inclement weather shall not, in any event, be considered to be 

circumstances beyond the Brasil CAFO Owners/Operators’ control. 

a. The Brasil CAFO Owners/Operators claiming impossibility shall notify Plaintiffs 

in writing within ten (10) days of the date that the Brasil CAFO Owners/Operators first knew of the 

event or circumstance or should have known of the event or circumstance by the exercise of due 

diligence and shall describe the reason for the non-performance. The Brasil CAFO Owners/Operators’ 

notice shall specifically refer to this Section of the Settlement Agreement and describe the anticipated 

length of time the delay may persist, the cause or causes of the delay, the measures taken or to be taken 

by the Brasil CAFO Owners/Operators to prevent or minimize the delay, the schedule by which the 

measures will be implemented, and the anticipated date of compliance. The Brasil CAFO 

Owners/Operators shall adopt all reasonable measures to avoid and minimize such delays. 

b. The Settling Parties shall meet and confer in good-faith concerning the nonperformance and, where the Settling Parties concur that the non-performance was or is impossible, 

Case 2:06-cv-01464-DLB Document 19 Filed 06/27/07 Page 17 of 75
Stipulated Dismissal and Settlement; [Proposed] Order 18 Case. No. CV 06-01464 OWW (DLB) 

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

despite the timely good faith efforts of the Brasil CAFO Owners/Operators, due to circumstances 

beyond the control of the Brasil CAFO Owners/Operators, that could not have been reasonably foreseen 

and prevented by the exercise of due diligence by the Brasil CAFO Owners/Operators, new performance 

deadlines shall be established. 

c. If Plaintiffs disagree with the Brasil CAFO Owners/Operators’ notice, or in the 

event that the Settling Parties cannot timely agree on the terms of such a stipulation, either party shall 

have the right to invoke the dispute resolution procedures described herein. In such proceeding, the 

Brasil CAFO Owners/Operators shall bear the burden of proving that any delay of any requirement of 

this Settlement Agreement was caused or will be caused by Force Majeure and the extent of any delay 

attributable to such circumstances. 

VII. DISPUTE RESOLUTION PROCEDURES

29. Meet and Confer. If any party believes that a breach of this Settlement Agreement has 

occurred, the Settling Parties shall meet and confer within ten (10) days of receiving written notification 

of a request for such meeting. 

30. During the meet and confer proceeding, the Settling Parties shall discuss the dispute and 

make best efforts to devise a mutually agreed upon plan, including implementation dates, to resolve the 

dispute. 

31. If either party fails to meet and confer or the meet and confer does not resolve the dispute, 

after at least ten (10) days have passed after the meet and confer occurred or should have occurred, 

either party shall be entitled to initiate the formal dispute resolution procedures in Paragraph 32 below. 

32. Formal Dispute Resolution. If any meet and confer process provided for in this Settlement 

Agreement has been terminated and the Settling Parties’ disputes have not been resolved, the Settling 

Parties agree to file concurrent briefs before Judge Beck, to determine whether either party is in breach 

of this Settlement Agreement and, if so, to require the breaching party to remedy any breach identified 

by the District Court within a reasonable time frame. Within 3 days of receiving one party’s notice to 

invoke formal dispute resolution the Settling Parties agree to call the court clerk to schedule a hearing 

date that gives the Settling Parties at least 14 days to file their concurrent briefs before the hearing. The 

party initiating the dispute resolution procedures identified in this Paragraph may request an expedited 

Case 2:06-cv-01464-DLB Document 19 Filed 06/27/07 Page 18 of 75
Stipulated Dismissal and Settlement; [Proposed] Order 19 Case. No. CV 06-01464 OWW (DLB) 

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

hearing schedule. If Judge Beck is not available to perform the role identified herein, the Settling 

Parties agree that the dispute resolution process shall be re-assigned pursuant to applicable rules of the 

District Court. The prevailing or substantially prevailing party in a motion before the Court, may be 

awarded their reasonable costs and attorneys’ fees incurred during the meet and confer and formal 

dispute resolution processes consistent with Section 505 of the Clean Water Act, 33 U.S.C. § 1365. 

VIII. MUTUAL RELEASE OF LIABILITY AND COVENANT NOT TO SUE

33. In consideration of the above, upon the Effective Date, the Settling Parties, on behalf of 

themselves and their respective representatives, agents, brokers, attorneys, employees, servants, 

consultants, heirs, successors, predecessors, and assigns hereby fully release and discharge each other 

from any and all rights, claims (asserted or unasserted), actions and causes of action, suits, debts, 

demands, reimbursements, contracts, covenants, liens, liabilities, losses, costs, expenses (including, 

without limitation, attorney’s fees), and damages of any nature, kind and description, known or 

unknown, anticipated or unanticipated, suspected or unsuspected, in law or in equity, arising out of, 

based on and/or in any way related to any allegations, claims and demands mentioned or referred to, or 

which might have been or could have been asserted in the Complaint up to and including the Effective 

Date of this Settlement Agreement. 

34. The Settling Parties hereto acknowledge that they have been advised by counsel and are 

familiar with California Civil Code Section 1542 which provides as follows: 

A general release does not extend to claims which the creditor does not know or suspect to 

exist in his favor at the time of executing the release, which if known by him must have materially 

affected his settlement with the debtor. 

35. The Settling Parties hereto, being aware of the foregoing code section, expressly waive to 

the extent applicable any rights they may have thereunder, as well as under any other statutes or 

common law principles of similar effect. The Settling Parties hereto acknowledge that they may 

hereafter discover facts different than, or in addition to, those that it now knows or believes to be true 

with respect to the claims related herein, and each of them agrees that this general release shall be and 

remain effective in all respects, notwithstanding later discovery of different or additional facts or 

evidence. 

Case 2:06-cv-01464-DLB Document 19 Filed 06/27/07 Page 19 of 75
Stipulated Dismissal and Settlement; [Proposed] Order 20 Case. No. CV 06-01464 OWW (DLB) 

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

36. Notwithstanding anything set forth in Paragraphs 33-35 above, the Releases shall not 

apply to the Settling Parties’ respective executory obligations, covenants, conditions and representations 

set forth in this Settlement Agreement, none of which shall be released. 

37. In addition, nothing in this Settlement Agreement limits or otherwise affects the Settling 

Parties’ right to address or take any position that it deems necessary or appropriate in any formal or 

informal proceeding before the Regional Board, EPA, or any other judicial or administrative body on 

any other matter relating to the Settling Parties. 

IX. MISCELLANEOUS AND GENERAL PROVISIONS

38. Neither the Settlement Agreement nor any payment pursuant to the Settlement Agreement 

shall constitute or be construed as a finding, adjudication, or acknowledgment of any fact, law, or 

liability, nor shall it be construed as an admission of violation of any law, rule, or regulation. The Brasil 

CAFO Owners/Operators maintain and reserve all defenses they may have to any alleged violations that 

may be raised in the future. 

39. The Court shall retain jurisdiction to enforce the terms and conditions of this Settlement 

Agreement and to resolve disputes arising hereunder as may be necessary or appropriate for the 

construction or execution of the Settlement Agreement up to and including the date of termination 

subject to any and all applicable defenses the Settling Parties may have under law. 

40. Construction. The language in all parts of this Settlement Agreement shall be construed in 

accordance with the law and according to its plain and ordinary meaning, except as to those terms 

defined in the applicable NPDES permits, Clean Water Act, or specifically herein. 

41. Choice of Law. The laws of the State of California and the United States shall govern this 

Settlement Agreement. 

42. Severability. In the event that any provision, paragraph, section, or sentence of this 

Settlement Agreement is held by a Court to be unenforceable, the validity of the enforceable provisions 

shall not be adversely affected. 

43. Correspondence. All notices required or contemplated by this Settlement Agreement or 

any other correspondence pertaining to this Settlement Agreement shall be sent by regular, certified, or 

overnight mail as follows: 

Case 2:06-cv-01464-DLB Document 19 Filed 06/27/07 Page 20 of 75
Stipulated Dismissal and Settlement; [Proposed] Order 21 Case. No. CV 06-01464 OWW (DLB) 

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

If to Plaintiff Organizations: Deb Self 

 Baykeeper 

 785 Market Street, Suite 850 

 San Francisca, CA 94103 

With copies to: Layne Friedrich 

 Lawyers for Clean Water, Inc. 

 1004A O’Reilly Ave. 

 San Francisco, CA 94129 

If to Brasil CAFO Owners/Operators: George Brasil 

 21728 E. Lone Tree Road, 

 Escalon, CA 95320 

With copies to: Eric E. Bronson 

 Bird Marella Boxer Wolpert Nessim Drooks & 

 Lincenberg 

 1875 Century Park East, 23rd Floor 

 Los Angeles, CA 90067 

Notifications of communications shall be deemed submitted three (3) days after the date that they 

are postmarked and sent by first-class mail or deposited with an overnight mail/delivery service. Any 

change of address or addresses shall be communicated in the manner described above for giving notices. 

In addition, the Settling Parties may agree to transmit documents electronically or by facsimile. 

44. Effect of Settlement Agreement. Plaintiffs do not, by their consent to this Settlement 

Agreement, warrant or aver in any manner that the Brasil CAFO Owners/Operators’ compliance with 

this Settlement Agreement will constitute or result in compliance with any federal or state law or 

regulation. Nothing in this Settlement Agreement shall be construed to affect or limit in any way the 

obligation of the Brasil CAFO Owners/Operators to comply with all federal, state, and local laws and 

regulations governing any activity required by this Settlement Agreement. 

45. Counterparts. This Settlement Agreement may be executed in any number of counterparts, 

all of which together shall constitute one original document. Telecopy and/or facsimile copies of 

original signature shall be deemed to be originally executed counterparts of this Settlement Agreement. 

Case 2:06-cv-01464-DLB Document 19 Filed 06/27/07 Page 21 of 75
Stipulated Dismissal and Settlement; [Proposed] Order 22 Case. No. CV 06-01464 OWW (DLB) 

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

46. Modification of the Settlement Agreement. This Settlement Agreement, and any 

provisions herein, may not be changed, waived, discharged, or terminated unless by a written 

instrument, signed by the Settling Parties. 

47. Full Settlement. This Settlement Agreement constitutes a full and final settlement of this 

matter. 

48. Integration Clause. This is an integrated Settlement Agreement. This Settlement 

Agreement is intended to be a full and complete statement of the terms of the agreement between the 

Settling Parties and expressly supersedes any and all prior oral or written agreements covenants, 

representations, and warranties (express or implied) concerning the subject matter of this Settlement 

Agreement. 

49. Authority. The undersigned representatives for Plaintiffs and the Brasil CAFO 

Owners/Operators each certify that he/she is fully authorized by the party whom he/she represents to 

enter into the terms and conditions of this Settlement Agreement. 

50. The provisions of this Settlement Agreement apply to and bind the Settling Parties, 

including any successors or assigns. The Settling Parties certify that their undersigned representatives 

are fully authorized to enter into this Settlement Agreement, to execute it on behalf of the Settling 

Parties, and to legally bind the Settling Parties to its terms. 

51. The Settling Parties agree to be bound by this Settlement Agreement and not to contest its 

validity in any subsequent proceeding to implement or enforce its terms. 

The term “Effective Date,” as used in this Settlement Agreement, shall mean the last date on which the 

signature of a party to this Settlement Agreement is executed. 

// 

// 

// 

// 

// 

// 

// 

Case 2:06-cv-01464-DLB Document 19 Filed 06/27/07 Page 22 of 75
Stipulated Dismissal and Settlement; [Proposed] Order 23 Case. No. CV 06-01464 OWW (DLB) 

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

The Settling Parties hereby stipulate and enter into this Settlement Agreement. 

APPROVED AS TO CONTENT: For PLAINTIFFS: 

Date: ____________, 2007 

 

By: Deb Self, Baykeeper 

 

By: Aaron Isherwood, Sierra Club 

 

By: Jeff Odefey, Waterkeeper Alliance, Inc. 

For BRASIL AND SONS DAIRY, INC. (dba BRASIL 

 AND SONS DAIRY, INC. #1, BRASIL AND SONS 

 DAIRY #1, BRASIL AND SONS DAIRY, INC. #2 

 BRASIL AND SONS DAIRY #2), GEORGE 

 BRASIL AND VICTOR BRASIL: 

Date: ____________, 2007 

 

By: Brasil and Sons Dairy, Inc., dba Brasil and Sons 

 Dairy, Inc. #1, Brasil and Sons Dairy #1, Brasil and Sons 

 Dairy, Inc. #2 and Brasil and Sons Dairy #2 

 

By: George Brasil 

 

By: Victor Brasil 

Case 2:06-cv-01464-DLB Document 19 Filed 06/27/07 Page 23 of 75
Stipulated Dismissal and Settlement; [Proposed] Order 24 Case. No. CV 06-01464 OWW (DLB) 

1

2

3

4

5

6

7

8

9

10

11

12

13

14

15

16

17

18

19

20

21

22

23

24

25

26

27

28

APPROVED AS TO FORM: For PLAINTIFFS: 

____________________________________ 

By: Layne Friedrich 

 Lawyers For Clean Water, Inc. 

 Attorney for Plaintiffs 

For BRASIL AND SONS DAIRY, INC. (dba BRASIL 

AND SONS DAIRY, INC. #1, BRASIL AND SONS 

DAIRY #1, BRASIL AND SONS DAIRY, INC. #2 and 

BRASIL AND SONS DAIRY #2), GEORGE BRASIL and 

VICTOR BRASIL: 

____________________________________ 

By: Eric Bronson 

 Bird/Marella 

Attorneys for Defendants Brasil and Sons Dairy, 

Inc., Brasil and Sons Dairy, Inc. #1, Brasil and Sons 

Dairy, Inc. #2, George Brasil and Victor Brasil 

Case 2:06-cv-01464-DLB Document 19 Filed 06/27/07 Page 24 of 75
EXHIBIT 1

Case 2:06-cv-01464-DLB Document 19 Filed 06/27/07 Page 25 of 75
11/22/06

CALIFORNIA REGIONAL WATER QUALITY CONTROL BOARD

CENTRAL VALLEY REGION

Order No. ____

WASTE DISCHARGE REQUIREMENTS GENERAL ORDER

FOR

EXISTING MILK COW DAIRIES

The California Regional Water Quality Control Board, Central Valley Region (hereafter, Central

Valley Water Board), finds that:

SCOPE OF COVERAGE OF THIS ORDER

1. This Order serves as general waste discharge requirements for discharges of waste from

existing milk cow dairies (defined in Finding 7) of all sizes.

2. This Order applies to owners and operators of existing milk cow dairies (hereinafter

Dischargers) that submitted a complete Report of Waste Discharge in response to the

Central Valley Water Board’s 8 August 2005 request for such a report. Following formal

written notification by the Central Valley Water Board, these Dischargers are required to

comply with the terms and conditions of this Order. Dischargers that do not qualify for

coverage under this Order will be covered under separate general or individual waste

discharge requirements or a waiver of waste discharge requirements.

REASON FOR THE CENTRAL VALLEY WATER BOARD ISSUING THIS ORDER

3. The Central Valley Water Board authority to regulate waste discharges that could affect the

quality of the waters of the state, which includes both surface water and groundwater and

the prevention of nuisances, is found in the Porter-Cologne Water Quality Control Act

(California Water Code Division 7).

4. California Water Code Section 13260 requires any person discharging waste, or proposing

to discharge waste, within the Central Valley Region, that could affect the quality of the

waters of the state to file a report of waste discharge with the Central Valley Water Board.

5. The Central Valley Water Board is required to prescribe waste discharge requirements for

proposed, existing, or material changes in discharges of waste and must implement the

relevant water quality control plans. The Central Valley Water Board may prescribe

general waste discharge requirements as to a category of discharges if all the following

criteria apply to the discharges in that category:

a. The discharges are produced by the same or similar operations.

b. The discharges involve the same or similar types of waste.

Case 2:06-cv-01464-DLB Document 19 Filed 06/27/07 Page 26 of 75
Waste Discharge Requirements General Order No.____ 2

Existing Milk Cow Dairies

11/22/06

c. The discharges require the same or similar treatment standards.

d. The discharges are more appropriately regulated under general requirements than

individual requirements.

6. In regulating discharges of waste, the Central Valley Water Board implements State laws

and regulations. California regulations governing discharges from confined animal

facilities are contained in Title 27 of the California Code of Regulations (CCR), Division 2,

Subdivision 1, Chapter 7, Subchapter 2, Article 1 (Title 27).

7. For the purposes of this Order, an existing milk cow dairy includes all dairies that were

operating as of 17 October 2005 and were requested by the Central Valley Water Board on

8 August 2005 to file a Report of Waste Discharge.

8. Existing dairy operations include herd sizes that may vary in order to ensure a constant

milk production volume. Doing so requires a dairy operator to manage the herd,

continually producing calves, raising support stock to replace cows that die or fail to

produce, and selling some of the mature cows and support stock.

9. Professionals at the University of California Davis estimate the normal variation in

California dairy herd sizes ranges from about 10 to 15 percent.

10. For the purposes of this Order, existing herd size is defined as the number of mature dairy

cows reported in the Report of Waste Discharge submitted in response to the 8 August

2005 letter from the Executive Officer, plus or minus 15 percent of that reported number to

account for the natural variation in herd sizes.

11. For the purposes of this Order, an increase in the number of mature dairy cows of more

than 15 percent beyond the number reported in the Report of Waste Discharge submitted in

response to the 8 August 2005 letter from the Executive Officer is considered an expansion.

12. There are approximately 1,600 milk cow dairies within the Central Valley Region (Region)

that will be required to operate under the requirements of this Order. Each facility

represents a significant source of waste discharge with a potential to affect the quality of

the waters of the State.

13. For the purposes of this Order, “waste” includes, but is not limited to, manure, leachate,

process wastewater and any water, precipitation or rainfall runoff that contacts raw

materials, products, or byproducts such as manure, compost piles, feed, silage, milk, or

bedding.

14. This Order implements the requirements of State Water Resources Control Board

Resolution 68-16 (Statement of Policy with Respect to Maintaining High Quality of Waters

in California), Title 27 CCR for confined animal facilities, the Central Valley Water

Case 2:06-cv-01464-DLB Document 19 Filed 06/27/07 Page 27 of 75
Waste Discharge Requirements General Order No.____ 3

Existing Milk Cow Dairies

11/22/06

Board’s Water Quality Control Plan for the Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins (4th

Ed.) and the Water Quality Control Plan for the Tulare Lake Basin (2nd Ed.) (Basin Plans)

and other applicable plans and policies of the State Water Resources Control Board (State

Water Board) and the Central Valley Water Board described in the Information Sheet,

which is attached to and made part of this Order.

CALIFORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT

15. The Central Valley Water Board is the lead agency for purposes of the California

Environmental Quality Act (CEQA) (Public Resources Code Section 21000 et seq.) with

respect to adoption of this Order.

16. In accordance with CEQA, the Central Valley Water Board adopted a Negative Declaration

in 1982 with the adoption of Central Valley Water Board Resolution 82-036 (Waiving

Waste Discharge Requirements for Specific Types of Discharge), which waived waste

discharge requirements for confined animal facilities where the Discharger complies with

Central Valley Water Board guidelines. That waiver program expired on 1 January 2003.

17. Food and Agricultural Code Section 33487 provides a statutory exemption from CEQA for

dairy farms under the following circumstances: (1) when the dairy will be constructed and

operated in accordance with the minimum standards in Chapter 5 of the Food and

Agricultural Code; (2) where the applicable local agencies have completed all necessary

reviews and approvals including that required by CEQA; and (3) where a permit for

construction was issued by a local agency on or after the effective date of Food and

Agricultural Code Section 33487 and construction has begun.

18. CEQA provides several categorical exemptions from CEQA that apply to this Order

including:

a. CEQA (Title 14 CCR Section 15301) for Existing Facilities that applies to “...the

operation, repair, maintenance, permitting, leasing, licensing, or minor alteration of

existing public or private structures, facilities, mechanical equipment, or topographical

features, involving negligible or no expansion of use beyond that existing at the time of

the lead agency’s determination...”

b. CEQA (Title 14 CCR Section 15302) for “...replacement or reconstruction of existing

structures and facilities where the new structure will be located on the same site as the

structure replaced and will have substantially the same purpose and capacity as the

structure replaced...”

c. CEQA (Title 14 CCR Section 15304) for “minor public or private alterations in the

condition of land, water, and/or vegetation which do not involve removal of healthy,

mature, scenic trees except for forestry and agricultural purposes...”

Case 2:06-cv-01464-DLB Document 19 Filed 06/27/07 Page 28 of 75
Waste Discharge Requirements General Order No.____ 4

Existing Milk Cow Dairies

11/22/06

19. The adoption of this Order is categorically exempt from CEQA because:

a. Consistent with the “existing facility” exemption in Title 14 CCR Section 15301,

eligibility under this Order is limited to milk cow dairies that were existing facilities as

of 17 October 2005. This Order does not authorize expansion of use beyond that

existing as of 17 October 2005. Restoration of, or improvements to dairy waste

management systems to ensure proper function in compliance with this Order will

involve minor alterations of existing private facilities.

b. Consistent with the categorical exemption of Title 14 CCR Section 15302, this Order

will require covered dairies to replace or reconstruct waste management systems to

ensure proper function in compliance with this Order.

c. Consistent with the categorical exemption of Title 14 CCR Section 15304, this Order

will require covered dairies to make improvements to their waste management systems

that will result in minor alterations to land, water, and/or vegetation.

20. This Order imposes significant new and more stringent requirements compared to previous

waste discharge requirements or waivers of waste discharge requirements that have applied

in the past to these existing facilities. This Order requires compliance with State Water

Resources Control Board Resolution 68-16, Title 27 CCR for confined animal facilities,

and the Basin Plans. As a result, existing milk cow dairies will reduce their impacts to

surface water and groundwater upon compliance with this Order. This Order prohibits:

a. Expansions of facilities while they are covered by this Order;

b. Discharges of waste and/or storm water to surface waters from the production area;

c. Discharges of waste to surface waters which causes or contributes to an exceedance of

any applicable water quality objective in the Basin Plans or water quality criteria set

forth in the California Toxics Rule or the National Toxics Rule;

d. Discharges of waste that causes pollution or nuisance;

e. Discharges of wastewater to surface waters during or following wastewater application

to cropland;

f. Discharges of storm water to surface water from the land application area where

manure or process wastewater has been applied unless the land application area has

been managed consistent with a certified Nutrient Management Plan (see Attachment

C, which is attached to and made part of this Order); and

Case 2:06-cv-01464-DLB Document 19 Filed 06/27/07 Page 29 of 75
Waste Discharge Requirements General Order No.____ 5

Existing Milk Cow Dairies

11/22/06

This Order requires that discharges of waste from existing milk cow dairies shall not cause

groundwater to be further degraded1, to exceed water quality objectives, unreasonably

affect beneficial uses, or cause a condition of pollution or nuisance. This Order also

requires monitoring of surface water and groundwater to demonstrate reduced impacts to

surface water and groundwater upon compliance with this Order.

DAIRY IMPACTS ON WATER QUALITY

21. Groundwater monitoring shows that dairies in the Region have impacted groundwater

quality. A study of five dairies in a high-risk groundwater area in the Region found that

groundwater beneath dairies that were thought to have good waste management and land

application practices had elevated levels of salts and nitrates beneath the production and

land application areas. The Central Valley Water Board requested monitoring at 80 dairies

with poor waste management practices in the Tulare Lake Basin. This monitoring has also

shown groundwater pollution under many of the dairies, including where groundwater is as

deep as 120 feet and in areas underlain by fine-grained sediments.

22. No set of waste management practices has been demonstrated to be protective of

groundwater quality in all circumstances. Since groundwater monitoring is the most direct

way to determine if management practices at a dairy are protective of groundwater,

Monitoring and Reporting Program No. ___, which is attached to and made part of this

Order, requires groundwater monitoring to determine if a dairy is in compliance with the

groundwater limitations of this Order.

23. The Central Valley Water Board has documented many discharges of waste from existing

milk cow dairies to surface water and has taken appropriate enforcement actions in such

cases. This Order prohibits discharges of: waste and/or storm water to surface water from

the production area; wastewater to surface waters from cropland; and storm water to

surface water from a land application area where manure or process wastewater has been

applied unless the manure has been incorporated into the soil and the land application area

has been managed consistent with a certified Nutrient Management Plan. When such

discharges do occur, this Order requires the Discharger to monitor these discharges.

24. The milk cow dairies at which this Order is directed were in existence prior to October

2005 and many were constructed several decades ago. The waste management systems at

these existing dairies are commonly not capable of preventing adverse impacts on waters of

the state either because of their outdated design or need for maintenance or both. Historic

operation of these dairies has presumptively resulted in an adverse effect on the quality of

waters of the state. Groundwater data are needed to determine the existence and magnitude

of these impacts. If data document impacts, continued operation of dairies without waste

management improvements will perpetuate the ongoing adverse water quality effects

caused by the generation and disposal of dairy waste.

 1

 Further degradation will only be allowed under individual waste discharge requirements following an analysis as required by

State Water Board Resources Control Board Resolution 68-16 (Statement of Policy with Respect to Maintaining High Quality of

Waters in California).

Case 2:06-cv-01464-DLB Document 19 Filed 06/27/07 Page 30 of 75
Waste Discharge Requirements General Order No.____ 6

Existing Milk Cow Dairies

11/22/06

25. As stated in Finding 18 above, this Order imposes new and more stringent requirements

than these existing facilities have had applied to them in the past. Many Dischargers will

need to make significant improvements in their facilities to meet these requirements. Some

of these improvements (e.g., recycling flush water, grading, establishing setbacks,

installing flow meters, exporting manure, leasing or purchasing land, etc.) can be made

relatively quickly while some involve infrastructure changes (e.g., new retention ponds,

additional piping, tailwater return systems, etc.) that may require more time to implement.

The Central Valley Water Board believes it is reasonable to allow Dischargers time to

phase in elements of the required Waste Management Plan and Nutrient Management Plan

in order to adequately design and construct major infrastructure changes needed to comply

with all the requirements of this Order. This Order requires Dischargers to make any

necessary interim facility modifications first in order to prevent discharges to surface

water, improve storage capacity, and improve the facility’s nitrogen balance before

completing any necessary infrastructure changes.

STATE WATER RESOURCES CONTROL BOARD RESOLUTION 68-16

26. State Water Resources Control Board Resolution 68-16 requires that any activity which

discharges a waste to existing high quality waters must meet waste discharge requirements

which will result in the best practicable treatment or control of the discharge necessary to

assure that pollution or nuisance will not occur and the highest water quality consistent

with the maximum benefit to the people of the State will be maintained.

27. To be consistent with State Water Resources Control Board Resolution 68-16, Dischargers

must employ best practicable treatment or control measures to assure that pollution or

nuisance will not occur and the highest water quality consistent with the maximum benefit

to the people of the State will be maintained. As noted in Finding 24 above, waste

management improvements will be needed at many of the existing milk cow dairies to

prevent ongoing adverse water quality effects caused by the generation and disposal of

dairy waste. The goal of this Order is to require Dischargers, through monitoring, to first

identify the existence, location, and magnitude of adverse water quality impacts and then

determine where and what improvements in waste management are needed to prevent

ongoing adverse water quality effects. As noted in Finding 25 above, this Order allows

Dischargers time to implement the needed improvements in order to achieve best

practicable treatment or control measures.

Best Practicable Treatment Or Control Measures For Retention Ponds

28. An October 2003 report (Task 2 Report) by Brown, Vence, and Associates concluded that

the “...current Title 27 requirements are insufficient to prevent groundwater contamination

from confined animal facilities, particularly in vulnerable geologic environments.” In

particular, the Task 2 Report concluded that the Title 27 requirement for retention ponds to

be lined with, or underlain by, soils that contain at least 10 percent clay and not more than

Case 2:06-cv-01464-DLB Document 19 Filed 06/27/07 Page 31 of 75
Waste Discharge Requirements General Order No.____ 7

Existing Milk Cow Dairies

11/22/06

10 percent gravel could result in seepage from a retention pond at a rate as high as 1 x 10-3

cm/sec or greater.

29. A November 2004 report (Task 4 Report) by Brown, Vence, and Associates recommended

minimum criteria applicable to all confined animal facilities to protect groundwater quality,

recognizing that based on site specific conditions, a facility may need to implement more

stringent criteria and that best professional judgment would be necessary to demonstrate

compliance with the appropriate performance goal (the performance goals evaluated in the

Task 4 report included no release to underlying geologic materials, no change in

groundwater quality, and no exceedances of water quality objectives). The minimum

criteria included the design of retention ponds with liners that have a maximum seepage

rate of 1 x 10-6 cm/sec with no credit for manure sealing. This minimum criteria was based

on the Natural Resource Conservation Service (NRCS) guidelines in Appendix 10D of

Chapter 7 of Part 651 (Agricultural Waste Management Field Handbook) of the 1992

United States Department of Agriculture National Engineering Handbook.

30. In June 2006, NRCS issued California Conservation Practice Standard No. 313 (PS 313)

for waste storage facilities that store manure, wastewater, and runoff as part of an

agricultural waste management system. NRCS practice standards establish the minimum

level of acceptable quality for planning and designing a practice. PS 313 specifies seepage

criteria for retention ponds. These criteria include a target maximum specific discharge

(seepage) rate of 1 x 10-6 cm/sec for all vulnerability/risk categories, except that: (1) a

synthetic liner is required where the aquifer vulnerability and risk are high (i.e.,

groundwater is within five to 20 feet of the pond bottom, coarse soils, and the pond is

within 100 to 600 feet from a domestic supply well), and (2) other storage alternatives are

required when the aquifer vulnerability and risk are very high (i.e., groundwater is within

five feet of the pond bottom and the pond is less than 1,500 feet from a public supply well

or less than 100 feet from a domestic supply well).

31. The Brown, Vence, and Associates Task 4 Report recommends a minimum criteria and the

California NRCS PS 313 indicates minimum level of acceptable quality for design and

construction of retention ponds to achieve a seepage rate of 1 x 10-6 cm/sec or less. This

seepage rate criterium alone does not assure that a condition of pollution or nuisance will

not occur and the highest water quality consistent with the maximum benefit to the people

of the State will be maintained. Other factors that must be considered include: depth to

groundwater, water quality beneath the facility, nature of the material between the bottom

of the retention pond and the first encountered groundwater, nature of the leachate from the

retention pond, and facility wastewater management practices.

32. Consistent with State Water Resources Control Board Resolution 68-16, this Order requires

that new retention ponds or reconstructed existing ponds be designed and constructed to:

(1) comply with General Specifications B.1 and the groundwater limitations in the Order,

(2) have a seepage rate no greater than 1 x 10-6 cm/sec with no credit for manure sealing,

and (3) result in the best practicable treatment or control of the discharge necessary to

prevent a condition of pollution or nuisance.

Case 2:06-cv-01464-DLB Document 19 Filed 06/27/07 Page 32 of 75
Waste Discharge Requirements General Order No.____ 8

Existing Milk Cow Dairies

11/22/06

Best Practicable Treatment or Control Measures for Land Application Areas

33. Pursuant to Title 40 Code of Federal Regulations Section 122.23(e), precipitation- related

discharges from land application areas are considered agricultural storm water discharges

and are not subject to the United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA)

regulations for concentrated animal feeding operations (CAFOs) if the “...manure, litter, or

process wastewater has been applied in accordance with site specific nutrient management

practices that ensure appropriate agricultural utilization of the nutrients in the manure,

litter, or process wastewater, as specified in Section 122.42(e)(1)(vi)-(ix)...”

34. The USEPA has established best practicable control technology currently available for

application of waste from large concentrated animal feeding operations to land application

areas. The best practicable control technology includes best management practices

required by Title 40 Code of Federal Regulations Section 122.42(e)(1)(vi)-(ix).

35. The technical standards for nutrient management as specified in Attachment C of this

Order are consistent with the USEPA best practicable control technology and the best

management practices required by Title 40 Code of Federal Regulations Section

122.42(e)(1)(vi)-(ix) and the large CAFO best practicable control technology. Therefore,

precipitation-related discharges from land application areas at facilities operating in

compliance with this Order are agricultural storm water discharges. And since they are

consistent with USEPA best practicable control technology, the technical standards for

nutrient management represent best practicable treatment or control for the purposes of

State Water Resources Control Board Resolution 68-16.

36. Farming practices on lands the receive dairy waste contribute salts, nutrients, pesticides,

trace elements, sediments and other by-products that can affect the quality of surface water

and groundwater. Evaporation and crop transpiration remove water from soils, which can

result in an accumulation of salts in the root zone of the soils at levels that retard or inhibit

plant growth. Additional amounts of water often are applied to leach the salts below the

root zones. The leached salts can reach groundwater or surface water. Even using the

most efficient irrigation systems and appropriate fertilizer application rates and timing to

correspond to crop needs, irrigation of cropland will have some measurable impact on

existing high quality groundwater as a result of the leaching required to protect the crops

from salt buildup in the root zone.

37. In land applications areas where groundwater is shallow, some Dischargers have installed

subsurface (tile) drainage systems to maintain the groundwater level below the crop’s root

zone. Drainage from these systems may be discharged directly to surface water bodies or

to drainage ditches that discharge to surface water bodies. Some of these systems

discharge to evaporation basins that are subject to waste discharge requirements.

Discharges from these systems have elevated concentrations of salts, including nitrates and

other nutrients. This Order requires Dischargers who have these systems to identify their

location and discharge point and to monitor discharges from these systems.

Case 2:06-cv-01464-DLB Document 19 Filed 06/27/07 Page 33 of 75
Waste Discharge Requirements General Order No.____ 9

Existing Milk Cow Dairies

11/22/06

38. The majority of the Dischargers that will be covered under this Order have been operating

for many years without a Nutrient Management Plan, which would have minimized the

impacts of land applications of dairy waste to surface water and groundwater quality. This

Order requires each Discharger to develop and implement a Nutrient Management Plan,

which should result in improved water quality by reducing the amount of dairy waste

applied to the land application areas.

39. Consistent with State Water Resources Control Board Resolution 68-16, this Order requires

that process wastewater that is applied to land application areas under the Discharger’s

control and process wastewater that is applied to land application areas under control of a

third party: (1) be managed according to a certified Nutrient Management Plan that is

consistent with the technical standards specified in Attachment C, and (2) not cause

groundwater to exceed the groundwater limitations of this Order.

ENVIRONMENTAL STEWARDSHIP PROGRAMS

40. Environmental stewardship programs, such as the California Dairy Quality Assurance

Program, and local ordinances can greatly assist the Central Valley Water Board efforts to

assure compliance with this Order. Since its inception in 1998, the California Dairy

Quality Assurance Program’s efforts have resulted in dairy operators having a greater

understanding of the need for water quality protection. Recently adopted local ordinances

in several counties throughout the Region have also increased dairy operators’

understanding of the needs for water quality protection.

41. Participation in an Environmental Stewardship Program or operation of a dairy in a county

that has a local ordinance regulating dairies may assist an existing dairy facility in meeting

the requirements of this Order but these programs are not a substitute for regulation under

this Order.

GENERAL FINDINGS

42. This Order does not authorize violation of any federal, state, or local law or regulation.

43. As stated in California Water Code Section 13263(g), the discharge of waste into waters of

the state is a privilege, not a right, and this Order does not create a vested right to continue

the discharge of waste. Failure to prevent conditions that create or threaten to create

pollution or nuisance will be sufficient reason to modify, revoke, or enforce this Order, as

well as prohibit further discharge.

44. This Order is not a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System Permit issued

pursuant to the Federal Clean Water Act. Any facility required to obtain such a permit

must notify the Central Valley Water Board.

Case 2:06-cv-01464-DLB Document 19 Filed 06/27/07 Page 34 of 75
Waste Discharge Requirements General Order No.____ 10

Existing Milk Cow Dairies

11/22/06

45. The Findings of this Order, supplemental information and details in the attached

Information Sheet, and the Central Valley Water Board record on milk cow dairies, were

considered in establishing the conditions of discharge.

46. The Central Valley Water Board has notified interested agencies and persons of its intent to

issue this Order for discharges of wastes from existing milk cow dairies, and has provided

them with an opportunity for a public hearing and an opportunity to submit comments.

47. The Central Valley Water Board, in a public meeting, heard and considered all comments

pertaining to the proposal to regulate discharges of wastes from existing milk cow dairies

under this Order.

48. Any person affected by this action of the Central Valley Water Board may petition the

State Water Board to review this action. The State Water Board must receive the petition

within 30 days of the date on which the Central Valley Water Board adopted this Order.

Copies of the law and regulations applicable to filing petitions will be provided upon

request.

IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that, pursuant to California Water Code Sections 13260, 13263, and

13267 and in order to meet the provisions contained in Division 7 of the California Water Code

and regulations and policies adopted thereunder; all Dischargers specified by the Central Valley

Water Board and all Dischargers that have submitted the appropriate fee and a complete Report

of Waste Discharge in response to the Central Valley Water Board’s 8 August 2005 request, their

agents, successors, and assigns shall comply with the following:

A. PROHIBITIONS

1. The discharge of waste, other than as defined in Finding 13 above, or hazardous waste, as

defined in California Water Code Section 13173 and Title 23 CCR Section 2521(a),

respectively, is prohibited.

2. The direct or indirect discharge of waste and/or storm water from the production area to

surface waters is prohibited2

.

3. The discharge of waste from existing milk cow dairies to surface waters which causes or

contributes to an exceedance of any applicable water quality objective in the Basin Plans or

any applicable state or federal water quality criteria, or a violation of any applicable state or

federal policies or regulations is prohibited.

4. The discharge or disposal of waste from existing milk cow dairies that results in pollution

or nuisance is prohibited.

 2

 Discharges of pollutants from the production area to waters of the United States may not lawfully occur except in compliance

with a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit. NPDES permit coverage is not provided by this

Order, but must be obtained separately.

Case 2:06-cv-01464-DLB Document 19 Filed 06/27/07 Page 35 of 75
Waste Discharge Requirements General Order No.____ 11

Existing Milk Cow Dairies

11/22/06

5. The disposal of waste not generated by on-site animal production activities is prohibited

unless a Report of Waste Discharge for the disposal has been submitted to the Executive

Officer and the Central Valley Water Board has issued or waived waste discharge

requirements (WDRs).

6. The disposal of dead animals in any liquid manure or process wastewater system is

prohibited. The disposal of dead animals at a dairy facility is prohibited except when

federal, state or local officials declare a State of Emergency and where all other options for

disposal have been pursued and failed and the onsite disposal complies with all state and

local policies for disposal of dead animals3

.

7. All animals shall be prohibited from entering any surface water within the animal

confinement area (Title 27 CCR Section 22561).

8. The application of waste to lands not owned, leased, or controlled by the Discharger

without written permission from the landowner or in a manner not approved by the

Executive Officer, is prohibited.

9. The land application of manure or process wastewater to cropland for other than nutrient

recycling is prohibited.

10. The discharge of wastewater to surface waters from cropland is prohibited. Irrigation

supply water that comes into contact or is blended with waste or wastewater shall be

considered wastewater under this Prohibition.

11. The application of process wastewater to a land application area before, during, or after a

storm event that would result in runoff of the applied water is prohibited.

12. The discharge of storm water to surface water from a land application area where manure

or process wastewater has been applied is prohibited unless the manure has been

incorporated into the soil and the land application area has been managed consistent with a

certified Nutrient Management Plan.

13. The use of manure to construct containment structures or to repair, replace, improve, or

raise existing containment structures is prohibited.

14. The direct discharge of wastewater into groundwater via backflow through water supply or

irrigation supply wells is prohibited.

15. The expansion of the existing milk cow dairy facility is prohibited4

.

 3

 In an emergency, guidance is provided by the CAL/EPA Emergency Animal Disease Regulatory Guidance for Disposal and

Decontamination (October 20, 2004). 4

 Dischargers must submit a Report of Waste Discharge and obtain coverage under individual waste discharge requirements

before any material facility expansion. “Expansion” is defined in Attachment E.

Case 2:06-cv-01464-DLB Document 19 Filed 06/27/07 Page 36 of 75
Waste Discharge Requirements General Order No.____ 12

Existing Milk Cow Dairies

11/22/06

B. GENERAL SPECIFICATIONS

1. The collection, treatment, storage, or disposal of wastes at an existing milk cow dairy shall

not result in: (1) discharge of waste constituents in a manner which could cause

degradation of surface water or groundwater except as allowed by this Order, (2)

contamination or pollution of surface water or groundwater, or (3) a condition of nuisance

(as defined by the California Water Code Section 13050).

2. The existing milk cow dairy shall have facilities that are designed, constructed, operated,

and maintained to retain all facility process wastewater generated during the storage period

(maximum period of time anticipated between land application of process wastewater),

together with all precipitation on and drainage through manured areas, up to and including

during a 25-year, 24-hour storm (see item II of Attachment B, which is attached to and

made part of this Order).

3. In the Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins, retention ponds and manured areas at

existing milk cow dairies in operation on or before 27 November 1984 shall be protected

from inundation or washout by overflow from any stream channel during 20-year peak

stream flows. Existing milk cow dairies that were in operation on or before 27 November

1984 and that are protected against 100-year peak stream flows must continue to provide

such protection. Existing milk cow dairies built or expanded after 27 November 1984 shall

be protected against 100-year peak stream flows (Title 27 Section 22562(c)).

4. In the Tulare Lake Basin, existing milk cow dairies that existed as of 25 July 1975 shall be

protected from inundation or washout from overflow from any stream channel during 20-

year peak stream flows and existing milk cow dairies constructed after 25 July 1975 shall

be protected from 100-year peak stream flows. Existing milk cow dairies expanded after

8 December 1984 shall be protected from 100-year peak stream flows.

5. Dischargers required to install new retention ponds in order to comply with the

requirements of this Order (i.e., to increase the storage capacity to meet the existing facility

conditions, not related to an expansion) shall construct such new retention pond(s) as

required in General Specification B.7 below.

6. Dischargers shall reconstruct existing retention ponds in compliance with General

Specification B.7 below when groundwater monitoring demonstrates that the existing

retention pond has impacted groundwater quality.

7. New retention ponds or reconstructed existing ponds, as required in General Specifications

B. 5 and B.6 above, shall be designed and constructed to: (1) comply with General

Specification B.1 and the groundwater limitations in this Order, (2) have a seepage rate no

greater than 1 x 10-6 cm/sec with no credit for manure sealing, and (3) result in the best

practicable treatment or control of the discharge necessary to prevent a condition of

pollution or nuisance.

Case 2:06-cv-01464-DLB Document 19 Filed 06/27/07 Page 37 of 75
Waste Discharge Requirements General Order No.____ 13

Existing Milk Cow Dairies

11/22/06

8. Prior to the enlargement of an existing settling, storage, or retention pond or the

construction of any such new pond not associated with an expansion, the Discharger shall

submit a design report prepared and certified by a Civil Engineer who is registered

pursuant to California law or other person as may be permitted under the provisions of the

California Business and Professions Code to assume responsible charge of such work.

Enlargement of any existing pond or construction of any new pond shall not begin until the

Executive Officer notifies the Discharger in writing that the design report is acceptable.

The design report shall include: (1) a demonstration that the proposed pond is in

compliance with General Specification B.7 above, including calculations that demonstrate

the amount and quality of seepage from the proposed pond and its effect on groundwater

quality, (2) a construction quality assurance plan describing testing and observations

needed to document construction of the pond in accordance with the design, and (3) an

operations and maintenance plan for the pond.

9. Prior to the placement of waste in any enlarged existing settling, storage, or retention pond

or any such newly constructed pond, the Discharger shall submit a post construction report

prepared and certified by a Civil Engineer who is registered pursuant to California law or

other person as may be permitted under the provisions of the California Business and

Professions Code to assume responsible charge of such work. Waste shall not be placed

into the pond until the Executive Officer notifies the Discharger in writing that the post

construction report is acceptable. The post construction report shall include: (1)

verification that the pond meets the requirements of this Order as specified in General

Specification B.7 including documentation of the results of the construction quality

assurance testing and observations, (2) certification that the pond was constructed as

designed, and (3) as-built diagrams.

10. The level of waste in the process wastewater retention ponds shall be kept a minimum of

two (2) feet from the top of each aboveground embankment and a minimum of one (1) foot

from the ground surface of each belowground pond. Less freeboard may be approved by

the Executive Officer when a Civil Engineer who is registered pursuant to California law,

or other person as may be permitted under the provisions of the California Business and

Professions Code to assume responsible charge of such work, demonstrates that the

structural integrity of the pond will be maintained with the proposed freeboard.

11. Retention ponds shall be managed and maintained to prevent breeding of mosquitoes and

other vectors. In particular,

a. Small coves and irregularities shall not be allowed around the perimeter of the water

surface;

b. Weeds shall be minimized through control of water depth, harvesting, or other

appropriate method;

c. Dead algae, vegetation, and debris shall not accumulate on the water surface; and

Case 2:06-cv-01464-DLB Document 19 Filed 06/27/07 Page 38 of 75
Waste Discharge Requirements General Order No.____ 14

Existing Milk Cow Dairies

11/22/06

d. Management shall be in accordance with the requirements of the Mosquito Abatement

District.

12. All precipitation and surface drainage from outside of the existing milk cow dairy (i.e.,

“run on”) shall be diverted away from any manured areas unless such drainage is fully

contained (Title 27 Section 22562(b)).

13. All retention ponds must have a depth marker that clearly indicates the minimum capacity

necessary to contain the runoff and direct precipitation from a 25-year, 24-hour storm

event.

14. All roofs, buildings, and non-manured areas located in the production area of the existing

milk cow dairy shall be constructed or otherwise designed so that clean rainwater is

diverted away from manured areas and waste containment facilities, unless such drainage is

fully contained in the wastewater retention system (Title 27 Section 22562(b)).

15. Roof drainage from barns, milk houses, or shelters shall not drain into the corrals unless the

corrals are properly graded and drained (Title 3 CCR, Division 2, Chapter 1, Article 22,

Section 661).

16. The milk parlor, animal confinement area (including corrals), and manure and feed storage

areas shall be designed and maintained to convey all water that has contacted animal

wastes or feed to the wastewater retention system and to minimize standing water and the

infiltration of water into the underlying soils.

17. Unlined ditches, swales, and/or earthen-berm channels may not be used for storage of

process wastewater, manure, or tailwater and may only be used for conveyance of process

wastewater collected in the production area to the retention pond, conveyance of process

wastewater from the retention pond to the land application area, irrigation return water

management, or temporary control of accidental spills, or rainfall-induced overflows at

existing milk cow dairies designed, constructed, operated, and maintained in compliance

with General Specification B.2.

18. The application of manure or process wastewater to the land application area must be done

in a manner that is consistent with a certified Nutrient Management Plan that is developed

as required in Required Reports and Notices H.2.b.

C. LAND APPLICATION SPECIFICATIONS

1. Land application of all waste from the facility to areas under the Discharger’s control shall

be conducted in accordance with a certified Nutrient Management Plan consistent with the

technical standards for nutrient management as specified in Attachment C. The Nutrient

Management Plan shall be modified within 30 days if monitoring shows that discharge

from the land application fails to comply with the Groundwater Limitations of this Order or

Case 2:06-cv-01464-DLB Document 19 Filed 06/27/07 Page 39 of 75
Waste Discharge Requirements General Order No.____ 15

Existing Milk Cow Dairies

11/22/06

surface water quality objectives or criteria. The modifications must be designed to bring

Dischargers into compliance with this Order.

2. Land application of process wastewater to offsite property under third party control will be

regulated by waste discharge requirements to be developed by the Central Valley Water

Board. Until such time that the waste discharge requirements are adopted, such land

applications shall be conducted: (1) in accordance with a certified Nutrient Management

Plan consistent with the technical standards for nutrient management as specified in

Attachment C, and (2) under a written formal agreement, which shall be included in the

Discharger’s Nutrient Management Plan. The Discharger shall include management of

such land application areas as part of the Discharger’s Nutrient Management Plan (see

Contents of a Nutrient Management Plan in Attachment C).

3. The Discharger shall have a written agreement with any third party that has control on the

use of solid manure provided by the Discharger. The written agreement with the third

party shall be included in the Discharger’s Nutrient Management Plan and shall specify

plans for the use and management of the third party’s land application area. Land

application areas under control of a third party that receive solid manure from the

Discharger may be regulated under the Conditional Waiver of Waste Discharge

Requirements for Discharges from Irrigated Lands (Order No. R5-2006-0053 for Coalition

Group or Order No. R5-2006-0054 for Individual Discharger, or updates thereto) if the

third party is a participant in a Coalition Group or has an Individual Discharger Waiver.

4. Land application of wastes for nutrient recycling from existing milk cow dairies shall not

cause the underlying groundwater to contain any waste constituent, degradation product, or

any constituent of soil mobilized by the interactions between applied wastes and soil or soil

biota, to exceed the groundwater limitations set forth in this Order.

5. The application of animal waste and other materials containing nutrients to any cropland

under control of the Discharger shall meet the following conditions:

a. The application is in accordance with a certified Nutrient Management Plan developed

and implemented in accordance with Required Reports and Notices H.2.b and

Attachment C of this Order; and

b. Records are prepared and maintained as specified in Record-Keeping Requirements of

Monitoring and Reporting Program No. ____.

6. The application of waste to cropland shall be at rates that preclude development of vectors

or other nuisance conditions and meet the conditions of the certified Nutrient Management

Plan.

7. Land application areas that receive dry manure shall be managed through implementation

of erosion control measures to minimize erosion and must be consistent with a certified

Nutrient Management Plan.

Case 2:06-cv-01464-DLB Document 19 Filed 06/27/07 Page 40 of 75
Waste Discharge Requirements General Order No.____ 16

Existing Milk Cow Dairies

11/22/06

8. All process wastewater applied to land application areas must infiltrate completely within

72 hours after application.

9. Process wastewater shall not be applied to land application areas during periods when the

soil is at or above field moisture capacity unless consistent with a certified Nutrient

Management Plan (see Attachment C).

10. Manure and process wastewater shall not be applied closer than 100 feet to any down

gradient surface waters, open tile line intake structures, sinkholes, agricultural or domestic

well heads, or other conduits to surface waters, unless a 35-foot wide vegetated buffer or

physical barrier is substituted for the 100-foot setback or alternative conservation practices

or field-specific conditions will provide pollutant reductions equivalent or better than the

reductions achieved by the 100-foot setback.

D. GROUNDWATER LIMITATIONS

1. Discharge of waste at existing milk cow dairies shall not cause the underlying groundwater

to be further degraded, to exceed water quality objectives, unreasonably affect beneficial

uses, or cause a condition of pollution or nuisance. The appropriate water quality

objectives are summarized in the Information Sheet, which is attached to and part of this

Order, and can be found in the Central Valley Water Board’s Water Quality Control Plan

for the Sacramento and San Joaquin River Basins (4th Ed.) and the Water Quality Control

Plan for the Tulare Lake Basin (2nd Ed.).

E. PROVISIONS

1. The Discharger shall comply with the Standard Provisions and Reporting Requirements

for Waste Discharge Requirements General Order No.______ for Existing Milk Cow

Dairies (Standard Provisions) dated [date of adoption of Order], which is attached to and

made part of this Order.

2. The Discharger shall comply with all applicable provisions of the California Water Code,

Title 27 CCR, and the applicable Water Quality Control Plans.

3. The Discharger shall comply with the attached Monitoring and Reporting Program No.

____which is part of this Order, and future revisions thereto or with an individual

monitoring and reporting program, as specified by the Central Valley Water Board or the

Executive Officer.

4. The Discharger shall submit a complete Report of Waste Discharge in accordance with the

California Water Code Section 13260 at least 140 days prior to any material change or

proposed change in the character, location, or volume of the discharge, including any

expansion of the facility or development of any treatment technology, or construction of an

anaerobic digester.

Case 2:06-cv-01464-DLB Document 19 Filed 06/27/07 Page 41 of 75
Waste Discharge Requirements General Order No.____ 17

Existing Milk Cow Dairies

11/22/06

5. If the Preliminary Dairy Facility Assessment (PDFA)5 indicates that facility improvements

are necessary (see Required Reports and Notices H.2.c), the Discharger shall make

continual facility improvements while completing implementation of the Waste

Management Plan and/or Nutrient Management Plan.

6. This Order does not apply to facilities where wastes such as, but not limited to, whey,

cannery wastes, septage, sludge, biosolids, ash or similar types of waste are generated

onsite or are proposed to be brought onto the dairy or associated croplands for the purpose

of nutrient recycling or disposal. The Discharger shall submit a complete Report of Waste

Discharge and receive WDRs or a waste-specific waiver of WDRs from the Central Valley

Water Board prior to receiving such waste.

7. If site conditions threaten to violate General Specification B.1 or Prohibition A.2, the

Discharger shall take immediate action to preclude the violation, documenting the

condition and all corrective actions. Such actions shall be summarized in the annual

monitoring report. Alterations of the Waste Management Plan (see Required Reports and

Notices H.2.a) for the production area to avoid a recurrence shall be submitted as a

modification to the Waste Management Plan.

8. If a discharge of waste creates, or threatens to create, significant objectionable odors or

nuisance odor and vector conditions, enforcement and/or revocation of coverage under this

Order may result.

9. The Discharger shall comply with all requirements of this Order and all terms, conditions,

and limitations specified by the Executive Officer.

10. Any instance of noncompliance with this Order constitutes a violation of the California

Water Code and its regulations. Such noncompliance is grounds for enforcement action,

and/or termination of the authorization to discharge.

11. Upon cessation of operations at the milk cow dairy facility, the Discharger must maintain

coverage under this Order or a subsequent revision to this Order until all manure, process

wastewater, and animal waste impacted soil, including soil within the retention pond(s), is

disposed of or utilized in a manner which does not pose a threat to surface water or

groundwater quality or create a condition of nuisance. At least 90 days before ceasing

operations, the Discharger must submit a closure plan that demonstrates proper disposal of

all manure, process wastewater, and animal waste impacted soil. The closure plan shall

describe:

 5

 The PDFA is required as part of the Existing Conditions Report (Attachment A). The Monitoring and Reporting Program No.

___ requires annual updates of the PDFA.

Case 2:06-cv-01464-DLB Document 19 Filed 06/27/07 Page 42 of 75
Waste Discharge Requirements General Order No.____ 18

Existing Milk Cow Dairies

11/22/06

a. Maximum concentrations of phosphorus, nitrate, ammonia, and total Kjeldahl nitrogen

that can remain in soil at the facility which will be protective of both groundwater and

surface water.

b. Laboratory analyses of phosphorus, nitrate, ammonia, and total Kjeldahl nitrogen in

soils beneath all ponds, animal confinement areas, and manure and feed storage areas to

determine the potential for a discharge of pollutants to surface water or groundwater;

c. The existing locations and approximate quantity of manure, process wastewater, and

animal waste impacted soil to be treated, applied to the land application area, or

removed from the facility in order to eliminate the potential for a discharge of

pollutants to surface water or groundwater;

d. The destination of any materials to be removed from the facility and documentation that

the destination is approved to accept the materials;

e. The method used to treat or land apply any material remaining at the facility;

f. The method(s) to be used to control the discharge of pollutants from the facility;

g. Any limitations on future land or water uses created as a result of the facility’s

operations or closure activities;

h. A schedule for implementation of the closure plan; and

i. Any other relevant information the Executive Officer determines to be necessary.

12. No more than 30 days after completion of site closure, the Discharger shall submit a

closure report which documents that all closure activities were completed as proposed and

approved in the closure plan.

13. This Order shall become effective upon adoption by the Central Valley Water Board.

14. The Discharger must comply with all conditions of this Order, including timely submittal

of technical and monitoring reports as directed by the Executive Officer. Accordingly, the

Discharger shall submit to the Central Valley Water Board on or before each report due

date the specified document or, if an action is specified, a written report detailing evidence

of compliance with the task. If noncompliance is being reported, the reasons for such

noncompliance shall be stated, plus an estimate of the date when the Discharger will be in

compliance. The Discharger shall notify the Central Valley Water Board by letter when it

returns to compliance with the time schedule. Violations may result in enforcement action,

including Central Valley Water Board or court orders requiring corrective action or

imposing civil monetary liability, or in terminating the applicability of this Order to a

specific facility or Discharger.

Case 2:06-cv-01464-DLB Document 19 Filed 06/27/07 Page 43 of 75
Waste Discharge Requirements General Order No.____ 19

Existing Milk Cow Dairies

11/22/06

15. Technical reports (Monitoring Well Installation and Sampling Plan, Monitoring Well

Installation Completion Report, Groundwater Monitoring Report, Waste Management Plan

Certification, and portions of the Waste Management Plan) required by this Order must be

certified by an appropriately licensed professional as required in this Order and its

Attachments (see Schedule of Tasks J.1 below). If the Executive Officer provides

comments on any technical report, the Discharger will be required to address those

comments.

16. The Discharger shall maintain a copy of this Order at the site so as to be available at all

times to site-operating personnel. The Discharger, landowner and his/her designee shall be

familiar with the content of this Order.

F. EFFECTIVE DATE OF COVERAGE UNDER THIS ORDER

1. Coverage under this Order is effective upon notification by the Executive Officer that this

Order applies to the Discharger.

G. PERMIT REOPENING, REVISION, REVOCATION, AND RE-ISSUANCE

1. If more stringent applicable water quality standards are adopted in the Basin Plans, the

Central Valley Water Board may revise and modify this Order in accordance with such

standards.

2. This Order may be reopened to address any changes in state plans, policies, or regulations

that would affect the water quality requirements for the discharges and as authorized by

state law.

3. The Central Valley Water Board or the Executive Officer may revoke coverage under this

Order at any time and require the Discharger to submit a Report of Waste Discharge and

obtain individual waste discharge requirements.

H. REQUIRED REPORTS AND NOTICES

1. Dischargers must submit documentation from a trained professional that no cross

connections exist between the waste management system and any water supply or irrigation

well that would ensure compliance with Prohibition A.14. A trained professional could be

a person certified by the American Backflow Prevention Association, an inspector from a

state or local governmental agency who has experience and/or training in backflow

prevention, or a consultant with such experience and/or training. Documentation shall be

supplied as part of the required Waste Management Plan (Item VI in Attachment B) and in

accordance with the Schedule of Tasks in J.1.

Case 2:06-cv-01464-DLB Document 19 Filed 06/27/07 Page 44 of 75
Waste Discharge Requirements General Order No.____ 20

Existing Milk Cow Dairies

11/22/06

2. Dischargers must submit the following in accordance with the Schedule of Tasks J.1:

a. Existing Conditions Report: The Discharger shall submit an Existing Conditions

Report for the dairy facility, prepared in accordance with Attachment A. The Existing

Conditions Report shall provide additional information on existing conditions at the

dairy that was not provided in the Report of Waste Discharge submitted in response to

the Central Valley Water Board’s 8 August 2005 request. The Existing Conditions

Report requires the Discharger to complete a Preliminary Dairy Facility Assessment.

The Preliminary Dairy Facility Assessment is available on the Central Valley Water

Board’s web site at

http://www.waterboards.ca.gov/centralvalley/available_documents/index.html#confine

d and must be completed electronically. The Discharger shall include a copy of the

results of the Preliminary Dairy Facility Assessment in the Existing Conditions Report.

Monitoring and Reporting Program No. ___ requires the Discharger to include an

updated Preliminary Dairy Facility Assessment in each Annual Report.

b. Waste Management Plan: The Discharger shall submit a Waste Management Plan for

the production area of the dairy facility, prepared in accordance with Attachment B.

The Waste Management Plan shall provide an evaluation of the existing milk cow

dairy’s design, construction, operation, and maintenance for flood protection and waste

containment and whether the facility complies with General Specifications B.1 through

B.4 and B.6 through B.14. If the design, construction, operation, and/or maintenance of

the dairy facility does not comply, the Waste Management Plan must propose

modifications and a schedule for modifications that will bring the dairy facility into

compliance. Certification that the modifications have been implemented shall be

submitted in accordance with the Schedule of Tasks J.1.

c. Nutrient Management Plan: A Discharger who applies manure, bedding, or process

wastewater, and/or provides process wastewater to a third party for application, to land

for nutrient recycling must develop and implement management practices that control

nutrient losses and describe these in a Nutrient Management Plan. The Nutrient

Management Plan must be certified as specified in Attachment C, maintained at the

dairy, submitted to the Executive Officer upon request and must ultimately provide for

protection of both surface water and groundwater. Certification that the Nutrient

Management Plan has been completed shall be in accordance with the Schedule of

Tasks J.1, shall incorporate the elements specified in Attachment C based on a fieldspecific assessment of the potential for pollutant transport to surface water and

groundwater, and shall be submitted to the Executive Officer. The Nutrient

Management Plan shall be updated as specified in the Technical Standards for Nutrient

Management in Attachment C or if the Executive Officer requests that additional

information be included. Groundwater monitoring will be used to determine if

implementation of the Nutrient Management Plan is protective of groundwater quality.

d. Proposed Interim Facility Modifications: A Discharger whose Preliminary Dairy

Facility Assessment (see Required Reports and Notices H.2.a above) shows that the

Case 2:06-cv-01464-DLB Document 19 Filed 06/27/07 Page 45 of 75
Waste Discharge Requirements General Order No.____ 21

Existing Milk Cow Dairies

11/22/06

Whole Farm Nitrogen Balance6 is greater than 1.5 and/or that the existing retention

pond(s) total storage capacity is less than the total storage capacity required shall

submit Proposed Interim Facility Modifications as Necessary to Balance Nitrogen

and/or Proposed Interim Facility Modifications as Necessary to Improve Storage

Capacity, respectively. Such Dischargers shall also submit a Status Report on the

Interim Facility Modifications and Documentation of Interim Facility Modifications

Completion as Necessary for Storage Capacity and to Balance N.

e. Salinity Report: The Discharger shall submit a report that identifies sources of salt in

waste generated at the dairy, evaluates measures that can be taken to minimize salt in

the dairy waste, and includes a commitment to implement measures identified to

minimize salt in the dairy waste. If a third party (for example, the California Dairy

Quality Assurance Program) produces an industry-wide report that is acceptable to the

Executive Officer, the Discharger may refer to that report rather than generating his

own report, but must certify that the appropriate measures will be implemented to

reduce salt in his dairy waste.

3. Reporting Provisions:

a. All Reports of Waste Discharge, applications, annual reports, or information submitted

to the Central Valley Water Board shall be signed and certified in accordance with C. 7

and C.8 of the Standard Provisions.

b. The Discharger shall submit all reports as specified in the attached Monitoring and

Reporting Program No.____.

c. Any Discharger authorized to discharge waste under this Order shall furnish, within a

reasonable time, any information the Central Valley Water Board may request, to

determine whether cause exists for modifying, revoking, and reissuing, or terminating

their authorization for coverage under this Order. The Discharger shall, upon request,

also furnish to the Central Valley Water Board copies of records required to be kept by

this Order.

d. All reports prepared and submitted to the Executive Officer in accordance with the

terms of this Order shall be available for public inspection at the offices of the Regional

Water Quality Control Board.

I. RECORD-KEEPING REQUIREMENTS

1. The Discharger shall create, maintain for five years, and make available to the Central

Valley Water Board upon request by the Executive Officer any reports or records required

 6

 The Whole Farm Nitrogen Balance is to be determined as the ratio of (Nitrogen generated + Nitrogen imported)/(Nitrogen

Removed by Crops and Exported) as reported in the Preliminary Dairy Facility Assessment in the Existing Conditions Report

(Attachment A).

Case 2:06-cv-01464-DLB Document 19 Filed 06/27/07 Page 46 of 75
Waste Discharge Requirements General Order No.____ 22

Existing Milk Cow Dairies

11/22/06

by this Order including those required under Monitoring and Reporting Program No.

_______.

J. SCHEDULE OF TASKS

1. Dischargers who receive coverage under this Order are required to develop and implement

a Waste Management Plan and Nutrient Management Plan and submit an Existing

Conditions Report, Proposed Interim Facility Modifications, and a Salinity Report

according to the schedule shown in Table 1. All elements of the Waste Management Plan

shall be submitted to the Executive Officer by the deadlines specified in Table 1 and signed

and certified by the Discharger as required in Required Reports and Notices H.3.a above

and the additional professional specified in Table 1. For the elements of the Nutrient

Management Plan, Dischargers shall submit a statement to the Executive Officer by each of

the deadlines that the item due has been completed. All statements must be signed and

certified by the Discharger as required in Required Reports and Notices H.3.a above and

the additional professional specified in Table 1.

2. If changes are made to the required submittals through Central Valley Water Board or

Executive Officer review, those changes shall be implemented.

3. Any Discharger may be requested to complete the Nutrient Management Plan and/or Waste

Management Plan prior to the due date identified in Table 1 if the Executive Officer has

determined the facility presents a significant risk to groundwater or surface water.

I, PAMELA C. CREEDON, Executive Officer, do hereby certify that the foregoing is a

full, true, and correct copy of an Order adopted by the California Regional Water Quality

Control Board, Central Valley Region, on _________.

____________________________________

PAMELA C. CREEDON, Executive Officer

Case 2:06-cv-01464-DLB Document 19 Filed 06/27/07 Page 47 of 75
EXHIBIT 2

Case 2:06-cv-01464-DLB Document 19 Filed 06/27/07 Page 48 of 75
11/22/06

CALIFORNIA REGIONAL WATER QUALITY CONTROL BOARD

CENTRAL VALLEY REGION

MONITORING AND REPORTING PROGRAM NO._____

GENERAL ORDER

FOR

EXISTING MILK COW DAIRIES

This Monitoring and Reporting Program (MRP) is issued pursuant to California Water Code

(CWC) Section 13267. The Discharger shall not implement any changes to this MRP unless a

revised MRP is issued by the Executive Officer.

This MRP requires monitoring of discharges of manure and/or process wastewater, storm water,

and tailwater from the production area and land application area and groundwater monitoring in

order to determine if the Discharger’s dairy is in compliance with the discharge limitations of

Waste Discharge Requirements General Order No. ____ (Order). Discharge monitoring should

be infrequent for those dairies that are operating in compliance with the Order.

The MRP also requires periodic visual inspections of the dairy to ensure the dairy is being

operated and maintained to ensure continued compliance with the Order. In addition, the MRP

requires monitoring of nutrients applied to, and removed from, land application areas in order for

the Discharger to develop and implement a Nutrient Management Plan that will minimize

leaching of nutrients and salts to groundwater and transport of these constituents to surface

water.

The Discharger shall conduct monitoring and reporting as specified below.

A. MONITORING PROVISIONS

Inspections

The results of inspections described below shall be recorded and the records shall be

maintained on-site for a period of five years.

1. The Discharger shall inspect the production area weekly including all waste storage

areas and note any conditions or changes that could result in discharges to surface

waters and/or from property under the control of the Discharger.

2. During and after each significant storm event1

, the Discharger shall make visual

inspections of storm water containment structures. These structures shall be

inspected for discharge, freeboard, berm integrity, cracking, slumping, erosion,

excess vegetation, animal burrows, and seepage.

1

 A significant storm event is defined as a storm event that results in continuous runoff of storm water for a minimum of one

hour, or intermittent runoff for a minimum of three hours in a 12-hour period.

Case 2:06-cv-01464-DLB Document 19 Filed 06/27/07 Page 49 of 75
Monitoring and Reporting Program No. _____ 2

General Order for Existing Milk Cow Dairies

11/22/06

3. Freeboard shall be measured weekly within each liquid manure storage structure

using a depth marker. Freeboard shall be the vertical distance from the pond surface

to the lowest elevation of the surrounding berm or the bottom of the spillway and

shall be measured to the nearest 0.25 foot (3 inches).

4. The Discharger shall inspect land application areas immediately prior to

commencement of application of process wastewater and daily when process

wastewater is being applied and note: the conditions of the land application area

berms including rodent holes, piping, and bank erosion; the presence (or lack) of field

saturation, ponding, erosion, runoff (including tailwater discharges from the end of

fields, pipes, or other conveyances), and nuisance conditions; and the conditions of

any vegetated buffers or alternative conservation practices.

Manure and Process Wastewater Monitoring

5. The Discharger shall monitor process wastewater and manure produced at the facility.

This monitoring is for nutrient management and is expected to be part of the Nutrient

Management Plan. Monitoring shall be performed to determine the nutrient and salt

content of process wastewater and manure separately. Monitoring results shall be

included in the Annual Monitoring Report (see Reporting Requirements B.2.n).

a. Manure composite samples shall be collected and analyzed as specified in

Monitoring Provisions A.25 and A.35 below, respectively. Manure shall be

monitored for parameters 1 (volume or weight) and 21 (moisture content/wet

weight) or 22 (density) each time applied to land under the Discharger’s control

or exported offsite, and at least quarterly for parameters 2, 7, 8, 10, and 11 in

Table 1. The total dry weight (tons) of manure applied annually to the land

application area shall be recorded for each field.

b. Process wastewater composite samples shall be collected and analyzed as

specified in Monitoring Provisions A.26 and A.36 below, respectively.

Monitoring of process wastewater shall include, at a minimum, parameters 1, 2,

6, 7, 8, 10, and 11 in Table 1. Parameters 2, 6, 7, 8, 10, and 11 shall be

monitored to determine the nutrient application to the land application area

during at least one irrigation event each quarter (every three months) in which

the process wastewater is applied to the land application area(s). Monitoring of

nitrate-nitrogen (parameter 6) is only required if the retention pond is aerated.

General minerals (parameter 13) shall be monitored when groundwater

monitoring is required and at the frequency to be specified in the Monitoring

Well Installation and Sampling Plan (MWISP). The volume (parameter 1) of

process wastewater applied shall be measured to gauge the hydraulic application

to the land application area during each irrigation event for each field. The

process wastewater application dates and total gallons or acre-inches of process

wastewater applied to each field shall be recorded for each application.

Case 2:06-cv-01464-DLB Document 19 Filed 06/27/07 Page 50 of 75
Monitoring and Reporting Program No. _____ 3

General Order for Existing Milk Cow Dairies

11/22/06

Irrigation Water and Water Use Monitoring

6. The Discharger shall monitor irrigation water that is used on all land application areas

under the Discharger’s control where manure and/or process wastewater is applied

and shall assure monitoring of irrigation water when the irrigation is conducted where

the Discharger’s process wastewater is applied under a third party’s control. The

Discharger shall also monitor rainfall and crop water use at the dairy using

information from the nearest California Irrigation Management Information System

(CIMIS) weather station. Crop water use shall be determined using data on

evapotranspiration from a standardized grass surface (ETo) from the CIMIS station

and the crop coefficient method (University of California Cooperative Extension

Publications 21427 and 21428 available at

http://www.cimis.water.ca.gov/cimis/infoEtoCropCo.jsp) or equivalent procedure.

This monitoring is for nutrient management and is expected to be part of the Nutrient

Management Plan. Irrigation water shall be sampled at least two times during the

irrigation season as follows:

a. At a minimum, one sample shall be collected at the beginning and another

sample shall be collected at the end of the irrigation season during actual

irrigation events.

b. Canal and well water sources shall be considered separate supplies, each

requiring sampling two times during actual irrigation events.

c. Monthly samples shall be collected from canals during actual irrigation events if

the canal is subject to water quality variations due to changes in supply water

sources.

7. Irrigation water samples shall be collected and analyzed as specified in Monitoring

Provisions A.27 and A.36 below, respectively. Irrigation water shall be monitored for

parameters 1, 2, 6, 7, 8, 10, and 11 in Table 1. The dates and volume (parameter 1) of

each irrigation application shall be monitored and recorded for each land application

area. Daily rainfall (parameter 23) and crop water use (parameter 24) shall also be

recorded.

Soil Monitoring

8. At least once every five years, commencing with the first full calendar year regulated

by the Order, the Discharger shall collect and analyze representative soil samples for

parameters 2, 6, 7, 9, 10, and 11 in Table 1 from all land application areas under the

Discharger’s control where process wastewater and/or manure is applied and shall

assure that soil is analyzed where the Discharger’s process wastewater is applied

under a third party’s control. Soil samples shall be collected following harvest of a

crop and before nutrients are added for the following crop as specified in Monitoring

Provision A.28 and analyzed as specified in Monitoring Provisions A.33 and A.34

Case 2:06-cv-01464-DLB Document 19 Filed 06/27/07 Page 51 of 75
Monitoring and Reporting Program No. _____ 4

General Order for Existing Milk Cow Dairies

11/22/06

below. The results of these analyses are to be used in determining application rates of

manure and process wastewater to the land application area and are expected to be

part of the Nutrient Management Plan. Monitoring results shall be included in the

Annual Monitoring Report (see Reporting Requirements B.2.n).

Plant Tissue Monitoring

9. The Discharger shall monitor plant tissue (1) at harvest to determine the nutrients

removed from each land application area where manure and/or process wastewater is

applied and (2) if necessary, mid-season to assess the need for additional nitrogen

and/or phosphorus fertilizer during the growing season. The total weight (tons) and

wet weight (parameter 21) or the volume (cubic yards) and density (parameter 22) of

the harvested material which is removed from each land application area shall be

determined and recorded. Plant tissue samples shall be collected and analyzed as

specified in Monitoring Provisions A.29 and A.33 below, respectively. Plant tissue

samples shall be monitored for parameters 9, 10, 11, and 21 (or 22) in Table 1.

Discharge and Surface Water Monitoring

10. The Discharger shall record the date and the approximate time and volume of each

off-property discharge of wastes from the production area or land application area and

the approximate duration and amount of wastes discharged. Such discharges shall be

reported in accordance with Reporting Requirement B.1, B.2.h, or B.2.j below as

appropriate.

11. The Discharger shall record the date and the approximate time and volume of each

discharge of storm water from the production area to surface water and the

approximate duration of the discharge. Such discharge shall be reported in

accordance with Reporting Requirements B.1 and B.2.i.

12. During or immediately after any overflow or other unauthorized discharge of storm

water to surface water or wastewater from a manure or process wastewater storage

area, retention pond, corral or land application area, the Discharger shall collect

samples of the discharge. If the discharge is to surface water, the Discharger shall

also collect samples from surface water upstream2

 and downstream3 of the discharge.

The Discharger shall record the estimated volume of the discharge and the date and

time of the discharge. Discharges and surface water shall be monitored daily during

each discharge event for parameters 2 through 8, 10 through 12, 14, 15, 18, and 19 in

Table 1. Discharges shall also be monitored daily for volume (parameter 1). The

results of such monitoring shall be reported in accordance with Reporting

Requirements B.1 and B.2.m.

2

 Upstream samples shall be taken just far enough upstream so as not to be influenced by the discharge.

3

 Downstream samples shall be taken just far enough downstream where the discharge is blended with the receiving water but not

influenced by dilution flows or other discharges.

Case 2:06-cv-01464-DLB Document 19 Filed 06/27/07 Page 52 of 75
Monitoring and Reporting Program No. _____ 5

General Order for Existing Milk Cow Dairies

11/22/06

Note: If conditions are not safe for sampling, the Discharger must provide

documentation of why samples could not be collected and analyzed. For example,

the Discharger may be unable to collect samples during dangerous weather conditions

(such as local flooding, high winds, tornados, electrical storms, etc.). However, once

the dangerous conditions have passed, the Discharger shall collect a sample of the

discharge or, if the discharge has ceased, from the waste management unit from

which the discharge occurred.

Tailwater Monitoring

13. The Discharger shall monitor and record each discharge of tailwater to surface water,

at the point of discharge, from any land application area where irrigation has occurred

less than 60 days after application of manure and/or process wastewater to that area.

A map showing the sample locations, and the method of measuring the flow must be

provided in the Annual Report (see Reporting Requirement B.2.j below). Samples of

discharges shall be analyzed as specified in Monitoring Provision A.36 below. Each

discharge shall be monitored during each event at the point of discharge for

parameters 1 through 8, 10, 11, 14, 15, 18, and 19 in Table 1. Each discharge shall be

monitored daily at the point of discharge for total dissolved solids (parameter 12).

The results of all tailwater monitoring shall be reported in accordance with Reporting

Requirements B.2.j and B.2.m below.

Storm Water Monitoring

14. During the first twelve months following enrollment under the Order, the Discharger

shall monitor discharges of storm water to surface water from each separate land

application area that is identified in Item 1.A (See Attachment C) of the Discharger’s

Nutrient Management Plan. The monitoring shall include the following:

a. Collection and analysis of grab samples from at least two storm events per wet

season. The first sample shall be from the first storm event of the wet season

that produces significant storm water discharge (continuous storm water runoff

for a minimum of one hour, or intermittent storm water runoff for a minimum of

three hours in a 12-hour period) and the second from a storm event that

produces significant storm water discharge during the peak storm season

(typically February) and that is preceded by at least three days of dry weather.

The sample(s) should be taken during the first hour of the discharge. The

samples shall be monitored for parameters 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, 6, 7, 8, 12, 14, 18, 19,

and 20 in Table 1. The samples shall be analyzed as specified in Monitoring

Provision A.36 below.

b. Sample locations must be chosen such that the samples are representative of the

quality and quantity of storm water discharged. A rationale for the sample

locations, a map showing the sample locations, and the method of measuring the

Case 2:06-cv-01464-DLB Document 19 Filed 06/27/07 Page 53 of 75
Monitoring and Reporting Program No. _____ 6

General Order for Existing Milk Cow Dairies

11/22/06

storm water flow must be provided in the Annual Storm Water Monitoring

Report (see Reporting Requirements B.4 below).

Documentation must be provided in the annual storm water monitoring report

(required in the Reporting Requirements B.4 below) if no significant discharges of

storm water from any of the land application areas occur, or if the Discharger is

unable to collect any of the required samples due to adverse climatic conditions

and/or inaccessibility to the discharge location.

If the Executive Officer does not approve reducing the constituents and/or sampling

frequency for any land application area based on the first year of storm water

monitoring report (see Reporting Requirements B.5 below), the Discharger shall

continue the storm water monitoring in accordance with the requirements above.

Groundwater Monitoring

The Discharger must sample each domestic and agricultural supply well and subsurface

(tile) drainage system present in the production and/or land application areas to

characterize existing groundwater quality. The Executive Officer will use groundwater

monitoring data from four quarters of monitoring events and additional information to

assess and determine the need for additional groundwater monitoring at a facility.

Groundwater monitoring data together with factors in Table 2 of this Monitoring and

Reporting Program will be used as a guide to prioritize where and when monitoring wells

are to be installed. The Discharger must comply with the groundwater monitoring

requirements below:

15. The Discharger shall immediately begin sampling each domestic and agricultural

supply well present in the production and land application areas. These wells shall be

sampled quarterly for parameters 6, 7, and 12 in Table 1. Monitoring of the supply

wells may be reduced to annually after one year of quarterly data are provided to the

Executive Officer or may continue at the same frequency if directed by the Executive

Officer.

16. The Discharger shall immediately begin sampling discharges from each subsurface

(tile) drainage system present in the land application area(s) quarterly for parameters

6, 7, and 12 in Table 1.

Additional Groundwater Monitoring Requirements

17. When required by the Executive Officer, the Discharger shall install sufficient

monitoring wells to:

a. Characterize groundwater flow direction and gradient beneath the site;

Case 2:06-cv-01464-DLB Document 19 Filed 06/27/07 Page 54 of 75
Monitoring and Reporting Program No. _____ 7

General Order for Existing Milk Cow Dairies

11/22/06

b. Characterize natural background (unaffected by the Discharger or others)

groundwater quality upgradient of the facility; and

c. Characterize groundwater quality downgradient of the corrals, downgradient of

the retention ponds, and downgradient of the land application areas.

It may be necessary to install more than one upgradient monitoring well (i.e., for the

production area and the land application area). The Executive Officer may require

more extensive monitoring based on site-specific conditions. The Executive Officer

will prioritize installation of monitoring wells based on the factors identified in Table

2.

18. Prior to installation of monitoring wells, the Discharger shall submit to the Executive

Officer a Monitoring Well Installation and Sampling Plan (MWISP) (see Attachment

G) and schedule prepared under the direct supervision of, and certified by, a

California registered civil engineer or a California registered geologist with

experience in hydrogeology. Installation of monitoring wells shall not begin until the

Executive Officer notifies the Discharger in writing that the MWISP is acceptable.

19. All monitoring wells shall be constructed in a manner that maintains the integrity of

the monitoring well bore hole and prevents the well from acting as a conduit for

pollutant/contaminant transport. The sampling interval of each monitoring well shall

be appropriately screened and fitted with an appropriate filter pack to enable

collection of representative groundwater samples of the first encountered

groundwater.

20. The construction and destruction of monitoring wells and supply wells shall be in

accordance with the standards under Water Wells and Monitoring Wells in the

California Well Standards Bulletin 74-90 (June 1991) and Bulletin 74-81 (December

1981), adopted by the Department of Water Resources (DWR). Should any county or

local agency adopt more stringent standards than that adopted by the DWR, then

these local standards shall supercede the Well Standard of DWR, and the Discharger

shall comply with the more stringent standards.

21. The horizontal and vertical position of each monitoring well shall be determined by a

registered land surveyor or other qualified professional. The horizontal position of

each monitoring well shall be measured with one-foot lateral accuracy using the

North American Datum 1983 (NAD83 datum). The vertical elevations of each

monitoring well shall be referenced to the North American Vertical Datum 1988

(NAVD88 datum) to an absolute accuracy of at least 0.5 feet and a relative accuracy

between monitoring wells of 0.01 feet.

22. Within 45 days after completion of any monitoring well, the Discharger shall submit

to the Executive Officer a Monitoring Well Installation Completion Report (MWICR)

(see Attachment G) prepared under the direct supervision of, and certified by, a

Case 2:06-cv-01464-DLB Document 19 Filed 06/27/07 Page 55 of 75
Monitoring and Reporting Program No. _____ 8

General Order for Existing Milk Cow Dairies

11/22/06

California registered civil engineer or a California registered geologist with

experience in hydrogeology.

23. The Discharger shall sample monitoring wells quarterly for one year to establish

background concentrations. Groundwater monitoring may be reduced to semiannually once one year of quarterly groundwater monitoring data are provided to the

Executive Officer. Groundwater monitoring shall include monitoring during periods

of the expected highest and lowest water table levels. Groundwater monitoring shall

include:

a. Measurement of the depth to groundwater from a surveyed reference point to

the nearest 0.010 foot in each monitoring well; and

b. Analysis of groundwater samples from each well as specified in Monitoring

Provision A. 36 below, for parameters 2, 5, 6, 7, 8, 10, 11, 12, and 13 in Table

1.

24. The Discharger shall submit to the Executive officer an evaluation of the groundwater

monitoring data within six months of obtaining sufficient data to evaluate trends in

the data (usually about 8 independent samples). The submittal shall include a

description of the statistical or non-statistical methods proposed for use in evaluating

the groundwater monitoring data. The proposed methods must be approved by the

Executive Officer

Sampling Requirements

The Discharger shall use sample containers and sample handling, storage, and preservation

methods that are accepted or recommended by the selected analytical laboratory or, as

appropriate, in accordance with approved United States Environmental Protection Agency

analytical methods. The following sampling procedures are standards currently recognized

by the Central Valley Water Board. When special procedures appear to be necessary at an

individual dairy, the Discharger may request approval of alternative sampling procedures

for nutrient management. The Executive Officer will review such requests and if adequate

justification is provided, may approve the requested alternative sampling procedures.

25. Manure samples shall be collected as follows:

a. At least 10 equal-size samples of manure shall be collected from various

portions of the manure pile, with most samples from the center. No more than

two samples shall be collected from the surface and two from the bottom.

b. The 10 samples shall be placed in a container and mixed well before a

subsample is placed in a clean container provided by or approved by the

analytical laboratory that will receive the samples.

Case 2:06-cv-01464-DLB Document 19 Filed 06/27/07 Page 56 of 75
Monitoring and Reporting Program No. _____ 9

General Order for Existing Milk Cow Dairies

11/22/06

c. Sample containers that are reused shall be washed with soap and thoroughly

rinsed with clean (tap) water.

26. Process wastewater composite samples shall be collected as follows:

a. A representative composite sample of process wastewater shall be prepared

based on a minimum of three time-series samples collected during an irrigation

event that are representative of the beginning, middle, and end of the process

wastewater discharge. These samples shall be combined in a single container,

mixed, and poured into a clean container provided by or approved by the

laboratory that will receive the samples. Containers that are reused shall be

washed with soap and thoroughly rinsed with clean (tap) water.

b. The samples shall be collected at a point that is prior to any dilution or blending

with irrigation water and shall be representative of the process wastewater

applied to the land application area.

27. Irrigation water samples shall be collected as follows:

a. Samples shall be collected before the addition of process wastewater.

b. Samples from irrigation wells shall be collected after the pump has run for a

minimum of 30 minutes or after at least three well volumes have been purged

from the well.

28. Soil samples shall be collected as follows:

a. Composite samples shall be collected from each land application area receiving

manure and/or process wastewater. Samples shall be composited by:

i. Placing equal volumes of soil from each of 10 or more sample sites for each

land application area and sample depth, in a clean plastic bucket. Moist

soils may be air dried until they can be mixed easily.

ii. Thoroughly mixing the sample and placing at least one pint of the composite

sample in a clean plastic container to be shipped to the laboratory. The

laboratory should be consulted for the exact amount of sample and the

sample container needed

b. At a minimum, composite samples shall be collected from a depth of 0 to 48

inches. Samples from each site shall be split into four sections representing

depth intervals 0 to 12 inches, 12 to 24 inches, 24 to 36 inches, and 36 to 48

inches. All samples from the same depth interval for all sites within each land

application area shall be composited for analyses.

Case 2:06-cv-01464-DLB Document 19 Filed 06/27/07 Page 57 of 75
Monitoring and Reporting Program No. _____ 10

General Order for Existing Milk Cow Dairies

11/22/06

c. Soil samples shall be collected with soil probes or augers from a minimum of 10

sites in each land application area and composited as described below.

i. At least three of the 10 samples shall be from the upper third of the land

application area.

ii. In fields where soil texture, crop yield, or other soil-related factors vary, at

least 10 samples shall be collected from each different area and composites

from each area shall be analyzed separately.

iii. Sample locations in each land application area shall be recorded on a sketch

for future sampling consistency.

iv. Soil probes or augers shall be cleaned thoroughly between selected sample

depth intervals with a non-residual detergent such as Alconox.

29. Plant tissue samples shall be collected as follows.

a. Harvest plant tissue samples shall be collected as follows:

i. At least 10 equal-size samples (for example, using a two- to three-pound

coffee can) of the harvested portion of the crop shall be collected as the

material is moved off of the field. These samples shall be combined and

thoroughly mixed in a plastic bag, taking care not to allow drying.

ii. Samples shall be contained in sealed plastic bags to retain moisture content.

b. Mid-season plant tissue samples, if collected, shall be collected following

University of California recommendations for the specific plant being tested.

30. Samples of discharges, surface water, tailwater, and storm water shall be collected as

specified above in Monitoring Requirements A.10 through A.14.

31. Groundwater samples from monitoring wells shall be collected as specified in an

approved Monitoring Well Installation and Sampling Plan.

32. Groundwater samples from domestic wells shall be collected from the tap nearest to

the pressure tank (and before the pressure tank if possible) after water has been

pumped from this tap for 10 to 20 minutes. Groundwater samples from agricultural

supply wells shall be collected after the pump has run for a minimum of 30 minutes

or after at least three well volumes have been purged from the well.

Case 2:06-cv-01464-DLB Document 19 Filed 06/27/07 Page 58 of 75
Monitoring and Reporting Program No. _____ 11

General Order for Existing Milk Cow Dairies

11/22/06

Analytical Requirements

33. Analyses of soil and plant tissue samples shall be conducted by: methods utilized by

the North American Proficiency Testing (NAPT) Program or accepted by the

University of California; and laboratories participating in the NAPT Program or other

programs whose tests are accepted by the University of California. This shall include

analysis for nitrate-nitrogen and ammonium-nitrogen utilizing the 1M potassium

chloride extract of soil.

34. Analyses of phosphorus in soil samples shall be performed using the method

recommended by the University of California or the bicarbonate-P or Olsen_P test.

35. Analyses of manure shall be conducted by: methods utilized by the Manure Analyses

Proficiency (MAP) Testing Program or accepted by the University of California; and

laboratories participating in the MAP Testing Program or other programs whose tests

are accepted by the University of California.

36. Analyses of process wastewater, irrigation water, tailwater, discharges, surface water,

storm water, and groundwater samples shall be conducted by a laboratory certified for

such analyses by the California Department of Health Services. These laboratory

analyses shall be conducted in accordance with the Title 40 Code of Federal

Regulations Part 136 (Guidelines Establishing Test Procedures for the Analysis of

Pollutants) or other test methods approved by the Executive Officer.

Record-Keeping Requirements

37. Dischargers shall maintain on-site for a period of five years from the date they are

created all information as follows:

a. All information necessary to document implementation and management of the

minimum elements of the nutrient management plan (NMP);

b. All records for the production area including;

i. Records documenting the inspections required under Monitoring

Provisions A.1, A.2, and A.3 above.

ii. Records documenting any corrective actions taken to correct deficiencies

noted as a result of the inspections required in Monitoring Provisions A.1,

A.2, and A.3 above. Deficiencies not corrected in 30 days must be

accompanied by an explanation of the factors preventing immediate

correction;

iii. Records of the date, time, and estimated volume of any overflow;

Case 2:06-cv-01464-DLB Document 19 Filed 06/27/07 Page 59 of 75
Monitoring and Reporting Program No. _____ 12

General Order for Existing Milk Cow Dairies

11/22/06

iv. Records of mortality management and practices;

v. Steps and dates when action is taken to correct unauthorized releases as

reported in accordance with Reporting Requirement B.1 below; and

vi. Records of monitoring activities and laboratory analyses conducted as

required in Standard Provisions and Reporting Requirements D.5.

c. All records for the land application area including:

i. Expected and actual crop yields;

ii. Identification of crop, acreage, and dates of planting and harvest for each

field;

iii. Dates, locations, and approximate weight and moisture content, or volume

and density, of manure applied to each field;

iv. Dates, locations, and volume of process wastewater applied to each field;

v. Weather conditions at time of manure and process wastewater applications

and for 24 hours prior to and following applications;

vi. Records documenting the inspections conducted required under

Monitoring and Reporting Provisions A.4 above;

vii. Dates, locations, and test methods for soil, manure, process wastewater,

irrigation water, and plant tissue sampling;

viii. Results from manure, process wastewater, irrigation water, soil, plant

tissue, discharge (including tailwater), and storm water sampling;

ix. Explanation for the basis for determining manure or process wastewater

application rates, as provided in the Technical Standards for Nutrient

Management established by the Order (Attachment C);

x. Calculations showing the total nitrogen, phosphorus, and potassium to be

applied to each field, including sources other than manure or process

wastewater;

xi. Total amount of nitrogen, phosphorus, and potassium actually applied to

each field, including documentation of calculations for the total amount

applied;

xii. The method(s) used to apply manure and/or process wastewater;

Case 2:06-cv-01464-DLB Document 19 Filed 06/27/07 Page 60 of 75
Monitoring and Reporting Program No. _____ 13

General Order for Existing Milk Cow Dairies

11/22/06

xiii. Dates of manure and/or process wastewater application equipment

inspections; and

xiv. Records documenting any corrective actions taken to correct deficiencies

noted as a result of the inspections required in Monitoring Provisions A.4

above. Deficiencies not corrected in 30 days must be accompanied by an

explanation of the factors preventing immediate correction.

xv. Records of monitoring activities and laboratory analyses conducted as

required in Standard Provisions and Reporting Requirements D.5.

d. A copy of the Discharger’s site-specific NMP;

e. All Manure/Process Wastewater Tracking Manifest forms (Attachment D)

which includes information on the manure hauler, destination of the manure,

dates hauled, amount hauled, and certification; and

f. All analyses of manure, process wastewater, irrigation water, soil, plant tissue,

discharges (including tailwater discharges), surface water, storm water, and

groundwater.

General Monitoring Requirements

38. The Discharger shall comply with all the “Requirements Specifically for Monitoring

Programs and Monitoring Reports” as specified in the Standard Provisions and

Reporting Requirements.

39. All samples collected shall be representative of the volume and nature of the material

being sampled.

40. All samples containers shall be labeled and records maintained to show the time and

date of collection as well as the person collecting the sample and the sample location.

41. All samples collected for laboratory analyses shall be preserved and submitted to the

laboratory within the required holding time appropriate for the analytical method used

and the constituents analyzed.

42. All samples submitted to a laboratory for analyses shall be identified in a properly

completed and signed Chain of Custody form.

43. Field test instruments used for pH, electrical conductivity and dissolved oxygen may

be used provided:

a. The operator is trained in the proper use and maintenance of the instruments;

Case 2:06-cv-01464-DLB Document 19 Filed 06/27/07 Page 61 of 75
Monitoring and Reporting Program No. _____ 14

General Order for Existing Milk Cow Dairies

11/22/06

b. The instruments are field calibrated prior to each monitoring event; and

c. Instruments are serviced and/or calibrated by the manufacturer at the

recommended frequency.

Case 2:06-cv-01464-DLB Document 19 Filed 06/27/07 Page 62 of 75
Monitoring and Reporting Program No. _____ 15

General Order for Existing Milk Cow Dairies

11/22/06

TABLE 1. MONITORING PARAMETERS

Units

Parameter Liquid Materials4 Solid

Materials5

Type of Analysis

1. Volume or Weight6 Gallons or Acre-inches Tons Field7

2. Electrical Conductivity mhos/cm8 mhos/cm Field/Laboratory9

3. Dissolved Oxygen mg/l10 NA11 Field

4. Temperature °F NA Field

5. pH pH units pH units Field/Laboratory12

6. Nitrate-Nitrogen mg/l mg/kg13 Laboratory

7. Ammonium-Nitrogen/Total AmmoniaNitrogen and Unionized AmmoniaNitrogen14

mg/l mg/kg Laboratory

8. Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen mg/l mg/kg Laboratory

9. Total Nitrogen mg/l mg/kg Laboratory

10. Phosphorus15 mg/l mg/kg Laboratory

11. Potassium mg/l mg/kg Laboratory

12. Total Dissolved Solids mg/l mg/kg Laboratory

13. General Minerals16 mg/l mg/kg Laboratory

14. BOD5

17 mg/l NA Laboratory

15. Total Suspended Solids mg/l NA Laboratory

16. Iron mg/l NA Laboratory

17. Manganese mg/l NA Laboratory

18. Total Coliform MPN/100 ml18 NA Laboratory

19. Fecal Coliform MPN/100 ml NA Laboratory

20. Turbidity NTU NA Laboratory

21. Moisture Content/Wet Weight19 NA percent Laboratory

22. Density20 NA g/l21 Laboratory

23. Rainfall inches22 NA CIMIS23

24. Crop Water Use inches NA CIMIS

4

 Liquid materials include process wastewater, irrigation water, tailwater, storm water, and surface water.

5

 Solid materials include manure, soil, and plant tissue.

6

 Volume or weight of waste application or discharge.

7

 These parameters are to be measured in the field.

8

 Micromhos per centimeter (mhos/cm). 9

 Electrical conductivity of: 1) liquid materials may be field measurements and 2) solid materials shall be laboratory measurements. 10 Milligrams per liter (mg/l). 11 NA – not applicable. 12 pH shall be determined by laboratory analysis for soil and manure. pH for all other types of samples may be by field

measurements.

13 Milligrams per kilogram (mg/kg). 14 Samples of soil, manure, process wastewater, irrigation water, and groundwater shall be analyzed for ammonium-nitrogen.

Samples of discharges of process wastewater, storm water, and tailwater to surface water and samples of surface water shall be

analyzed for total ammonia-nitrogen and unionized ammonia-nitrogen.

15 Samples of manure, process wastewater, irrigation water, groundwater, and discharges of process wastewater, storm water, and

tailwater to surface water shall be analyzed for total phosphorus. Samples of soil shall be analyzed for soluble phosphorus as

required in A.34.

16 General minerals include calcium, magnesium, sodium, bicarbonate, carbonate, sulfate, and chloride reported individually. 17 Five-day Biochemical Oxygen Demand. 18 Most probable number, five dilutions minimum. 19 Manure shall be analyzed for moisture content (percent) when the amount of manure applied to a land application area or

exported is expressed in weight (i.e., tons). Plant tissue shall be analyzed for wet weight (percent) when the amount harvested is

reported in weight (i.e., tons), but the constituent analyses expressed on a dry weight basis.

20 Manure density shall be analyzed when the amount of manure applied to a land application area or exported is expressed in

volume (i.e., cubic yards). Plant density shall be analyzed when the amount harvested is expressed in volume (i.e., cubic yards). 21 Grams per liter (g/l). 22 Rainfall shall be reported to the nearest tenth of an inch. 23 California Irrigation Management Information System (CIMIS) data from the nearest station..

Case 2:06-cv-01464-DLB Document 19 Filed 06/27/07 Page 63 of 75
Monitoring and Reporting Program No. _____ 16

General Order for Existing Milk Cow Dairies

11/22/06

TABLE 2. GROUNDWATER MONITORING FACTORS FOR RANKING PRIORITY24

FACTOR SITE

CONDITION POINTS SCORE

< 10 0

10 - 20 10

Highest nitrate concentration (nitrate-nitrogen in mg/l) in any existing

domestic well, agricultural supply well, or tile drainage system at the

dairy or associated land application area (detected two or more

times in any one well or tile drainage system).* >20 20

< detection limit25 0 Ammonium (ammonium-nitrogen in mg/l) detected twice at any

concentration in any existing domestic well, agricultural supply well,

or tile drainage system at the dairy or associated land application

area.* > detection limit 20

Outside GWPA 0 Location of production area or land application area relative to a

Department of Pesticide Groundwater Protection Area26 (GWPA). In GWPA 20

> 1,500 0

601 to 1,500 10

Distance (feet) of production area or land application area from an

artificial recharge area27 as identified in the California Department of

Water Resources Bulletin 118 or by the Executive Officer. 0 to 600 20

Nitrate concentration (nitrate-nitrogen in mg/l) in domestic well on < 10 or unknown 0

property adjacent to the dairy production area or land application

area (detected two or more times). 10 or greater 20

> 600 0

301 to 600 10 Distance (feet) from dairy production area or land application area

and the nearest off-property domestic well.*

0 to 300 20

> 1,500 0

601 to 1,500 10 Distance (feet) from dairy production area or land application area

and the nearest off-property municipal well.*

0 to 600 20

1 5

Number of crops grown per year per field.* 2 10

3 15

Nutrient Management Plan completed by [24 months after Yes 0

adoption of the Order]?* No 100

<1.5 0

Whole Farm Nitrogen Balance. 1.5 to 3 10 28*

>3 20

 Total Score: _________

* This information will be provided by the Discharger. All other information will be obtained by the Executive Officer.

24 Information on each factor may not be available for each facility. Total scores will be the ratio of the points accumulated to the

total points possible for each facility. Dairies with higher total scores will be directed to install monitoring wells first.

25 The detection limit for ammonium-nitrogen shall not exceed 1.5 mg/l. 26 The Department of Pesticide Regulation (DPR) defines a Groundwater Protection Area (GWPA) as an area of land that is

vulnerable to the movement of pesticides to groundwater according to either leaching or runoff processes. These areas include

areas where the depth to groundwater is 70 feet or less. The DPR GWPAs can be seen on DPRs website at

http://www.cdpr.ca.gov/docs/gwp/gwpamaps.htm.

27 An artificial recharge area is defined as an area where the addition of water to an aquifer is by human activity, such as putting

surface water into dug or constructed spreading basins or injecting water through wells.

28 The Whole Farm Nitrogen Balance is to be determined as the ratio of (Nitrogen generated + Nitrogen imported)/(Nitrogen

Removed by Crops and Exported) as reported in the Preliminary Dairy Facility Assessment in the Existing Conditions Report

(Attachment A).

Case 2:06-cv-01464-DLB Document 19 Filed 06/27/07 Page 64 of 75
Monitoring and Reporting Program No. _____ 17

General Order for Existing Milk Cow Dairies

11/22/06

B. REPORTING REQUIREMENTS

Noncompliance Reporting

1. The Discharger shall report any noncompliance that endangers human health or the

environment or any noncompliance with Prohibitions A.1, A.2, A.3, A.4, A.5, A.8,

A.9, A.10, A.11, and A.12 in the Order, within 24 hours of becoming aware of its

occurrence. The incident shall be reported to the Central Valley Water Board Office,

local environmental health department, and to the California Office of Emergency

Services (OES). During non-business hours, the Discharger shall leave a message on

the Central Valley Water Board’s voice mail. The message shall include the time,

date, place, and nature of the noncompliance, the name and number of the reporting

person, and shall be recorded in writing by the Discharger. The OES is operational

24 hours a day. A written report shall be submitted to the Central Valley Water Board

office within two weeks of the Discharger becoming aware of the incident. The report

shall contain a description of the noncompliance, its causes, duration, and the actual

or anticipated time for achieving compliance. The report shall include complete

details of the steps that the Discharger has taken or intends to take, in order to prevent

recurrence. All intentional or accidental spills shall be reported as required by this

provision. The written submission shall contain:

a. The approximate date, time, and location of the noncompliance including a

description of the ultimate destination of any unauthorized discharge and the

flow path of such discharge to a receiving water body.

b. A description of the noncompliance and its cause;

c. The flow rate, volume, and duration of any discharge involved in the

noncompliance;

d. The amount of precipitation (in inches) the day of any discharge and for each of

the seven days preceding the discharge;

e. A description (location; date and time collected; field measurements of pH,

temperature, dissolved oxygen and electrical conductivity; sample

identification; date submitted to laboratory; analyses requested) of

noncompliance discharge samples and/or surface water samples taken to comply

with Monitoring Provision A.12;

f. The period of noncompliance, including dates and times, and if the

noncompliance has not been corrected, the anticipated time it is expected to

continue; and

g. A time schedule and a plan to implement corrective actions necessary to prevent

the recurrence of such noncompliance.

Case 2:06-cv-01464-DLB Document 19 Filed 06/27/07 Page 65 of 75
Monitoring and Reporting Program No. _____ 18

General Order for Existing Milk Cow Dairies

11/22/06

The laboratory analyses of the noncompliance discharge sample and/or upstream and

downstream surface water samples shall be submitted to the Central Valley Water

Board office within 45 days of the discharge.

Annual Reporting

2. An annual monitoring report covering the 12-month period beginning 1 November

and ending 31 October of the following year shall be submitted to the Executive

Officer by [12 months after adoption of the Order] of each year. The annual

report shall be completed on an annual report form provided by the Executive Officer

(available on the Central Valley Water Board website at

http://www.waterboards.ca.gov/centralvalley/available_documents/index.html#confin

ed) and shall include all the information as specified below.

a. An updated Preliminary Dairy Facility Assessment using the tool provided in

Attachment A.

b. Number and type of animals, whether in open confinement or housed under

roof;

c. Estimated amount of total manure (tons) and process wastewater (gallons or

acre-inches) generated by the facility in the previous 12 months;

d. Estimated amount of total manure (tons) and process wastewater (gallons or

acre-inches) applied over the previous 12 months to each land application area

identified in 3.f below;

e. Estimated amount of total manure (tons) and process wastewater (gallons or

acre-inches) transferred to other persons by the facility in the previous 12

months;

f. Total number of acres and the Assessor Parcel Numbers for all land application

areas covered by the Nutrient Management Plan;

g. Total number of acres and the Assessor Parcel Numbers of property that were

used for land application of manure and process wastewater in the previous 12

months;

h. Summary of all manure and process wastewater discharges from the production

area to surface water or to land areas (land application areas or otherwise) when

not in accordance with the facility’s Nutrient Management Plan that have

occurred in the previous 12 months, including date, time, location, approximate

volume, a map showing discharge and sample locations, rationale for sample

locations, and method of measuring discharge flows;

Case 2:06-cv-01464-DLB Document 19 Filed 06/27/07 Page 66 of 75
Monitoring and Reporting Program No. _____ 19

General Order for Existing Milk Cow Dairies

11/22/06

i. Summary of all storm water discharges from the production area to surface

water in the previous 12 months, including the date, time, approximate volume,

duration, location, and a map showing the discharge and sample locations,

rationale for sample locations, and method of measuring discharge flows.

j. Summary of all discharges from the land application area to surface water that

have occurred in the previous 12 months, including the date, time, approximate

volume, location, source of discharge (i.e., tailwater, process wastewater, or

blended process wastewater), a map showing the discharge and sample

locations, rationale for sample locations, and method of measuring discharge

flows;

k. A statement indicating if the NMP has been updated and whether the current

version of the facility’s NMP was developed or approved by a certified nutrient

management planner as specified in Attachment C of the Order;

l. Copies of all manure/process wastewater tracking manifests for the reporting

period;

m. Copies of laboratory analyses of all discharges (manure, process wastewater, or

tailwater), surface water (upstream and downstream of a discharge), and storm

water, including chain-of-custody forms and laboratory quality

assurance/quality control results;

n. Tabulated analytical data for samples of manure, process wastewater, irrigation

water, soil, and plant tissue. The data shall be tabulated to clearly show sample

dates, constituents analyzed, constituent concentrations, and detection limits.

o. Results of the Record-Keeping Requirements for the production and land

application areas specified in Monitoring Provisions A.37.b.ii, A.37.b.iii,

A.37.c.i, A.37.c.ii, A.37.c.iii, A.37.c.iv, A.37.c.v, A.37.c.xi, and A.37.c.xiv

above.

Groundwater Reporting

3. The Discharger shall report the results of all groundwater monitoring annually by 30

June each year. Groundwater monitoring reports shall include all laboratory analyses

(including chain-of-custody forms and laboratory quality assurance/quality control

results) and tabular and graphical summaries of the monitoring data. Data shall be

tabulated to clearly show the sample dates, constituents analyzed, constituent

concentrations, detection limits, depth to groundwater, and groundwater elevations.

Graphical summaries of groundwater gradients and flow directions shall also be

included. Each groundwater monitoring report shall include a summary data table of

all historical and current groundwater elevations and analytical results. The

groundwater monitoring reports shall be certified by a California registered

Case 2:06-cv-01464-DLB Document 19 Filed 06/27/07 Page 67 of 75
Monitoring and Reporting Program No. _____ 20

General Order for Existing Milk Cow Dairies

11/22/06

professional as specified in General Reporting Requirements C.9 of the Standard

Provisions and Reporting Requirements of the Order.

Storm Water Reporting

4. The Discharger shall submit an annual report by 30 June of each year that details the

results of the previous year’s storm water monitoring, including the Discharger’s

preparation for the upcoming wet season for all land application areas. The annual

report shall include a map showing all sample locations for all land application areas,

rationale for all sampling locations, a discussion of how storm water flow

measurements were made, the results (including the laboratory analyses, chain of

custody forms, and laboratory quality assurance/quality control results) of all samples

of storm water, a summary of events during the year that contributed pollutants to

storm water from any land application area, and any modifications made to the

facility or sampling plan in response to pollutants detected in storm water. The

annual report must also include documentation if no significant discharge of storm

water occurred from the land application area(s) or if it was not possible to collect

any of the required samples or perform visual observations due to adverse climatic

conditions.

5. The first year storm water report shall include an assessment of the storm water

monitoring results for any land application area where monitoring was necessary. If

the first year of storm water monitoring for any land application area indicates

pollutants have not been detected in storm water samples, the Discharger may

propose to the Executive Officer to reduce the constituents and/or sampling frequency

for that area.

General Reporting Requirements

6. The results of any monitoring conducted more frequently than required at the

locations specified herein shall be reported to the Central Valley Water Board.

7. Laboratory analyses for manure, process wastewater, and soil shall be submitted to

the Central Valley Water Board upon request by the Executive Officer.

8. Each report shall be signed by the Discharger or a duly authorized representative as

specified in the General Reporting Requirements C.7 of the Standard Provisions and

Reporting Requirements (SPRR), and shall contain the following statement:

“I certify under penalty of law that I have personally examined and am familiar with

the information submitted in this document and all attachments and that, based on my

inquiry of those individuals immediately responsible for obtaining the information, I

believe that the information is true, accurate, and complete. I am aware that there are

significant penalties for submitting false information, including the possibility of fine

and imprisonment.”

Case 2:06-cv-01464-DLB Document 19 Filed 06/27/07 Page 68 of 75
Monitoring and Reporting Program No. _____ 21

General Order for Existing Milk Cow Dairies

11/22/06

9. For facilities in Fresno, Kern, Kings, Madera, Mariposa, and Tulare counties, submit

reports to:

California Regional Water Quality Control Board

Central Valley Region

1685 E Street

Fresno, CA 93706

Attention: Confined Animal Regulatory Unit

For facilities in Butte, Lassen, Modoc, Plumas, Tehama, and Shasta counties, submit

reports to:

California Regional Water Quality Control Board

Central Valley Region

415 Knollcrest Drive, Suite 100

Redding, CA 96002

Attention: Confined Animal Regulatory Unit

For facilities in all other counties, submit reports to:

California Regional Water Quality Control Board

Central Valley Region

11020 Sun Center Drive #200

Rancho Cordova, CA 95670

Attention: Confined Animal Regulatory Unit

ORDERED BY: ____________________________________

PAMELA C. CREEDON, Executive Officer

____________________________________

 Date

Case 2:06-cv-01464-DLB Document 19 Filed 06/27/07 Page 69 of 75
EXHIBIT 3

Case 2:06-cv-01464-DLB Document 19 Filed 06/27/07 Page 70 of 75
%;40B4?A8=C>ACH?48=C74D=B703430A40B>=;H >A<??A>E43$"#>	
			

%#*"'

( ) 

 

$'"

#'!

*(#+'$#"#)!%'$))$##.

	

		

	
 
  
 

 

!!)"(

 %#*"'

 !).#"

+ !)."!#

'((

+ !).!$)$#

%!(%!!!#)((%

#'!#()'*)$#(

5 0 ?A4?A8=C43 ;014; 70B 144= ?A>E8343 0558G 8C 8= C74

34B86=0C43B?024'4E84FC748=5>A<0C8>=20A45D;;H850=H>58C

8B 8=2>AA42C 2A>BBC7A>D67 8C 0=3 4=C4AC74 2>AA42C 30C0 8=C74

0??A>?A80C458;;8=0A4014;>F;B>850=H>5C74?A4?A8=C4330C0

8B 01B4=C         
  

?;40B4?A>E8348C8=C74?A>?4A

58;;8= 0A40B 14;>F 5 C74 ;014; 8B 2><?;4C4 0=3 2>AA42C H>D

=443 =>C 2><?;4C4 C4<B   + 0=3 + 
 
 

  
  ><?;4C4 0;; 8C4<B 85 => ;014;

70B 144= ?A>E8343 '454A C> C74 8=BCAD2C8>=B 5>A 34C08;43 8C4<

34B2A8?C8>=B 0=3 5>A C74 ;460; 0DC7>A8I0C8>=B D=34A F7827 C78B

30C08B2>;;42C43

%$!!*)#)')'()(

#()'*)$#(><?;4C4C7A>D67C>34C4A<8=4F74C74AH>D=443C>BD1<8C0=H?4A<8C0??;820C8>=5>A<BC>C74%5H>D0=BF4AKH4BLC>0=H@D4BC8>=BH>D<DBC

BD1<8CC78B5>A<0=3C74BD??;4<4=C0;5>A<;8BC438=C74?0A4=C74B8B5>;;>F8=6C74@D4BC8>="0A:K-L8=C741>G8=C74C78A32>;D<=85C74BD??;4<4=C0;5>A<8B0CC027435

H>D0=BF4AK=>LC>4027@D4BC8>=H>D=443=>CBD1<8C0=H>5C74B45>A<B.>D<0H0=BF4AK=>L85H>DA02C8E8CH8B4G2;D3435A><?4A<8CA4@D8A4<4=CBB44(42C8>=>5C74

8=BCAD2C8>=B(440;B>(42C8>=>5C748=BCAD2C8>=B5>A3458=8C8>=B>5#!"

"0A:K-L "0A:K-L

(%&*()$#( .( #$ $'"

)) (%&*()$#( .( #$ $'"))

BC78B5028;8CH 0$& % #!##%!"F7827  

A4BD;CB8=0"!C>%#!"#$'"

 
 

>4B >A F8;; C78B 5028;8CH    

8=2;D34 0 #!#   !# >A

 $#  !$# #& F7827 A4BD;CB 8= 0

"!C>%#!"#$'" 
 	 

B C78B 0 5028;8CH F7827 2DAA4=C;H A4BD;CB 8= "!" C>  

%#!" #>C74AC70=C7>B434B2A81438=>A

01>E4$'"   

BC78B0?A>?>B435028;8CH

F7827F8;;A4BD;C8=0"!C>%#!"

#$'"   

>4B >A F8;; C78B 5028;8CH CA40C BC>A4 >A 38B?>B4 >5  

'!$"%"#"$'"

  	

 > H>D >A F8;; H>D 8=942C 0C C78B 5028;8CH 8=3DBCA80; >A

<D=828?0; 455;D4=C 14;>F C74 ;>F4A<>BC BCA0CD<

2>=C08=8=6 F8C78= >=4 @D0AC4A <8;4 >5 C74 F4;; 1>A4

D=34A6A>D=3B>DA24B>53A8=:8=6F0C4A$'"
 
  

>H>D>AF8;;H>D8=942C0CC78B5028;8CH0=H?A>3D243F0C4A  

>A >C74A 5;D83B F7827 0A4 1A>D67C C> C74 BDA5024 8=

2>==42C8>=F8C72>=E4=C8>=0;>8;>A=0CDA0;60B?A>3D2C8>=

8=942C5;D83B DB435>A 4=70=243 A42>E4AH >5 >8; >A =0CDA0;

60B >A 8=942C 5;D83B 5>A BC>A064 >5 ;8@D83 7H3A>20A1>=B

$'"
 
  

> H>D >A F8;; H>D 8=942C 0C C78B 5028;8CH 5;D83B 5>A B?4280;

?A>24BB4BBD270B<8=8=6>5BD;5DA1HC74A0B27?A>24BB

B>;DC8>= <8=8=6 >5 <8=4A0;B 8= B8CD 2><1DBC8>= >5 5>BB8;

5D4;>AA42>E4AH>564>C74A<0;4=4A6H$'"

  

 BC78B5028;8CH0?A>?>B43"##!&"$!F78278B>=4  

>5C748=3DBCA80;20C46>A84B;8BC438=C748=BCAD2C8>=B0=3

F7827 F8;; ?>C4=C80;;H 4<8C 
		 C>=B ?4A H40A >5 0=H 08A

?>;;DC0=CA46D;0C43D=34AC74;40=8A2C0=3<0H05542C

>A14;>20C438=0=0CC08=<4=C0A40$'" 
	 

 

 B C78B 5028;8CH 0 ?A>?>B43 "##!& "$! F7827 8B

#$) >=4 >5 C74  8=3DBCA80; 20C46>A84B ;8BC43 8= C74

8=BCAD2C8>=B 0=3 F7827 F8;; ?>C4=C80;;H 4<8C 	 C>=B ?4A

H40A>50=H08A?>;;DC0=CA46D;0C43D=34AC74;40=8A2C

0=3 <0H 05542C >A 14 ;>20C43 8= 0= ### !

$'"

 

 

 #"$!).

 ( % 

 
J 	       

+ !).$#))

#"))!
 %$#

                  

  

 
 
 
 
 
 
  

+!)."!#'((

()')$'%$$-

 

 
 

).$')$,# ()) /%$

                   

                            

 
    
	 

 
 
 

+ !).!$)$#

()')'$*)#$$'$)'(%#)'

 

 
     

$*#).#"

      	

).$')$,# ()) /%$ $*#).$

          

                             

 
    
	 

 
 
 
   

%>A<
	
	 $#)#*$#'+'(

Case 2:06-cv-01464-DLB Document 19 Filed 06/27/07 Page 71 of 75
 $%" $" $

&# #

"#$ #    

      

	
 	  	

!&

	
 	  	

!&

$"  %"$    

     

	
 	  	

!&

	
 	  	

!&

& !"$ " "$ 

                                         

 

	
 	 

=>2/8+7/63=>/.38>/7

&+6=9>2/9A8/<

)#  

#$$%#  !"$ "" "  """ ""!$ %(" )!& !  

-          

  "

##$$

!!"&$

!%" "  !""

  $"!&

!&

	
   	 	  
	 

  

#$"$ "!  (

  

$) "$ ' #$$ *!  (                                 

    

	
 	    	 
   
	

=>2/0+-363>C69-+>/.988.3+86+8.=

)#   

((#$&" $!"$#

!#! !"# "  !# !!! 
 !# !

 $    $              

                !  

	
 	 	 	  	
 	 	 	 

%  #"	#!  $"!&

 $                $              

 %                 

	
 	 	 	  	
 	 	 	 

!&

""' #!!"!  $"!&

 $                $              

 "       !&

	
 	 	 	  	
 	 	 	 

(!

>>+-2>9>23= +::63-+>398 +>9:91<+:23-7+: 90>2/ +</+/B>/8.381>9 +> 6/+=> 98/736/ ,/C98. :<9:/<>C ,9?8.+<3/=$2/7+:7?=> =29A>2/ 9?>638/ 90>2/0+-363>C>2/

69-+>39890/+-2903>=/B3=>381+8.:<9:9=/.38>+5/+8..3=-2+<1/=><?->?</=/+-2903>=2+D+<.9?=A+=>/></+>7/8>=>9<+1/9<.3=:9=+60+-363>3/=+8./+-2A/66A2/</3>

384/->=06?3.=?8./<1<9?8.8-6?./+66=:<381=<3@/<=+8.9>2/<=?<0+-/A+>/<,9.3/=38>2/7+:+</+#//38=><?->398=09<:</-3=/</;?3</7/8>=

($%" %###
	

("$$ 

				

	
	
				
	

						
		
	

	

	
		

		

	
	
		
	

			
	

	
	
	

	
	

	

 $$"&  " #$%" $#

 $# " %# )

                                        

 

	
 	 

!9<7
		

 

 

 

 

 

Case 2:06-cv-01464-DLB Document 19 Filed 06/27/07 Page 72 of 75
5836685<,+

5

6685<(2,>608,9	
	

 

" #!!!%

! !! $ !$!

!!! "!"!

! 

 	
 662?04.-58 4+0<0+;(2,830:  5<,8(.,"4+,8,4,8(2,830: 

 !%"   !!! !%!

 !!" 

 	54*,4:8(:,+403(2,,+04.

6,8(:054*5362,:,0:,39

(4+ ,*:054

 
54*,4:8(:,+7;(:0*403(2

85+;*:054(*020:?*5362,:,0:,39

(4+9,*:054

=4,858

6,8(:58(3,

!,2,6/54,'''''

++8,99

(*90302,'''''

0:? :(:,''''' &065+,

''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''

''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''

''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''

'''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''

'''''''''''''' '''''''''

	>09:04.(*020:?

85659,+(*020:?

 !%!

(3, !,2,6/54,''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''

++8,99 (*90302,'''''

0:? '''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''' :(:, &065+,

5;4:? ''''''''''''''''''''''''' (:0:;+, 54.0:;+,

-*54:8(*:56,8(:054 (3,5-4:,.8(:58

++8,995-4:,.8(:58

'''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''

''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''' '''''''''''''''''''''''''''''

''''''''''''''''''' '''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''

''''''''''''''''''''''''' '''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''

'''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''

'''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''''

 
	

 !%"  (4;8,0::,8(4+58$(9:,=(:,885+;*:054(4+"9,

  ( 5=3;*/3(4;8,20::,8(4+=(9:,=(:,809.,4,8(:,+

(44;(22?)?:/,-(*020:? :549 .(22549

) -2(4+(6620,+/5=3(4?(*8,95-2(4+;4+,8:/,*54:8525-

:/,(6620*(4:(8,(<(02()2,-58(662?04.:/,9

3(4;8,20::,8=(9:,=(:,8 ''''''''''''''''''''(*8,9

* 5=3(4?:5495-3(4;8,5820::,858.(225495-=(9:,

=(:,8685+;*,+)?:/,=022),:8(49-,88,+(44;(22?

:55:/,86,89549:549.(22549	

''''' '''''''

	 !% 

!

" 

"

 (:;8,(08?5=9

 (08?,0-,89

 #,(2(2<,9

 (::2,45:+(08?58<,(2

 =04,

2)9585<,8

 =04,;4+,8

2)9

 589,9

 /,,658(3)9

 !;81,?9

583
	
	

tons

Case 2:06-cv-01464-DLB Document 19 Filed 06/27/07 Page 73 of 75
13/22317('

1

22317$.(92,3(4	
	

 +,&-(0431,.(34

 +,&-(04$:(34

 6&-4

 5+(3

2(&,): ###########

  

 

 "    "

	 :2(1)105$,0/(05 15$.$2$&,5:,0*$..104

 $*110

 1.',0*10'

 7$213$5,1010'

 5+(32(&,): ###############

 (21355+(515$.06/%(31)$&3(4&1053,%65,0*'3$,0$*( $&3( ########################## 4

 :2(1)513$*( 15$.6/%(31)

$:4

 15$.$2$&,5:

*$..1045104

 0$(31%,&$*110

 513$*($*110

 7$213$5,1010'

 %17(*3160'513$*( $0-4

 (.18*3160'513$*( $0-4

 11)('513$*(+('

 10&3(5($'

 /2(37,1641,.$'

 5+(32(&,): ###############

 !   

$4$0653,(05/$0$*(/(052.$0%((0'(7(.12(' "(4 1

4$0653,(05/$0$*(/(052.$0%(,0*,/2.(/(05(')135+()$&,.,5: "(4 1

)018+(08,..5+(0653,(05/$0$*(/(052.$0%('(7(.12(' $5(############

 +('$5(1)5+(.$453(7,(8133(7,4,101)5+(0653,(05/$0$*(/(052.$0 $5(############

)015.$0'$22.:,0*'(4&3,%($.5(30$5,7(64(41)/$063(.,55(3$0'138$45(8$5(3

13/
	
	

Case 2:06-cv-01464-DLB Document 19 Filed 06/27/07 Page 74 of 75
.1,//1.5%$

.		

//1.5!+%7/)1%2	

 

+%!2%#(%#*!-8.&3(%&.++.6)-'"%23,!-!'%,%-3/1!#3)#%23(!3!1%"%)-'),/+%,%-3%$!33(%&!#)+)383.#.-31.+14-.&&!-$/1.3%#36!3%1

04!+)38

4&&%12 %3"!#*2 .-2%15!3).-3)++!'% .-2314#3%$6%3+!-$2 -&)+31!3).-&)%+$ 1!22&)+3%1 %11!#%

			 
		

	
	
			

 .1%!#(.43&!++')5%3(%,!7),4,$!)+8&+.6,!7),4,
$!8  -$)#!3%3(%3.3!+-4,"%1.&/.-$21!#%6!82!-$2),)+!1

&+.6!-$3(%+.-'3%1,!5%1!'%&+.6 2314#341%2)-8.41&!#)+)38

43&!++. 	+.6
	 .-$2 	!#%6!82 
3(%1

!!7),4, "!7),4, #.-'%1,

!8 5%1!'% 42%$"88.41&!#)+)38

%#%)5)-'!3%1

 1.5)$%3(%-!,%.&3(%1%#%)5)-'6!3%1!-$3(%2.41#%.&6!3%1

!)+8

	!3%1.41#%

 )233(%2/%#)%2.&&)2(.1!04!3)#!-),!+2(%+$!-$&%$!38.41&!#)+)38.1%!#(2/%#)%2')5%3(%3.3!+6%)'(3/1.$4#%$"88.41&!#)+)38

/%18%!1)-/.4-$2.&(!15%23!"+%6%)'(3!-$!+2.')5%3(%,!7),4,6%)'(3/1%2%-3!3!-8.-%3),%

.+$!3%1/%#)%2 	!1,!3%1/%#)%2

!/%#)%2 "!15%23!"+%%)'(3	 !/%#)%2 "!15%23!"+%%)'(3	

.3!+ %!1+8 	!7),4, .3!+ %!1+8 	!7),4,

 %/.133(%3.3!+/.4-$2.&&..$$41)-'3(%#!+%-$!1,.-3(.& .-3( 	.4-$2.&..$

,!7),4,&%%$)-'

				

 !,%!-$&&)#)!+)3+%

	

		

	
	

	

	

		
	

	

	

	

 (.-%. 

 )'-!341%  !3%)'-%$

.1,
			

Case 2:06-cv-01464-DLB Document 19 Filed 06/27/07 Page 75 of 75