Jump to content






Photo
- - - - -

Excess Sewage, Fill Concrete Basin With "dig Materials"

city sludge

  • Please log in to reply
47 replies to this topic

#1 maestro

maestro

    Superstar

  • Premium Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 744 posts

Posted 20 March 2015 - 07:33 AM

Folsom posted Public Notice it plans to fill the concrete raw sewage basin where the massive spill occurred.     City Contracts section shows the most city projects are devoted to

sewage odor control, sludge processing, 

so it appears sewage is popping out all over city, even up the hills.    

 

Direct questions to the city engineer or city sewer/water director, even though no city engineer them signed  off on this  Public Notice about filling a cement pond with sewage stuff.

 

 

 

 

 

 

 



#2 nomad

nomad

    Living Legend

  • Premium Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 2,548 posts

Posted 20 March 2015 - 07:45 AM

I don't know what it is but I really love these videos.



#3 tony

tony

    Hall Of Famer

  • Premium Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,396 posts
  • Gender:Male
  • Location:Historic District

Posted 20 March 2015 - 08:23 AM

It's no longer used as a sewer overflow basin, that's why the city is planning on filling it in. The giant sewage spill was 15 years ago. As you said, it was an overflow from this basin.  Because of that, the basin was eliminated from the system, so there is no longer a possibility of an overflow at this site. The plan is to fill it over time with excavation spoils from sewer and water projects (whenever you build a sewer or water line, you have excess excavated material that has to go somewhere).  Unless the excavated material is contaminated, there is little potential for harm to Lake Natoma.

 

You say "don't fill it". Would you rather it stay a big, empty, concrete-lined breeding ground for mosquitoes? My concern would be that, according to the draft environmental document, it might take 24 years to fill it, so it will essentially be an ongoing construction site for a long time before it start to get re vegetated and return to a more natural state. But, it's been sitting empty for 10 years now, so filling it slowly seems better than not at all, unless they want to convert it to a skateboard park or a giant swimming pool (there is a certain yuch factor there)!

 

 Here's the Draft Environmental Document.



#4 kcrides99

kcrides99

    Veteran

  • Premium Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 220 posts

Posted 20 March 2015 - 09:54 AM

Maybe we should preserve them as skateboard parks?? :)

 

Not everything is a conspiracy theory... unless they are really meant for landing pads for the next coming of the aliens? :bowdown: :BREAKDANCE:



#5 maestro

maestro

    Superstar

  • Premium Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 744 posts

Posted 20 March 2015 - 11:04 AM

No draft environmental documents were available prior to posting of link here.

It is shocking that Marcus Yasutake signed a Negative Declaration when ABSOLUTELY ZERO Approved Engineering Plans, Blueprints, and packet of proven documents are provided.      This is like his saying "yup, it's my opinion and I have not seen any engineer-approved plans."

 

WORSE YET, this is yet another HUGE project which WAS NOT REGISTERED with the state clearinghouse.    Unregistered, this project is never vetted and the rest of the world knows NOTHING about it.

 

But, LACKING ENGINEER APPROVED DOCUMENTS, no one knows anything about it.

 

Concepts and behaviors like this frighten  the sewage out of law-abiding engineers, agencies, and organizations (not to mention residents).      Can you imagine the costs of concrete removal?   Cost of dumping it into an approved dump (most refuse to take this)?     

 

Can you imagine how the rest of the sane world is viewing this city's officials?

 

 

 



#6 kcrides99

kcrides99

    Veteran

  • Premium Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 220 posts

Posted 20 March 2015 - 11:54 AM

Maestro-

 

I do not how to make this clearer - STAMPED ENGINEERED PLANS ARE NOT REQUIRED FOR CONDUCTING ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEW.... Preliminary drawings are adequate. CEQA does not require engineered drawings.

 

What CEQA does require is that the impacts (ie footprint) of the FUTURE engineered drawings are substantially complying with the documentation in the CEQA document. If every City was required to have an engineers stamp for every environmental document there would be a lot of poor City's and rich engineers.

 

Furthermore, the lead agency (City) is not required to post anything with the State Clearinghouse...unless it requires review and approval by state agencies only the County recorders. See Government Code Section 15073 for more information.

 

I appreciate that you are someone that is looking out for the betterment of the City; however, as the old story the boy who cried wolf goes, if you keep pointing fingers without knowing the facts, those of us who care will stop listening when it matters most.

 

As you stated, the City posted a public notice, which is the opportunity to provide feedback on the proposed project and environmental document. Based on skimming the document it appears to make sense to move forward, the document includes mitigation to ensure no impacts to the environment and the facility is no longer necessary.



#7 redman

redman

    All Star

  • Premium Member
  • PipPipPipPipPip
  • 323 posts
  • Location:California Hills Subdivision, Folsom, CA

Posted 20 March 2015 - 03:12 PM

kcrides99, I agree with you on this, having some knowledge of how these things work. This sounds like a minor project just to fill in the basin and decommission it. The engineering to disconnect it from the pump station probably happened a while back. A negative declaration is appropriate, and a simple project description is all that's needed. CEQA gets much more involved if a NEW project is being constructed, or an expansion, but that's not the case here. 

 

Cities and agencies such as Folsom are routinely upgrading sewer systems to address aging, add reliability and redundancy, and improve spill prevention. The projects listed on the city's website are a good thing.

 

There is a lot more state oversight over sewer spills than there was 15 years ago, and if a major spill occurs it is reported in detail and a fine is issued and it will most likely be in the newspaper. Lots of info here: http://www.waterboar...s/programs/sso/



#8 maestro

maestro

    Superstar

  • Premium Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 744 posts

Posted 21 March 2015 - 08:20 AM

If  wanna-bee   experts know so much about  compliance, why don't you DEMAND the city engineer S. Krahn provide these "opinions"   not you.      City is currently under investigation by multiple agencies, including state water board SIU.           Wanna bee experts are unaware of the truth.

 

For example, how on earth can a formal Negative Declaration be declared when absolutely NO   APPROVED ENGINEERED Documents exist for any such scheme?       If wanna-bees or city staff do not put their Engineer Seal and signature on their work-products, their words are unsubstantiated opinion.       This is about transporting "sludge" to this cement pond.    Use some logic, men.

 

Please do call Central Valley Reg. Water Quality Control Board CEO Pamela Creedon or Adam Laputz, and ask them what enforcement they have done about the city putting 133 inches of sewage pipes into a single connection to Reg. San.  -- which is only 27 inch diameter?        Ask them where the city causes the excess raw sewage to go, and why is the city making 'sludge' when it has no sewage treatment plant.

 



#9 kcrides99

kcrides99

    Veteran

  • Premium Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 220 posts

Posted 21 March 2015 - 02:09 PM

I give up!

#10 supermom

supermom

    Supermom

  • Premium Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 10,225 posts
  • Gender:Female

Posted 21 March 2015 - 02:54 PM

Three things here:

 

So what if - down the road-the city does decide to chunk up that concrete filled hole and make it something like a park or fill it with trees or something?

A) will that area be clean (health and safety) for human interaction?

B) what would happen to those concrete chunks when/if it is ever broken up for a different project? What type of special handling will be necessary because the concrete sat on a raw sewage area?

 

 

"why is the city making 'sludge' when it has no sewage treatment plant."---this is a fair question. Since I am not aware of how the whole issue with open sewage and "stuff" -got to that site-- how long did it sit there and what is the right way to clean up a sewage spill or sewage line break? 

 

 

What the heck is the difference between sewage and sludge? is sludge a nice way of saying a combined pile from the toilet and the garbage disposal or is it actually just solid human waste? 

 

 

Finally, with a city as big as ours (and apparently getting so much bigger with S50 creeping into our responsibilities)- why dont we have a sewage treatment plant--and from a different thread- a gas site? Could we save money by having a recycle center for raw sewage?

 

Just asking-because I really dont know much about how this all works.



#11 Redone

Redone

    Hall Of Famer

  • Premium Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 1,865 posts

Posted 21 March 2015 - 03:15 PM

I just wonder why you live in Folsom ? Youre not happy.

#12 maestro

maestro

    Superstar

  • Premium Member
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 744 posts

Posted 22 March 2015 - 08:12 AM

I just wonder why you live in Folsom ?

 

 

That's a question I can answer:   the American River!

 

It should not have sewage diverted into it.    Not have a freeway road/bridge ruining our views of it.

Not have concrete everywhere, when it is defined by federal regs as a magnificent, passive "Conservation Zone" to preserve the habitat, trees, and wildlife.

 

That bridge made the entire canyon an echo box of  speeding trucks and cars.     Light rail coming to the forest land created its own set of problems because there are not enough police -- they are busy with the problems coming from dozens of liquor licenses on old Sutter st.

 

The river is a reason to be here, and to eliminate those  who have done so much which is not sanctioned by laws.       Without me, the federal NPDES Permit would not exist on city's sewage system;  city would not have been "self-audited" twice;  city would not be under investigation currently.    

 

Remember the old TV ad where an  Indian Chief cried over what reckless people had done to pure water?     One can be sad, but one does not leave one of the most magnificent rivers in the world.       Fight to protect it........   and wait for the inevitable day of justice   .......

 

 

PS  Quite happy with current progress of enforcement actions (above the state and local level.)

 

.

 

 

.



#13 knittychick

knittychick

    Superstar

  • No Politics!
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 640 posts
  • Gender:Female
  • Location:Broadstone

Posted 22 March 2015 - 08:48 AM

Things are not always as they seem. It doesn't make your love of the American River any less valid, but since you cited him as an example I thought you should know he was not an Indian and he was not crying:

 

America's Favorite Indian

 

But while Hollywood trumpeted Iron Eyes Cody as a “true Native American” and profited from his ubiquitous image, the man himself harbored an unspoken secret: he was 100% Italian.

 

http://priceonomics....-crying-indian/

 

That "crying Indian," as he would later sometimes be referred to, was Iron Eyes Cody, an actor who throughout his life claimed to be of Cherokee/Cree extraction. Yet his asserted ancestry was just as artificial as the tear that rolled down his cheek in that television spot — the tear was glycerine, and the "Indian" a second-generation Italian-American. 

 

http://www.snopes.co...rs/ironeyes.asp


"Peace is always beautiful." - Walt Whitman

#14 JohhnyCash

JohhnyCash

    Veteran

  • Premium Member
  • PipPipPipPip
  • 113 posts

Posted 22 March 2015 - 09:22 PM

Tinfoil hats...... on!



#15 mrdavex

mrdavex

    Superstar

  • No Politics!
  • PipPipPipPipPipPip
  • 794 posts

Posted 23 March 2015 - 08:34 AM

 

What the heck is the difference between sewage and sludge? is sludge a nice way of saying a combined pile from the toilet and the garbage disposal or is it actually just solid human waste? 

 

 

Sewage is anything that goes down the drain.  When it gets to the sewage treatment plant, it is put into a clarifier, which is a large holding tank.  Gravity does its work and the sewage separates into a layer of 3 components.  All the heavy dissolved solids settle to the bottom, this is Sludge.  The liquid on top is called Effluent and this flows out of the clarifier for further processing before it discharged out into the lake or river.  On top of the effluent is a layer called Scum, which consists of fats, oils, and greases.  Both the scum and sludge also undergo further processing.  The sludge goes into a airtight tank called a Digester, where anaerobic bacteria feed on it and produce methane. The recovered methane can be used for generating electricity and heat.  Coming out of the digester, the sludge is odorless and germ free, and after drying it is either hauled to a landfill or used as fertilizer.  

 

Here's a video from Regional San on what happens to our sewage after it goes down the drain: http://www.regionals...od/virtual-tour


--
"Let's just hope Comcast doesn't own any tanks."
-Robert X. Cringely




0 user(s) are reading this topic

0 members, 0 guests, 0 anonymous users