CaliforniaRegional Water Quality Control Board SantaAnaRegion August 20, 1999
ITEM: 10 SUBJECT: General Waste Discharge Requirements For Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations (Dairies And Related Facilities) Within The SantaAna Region, OrderNo. 99-11, NPDES No. CAG018001 DISCUSSION: See attachedFact Sheet RECOMMENDATION: Adopt OrderNo. 99-11, as presented. Comments were solicited from the following agencies and/orpersons: U.S. EPA, Washington, Office ofWastewaterEnforcement and Compliance

- Michael B. Cook U.S. EPA, San Francisco

- Alexis Straus U.S. EPA, Permit Issuance Section

- Terry Oda (W-5-1) U.S. EPA, San Francisco

- Dan Meer State Water Resources Control Board, Office ofthe ChiefCounse1- Ted Cobb State Water Resources Control Board, DWQ

- Jim Kessel, Jack Hodges, Cheryl Closson State Department ofWater Resources

- Glendale State Department ofHealth Services

- San Bernardino/SantaAna/San Diego State Department ofFish and Game

- Fred Worthley Regional Water Quality Control Board (1)

- Lee Mich1in Regional Water Quality Control Board (2)

- LorettaBarsamian Regional Water Quality Control Board (3)

- RogerBriggs Regional Water Quality Control Board (4)

- Dennis Dickerson Regional Water Quality Control Board (5)

- Gary Carlton Regional Water Quality Control Board (6)

- Harold J. Singer Regional Water Quality Control Board (7)

- Philip Gruenberg Regional Water Quality Control Board (9)

- John Robertus San Bernardino County Board ofSupervisors San Bernardino County Department ofEnvironmental Health Services

- Pam Bennett San Bernardino County Transportation/F1ood Control District

- Naresh Varma San Bernardino County LEA Riverside County Board ofSupervisors Riverside County Department ofEnvironmental Health ServicesRiverside County Flood Control and Water Conservation District

- Jason Christie Riverside County LEA City ofChino City ofOntario MilkProducers Council- Robert Feenstra CaliforniaMilkProducers Association

- John Godino SantaAnaWatershed Project Authority

- Joseph Grindstaff Inland Empire Utilities Agency

- Doug Drury Orange County WaterDistrict

- Bill Mills, Nira Yamachika D.C. Extension, San Bernardino

- Abraham Wubishet Inland Empire West Resource Conservation District

- JeffWilson National Resource Conservation Service

- Jim Earsom City ofLake Elsinore

- DickWatenpaugh, Pat Kilroy Eastern Valley Municipal WaterDistrict WesternUnited Dairymen

- Gary Conover, John Borges Chino Basin Watermaster

- Tracy Stewart Daily Bulletin

- Bob Page Orange County Register Press Enterprise

- Leslie Bergman NorthwestMosquito and Vector Control District SantaAna RiverWatershed Group

- Lindel Marsh Orange County Sanitation District

- Blake Anderson WaterAdvisory Committee ofOrange County

- H. E. Hartge Los Alisos WaterDistrict

- Kenneth Petersen Municipal WaterDistrict ofOrange County

- Stanley E. Sprague El Toro WaterDistrict

- Ronald Kennedy Mesa Consolidated WaterDistrict

- Fred Bockmiller Irvine Ranch WaterDistrict

- Paul D. Jones II Metropolitan WaterDistrict

- Bob Huntley YorbaLindaWaterDistrict

- Arthur C. Korn City ofAnaheim, Public Utilities Department

- Edward K. Aghjayan Dairy Mailing List

Page 10(2

### CaliforniaRegional WaterQuality Control Board SantaAnaRegion

FACT SHEET GENERAL WASTE DISCHARGE REQUIREMENTS FORCONCENTRATED ANIMAL FEEDING OPERATIONS (DAIRIES AND RELATED FACILITIES) WITHINTHE SANTAANAREGION, ORDERNO. 99-11, NPDES NO. CAG018001
I. Need for General Waste Discharee Requirements 

### There are approximately 302 animal feeding operations (AFOs), including dairies, heifer ranches and calfnurseries in the Santa Ana Region. These AFOs contain about 370,000 animals [213,000 lactating (milking) cows, 37,000 dry (pregnant) cows, 56,000 heifers (12-18 month old cows), and 60,000 calves (less than 12 month old cows)]. Two hundred and seventy nine ofthese facilities (320,000 animals) are located in the Chino Basin, while 23 ofthe facilities (50,000 animals) are located in the San Jacinto Basin. The wastes generated at these facilities include manure, wash waterl 

### and storm water runoff from manured areas. About 950,000 tons of manure (at 33% moisture) were produced in the corrals by these facilities in 1998. This is equivalent to about 4,000,000 cubic yards ofmanure (at 33% moisture). About 15 million gallons ofwashwater, which contains about 10% ofthe manure producedby milking cows, is discharged to the ground each day. Wastes produced at AFOs contain high levels ofbacteria, biochemical oxygen demand, ammonia, nitrate, phosphorus, and other salts. Wastes in rainfall runofffrom AFOs in the Chino Basin affect Chino Creek, Mill Creek and Reach 3 ofthe Santa Ana River, which are 303(d) listed impacted water bodies. Wastes from AFOs that are discharged to the Santa Ana River also affect the quality ofgroundwater in Orange County, since the Orange County WaterDistrict captures and percolates a significant amount ofthe flow of the SantaAnaRiverto recharge the SantaAnaForebay Groundwater Subbasin. The Chino Basinis consideredto have thehighest concentration ofdairy animals inthe world, withits 279 facilities and 320,000 animals located within an area ofless than 50 square miles (30,000 acres). The application of manure to the ground in the Chino Basin has resulted in significant groundwater pollution, specifically total dissolved solids (TDS) and nitrate. Affected groundwater in the Chino Basin also impacts the quality ofthe SantaAnaRiverbecause the SantaAnaRiverbecomes a gaining steamin the Prado Basin where groundwater from the Chino Basin contributes to the surface flow ofthe SantaAnaRiver. Wastes in surface runofffrom AFOs in the San Jacinto Basin affect the San Jacinto River, Canyon Lake and Lake Elsinore. Phosphorus from AFOs is considered to be the primary cause ofalgae blooms in Lake Elsinore, the largest natural freshwater lake in Southern California. These algae blooms deplete oxygen in the lake, creating fish kills and other conditions which affect the economic development and aesthetics ofthe area. Proper management ofwastes from AFOs is essential to protectthe surface and groundwaterresources ofthe Region.

Waterused to wash cows priorto milking, milking equipment and the milkbam.
.Fact Sheet

- General Waste Discharge Requirements for ConcentratedAnimal Feeding Operations (Dairies andRelatedFacilities) OrderNo. 99-11, NPDES No. CAGOl8001 Page 2 of 10
Beginning in 1972, and continuing through 1994, the Board's regulatory approach was to issue individual waste discharge requirements to each AFO. Changes in the location, size, number of animals, or operator of these facilities were frequent and necessitated rescinding existing waste discharge requirements and issuing new requirements. The time demands to draft and rescind individual waste discharge requirements far exceededthe staffresources available to do so. Criteria cited in 40 CFR 122.28 state that general permits may be issued for facilities 1) involving the same or substantially similar types ofoperations; 2) discharging the same types ofwastes; 3) having the same or similaroperating conditions; 4) requiring the same or similarmonitoring; and 5) that are more appropriately regulated under a general permit rather than individual permits. The types ofwastes and appropriate waste discharge requirements for dairies and related facilities are similar. Given this, the AFOs in the Region can be adequately and appropriately regulated by coverage underthe terms ofageneral waste dischargepermit. On February 17, 1994, the Board adopted OrderNo. 94-7, General Waste Discharge Requirements For Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations, Including Dairies, Within The Santa Ana Region (NPDES NO. CAG018001). OrderNo. 94-7 has allowed the Board to betterutilize staffresources. Currently, approximately 215 AFOs have been enrolled under Order No. 94-7. The remaining AFOs are either covered under individual waste discharge requirements issued prior to 1994, have submitted aNotice ofIntent (NOI) to be covered under OrderNo. 94-7, orhave not yet submitted a NOI. AFOs that have submitted a NOI and have not yet been granted coverage under Order No. 94-7 and AFOs that are still covered under individual waste discharge requirements, have not been granted coverage under Order No. 94-7 because they have not yet completed Engineered Waste Management Plans (EWMPs). Order No. 94-7 expired on March 1, 1999. Therefore, it is necessary to renew the waste discharge requirements containedin OrderNo. 94-7. Although Order No. 94-7 regulated the discharge ofwaste from all AFOs (including non-dairy related facilities), theproposed orderonly addresses the discharge ofwastes from dairies andrelated facilities, such as calf nurseries and heifer ranches. Over 95% of the dischargers enrolled, or waiting to be enrolled, under Order94-7 are dairies andrelated facilities. Many ofthe requirements contained in Order No. 94-7, and this proposed order, are not appropriate for most other types of AFOs. Therefore, persons discharging, orproposing to discharge, wastes from othertypes ofAFOs must obtain coverage under individual waste discharge requirements or another general permit, if one is adopted. Currently, the larger AFOs are required to get coverage under the State Water Resources Control Board (State Board) General Industrial Storm Water Permit (Order No. 91-13-DWQ) for storm water runofffrom their facilities. However, the proposed order consolidates all requirements for AFOs, including those for stormwaterrunoff, into a single permit. Once coverage is granted under this order, other waste discharge requirements issued by this Regional Board and coverage under the State's GeneralPermitwill beterminated.Fact Sheet

- General Waste Discharge Requirements for ConcentratedAnimalFeeding Operations (Dairies andRelatedFacilities) OrderNo. 99-11, NPDES No. CAG018001 Page 3 of 10
The Federal Clean Water Act (CWA) states that all concentrated animal feeding operations (CAFOs) arepoint sources and are subjectto NPDES permitting requirements. The CWA defines a CAFO as any AFO that has more than 1,000 animal units (i.e., dairy cattle are considered 1.4 animal units). About 70% ofthe AFOs in the Region have over 1,000 animal units, and are, therefore, considered CAFOs under the CWA. However, the CWA states that smaller facilities can be designated as CAFOs by the permitting authority (i.e., Regional Board) after considering certain criteria. These criteriainclude, inpart, the location ofthe AFO relative to surface waters, the slope, rainfall and other factors that increase the likelihood or frequency ofdischarges, and the impact of the aggregate amount ofwaste from many small operations in awatershed that exceed that oflager operations. Board staffhas determined that all dairies, heifer ranches and calfnurseries in the Region meet one ormore ofthese criteria, and, therefore, shouldbe designated as CAFOs underthe CWA. Tentative Order No. 99-11 designates all dairies, heifer ranches and calfnurseries in the Region as CAFOs, and makes them subject to NPDES requirements. Therefore, the acronym "CAFO" willbe usedto describe all facilities addressedby Tentative OrderNo. 99-11.


### II. Basis for DischareeLimitations Development and ImplementationofEngineeredWaste ManagementPlans In compliance with the CWA and the California Code ofRegulations, Tentative Order No. 99-11 prohibits discharges to any surface water bodies, or tributary thereof, unless rainfall events, either chronic or catastrophic, cause an overflow of process waste water from a facility designed, constructed and operated to contain all process generated waste waters plus the runofffrom a 25- year, 24-hour rainfall event. (Title 27, Chapter 7, Subchapter 2, Article 1, Section 22562(a), CaliforniaCode ofRegulations and 40 CFRPart412). Therefore, process waste waterin overflows resulting from rainfall events that are chronic or catastrophic, or are in excess ofa 24-hour, 25-year rainfall event, may be dischargedto surface waterbodies in accordance with requirements specified inthis order. To insure that compliance withthese requirements is achieved, all CAFOs are required to develop and implement an Engineered Waste Management Plan (EWMP). The guidelines for the preparation ofan EWMP are included in Attachment "B" ofthe proposed order. Attachment "B" is intendedto be revisedbythe Executive Officerinthe nearfuture. As with expired OrderNo. 94-7, Tentative Order No. 99-11 authorizes the Executive Officer to make necessary revisions to "AttachmentB". Prohibition onthe Application ofManureto Landinthe Chino Basin The Regional Board has conducted extensive studies on TDS and nitrate using computermodels to determine acceptable salt loading rates to groundwater from various land uses, including dairies and other animal confinement facilities. These studies are the basis of the TDS and nitrogen management plan specified in the Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) for the Region. In accordance with the TDS/nitrogen management plan, since 1972, waste discharge requirements adopted by the Board for CAFOs limited the amount ofmanure disposal on disposal acreage atFact Sheet

- General Waste Discharge Requirements for ConcentratedAnimalFeeding Operations (Dairies and Related Facilities) OrderNo. 99-11, NPDES No. CAG018001 Page 4 of10

CAPOs to 3 (dry) tons (4.38 tons @ 33% moisture) per acre per year to address potential groundwater impacts. The resultant salt load is roughly equivalent to that permittedby the plan for other types ofland use when the affected receiving waters have salt assimilative capacity. Dairy manure contains much more salt per unit ofnitrogen than other types offertilizers. The Board's 1990 Dairy Report, "Dairies and Their Relationship to Water Quality Impacts in the Chino Basin", showed that the use of manure as a fertilizer results in two to four times more salt reaching groundwater (up to 10 times more non-nitrate salts) than the use of non-manure commercial fertilizers. Forthis reason, the use ofmanure to meetthe nutrientneeds ofcrops results in excessive application ofsalts that are not utilized by plants and which can, therefore, migrate to groundwater. OrderNo. 94-7 limitedmanure applicationto croplandto agronomic rates [up to 12 (dry) tons (17.5 tons @ 33% moisture) per acre per year]. Limiting the amount ofmanure applied to cropland to agronomic rates was an attempt to minimize the amount ofsalt that would reach groundwater from the use ofmanure on cropland, withouthindering the effective use ofmanure as a fertilizer. Ninety percent ofthe CAPOs in the Region are located in the Chino Basin, which has severe TDS and nitrate groundwater quality problems. As noted in the Board's Basin Plan, the Chino II and III Groundwater Subbasins lack assimilative capacity for these constituents. For groundwater subbasins without assimilative capacity, additional salt inputs at rates above Basin Plan objectives cannot be allowed (State Water Resources Control Board Order No. 73-4, the Rancho Caballero decision). To meet the Chino Basin groundwater objectives, the discharge ofmanure and other animal wastes, such as dairy wash water, and their application as fertilizer, cannot be legally permitted unless this salt load is offset. The BasinPlan contains a dairy regulatory strategy that was developed in the Board's 1990 Dairy Report. One element of that strategy addresses waste discharge requirements for manure and wash water disposal and application ofwastes to cropland. That element specifies that ongoing manure and wash water disposal or application to cropland in the Chino Basinmustbeprohibitedunless suitable saltoffsetprograms are implemented. In 1994, the Board was informed that two desalters would be built in the Chino Basin. The Board was also informed that a significant amount ofmanure would be exported from the Chino Basin by the proposed Chino Basin Co-Composting Facility. It was assumed that after the Chino Basin CoComposting Facility began operation and began exporting a significant amount of manure, the amount of salt to be extracted from the Chino Basin by the two desalters would be adequate to provide sufficient salt removal to offset the present and projected salt loads from ongoing dairy discharges. Therefore, the Board adopted Order No. 94-7, allowing manure and wash water discharges to continue, on the assumption that adequate salt offsets would be implemented. However, the desalters were never built (although one is now under construction) and the CoComposting Facility, built in 1995, has never exported the significant amount ofmanure that had been projected. Therefore, sufficient offsets were not implemented, and manure and wash water discharges, and the use ofmanure on cropland, have been continuing without adequate salt offsets, in violation ofState law. Board staffestimates that over 13 million tons ofmanure have been applied in the Chino Basin since the mid-1950's, resulting in over 1.4 million tons of salt that have reached, or will reach,Fact Sheet

- General Waste Discharge Requirements for ConcentratedAnimalFeeding Operations (Dairies andRelatedFacilities) OrderNo. 99-11, NPDES No. CAG018001 Page 5 of10 groundwater. The application of about 400,000 tons ofmanure (@ 33% moisture) per year to disposal land, cropland and ongoing stockpiles in the Chino Basin is continuing. Board staff estimates thatthe currentrate ofapplication ofmanure and wash water to land inthe Chino Basin is resulting in about 34,000 tons ofsalt that will reach groundwater each year. About 30,000 tons per yearis from the application ofmanure, and about 4,200 tons peryear is from the discharge ofwash water. A desalter is currently being built in the Chino Basin. The extraction wells that will supply water for the desalter are expected to remove about 11,500 tons of salt per year from the Chino Basin. Kaiser Steel will be creditedwith an offset of4,000 tons ofthis salt each year for aperiod of 25 years, in accordance with a previous settlement agreement with the Board. The Board has previously indicated that it would accept the remainder ofthe salt that will be removed from the extraction wells as an offset for continuing discharges from CAPOs in the Chino Basin. However, that amounts to an offset ofonly 7,500 tons of salt per year, compared to a current CAPO salt loading to groundwater of about 34,000 tons per year. In addition to the 4,200 tons of salt that reaches groundwater each year from wash water discharges, salt also is discharged to groundwater as a result ofthe percolation ofrainfall runofffrom corrals and drainage from manure stockpiles. The amount ofsalt that reaches groundwater each year from the percolation ofrainfall runofffrom corrals andpercolation ofdrainage from manure stockpiles has not yetbeen adequately determined. However, staffbelieves that it may account for the remaining 3,800 tons ofsalt offset provided by the desalter, leaving no, or very little, salt offset available for continued manure application in the Chino Basin. No other mitigation measures are currently in place, and none are expected to be in place immediately, to offset the salt loading from ongoing manure application in the Chino Basin. Therefore, the discharge ofmanure and its application as fertilizer in the Chino II and Chino III Subbasins must be prohibited. The remainder ofthe subbasins in the Chino Basin are ofexcellent quality and are tributary to the Chino II and Chino III Subbasins. Also, the addition ofsalt to those subbasins by the application ofmanure was not considered when the assimilative capacity for those subbasins was determined. Therefore, Tentative OrderNo. 99-11 prohibits the discharge ofmanure and its application as fertilizer throughout the entire Chino Basin (The accompanying cease and desist order allows manure to continue to be applied to cultivated croplands within the Chino Basin at agronomic rates as long as significant progress is being made towards the construction and operation ofa second desalterwithinthe Chino Basin). Tentative OrderNo. 99-11 does notprohibit the on-site discharge of wash water, rainfall runoff from corrals, or drainage from manure stockpiles, since the salt loadings from these discharges appear to be offset by the salt that will be removedby the desalter facility. Removal ofManure from the Facility Tentative OrderNo. 99-11 requires that manure be hauled from each facility within 180 days after being removed from the corrals. Any manure remaining at the facility after 180 days ofbeing removed from the corrals is considered to be disposal ofmanure and is prohibited by Tentative OrderNo. 99-11. Draft OrderNo. 99-11, which was distributed for comments in March and April 1999, proposed requiring the removal ofmanure from the facility within 90 days after removal of the manure from the corrals. Several comments were received in writing and orally at Board Workshops, stating reasons why this time frame was unreasonable. Board staff also solicitedFact Sheet

- General Waste Discharge Requirements for ConcentratedAnimalFeeding Operations (Dairies andRelated Facilities) OrderNo. 99-11, NPDES No. CAG018001 Page 60flO

comments from farm advisors with the University of California Cooperative Extension. It was determined that it is beneficial to "cure" manure for 90 to 180 days prior to composting or for application to cropland, and that the nutrient value ofthe manure is not significantly affected when manure is stored for less than 180 days. During the winter, 90 days would not allow sufficient time for the manure to dry adequately prior to hauling. Providing 180 days ofstorage will allow the moisture content ofthe manure to be sufficiently reduced, making it lighterper unit ofvolume, and easier and less expensive to haul. Some commercial fertilizer facilities in the Chino Basin prefer receiving manure that has been aged for at least 150 days. Also, CAPOs generally remove manure from their corrals twice a year. Allowing up to 180 days (6 months) storage will result in manure being removed from the facility prior to the next corral cleaning, and will still achieve the goal of preventing the long term accumulation ofmanure at CAPOs. Board staffbelieves that allowing for 180 days storage is reasonable, and that there would be no significant difference in water quality impacts from storing manure atthe facility for 180 days instead of90 days. Change inLanguagePertaining to Containment ofStormWaterRunoff Order No. 94-7 and Draft Order No. 99-11 included the following Discharge Specification: "The discharge to any surface water bodies, or tributary thereof, is prohibited unless a chronic, catastrophic or cumulative rainfall causes overflow from a storage facility designed, constructed, maintained and operatedto contain all process generatedwastewaterplus the runofffrom a24-hour, 25-year storm." These Orders defined a chronic, catastrophic or cumulative rainfall as rainfall occurring over a 7-day period or less which is equivalent to that from a 24-hour, 25-year storm event. This language is slightly different than similarlanguage included in the CWA that does not refer to "cumulative" rainfall, and does not contain a definition that refers to rainfall "occurring over a 7-day period." The specification included in OrderNo. 94-7 and Draft OrderNo. 99-11 is, overall, more stringent than the language in the CWA, and was developed to provide a more objective basis for determining compliance with the rainfall containment requirement and to be consistent with the Board's EWMP Guidelines. However, the USEPA, and others, have noted that there could be instances during certain storm events ofless than 7 days when the specification included in Order No. 94-7 and Draft Order No. 99-11 can be less restrictive than the language included in the CWA. Theyhave requestedthatthe languageproposed in Draft OrderNo. 99-11 be changed to be consistent with the language in the CWA, since NPDES permits cannot contain requirements that can be less restrictive than the CWA. Therefore, the term "cumulative" and the reference to rainfall "occurring over a 7-day period" has been removed from Tentative OrderNo. 99-11 to make the rainfall containmentrequirementconsistentwiththe CWA. ConsistencywithUSDAIUSEPA "UnifiedNational Strategy for Animal Feeding Operations" In March 1999, the United States Department ofAgriculture (USDA) and the USEPA finalized their unified national strategy for APOs. Among other items, the national strategy recommended that general permits require the development and implementation of Comprehensive Nutrient Management Plans (CNMPs). In general, development and implementation ofCNMPs is intended to bring each CAPO into compliance with the requirements of the CWA and to minimize theFact Sheet

- General Waste Discharge Requirements for ConcentratedAnimal Feeding Operations (Dairies andRelatedFacilities) OrderNo. 99-11, NPDES No. CAG018001 Page 7 of 10 impacts to groundwater and surface water by the implementation ofbest management practices. The national strategy describes many best management practices that could be included in CNMPs for individual CAFOs. The best management practices included in each CNMP for each CAFO would include specific best management practices for that CAFO, depending on the specific situations that exist at that particular CAFO. In general, the CNMP would assure that appropriate wastewater facilities were developed, constructed and maintained to comply with the requirements ofthe CWA, and thatthe use and application ofwaste water and manure (i.e., nutrientmanagement) was managed to minimize impacts to groundwater and surface water. Tentative Order No. 99-11 does not require the development and implementation ofCNMPs, as described andrecommendedin the national strategy. This is because the requirements included in Tentative Order No. 99-11 are equivalent to, or more stringentthan, what wouldbe required in CNMPs. Also, many ofthe BMPs recommended to be included in CNMPs are not relevant to the specific, isolated conditions that exist in the Chino Basin. The requirements in Tentative Order No. 99-11 for wastewater and rainfall are equivalent to what the national strategy requires. General BMPs that can be implemented to comply with the wastewater and rainfall containment requirements will be further addressed in the Board's EWMP Guidelines when they are revised in the near future. Specific BMPs that will be implemented at each CAFO to comply with the wastewater and rainfall containment requirements will be addressed in each CAFO's specific EWMP. The prohibition on the application ofmanure in the Chino Basin is obviously a more stringent requirement than the BMPs for manure application and management that the national strategy recommends to be included in CNMPs, since application ofmanure is notpermitted. The limitation on the application ofmanure to agronomic rates, not to exceed 12 (dry) tons (17.5 tons @ 33% moisture) per acre per year, in groundwater basins outside the Chino Basin where assimilative capacity exists and application ofmanure is permitted, is equivalent to the nutrient management guidelines included in the national strategy. Specific BMPs addressing application ofmanure will be included in each CAFOs specific EWMP. Prohibition on Covering New Discharges in the Chino BasinUnderthis Order The 1998 California 303(d) List and TMDL Priority Schedule includes several surface waterbodies as impaired due to CAFOs, including Chino Creek, Mill Creek (prado Area), and Reach 3 ofthe Santa Ana River for nutrients, pathogens, salinity/TDS/chlorides, and suspended solids. The CWA states that NPDES permits cannotbe issued to a new source (discharger) ifthe discharge will cause or contribute to the violation ofwater quality standards, unless certain specified criteria are met, including the development of TMDLs. In the absence of a current TMDL, USEPA has recommended that this general permitbe limited to current facilities, and that any new sources (i.e., construction ofany new facilities) be processed through an application for an individual NPDES permit. Therefore, Tentative OrderNo. 99-11 prohibits new sources (i.e., new facilities) from being covered under this general permit. Since the most recent new construction ofa CAFO facility in the Chino Basinwas approximately 20 years ago, this prohibition is not expected to be a significant Issue.Fact Sheet

- General Waste Discharge Requirements for ConcentratedAnimalFeeding Operations (Dairies andRelatedFacilities) OrderNo. 99-11, NPDES No. CAG018001 Page 8 of10

Inability of Many CAPOs to Immediately Comply with Several Requirements Included in this Order Many CAPOs will notbe able to immediately comply with several ofthe requirements contained in Tentative Order No. 99-11. These requirements include the prohibition on the application of manure in the Chino Basin, implementation ofEWMPs and containment ofrainfall from a 24-hour, 25-year storm. The Board will consider adoption ofa Cease and Desist Order No. 99-65 with a time schedule for compliance withthese requirements.


### III. CoveraeeUnder the General NPDES Permit A. Dischargers Currently Regulated Under Order No. 94-7 or Under Individual Waste Discharge Requirements, andDischargers thathave SubmittedNOls These dischargers will be automatically enrolled under the proposed order, once it is adopted. Dischargers who have not yet submitted an acceptable EWMP (see Attachment "B" ofthe order) are requiredto do so. B. Dischargers Not Currently Regulated Under Order No. 94-7 or Under Individual Waste DischargeRequirements, andDischargers thathave not SubmittedNOls: At least 60 days prior to initiating a discharge at an existing facility, the discharger shall submit a Notice of Intent (NOI) (see Attachment "A") with the appropriate filing fee (currently, the filing fee is $2,000.00 for each facility) and an acceptable EWMp2.


### IV. DischareeAuthorization Letter Upon adoption ofthis order, the Executive Officer shall issue discharge authorization letters to dischargers currently enrolled under Order No. 94-7, discharging waste under individual waste discharge requirements orwho have submitted anNOI to be coveredunder a generalpermit. Upon receipt of a complete application for initiation of a discharge at an existing facility, the Executive Officerwill review the application to determine eligibility for discharge under this order. Ifthe Executive Officer determines that the discharger is eligible to discharge wastes under this general order, the Executive Officer may authorize the proposed discharge. Otherwise, the Executive Officermay require the dischargerto obtainindividual waste discharge requirements.

New operators/owners ofexisting facilities for which an EWMP has been approved are notrequired to submit an additional EWMP.Fact Sheet

- General Waste Discharge Requirements for ConcentratedAnimal Feeding Operations (Dairies andRelatedFacilities) OrderNo. 99-11, NPDES No. CAG018001 

### V. Antide2radation Analysis Page 9 of 10

The Regional Board conducted extensive TDS and nitrate studies using computer models to determine acceptable salt loading rates to groundwater from various land uses, including dairies and other concentrated animal feeding operations. These studies indicate that if the requirements specified in the proposed general permit are met, water quality ofthe Region is not expected to degrade as a result ofdischarges authorized under this general permit. The Regional Board, in establishing the requirements inthe tentative order, has taken into consideration the requirements of the State and Federal "antidegradation policies" and has determined that the discharges are in conformancewiththe antidegradationpolicies.


### VI. Written Comments All written comments regarding the proposed general order should be submitted to: Robert Holub, Regional Water Quality Control Board, 3737 Main Street, Suite 500, Riverside, CA 92501.


### VII. Information and CoPyin2 Persons wishing further information may write to the address given below (see IX, below) or call the Regional Board at (909) 782-4130. Copies ofthe proposed waste discharge requirements, and other documents (other than those which the Executive Officer maintains as confidential) are available at the Regional Board office for inspection and copying by appointment scheduled betweenthe hours of10:00 a.m. and4:00 p.m., Mondaythrough Thursday (excludingholidays).


### VIII. Re2ister ofInterested Persons Any person interested in a general permit, or in a particular application or group ofapplications, may leave his name, address, and phone number as part ofthe file for an application. Copies of tentative waste discharge requirements willbemailedto all interestedparties.


### IX. Workshops and Public Hearin2 The Regional Board conducted public workshops on April 9, 1999, May 21, 1999, and June 25, 1999, to solicit comments on the draft general waste discharge requirements that were distributed in March and April 1999. Oral comments were received during these workshops, and written comments were submitted by several parties. These comments were considered by staff and incorporatedinto Tentative OrderNo. 99-11, as appropriate.Fact Sheet

- General Waste Discharge Requirements for ConcentratedAnimal Feeding Operations (Dairies andRelatedFacilities) OrderNo. 99-11, NPDES No. CAG018001 Page 10 of10

The Regional Board will hold a public hearing and consider adopting Tentative Order No. 99-11 during apublic meeting on August 20, 1999, beginning at 9:00 a.m. The meeting will be held at the City Council Chambers ofLornaLinda, 25541 BartonRoad, LornaLinda. Further information regarding the conduct and nature ofworkshops and pubic hearings concerning waste discharge requirements may be obtainedby writing or visiting the SantaAnaRegional Board office, 3737 Main Street, Suite 500, Riverside, 92501 orby calling Robert Holub ofRegional Board Staffat (909) 782-3298.CaliforniaRegional Water Quality Control Board SantaAnaRegion
OrderNo. 99-11 NPDES No. CAG018001 GENERAL WASTE DISCHARGE REQUIREMENTS FOR CONCENTRATED ANIMAL FEEDING OPERATIONS (DAIRIES AND RELATED FACILITIES) WITHIN THE SANTA ANA REGION
The California Regional Water Quality Control Board, Santa Ana Region (hereinafter, Regional Board), finds that: 1. On February 17, 1994, the Board adopted Order No. 94-7, General Waste Discharge Requirements For ConcentratedAnimal Feeding Operations, Including Dairies, Within The SantaAnaRegion (NPDES NO. CAGOI8001). 2. Order No. 94-7 satisfied the criteria cited in 40 CFR 122.28 and, as such, served as a General NPDES Permit. 40 CFR 122.28 pertains to the issuance of general permits to regulate discharges ofwaste thatmeetthe following criteria:
a. Waste discharges involving the same or substantially similartypes ofoperations; b. Discharge the same types ofwastes; c. Require the same or similaroperating conditions; d. Require the same or similarmonitoring ; and e. Are more appropriately regulated under a general permit rather than individual permits. 3. 40 CFRPart 122.23 defines aconcentrated animal feeding operation (CAFO) as any animal feeding operation that has more than 1,000 animal units (dairy cattle are considered 1.4 animal units). Pursuant to the Clean Water Act (CWA), all CAFOs are point sources and are subject to NPDES permitting requirements. Smaller animal feeding operations can also be designated as CAPOs by the permitting agencies after considering certain criteria cited under 40 CFR 122.23 (b)(I). The Regional Board has determined that all dairies, heifer ranches, and calfnurseries inthe Region shall be designated as CAFOs. 4. Order No. 94-7 has expeditedthe preparation of waste discharge requirements and has allowed the Regional Board to better utilize staffresources. To date, approximately 215 CAFOs have been enrolledunder OrderNo. 94-7. Another 72 CAFOs are inthe process of obtaining authorization to discharge wastes under that order. Order No. 94-7 expired on March 1, 1999. The dairies currently enrolled under Order No. 94-7, or in the process of enrolling under Order No. 94-7, will want to continue to discharge waste. Therefore, it is necessary to renew the waste discharge requirements contained in Order No. 94-7 to continue this expeditedpermitting process. Page 1 of 10General Waste Discharge Requirements for Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations (Dairies and Related Facilities) OrderNo. 99-11, NPDES No. CAG018001 Page 2 of 10
5. Persons discharging, or proposing to discharge, dairy wastes or other similar kinds of wastes from an existing dairy orrelated facility in any mannerthat may affect water quality are hereinafterreferredto as "discharger" and are subjectto the terms and conditions ofthis order. Persons discharging, or proposing to discharge, wastes from other types ofanimal feeding operations mustobtain coverage under a separate general permit orindividual waste discharge requirements. Persons proposing to discharge wastes from a new dairy orrelated facility must obtain coverage under individual waste discharge requirements. 6. The Regional Board adopted a revised Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) on March 11, 1994. The Basin Plan became effective on January 24, 1995. The Basin Plan specifies beneficial uses and water quality objectives for surface and ground waters in the SantaAna Region (Chapters 3 and 4). This order specifies requirements necessary to meet the water quality objectives andto protectthebeneficial uses. 7. Revised regulations governing discharges from CAFOs, including dairies, are contained in Division 2, Title 27 of the Combined State Water Resources Control Board/California Integrated Waste Management Board AB 1220 Regulations, which became effective on July 18, 1997. Chapter 7, Subchapter 2 (Article 1) contains requirements for Confined Animal Facilities. Previously, these regulations were specified in Chapter 15, Division 3, Article 6, Title 23 ofthe CaliforniaCode ofRegulations. 8. Section 402(P) ofthe CWA as amended by the Water Quality Act of 1987 and the related regulations published by the U.S. EPA onNovember 16, 1990 (40 CFR Parts 122, 123 and 124), requires anNPDES permitfor pollutantdischarges from CAFOs. The EPA's Effluent Guidelines and Standards for Feedlots are contained in 40 CFR Part 412 (revised July 1, 1993). 9. On April 17, 1997, the State Water Resources Control Board adopted the General Industrial Storm Water Permit, OrderNo. 97-03-DWQ, NPDES No. CASOOOOOI. OrderNo. 97-03- DWQ implements the final regulations (40 CFR 122, 123, and 124) for storm water runoff published onNovember 16, 1990 by the U.S. EPA in compliance with Section402(P) ofthe CWA. This order includes those provisions ofthe General Industrial Storm Water Permit that pertains to dairies. Once a discharger is authorized under Order No. 99-11, coverage under the State Water Resources Control Board's General Industrial Storm Water Permit (OrderNo. 97-03-DWQ) will be terminated. 10. Wastes from CAFOs contain high concentrations of salts (total dissolved solids and nitrates). Previous studies conducted by the Board have shown that cow manure produced inthe Region contains about 160 pounds ofsaltper (dry) ton ofmanure (110 pounds ofsalt perton ofmanure 

### @ 33% moisture). The application ofmanure orthe discharge ofprocess wastewater1 to land results in the discharge of salts that has adversely impacted, and continues to adversely impact, the quality ofgroundwater and surface waterinthe Region.

I Process wastewater shall mean any process generated wastewater and any precipitation (rain or snow) which comes into contact with any manure, litter or bedding, or any other raw material or intermediate or final material or product used in or resulting from the production of animals orpoultry ordirect products (e.g. milk, eggs).General Waste Discharge Requirements for Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations (Dairies and Related Facilities) OrderNo. 99-11, NPDES No. CAG018001 Page 3 of 10


### 11. Mostofthe CAPOs inthe Region overlie the Chino GroundwaterBasin. The Chino II and III Groundwater Subbasins lack assimilative capacity for additional salt inputs (total dissolved solids and nitrogen). For groundwater subbasins without assimilative capacity, salt inputs that exceed the water quality objectives for these subbasins cannot be allowed (State WaterResources Control Board OrderNo. 73-4, the Rancho Caballero decision). To meetthe Chino Basin groundwaterobjectives, as well as the groundwaterobjectives for any other subbasin lacking assimilative capacity, the discharge of manure and other animal wastes, such as process waste water, and their application as fertilizer and irrigation water, must be controlled to prevent further exceedance of water quality objectives. Salt discharges in excess ofwater quality objectives can only be allowed ifthe additional salt inputs are offset. 12. The Basin Plan assumed thattwo desalters wouldbe built in the Chino Basin. The amount ofsalt to be extracted from the Basin from these desalters was assumed to be adequate to provide sufficient salt removal to offset the present and projected salt loads from ongoing discharges from CAPOs. However, only one desalteris currently being built. This desalter will extract enough salt to offset the amount ofsalt being added to the basin from process wastewater water discharges. No mitigation measures are currently in place to offset the salt loading from manure application withinthe Basin. Therefore, the discharge ofmanure, and its applicationas fertilizer, mustbeprohibited. 13. The Board has considered antidegradation pursuant to 40 CFR 131.12 and State Board Resolution No. 68-16 and finds that these discharges are consistent with the State and Federalregulations, as long as appropriate saltoffsetprograms are implemented. 14. In accordance with Water Code Section 13389, the issuance of waste discharge requirements for these discharges is exempt from those provisions of the California Environmental Quality Act contained in Chapter 3 (Commencing with Section 21100), Division 13 ofthe Public Resources Code. 15. The Regional Board has notified interested agencies and persons of its intent to issue general waste discharge requirements for discharges ofwastes CAFOs, and has provided themwith anopportunityto submittheirviews and recommendations. 16. The Regional Board, in a public meeting, heard and considered all comments pertaining to discharges of wastes from CAFOs proposed to be regulated under the general waste discharge requirements.General Waste Discharge Requirements for Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations (Dairies and Related Facilities) OrderNo. 99-11, NPDES No. CAG018001 Page 4 of 10



### IT IS HEREBY ORDERED that, in order to meet the provisions contained in Division 7 ofthe California Water Code and regulations adopted thereunder and the provisions ofthe Clean Water Act as amended, and regulations and guidelines adopted thereunder, dischargers, their agents, successors, and assigns, discharging wastes from CAFOs shall comply withthe following: A. DISCHARGE SPECIFICATIONS: 

### 1. The discharger shall design, construct and maintain containment structures to retain all wastewater within its facility, including all process generated wastewater and all precipitation on, and drainage through, manured areas resulting from storms up to and including a24-hour, 25-year storm. 2. The discharger shall develop and fully implement an Engineered Waste Management Plan (EMWP) acceptable to the Executive Officer. The EMWP shall be developed by a registered professional engineer, or other qualified individual, in accordance with the guidelines specified in Attachment "B" ofthis order. The Executive Officer is hereby authorized to make necessary revisions to the guidelines for the preparation ofan EWMP outlinedinAttachment "B". 3. The discharge to any surface water bodies, or tributary thereof, is prohibited unless a chronic3 

### or catastrophic4 

### rainfall causes overflow from a storage facility designed, constructed, maintained and operated to contain all process generated wastewater plus the runofffrom a 24-hour, 25-year storm. 4. Retentionponds and manured areas at CAFOs in operation onNovember 27, 1984, shall be protected from inundation orwashoutby overflow from any stream channel during 20-year peak stream flows. Facilities existing beforeNovember 27, 1984 that are protected against 1DO-yearpeak stream flows must continue to provide suchprotection. New facilities (built afterNovember27, 1984) shall be protectedfrom 1DO-yearpeak stream flows. 5. No new containment structures shall be constructed ofmanure, and manure shall not be usedto improve orraise existing containment structures. 6. Disposal of manure to land is prohibited, unless allowed by separate waste discharge requirements issuedby the Board.

Process generated wastewater shall mean water directly or indirectly used in the operation of a feedlot for any or all of the following: Spillage or overflow from animal orpoultry watering systems; washing, cleaning offlushing pens, barns, manure pits or otherfeedlot facilities; direct contact swimming, washing or spray cooling ofanimals; and dust control. Chronic rainfall means a series ofwet weather conditions which would not provide opportunity for dewatering and which total the volume ofthe 25 year, 24 hour storm event. Catastrophic rainfall means any single event which would total the volume ofthe 25 year, 24 hour storm event; this could include tornadoes, hurricanes or othercatastrophic conditions which could cause overflow due to winds ormechanical damage.General Waste Discharge Requirements for Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations (Dairies and Related Facilities) OrderNo. 99-11, NPDES No. CAG018001 Page 5 of 10



### 7. The use ofmanure as afertilizer in any areathatmay affect a groundwater subbasin lacking assimilative capacity, including the Chino Groundwater Basin, is prohibited unless a plan, acceptable to the Executive Officer, is implemented which mitigates the effects ofthat use onthe underlying groundwater subbasin. 8. Manure applied to cultivated cropland outside ofany area that may affect a groundwater subbasin lacking assimilative capacity, including the Chino Groundwater Basin, shall not exceed agronomic rates and shall be incorporated into soil soon after application, or appropriate containment (based upon the specific crop grown) controls must be provided. For any application ofmanure to cropland in excess of 12 dry tons per acre per year (17.5 tons/year @ 

### 33% moisture), an explanationofthe type ofcrop and the number oftimes it is harvestedperyear shall also be includedinthe annual report. 9. Manure removed from the corrals shall be removed from the facility within 180 days. Any manure remaining at the facility after 180 days of being removed from the corrals is considered to be disposal of manure and is prohibited in accordance with Discharge Specification A.5. A manifest ofthe manure hauled away shall be prepared and submitted with the annual report in accordance with Monitoring and Reporting Program No. 99-11. (The discharger shall be responsible for active management oflegal disposal ofmanure from the property overthe six month period following removal ofthe manure from corrals. This means thatlegal disposal mustbe coordinated withperiods ofrainfall suchthatmanure canbe removed from the facility within 180 days ofbeing scrapedfrom corrals.) 10. On two designated "clean days" per calendar year, facilities subject to this order shall be free ofall stockpiled manure that has been removed from corrals. These "clean days" shall be selected by each discharger, beginning in 2000. The two "clean days" shall be at least four months apart. Each "clean day" shall be identified and reported to the Board office at least five working days in advance ofthe selected date. 11. All surface drainage from outside ofthe facility shall be diverted away from any manured areas unless suchdrainage is fully contained.
B. PROVISIONS: 

### 1. Neither the treatment nor the discharge of wastes shall create, or threaten to create, a nuisance orpollution as definedby Section 13050 ofthe CaliforniaWaterCode. 2. This order shall serve as a general National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System permit pursuantto Section402 ofthe Federal CleanWaterAct or amendments thereto. The general permit shall become effective 10 days after the date ofits adoption provided the Regional Administrator ofthe Environmental Protection Agency has no objection. Ifthe Regional Administrator objects to its issuance, the permit shall not become effective until such objectionis withdrawn.General Waste Discharge Requirements for Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations (Dairies and Related Facilities) OrderNo. 99-11, NPDES No. CAGOl8001 Page 6 of 10


### 3. This orderexpires on August 1,2004. However, it shall continue in force and effect until a new general permit is issued. All dischargers authorized to discharge under the expired permitmay continue to discharge waste in accordance withthatpermituntil anew permit is issued. 4. Upon receipt ofan application to discharge wastes under this order, the Executive Officer shall authorize the proposed discharge by transmitting a "Discharge Authorization Letter" to the discharger. The discharge authorization letter may be terminated or revised by the Executive Officeratany time. 5. Upon issuance ofa discharge authorization letter from the Executive Officer to discharge wastes under this order, the discharger's authorization to discharge waste under the State WaterResources Control Board's General Industrial StormWaterPermit (OrderNo. 97-03- DWQ) is hereby terminated. 6. All discharges from the facility must comply with the lawful requirements of municipalities, counties, drainage districts, and other local agencies regarding discharges of stormwaterto stormdrain systems orothercourses undertheirjurisdiction. 7. Stormflows inexcess ofa 24-hour, 25-year stormeventmay be dischargedto surface water bodies in accordance with the requirements specified in U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's "EffluentGuidelines and Standards for Feedlot's, 40 CFRPart412". Additionally, storm flows resulting from chronic or catastrophic events may also be discharged to surface water bodies in accordance with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's effluent guidelines referenced above. 8. The discharger shall comply withMonitoring and Reporting ProgramNo. 99-11. 9. The discharge ofwastes to property not owned or controlled by the discharger, except as authorizedbythis order, is prohibited. 10. The discharger shall comply with all Federal, State, County and local laws and regulations pertaining to the discharge ofwastes from the facility. 11. Following a storm event, the discharger shall restore the wastewater holding capacity of retentionponds in atimely manner. 12. The requirements prescribed herein do not authorize the commission of any act causing injury to the property ofanother, nor protect the discharger from liabilities under Federal, State, orlocal laws, nor guaranteethe discharger acapacity rightinthe receiving waters. 13. This orderdoes not convey any property rights ofany sort, orany exclusive privilege. 14. An 

### authorization to discharge wastes under this order is not transferable to any person withoutwritten authorizationfrom the Executive Officer.General Waste Discharge Requirements for Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations (Dairies and Related Facilities) OrderNo. 99-11, NPDES No. CAGO18001 Page 7 of 10

15. The discharger shall comply with all requirements ofthis order and all terms, conditions, and limitations specified in the discharge authorization letter issued by the Executive Officer. 16. The discharger shall take all reasonable steps to minimize orprevent any discharge that has areasonable likelihood ofadversely affecting humanhealth orthe environment. 17. Any instance ofnoncompliance with this order constitutes a violation ofthe Clean Water Act (CWA), its regulations, and the California Water Code, and is grounds for enforcement action, and/ortermination ofthe authorizationto discharge. 18. The provisions of this order are severable, and if any provision of this order, or the application of any provisions of this order to any circumstance, is held invalid, the application ofsuch provision to other circumstances, and the remainder ofthis order shall notbe affectedthereby. 19. It shall not be a defense for a discharger in an enforcement action that it would have been necessary to halt or reduce the permitted activity in order to maintain compliance with the conditions ofthis order. 20. Compliance determination withthe terms ofthis order shall be based onthe following:
a. Periodic inspections by Regional Board staff; b. Evaluation of the annual report of animal waste and storm water discharge submitted according to the attachedmonitoring andreporting program; and c. Any otherinformation deemed necessary by the Executive Officer. 21. The Regional Board, USEPA, and other authorizedrepresentatives shall be allowed:
a. Entry uponpremises where aregulated facility or activity is located or conducted, or where records are keptunderthe conditions ofthis general permit; b. Access to copy any records that are keptunderthe conditions ofthis general permit; c. To inspect any facility, equipment (including monitoring and control equipment), practices, oroperations regulated orrequiredunderthis general permit; and d. To photograph, sample, and monitor for the purpose ofassuring compliance with this general permit, oras otherwise authorizedby the CWA.
C. PERMIT REOPENING, REVISION, REVOCATION, AND RE-ISSUANCE: 1. If more stringent applicable water quality standards are promulgated or approved pursuant to Section 303 of the Federal CWA, or amendments thereto, the Board will revise and modify this order in accordance with such standards. 2. This order may be reopened to address any changes in State or Federal plans, policies or regulations that would affectthe quality requirements for the discharges.General Waste Discharge Requirements for ConcentratedAnimal Feeding Operations (Dairies and Related Facilities) OrderNo. 99-11, NPDES No. CAG018001 

### D. PENALTIES: Page 8 of 10

1. 

### The CWA provides that any person who violates a provision implementing sections 301, 302, 306, 307, or 308 ofthe CWA is subject to a civil penalty not to exceed $11,000 per day of such violation. Any person who willfully or negligently violates provisions implementing these sections ofthe CWA is subject to a fine ofnot less than $2,500 nor more than $25,000 per day ofviolation, or by imprisonment for not more than 1 year, or both. 2. The CWA provides that any person who knowingly makes any false statement, representation, or certification in any record or other document submitted or required to be maintained underthis permit, including monitoring reports orreports ofcompliance or noncompliance shall, upon conviction, be punished by a fine ofnot more than $11,000 perviolation, orby imprisonment for notmore than 6 months perviolation, orby both. 3. The CWA provides that any person who falsifies, tampers with, or knowingly renders inaccurate any monitoring device or method required to be maintained under this permit shall, upon conviction, be punished by a fine ofnot more than $11,000 per violation, or by imprisonment for notmore than six months per violation, orby both. 4. The California Water Code provides that any person who violates a waste discharge requirement or aprovision ofthe CaliforniaWater Code is subject to civil penalties ofup to $5,000 per day, $10,000 per day, or $25,000 per day ofviolation, orwhen the violation involves the discharge ofpollutants, is subject to civil penalties ofup to $10 per gallon per day, or $20 per gallon per day ofviolation; or some combination thereof, depending onthe violation, oruponthe combination ofviolations.


### E. REQUIRED REPORTS AND NOTICES: 1. Reporting Provisions:
a. All applications, annual reports, or information submitted to the Regional Board shall be signed and certified in accordance with 40 CFR 122.22. b. Any discharger authorized to discharge waste under this order shall furnish, within a reasonable time, any information the Regional Board or EPA may request to determine whether cause exists for modifying, revoking and reissuing, orterminating their authorization orthis general permit. The discharger shall also furnish to the Regional Board, upon request, copies ofrecords required to be kept by this order.General Waste Discharge Requirements for ConcentratedAnimal Feeding Operations (Dairies and Related Facilities) OrderNo. 99-11, NPDES No. CAG018001 Page 9 of 10



### c. Except for data determined to be confidential under Section 308 ofthe CWA, all reports prepared in accordance with the terms of this general permit shall be available for public inspection at the offices of the Regional Water Quality Control Board and the Regional Administrator ofUSEPA. 

### As required by the CWA, effluent data shall not be considered confidential. Knowingly making any false statements on any such report may result in the imposition of criminal penalties as provided for in Section 309 of the Act and Section 13387 of the CaliforniaWater Code. 2. The discharger shall notify the Regional Board by telephone within 24 hours of any unauthorized discharge ofwaste from the facility. This notification shall be followed by a writtenreport including the following:
a. The approximate date andtime ofthe discharge; b. The volume and duration ofthe discharge; c. The cause ofthe discharge; and. d. Atime schedule and aplanto implementnecessary corrective actions to preventthe recurrence ofsuchdischarges. 3. The discharger shall report promptly in writing to the Regional Board ofany changes or proposed changes in:
a. The control, ownership, operationorlocation ofthe facility; b. The character, location, volume ordisposal methods ofwaste discharges; and c. The size ofthe animal population, ifit increases beyond the design capacity ofthe facility specified inthe EWMP. 4. The discharger shall give advance notice to the Regional Board ofany planned changes in the permitted facility or activity that may result in noncompliance with this general permit.


### F. APPLICATION REQUIREMENTS: 1. 

### Dischargers previously authorized to discharge wastes under Order No. 94-7, dischargers currently discharging wastes under individual waste discharge requirements, and dischargers who have submitted anotice ofintentto discharge wastes under OrderNo. 94-7 are automatically enrolled under this Order, unless they file an application to be covered under an individual permit. Once the Executive Officer issues a discharge authorization letter, the individual waste discharge requirements arehereby rescinded.General Waste Discharge Requirements for Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations (Dairies and Related Facilities) OrderNo. 99-11, NPDES No. CAG018001 Page 10 of 10



### 2. Dischargers not previously authorized to discharge waste under Order No. 94-7 are required to submit the following within 60 days ofthe effective date ofthis Order for existing discharges and at least 60 days before the start ofany new discharge:
a. A completed Notice of Intent Form (see attachment "A") with the appropriate filing fee; b. An Engineered Waste Management Plan for the facility, acceptable to the Executive Officer (see Attachment "B"); c. Ifan acceptable EWMP has not been developed, the discharger must submit the name ofthe engineer, or other qualified individual, who will develop the EWMP and aproposedtime schedule for its development; and d. Any otherinformation deemed necessary by the Executive Officer. Ifthe proposed discharge meets the requirements ofthis order, the Executive Officer will provide the discharger with a written authorization to discharge waste in accordance with these waste discharge requirements. 3. The following types offacilities are generally not required to obtain authorization under this order. Such facilities must not discharge waste which may affect water quality, or cause anuisance orpollution as defined in Section 13050 ofthe CaliforniaWater Code.
a. Dairies wherethe animal populationis less than 20 (dry ormilking cows). b. Heiferorcalfranches wherethe herd size is less than 50. I, Gerard J. 

### Thibeault, Executive Officer, do hereby certify that the foregoing is a full, true, and correct copy ofan order adopted by the California Regional Water Quality Control Board, Santa AnaRegion, onAugust 20, 1999.

G d J. 

### Thibeault Executive Officer

# II California Regional Water Quality Control Board Santa Ana Region 

### NOTICE OF INTENT TO COMPLY WITH THE TERMS OF THE GENERAL PERMIT TO DISCHARGE WASTES ASSOCIATED WITH CONCENTRATED ANIMAL FEEDING OPERAnONS FACILITY Attachment "A"



## II
NAME AND ADDRESS OF FACILITY

NAME AND ADDRESS OF LEGAL OWNER OF FAClLlTY

NAME OF BUSINESS OPERATING FAClLITY CONTAcr PERSON

TELEPHONE NO. CONTAcr PERSON

TELEPHONE NO.

TELEPHONE NO.

1='==="iimllloi5.iitXl:nl£Ndiiiiiii"a£lti'aiOFr======T=Y=PE=O=F=O=P=ERA=T=IO=N===============:!Il 1. DAIRY

____ MILKING COWS

____ DRY COWS

____ HEIFERS CALVES ,

# ~OTAL ACREAGE 2. CALFIHEIFER RANCH

_____ CALVES

_____ HEIFERS

DISPOSAL INFORMATION 3. OTIIER CAFO (IDENTIFY TYP£ AHD NUWBEI. OF AHIJroCALSj TYPE NO.

_ TYPE NO.

_ TYPE NO.

_ 

## II

SITE DESIGN CAPACITY 

# II DISPOSAL LAND' (, SEE FJ«JlNEERID WASTE MANA<EMFNf PU.N FOR llEFINlT1Q<l AGRICULTURAL LAND'

_______ BUILDINGs/CORRALS' 

## II

PRESENTIPROPOSED POPULATION DESIGN POPULATION/CAPACITY HAS AN ENGINEERED WASTE MANAGEMENT PLAN (SEE ATIACHED) BEEN PREPARED? YES NO CALIF'ORNIA ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY ACT (CEQA) COMPLIANCE
HAS ANY CEQA DOCUMENT BEEN PREPARED FOR TIllS PROJECT? IF "YES", PLEASE ENCLOSE A COPY IF "NO", WILL ANY CEQA DOCUMENT BE PREPARED? WILL A NEGATIVE DECLARATION BE PREPARED? YES YES YES
NO NO NO

IF "YES", WHO WlLL PREPARE TIIE NEGATIVE DECLARATION?

_ APPROXIMATE DATE OF COMPLETION

_ 

## II CERTlFICAnON 

## II
IHF.REBY CERTIFY UNDER PENALTY OFPERJURY THAT THE lNFOIVdATlON PROVIDED IN THIS NOTICE OFINTENTAND INANYATTACHMENTS IS TRUE fCCURATE TO THE BESTOFMYKNOWLEDGE

SIGNATURE OF OWNER OF FAClLITY

PRINT OR TYPE NAME

TITLE AND DATE SIGNATURE OF OPERATOR OF FACILITY

PRINT OR TYPE NAME

TITLE AND DATE

### Attachment "B"
REQUIREMENTS FORAN ENGINEERED WASTE MANAGEMENT PLAN
The Eneineered Waste Manaeement Plan must be prepared by a reeistered professional eneineer in the State ofCalifornia or another qualified individual. A. SITE PLAN: 

### Siteplan shall include: 1. Address and/orlegal description oftheproperty. 2. Name, address, andtelephone numberofthe owner and operatoroftheproperty. 3. Total gross acreage of the property, showing property boundaries and all existing and proposed facilities including buildings, storage areas, berms/levees, holding ponds, pumping facilities, culverts, drainage easements, disposal areas, croplands (whether farmed by the owner/operator or another party), etc. The site plan must include the overall dimensions, contours, a vicinity map, north arrow, and the date the plan was prepared. The plan shall be drawn on a standardblue print format using an appropriate scale that shows sufficient details ofall facilities. 4. Containment facilities shall be designed to retain, on the property, all process generated wastewater and storm water runoffdue to precipitation and drainage through manured areas which results from a 24-hour, 25-year storm event. Facilities in operation on November 27, 1984 shall be designed for protection ofall manured areas from inundation or washout by overflow from any stream channel during 20-year peak stream flows. All manured areas for new facilities (built after November 27, 1984) shall be protected from inundation resulting from a IOO-year peak stream flow. The site plan shall show all facilities necessary for containment and management ofon-site storm water runoffas well as the interception and conveyance ofany off-site stormwaterrunoffthroughthe property. 5. The site plan shall show the size, elevation, and location of all facilities proposed for containment of process generated wastewater and storm water runoff on the property (berms/levees, holding ponds, upstream diversion structures, etc.). Cross section details of these facilities shallbepresented. 6. A description of existing and proposed disposal areas or cropland, designated to receive operational water.

Page 1 of2Attachment HB" Requirementsfor an Engineered Waste ManagementPlan


### B. DESIGN CALCULATIONS: Design calculations shall include: Page 2 of2

1. Present and proposed animal population (numbers of each: milk cows, dry cows, calves, heifers, etc.) andthe volume ofwashwater generated. 2. Amount ofstorm waterrunoffresulting from a 24-hour, 25-year storm event. 3. Total amount ofwastewater (washwater and stormwater) to be contained ontheproperty. 4. Dimensions and capacity oftheholding ponds. 5. Percolationrates, ifused. 

### C. CONSTRUCTION SPECIFICATIONS: Construction specifications shall include the construction materials and method of compaction utilizedto buildberms/levees and othercontainment facilities. 

### D. OPERATIONAND MANAGEMENT PLAN: Operations andmaintenance plan shall include: 1. A proposed holding pond management plan (to provide maximum pond capacity prior to winter storms; periodic dredging, etc.). 2. A proposed wastewater distribution plan (periodic rotation ofwastewater to disposal areas or croplands). 3. A proposed maintenance plan for berms/levees and other containment facilities, including a proposedrodent control plan (periodic inspections to monitorforholes/cracks orbreaks, etc.)CaliforniaRegional Water Quality Control Board SantaAnaRegion Monitoring andReporting ProgramNo. 99-11 for ConcentratedAnimal Feeding Operations (Dairies and Related Facilities) SantaAnaRegion 

### A. Monitoring 1. The discharger(s) shall inspect the waste holding and disposal areas and note any discharges offthe property that is under the control ofthe discharger. Inspections will be made daily when wastewateris being appliedto cropland and weekly during otherperiods. The results ofall inspections will be recorded and submitted withthe required reports. 2. During each significant stormevents, the discharger(s) shall make visual inspections ofall stormwater containment structures. 3. The discharger(s) shall record the approximate time ofeach storm-related discharge that results in off-property discharges ofstorm water commingled with wastewater ormanure, and its approximate duration. 4. The discharger(s) shall record each manure-hauling event on a manure tracking manifestform. B. 

### Reporting 1. By January 15 ofeach year, an annual report ofanimal waste discharge and storm water discharge shall be submitted. 2. The annualreport shallbe submitted on forms providedby Regional Board staffand shall also include copies ofall manure tracking manifests for the reporting period and copies ofthe inspection logs required to be maintained under A.l. and A.4. above. 3. The discharger shall notify the Regional Boardby telephone within 24 hours ofany unauthorized discharge ofwastes. This notification shall be followed by a written

A significant storm event is defined as a storm event which results in continuous discharge ofstorm water for a minimum ofone hour, orintermittentdischarge ofstormwaterfor aminimumofthree hours in a 12-hourperiod. Page 1 of2M&RPNo. 99-11 Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations (Dairies andRelatedFacilities)


### a. The approximate date andtime ofthe discharge; b. The flow rate and duration ofthe discharge; Page 2 0[2



### c. The specific type and source ofthe waste discharges (e.g., overflow from holding pond, rainfall runofffrom manure storage areas, etc.); and d. A time schedule and a plan to implement necessary corrective actions to preventthe recurrence ofthe discharge. All reports shall be signed by a responsible officer or duly authorized representative of the discharger(s) and shall be submittedunderpenalty ofperjury.

# A&' 4/;I;z \/14 Orderedby "

# ~~!ftd1..42'tt£I~---- Gerard J. 

### Thibea'lt Bxecuhve Officer Al';gust 20 , 1999