HomeMy WebLinkAboutAgenda Report - May 18, 1988t Q.
TO : C i t y Council
Fpnm,- city Mananor
COUNCIL COMMUNICATION
MEETING GATE: May 18. 1988
AGENDA TITLE: Goehring Meat's Request for Sewer Service - Discussion and
Appropriate Action
RECOHMENDED ACTION: That the City Council not modify the City Code to
allow for acceptance of discharges outside the City limits.
BACKGROUND INFORMATION: Attached as Exhibit A is a letter requesting the
City Council to allow Goehring Meat to discharge into the City's industrial
waste system and to be exempt from the City's industrial waste discharge
permit process .
?he Lodi City Code as shown below prohibits sewer connections from outside
the City limits.
13.12.150 Connections outside city.
No discharge from facilities or proper-
ties outride the limits of the city shall be
allowed into the sewerage system. (Prior
code § 20-15)
35. "Sewerage system" means all
words for collecting. pumping. treating.
disposing. storng and reclaimingsewage.
industrial waste and/or storm arajn sys-
City Council
My 18, 1988
Page 2
requirements to any discharger. No such waiver has ever been granted to
any discharger wi hin the City of Lodi. In order to allow the requested
waiver, the City Council must change the City Code by ordinance.
Our engineers , 31 ack and Veatch , have been meeting w i t h Goehri ng Meat's
engineers, Nolte and Associates, since January of this year analyzing
different proposals. A major concern to the City is the salt ccntent of
the proposed flows from Goehring Meat. One measure of salt content is total
dissolved solids (TDS) in milligrams per liter (mg/1).
Goehring's original proposal
Goehring's latest proposal
Average Flow (gal/day)
110,000
33,000
2,000
750
A considerable amount of correspondence and data has been generated analyzing
the proposals. This data is available by contacting the Public Works
Department. All of this material has been provided to the City Council as an
Appendix to its Council packet.
Our engineer's response to Goehring's last proposal is attached as Exhibit C.
The City's present land disposal operation at White Slough is experiencing
increasing 'levels of TDS. Looking at the problem with TDS and the other
concerns related to Goehring's proposal, vie are in full agreement with Black
and Veatch's position:
"The City is faced with potential reduction in TDS limits by regulatory
agencies, expected increases in domestic influent TDS levels, and
incomplete information on Goehring's ability to achieve the proposed
flow separation and iteet contaminant limits over the long run. The
current land application of effluent provides the City with the
flexibility to meet changing conditions while still protecting the
environment. Sufficient margin of safety does not exist within these
constrictions to allow the City to reduce their operational options
uy accepting Goehring's proposal. Any benefits of accepting Goehring
Heats' 750 mg/1 process waste stream are more than offset by the
considerable risk of future effluent discharge liability for the City
and its citizens."
Therefore, vve cannot recommend that the City modify the City Code to allow
for acceptance of discharges outside the City limits, nor can v& recommend
any waiver o f our waste discharge permit process to any discharger to our
sewerage syst�
l
Jack P�nete�
P Worms 3i rector
April 15, 1988
2353-99-00
Sacramento
Ni Thomas A. Peterson
City of Lodi - City Manager
City Hall , 221 West Pine Street
Call Box 3006
Lodi, CA 95241-1910
Exhi bi t
SUBJECT: GOEHRING FEAT INC. - PROPOSED CONNECTION M CIN OF LODI
NCUS'IFVL WASTE TREATMENT SYSTEM
Dear MC Peterson:
On behalf o f Goehring Meat Inc., i t i s requested t h a t the City o f todi City
Council formally consider, as an agenda item, Goehring's proposal to connect
to the City industrial was' system. If possible, it is requested that the
matter be brought before t ty Council for a vote no later than the meeting
scheduled for KAaj 4, 1958.
The current City of Lodi Wastewater Discharge Regulations- prohibit industrial
users outside the City limits from connecting to the wastewater treatment
system. In addition, Regulations require that a Waste Discharge Permit be
obtained for industrial wastewater flows in excess of 50,000 gpd. It is spec
fically requested that the City Council..exempt Goehring Meat from these two
items in the Regulations which are preventing the proposed connection to.the
industrial waste system at this time.
Upon approval by the City Council, Goehring Meat is prepared to enter ,into _a
contractual arrangement with the C.ty for handling the process wastewater. -
i �—
To: 14 Thomas A. Peterson Page 2
April 15, 1988
Your serious consideration of this matter would be greatly appreciated. Please
call if you have any questions or comments.
Very truly yours,
NOLTE AND ASSOCIATES
Ran Crites
Associate
/das (CL291-K.6)
xc: Ben Goehring, Goehring Meat Inc.
.lack Rnn-,kn_ Citv of Lodi_ Public Works Director
W(?iTE a ASSOCIATES
:.'..%''.�� h.`l^I 5�" ✓, ..,. r,'S. •:>t. ^`...vv e.� �:i..' .? — ? � . s - ..t �4 . - r zf
,
13.12.110 Restricted discharges.
No person shall discharge or cause to
be discharged to a sewerage system an): of
the following without first obtaining a
wastewater discharge permit that specifi-
cally permits such waste discharge char-
acteristics:
A. Discharge during a daily twenty-
four -hour period in excess of fifty thou-
sand gallons:
B. Volume o tow or concentration o
waste constituting a slug:
C. Waters or waste with a pH factor
lower than 6.5 or higher than 8.5:
D. Discharges containing metal pick-
ling or etching wastes or plating solu-
tions, whether neutralized or not:
E. Any discharge which has an aver- .
ge daily concentration of:
Toxicant
Arsenic
Boron
Cadmium
Chlorinated,hydrocaib ns (total
.identifiable)
Chromium. hexavalent
Chromium. total
Copper
Cyanide
Iron
Lead
Mercury
Nickel
Phenolic compounds
Silver
Zinc
Other toxic substances .in eon -
centrations. having an acute
toxicity to fish exceeding a
nine:v-six-hour tolrance limit
of fifty percent when tested in
accordance with standard test
pruredur— . ,
`Maximum
Allowable
concentration
(Mg/1)
0.I
-'0.0
0.5
0.0I
0.5
2.0
20
_'.0
50.0
1.0
0.01
1.5
'-.0
0.5
3.0
•
r
Exhibit B
13.13.110
other taste -producing and odor -produc-
ing substances in concentrations exceed-
ing limits which may be established by
the pebiic works director as necessary to
meet water quality requirements:
G. Hot wastes at temperatures
exceeding one hundred sixty degrees
Fahrenheit (seventy degrees Celsius) or
exceeding one hundred ten degrees
Fahrenheit (forty-three degrees Celsius)
for any eight-hour period:
H. iMaterials which exert or cause in
the sewerage system or receiving waters
unusual concentrations either of inert
suspended solids (such as but not limited
to. soil solids. fuller's earth, lime slurries
and line residues) or of dissolved solids
(such as. but not limited to. sodium chlo-
ride and sodium sutphate) in excess of
k seven hundred tl#y milligrams per lite,
I. Discharges in such quantities of
such qualities that they are not amenable.
to treatment or reduction by wastewater <.
treatment processes employed. or are
amenable to treatment only to such 3
degree that the treatment facility effluent
cannot meet water quality requirements:
J, Grease, oil and sand interceptors
shall be provided by the discharger when:
in the opinion cf the public works direc-
tor. they are necessary for the proper han-
dling of wastes containing grease in
excess of one hundred fifty milligrams.
per liter of animal and vegetable origin
and fifty milligrams per liter of mineral
origin. or any flammable wastes. sand.'
grit and other harmful ingredients. All
interceptors shall be of a type and capac-
ity approved in writing. prior to installa-
tion. by the public works director, and
SLACK & V E A T C H
Black b Veatch
MEMORANDUM
I Exhibit C f
ReSUlts of Review of 4/6/88 Memorandum B&V Project 14279
from Nolte b Assoc. Regarding Proposed Hay 9, 1988
Discharge of Goehring Meats Process
Wastevater to the City of Lodi
To: Rich Stratton., Nolte & Associates
From: Kpn .sones, Black 6 Veatch
Nolte has requested tha: the City of Lodi reconsider its position on the
proposed discharge of process wastewater into the City's industrial waste
system. Goehring Heat is proposing' to make in -plant modifications to allow
the process wastewater to be divided into two streams, and to discharge 85
to 90 percent of their wastevarer to Lodi's Industrial sewer. The proposed
discharge would have a total dissolved solids (TDS) concentration of
750 mg/l. The proposal does not indicate how this division of vaste
streams will be accomplished or if the flov and strengths proposed are
based on actual tests or are estimates.
A lab analysis of wastewater sample's provided with Goehring's original
proposal indicated zinc levels in excess of concentrations acceptable by
City ordinance. The current wastewater sample analyses, from December 3,
2987, to April 4, 1988, by Nelson Laboratories, do not indicate excessive
toxicant levels. BOD an2 pH do exceed acceptable levels in a few
instances, however. aoehring's ability to consistently meet the City's
limits on vastewater characteristics has not been adequately demonstrated.
Average annual flov estimates have been reduced from 110,000 gallons per
day (gpd) to 90,000 gpd with total annual discharge estimated at 31 million...''.'
gallons per year. This flov value is not substantiated by a discussion
the planned division of waste streams or by a flow record, and so is open:,``:
to question. The volume reduction proposed has a significant impact on the:'
sizing of the required facilities and cannot be considered dependable ln.:... ..:
the absence of supporting data.
Waste discharge regulations have become more stringent over the past decade
and the City believes that this pattern could continue. In the near
future, the City of Lodi will consider revisions to their sewer ordinance:.'.,.
in order to reduce TDS levels, and may go to a limit of 450 mg/1 on their
industrial dischargers. As stated in our March 16, 1988, memorandum, t1,Is
limit is being considered for several reasons:
1. The City of Manteca effluent TDS level averages about 474
The California Regional Water Quality Control Board (CRWQCB
recently advised Hanteca to consider ways to reduce this TDS
level, and indicated that a TDS limit is being considered as a::..`:::;.:
condition of their expansion permit.
c'7 10: 14 1.EEA T CH Oti��
BLACK & v L' ATC H
Black & Veatch
MEMORANDUM
Results of Review of 4/6/88 Hemo 2 B&v Project 14279
from Nolte c Assoc. Regarding Hay 9, 1988
Proposed Discharge of Goehring
!teats Process uastevater to
the _City of Lodi
2. TDS levels in the City's treated domestic effluent for the past
several months have varied betveen 420 mg/l and 460 mg/1. The
average TDS level is expected to continue increasing in the
future due to increased use of vater softeners by residents.
Industrial effluent TDS levels are also variable. At a January
14, 1988, meeting with City of Lodi end Black & Veatch personnel,
CRWQCB representatives discussed the possibility of imposing a
500 mg/1 TDS limit on discharge from the expanded treatment
plant. Even without the addition of Goehring Meats' 750 mg/l TDS
wastewater, the City's combination of treated domestic and
industrial effluent disposed of by irrigation is already
uncomfortably close to this limit given the variability of TDS
levels and the expected gradual rise -in the average TDS level.
3. The National Drinking Water Standards include a TDS goal of 500
i:q/l on groundvater used for drinking vater supplies.
California's Secondary Drinking Water Standards include a
recommended maximum TDS limit of 500 mg/l. There is evidence
that the percolated water from the City's effluent disposal area
may flow in lice direction of existing and future municipal water
supply wells located in the North Stockton area. Lodi must take
all reasonable steps.`'to errsur+e that future liability is avoided.
Our position remains unchanged.,., The City is -faced with potential reduction
in TDS limits by regulatory agec:c:ies, expected increases in domestic
influent TDS levels, and incomplete inl_vrmativ►i uci Gueliriug's ability to
achieve the pLvposed flow separation and meet contaminant linits over the
long run. The current land application of effluent provides the City with
the flexibility to meet changing conditions while still protecting the
environment. Sufficient margin of safety does not exist within these
constrictions to allow they City `to reduce their operational options by
accepting Goehriug's proposal.' Any benefits of accepting Goehring Meats'
750 mg/l process waste stream` are more than offset by the considerable risk
of future effluent discharge liability for the City and its citizens.
It is suggested that Guehring pursue CRWQCB approval,forl9cal irrigation
with the 750 mg/l TDS process waste stream. Irrigation water with a TCS of
750 mg/l is only slightly more saline than Class I irrigation water (0-700
mg/1), which can be used on all plants without restriction. The 750 mg/1
TDS wastewater may also be suitable for onsite disposal similar to
05/10/88 10:14 FLACK & VEiTCH 004
B LAC K Q V E A T C H
Black & Veatch
MEMORANDUM
Results Of Review of 416188 Memo 3 MY Project 14279
from Nolte & Assoc. Regarding Hay 9, 1988
Proposed Discharge of Goehring
!seats Process Wastewater to
the City of Lodi
Goehring's existing percolation ponds. These alternatives appear viable at
the TDS level of the proposed waste stream, and focal disposal may be
achieved at a lower cost than that estimated for conveyance to Lodi's
treatment plant for disposal.
er
cc: J.L. Ronsko, Public Works Director
F. Forkas, Vtr/ustvtr. Superintendent
M. Burchett, Uhitley, Burchett & Asso.
A. Vorster, CVBWQGB..
P ET I T 1 0':N
TO Lodi :.,;.,C i- ty Counc:
-�.i.We urge,-youto vote
. favor �.of qllowinq�: the :City.. of 6odi to accept the of f luent of
-.;
-, ."G'Qehring'�ik
jjeat,.,:;:C'd�: : ;TheComoanX::,is a ma j)major economic force in the Community amp ,
mpany has been in business
'in excess:: of 500'.e s at the Lodi location Vie Cc
mp oyee
s' -,-for i 37 -'years ease cons
:inth area id,er:that��'hupdre( s of Goehring employees anti
•f aMiS; work live-znd/or Purcha.se.services in tj e community.
-,l
10,
:CHECK ONE NAME
44,
GOEHRING FAMILY INTERESTED
IPLOYEE::: MEMBER. OF:- MEMBER :OF
GOEHRINU CO*1UNITY
EMPLOYEE
j
C1,11y
CITY
I cA I
L
- � 41L -
CITY
1`41-
'76 Z AlQ_ 3-k"Ai
14 1 L.
P E T I T 1 0 N
-
TO: Lodi City YCouncil
"
We urge.:you to vote in favor of Allowing the City
ofLodi to accept the effluent of
Goehrin g Meat Co. The Company is a major economic
force in the Community employing
in, excess .of -,500,.employees at.the Lodi location,
The Company has been in business
in this area for -37 years. Please consider that hundreds
of Coehring employees and
theirfamilies work, ',live and/or purchase services
in the community.
CHECK ONE NAME
ADDRESS
GOEHRING FAMILY INTERESTED
EMPLOYEE MEMBER OF MEMBER OF
GOEHRING COH UNITY
EMPLOYEE
CITY
1`41-
'76 Z AlQ_ 3-k"Ai
14 1 L.
TO: Lodi. City' Council
=�u^*e,yvu.cn�?ocez'o'�zuvor oz allowing the City of Lodi to accept the e{[}u:xt of
oebriogMeat Co'.The Company is a' -major economic force in the Community employing
iu''excesab£' �500 employees at the Lodi location. The Company has been in houinonu
io�this/,orea`for 37`y.oaro^:.:'Pleaae-couaider.thaL hundreds of :oehriu8 employees and
their zamiliee work°_liveanU/or purchase -services in the cowmuoitr'
J4vil 1
3 0
Ji
CITY
(-r&. I - .
P E T I T 1 0 N
"'C
TO: Lod City ouncil
-we--urge--you to vote
in.:: f
t avor o allowing the City "o f .1,
0 to accept the effluent of
Lodi.
�.Goehring;:Meat,: Co.
TheCompanyis a major economic fo
rce, in the Community
employing
in,exc S 0 6 s of 5 0 ,
employees 'a t: the Lodi location;` T I iCompaTiy has been in
business
rte;'in,
this area for
37 years . _Please consider that hundreds,
reds of Goeltring employees and
'work,
live e a nd/or purchase- services in
,the community.
7",
-CHECK ONE
NA E
ADDRESS
CITY
FAMILY MILT :..INTERESTED
EMPLOYEEMEMBER OF'
MEMBER OF
Ys
-"COEHRING:
Ca1HUNITY
DIPLOYW'."
A)v
2. //,/t e
Q)
3 .
el -.11.-
it
t,
P E T I T T 0
N
kY t
TO; Lodi ..City! Counczl
We..urge you to vote YES 'on the
issue of letting'G'oehring
Meat
Citv.to,take their effluent.
The Company is a
major economic
i psi
Company
force
T
ti employing 500 employees. _.hey have been in business in this area for
Hundreds o.fGoehring employees work, live and/or purchase services in
contract with the
in the Community
37 years.
the Community. VOTE YES!
CITY
.... P F T l .,T, I 0 N
t
TOL"odi.city Council
0
CITY
`- j / '3.6
.:......... r .
CITY
5.
lie favor of �' allowing the City of Lodi to accept the effluoct Of
'� `C�"pa�v�ia`am'jor�economicforce in the Community employin8
' o e` .a'�bs,.l'odi'loca�ion,` The Compuny �oo heen in 6oaioens
=- 'employee's
7_.e`ro.`�/9Ieae� conaiderthat hundreds of (I"ekcin& employees and
om
'lies work. live and/or i)urchase services in the c munity.
'
� |
CITY
f /
J 3
y�
d�
a .
1
4
S4 t
f
r
i
P E T IT I'0 N
2�,
`TO
Lodi City' !Council
W".'' votein'favor of h11owi
e urge :,youtp
ng the City
of Lodi to <�ccept the effluent of
Goehring,,Meat` Co The Company 'is:
a major` economic
force in the Community employing
in`,excess,'of:S;OO.employee at the
Lodi location.
The Company has been in business
�.
iw,this fbr'37- years,. Pease
consider -that hundreds of Goehring employees and
,area
their -4 amlies'` work', live andjor`.
purchase services.
ire the community.
:CHECK ONE NAME
ADDRESS CITY
GOEHRING FAMILY INTERESTED
�;,
EMPLOYEE MEMBER OF MEMBER OF
-
GOEHRING -COMMUNITY
EMPLOYEE
f /
J 3
y�
d�
a .
1
r
2�,
f /
J 3
y�
d�
a .
1
P C
�- i ,
� couucl
`na mrfavor of allowing the City of Lodi to accept the effiupoL of
Company is amajor economic force in the Community employing
o o Ioree���t �he`/�ndiloca�ion, TheCompany 4em been in business
e7�'earmn�^PIeuae�^^cnoa|dmr't|at `hundreds o['Gnebriu& employees and
�I.tbeirfomll.iea�wbrk,'live and/or purchase services in the community,
'&DDD8S8 `
`
�
LY
CITY
EMPLOYEE
zv,5� L„P.�Theo�' �A �S33G
rt3A)tits ,.
2.
G
3.
P E T i T I 0,h
T0. Lodi. C� ty Council
We urge YO t4 vcite in,.,favor of:,allowing the City
of Lodi
to accept the effluent of
},
Goehring:Meat''<Co. The.Company is a major .economic
force
in the Community employing
in;,excessof ISOO emplayees`at the Lodi location.
The Company
has been in business
!,
in this area•;for 37'years.' Please consider that hundreds
of Goehring employees and
,,•'their=families
work. live and/or purchase, services
in the
community.
CITY
EMPLOYEE
zv,5� L„P.�Theo�' �A �S33G
rt3A)tits ,.
2.
G
3.
14
G
5•
to vote in favor of; allowing the City of Lodi to.accept the effluent of
tl`. Co. Ther Company".is a major economic force in the Community employing
500"employees,at"rhe"Lodi "location. The Company has be"en in business
.for 37 years. Pleaseconsider that hundreds of Goehring employees and
e`work, 'live and/or purchase -services in the community.
ADDRESS
CITY
" f
s
�a P �:T,1,T z. 0`N
��
Lodi City Council
We urge you to vote in favor of allowing the City
of Lodi
to accept the effluent of
Goehring'.Meat Co. The Company. 'is a major: economic
force
in the Community employing
in: excess -of. 500 empl.oyees ".at the Lodi location.
The Company
has been in business
=}
in this area'for'37 years. Please consider that hundreds
of Goehring employees and
}
their families work, live'and/or purchase services
in the
community.
CITY
F.R ' OF
'"v r
fy
P L'. T I T 1'0 'N
.���`�,` xO.A Lodi City Council
'aa.r r
t'.We urge you"to'.vote �n:favor .df allowing the City of Lodi to accept the effluent of
tt Go;ehring..Meat, Co,`..TheeCompany is'a major econornic. force in the Community employing
excess of ;50.0 employees at the Lodi location. The Company has been in business
in this area'for L37 years. Please consider that hundreds of Goehring employQes and
r ::;,their.;amities'-work live and/or purchase' services in the community,
CITY
2.
3.
X;:
t
5.
i
. .... .. ....
p , --7
P E T I T 1 0 N
,
TO: Lodi.' 'City Council
We urge y o u to. vote, in f a,vor of allowing the City
of Lodi.
to accept the effluent of
Goehring.Meat Co.::. The Company is a major economic
force
in the Community empl-ying
-in.excess
of 500 employees at the Lodi location.
The Company
has been in busine,5s
in'this-area for: 37,years. Please consider that hundreds
of Goehring employees and
their. families work, live and/or,purchase* services
in the
community.
-N
CHECK ONE NAME ADDR ESS Ua
GOEHRING FAMILY - INTERESTED
EMPLOYEE' MEMBER OF MEMBER OF
GOEHRING COWIUNITY
alPLOYBE
nz�
lit
TO
L6dV: City '-]CoVnci1
..:.y o t e - i n--
C:a urge;you, r_0 fayor:; of, all,owing the'.City of Lodi to accept the ef F.1 tien t of
Goehringe at,A C ; :,:.The. o :
pany. is a major::;economic fcrce in the Community employing
n.-ex.c-eeif..'.6-f.-:7500; gmo.Loy at' 'the :Lodi I lac been in business
e.e. ocation. The Company
Please: consider.: that
hundreds of Goehring employees and
r'..their`famili.et'. work -�'14-e,'and../0 r. purchase.- services ir, the community.
.
ADDRESS
CITY
-5 2 1 t1) - (- V -,L) TU V- -/ L ` tD -� 0 f) f"
Ane
UECU" ONE'::' -
NAME
INTERESTED..:..
?41t;`,:'EMPLOYEE ;-:-MEMB.ER
::�:MU'IBER
,.777.,,,
GOEHRING' COMUNITY
LOYEE's,
a
MCA
A-
ADDRESS
CITY
-5 2 1 t1) - (- V -,L) TU V- -/ L ` tD -� 0 f) f"
Ane
�
r '
,Oouucil
City
rQo��ou'�o�'vote���n��favor, of allowing the City of Lodi to ncoept the effluent of
oebriog`'Meat!Co. 'Tba'`Comyauy ia amajor economic force in the Community employing
o^exc o'of500 employees at the Lodi location. The Company has been in huatneao
o thia'srea for 37'years. 'Please consider that hundreds of Coehriug employees and
^ services in the commuu��y.�.�i't�m�r��emiliea'worb, liv�
�
�
CHECK:ONE
NAME
GOEHRING
-INTERESTED,,.
EMPLOYEE
AA
LAL
2.
3.
�
�
AA
�
�
CITY
P, E' T I 'I' I 0 N
ti
a
s T0: Lodi City.--
Council
k� v
f W
e uige.you to. vote in:favor of allowing the City of Lodi to arcc.ept the effluent of
Goehring Meat`';Co. The.Company is a major economic force in the Community employinb
in:excess:.of 500 employees at the Lodi- location. he Company has been in business
in his :area for 37 years.
I, Please consider that hundreds of Goehring employees and
eJ.r, a
milies.i.work, live and/or purchase' services in the community.
t
3
f
4.
P E T I T 1 0 N
V,TO: Io,di,,City,�'Council
Weurge youf oi� allowing the. City of Lodi to accept the effluent of
� ,�.,.- to; v-ote, -inav
'Go'eh"r'in,gl'ke'at'l.,Cb.:.,"":TlieCompany, s amajor economic ic. force in the Community employing' -
location. The Company has been in business
in-,exceds';,-Of 500�,'.empl6yees a
t,the.Lodi
Is,�.'a r e a , f o r;, 3 7 y e . a r s:.
Please consider that hundreds of Coehring employees and
:in h
th=i T- rMn
mili -z.:wnrk_ t)
live.andlor urchase- services in the Community
ADDRESS
CITY
'ncilto
urge you to voteis
accept Lhe eWe
a major economic force in the Coii1munity employingthe
n: excess of 500 employees
Lodi location. "'he Company has been in businessi
at'for
n :this areaw 37 years.
Please consider that hundreds of Goehring employees andi
families ork, live
the community.their.
an,d/,or purchase services inNAME
ADDRESSCHECKONEGOEHRING
FAMILY INTERESTED.,:FXPLOYEt:
EMBER OF' MEMftR. OFGOEHRING
-COMMUNITYEMPLOYEE
CITY
)�- ,/-C I
I
2`,
CITY
P,`E T I T I O N
,�
TO Lodi City Council
�f
i
j
We urge you to. vote in favor of allowing the City
of Lodi to accept the effluent of
=Goehring Meat. Co. The Company is a. major economic
force in the Community employing
in excess of 500 at the Lodi location.
The Company has been in business
u�
;in this area for '.37 years ' Please consider that hundreds
of: Goehring employees and
:.
their families work, live aid/or purchase services
in the community.
r
CHECK ONE ,,,TAME
ADDRESS
rX
GOEHRING, FAMILY INTERESTED
t'
EMPLOYEE MEMBER OF,,-'OF,.PIEhiBER
GOEHRING COI•IrtUNITY
alPLOYEE
2`,
CITY
j
S
CITY
5.
P E T I -T 1 6 N
TO
'Coda I
, Council Cty, 0
W 6'11
,
-vote An ';f a'yo
v'-' o f a o w. it g,
"' i " t h e Ci�ty
of Lodi to accept the effluent: of
Goe
"A 6,6 C 0
h rA fig The-.' ompany
;is* a m a o r., ,e c o n o I
c force in the Community employiii6
:L: n
e 'o,
excess' of ,500 employee,-;
at ,Oie' Lodi location.�-The
Coillpany has been i n business
n
a
t h, 1.t e years
.37;years:
P1 -ease d'onsidir that
hundreds of Goehring employees and
h e i e.'m i
a ies work, live: i e,
an or :purchase .'services in the commtiWity.
S
CITY
5.
CI'T'Y
I T I 0 N
1"
+�
t3'0: Lodi City. Counci l
4 },'
,We urge you to vote in'f3vor of allowing the City
of Lodi to accept the efftuent of
Goehxing_Meat; Co. The, Company.;is a major economic
force in the Community employing
a
Ins .of 500 -employees 'at the Lodi location,
The Company has been in business
in this years .
37 Please consider that hundreds
of Coehring employees and
t « .
;the.ir families work ve and/or
, lipurchase' services
in the community.
IECK ONE NAME
AU1)RESS
Cl'1'f
GOEHRING FAMILY INTERESTED
EMPLOYEE 'MEMBER OF 1`lEhiBER.' OF
!
- GOEHRING. COWUNITY
.EMPLOYEE
}
'
______.._.__ ✓ 1. ,I. , 4�'
t�
�.� _��
R
-- r r
h.
(•//i�,Ul_.3[_('I._A, ^. "T�+��•Y'�CC-
l/`-5V•CIYVI.
3.
a
5.
x
'•Yssr�' .. :''►.!:,'!Y ;.c'i ,rs.r Y)`<<: r, ».-Y.,, .,:,•.�r�r«.«. ;r'rrR?�el.r n� •, r ,�
- ''. _ •. :. 7 i•.+K.:. .`�eN%Fi' .. (Ti,^'i W:'Y .T!^7t".'?';9','.l',:`S�E`►!'f �"SCl.'•'r'.':[i sr'1."L•y"-`�.Y.�Xf..^9••'S,"T1^i'iT
7..,•-•t;r►+ n..;-••�..
P.E`F I T I'0 .N
t
TO: Lodi City council
F
rt
4!e urge you to vote in favor of allowing the City of-Lodi-to accept the effluent of
Goehring Meat Co. The.Company is a major economic forceAn the Community employing
_ in excess of 500 employees at the Lodi location. The Compnny has been in business
i11 thisarea for -37 years. Please consider that hundreds of Goehring employees and
their families work, live and/or purchase, services in the community.
a �-r
{4
CHECK' ONE.. NAME ADDRESS
g GOEHRING FAMILY INTERESTED
EMPLOYEE MEMBER OF MEMBER OF
GOEHRING ' ;; COh[MUNITY
EMPLOYEE
CITY
i- I
h �r P E T I T 1„O N
NfR"i SXR
`!TO• Lodi Cit'y..Council
We urgeyou to "ote in favor of allowing the :City of Lodi to accept the effluent of
;Goehring Meat Co. The Company is a major economic force in she Community employing
in: excess of 500 employees at the Lodi location. The Company has been in business
50
in thisarea for 37 years.. Please consider that hundreds of Coehring employees and
"ssr�r their faarilies. work,` live{' and/or purchase, services in the community.
yr
CHECKONE NAME ADDRESS
.GOEHRING FAMILY -:INTERESTED -
'> EMPLOYEE; MEMBER ?OF MEMBER OF
`GOEHRING COH MUNITY
•
+r EMPLOYEE
Sy
2.
5.
� sr
'v } fF o rYk
-
y
1
s
CITY
_Lot)_T�_
CITY
0 /_4! 5 �%,vii
e"Y.E
T I T I O N
5`. TO.: Lodi City Council
``t4 Wel.,urge youz ote in ;favor; of :allowing the City .of
Lodi. to ,accept the effluent of
Goehri g Meat Co. T'he:company is 'a major"'econom.ic force
in the Community employing
ru in:excess,.o_f 500:`emp3oyees,:aC the Lodi :locaCian. The
: .
Company has been in business
i- n.- h -S.. ea dor 37 years.
Please consider that hundreds
of t;oelrrinl; employees and
`� their families work,:; live
and%or purchase services in
the cor;munity.
CHECK ONE..
NAPIE
A D 1) R E S3
GOEHRING;'.,FAMILY. INTERESTEll
EMPLOYEE 'MEMBER OF MEMBER Of
r : GOEHRING C0111WITY
' ;EMPLOYEE
J
5.
if
r s.
CITY
0 /_4! 5 �%,vii
&�
fes'
z
d
...: .
n�
0
. t _
M .. 3. (
t.
.x
T'
a.
E 9.
�i
v{
• • yn, �•
.s
r.. r . ... .:;.
:L
ity unc
e
''to vote' n`,£avor `.o.f allowih the Cit of Lodi ecce r the effluent of
8.,...Y g Y to p
:>
Goehrin Meat,:Co.. TheCom an is a `m€► or economic force in the Community employing
;in. excess .`of 500 employees at the Lodi location. The Company has been in business
in thi.s:;erea. f.or37':.'y.ears.'. P.lease'c.onsi'der that .hundreds of Coelrring employees and
their farpilies work ;lire and' /or urchase services in the community.
CKECK' ONE NAh1E " ADDRESS CITY
GOEHkNG`' FAMILY INTERESTED
: EMPLOYEE : MEMBER OF MEI IBER OF
0' ,� x•. GOEHRING COKIWNITY
:Y • EMPLOYEE
40
I, I A inn C(^_ Aec4An 1 1 iJ�F�k' a2 }lr'r o
3.
4.
.:
5.
kf;
I .r I-0 N
x
P.E T
NAPIE:
a
` F
y. Council
EMPLOYEE .'MEMBER; OF._ ME,*IBEtt OF
`#
We urge you"to':vote-in `favor. of'al1owing;the City
of Lodi
to accept the effluent of
:`Goehring;Meat"to.
The:"Company.is a,major economic
force
in the Community employing
in.'excess`of"500 employees at the Lodi location,
The Company
has bee=n in business
in this ,area for 37years. Please consider that hundreds
of Coehring employees and
their families work, live.and/or purchase' -services
in the
community.
kf;
x
CHECK ONE
NAPIE:
a
GOEHRING TAMILY.INTERESTED
EMPLOYEE .'MEMBER; OF._ ME,*IBEtt OF
r,
GOEHRING ; ';' C%UgUNITY
':EMPLOYEE
z, ((._.A y
J
3.
5,
ADDRESS
CITY
�!!rof� �� _ Aim o
1
t
P`E T I T .I 0' N
t
TO; Lodi City Council'
!
We urge-you'to vote in favor of allowing the City
of Lodi to accept the effluent of
Goehring Meat!C0.<`.The Company is a major economic
force in the Community employing
in excess of '500'employees at.the Lodi location.-
The Company las been in business
in this area 37 years`. Please consider that hundreds
of: (.�oehring employees and
-their families work, live and purchase services
in the community.
t r
CHECK ONE NAME
ADDRESS
CITY
(r'
GOEHRING FAMILY INTERESTED
EMPLOYEE, MEMBER OF MF.t1BER OF
4
,'GOEHRING COMMUNITY
EMPLOYEE
La 2 'AV,
ADDRESS
c
A -PA J[lAl i I'eL,ulb�L'—
f'NRCK nNF
NAME
GOEHRING.
'FAtIILY
INTERESTED
EMPLOYEE
:MEMBER OF
MEMBER OF
GOEHRING
GOMi�NNITY
:EMPLOYEE
2.
3• j
ADDRESS
c
A -PA J[lAl i I'eL,ulb�L'—
V
CITY
urge-you-ro vlote,.,in tavor of allowing the City
of Lodi
to accept the effluent of
GOEHRING
Goehring Meat Co The Company is,,a major'economic
force
in the Community employing
MEMBER OF', *MEMBER OF
%in:excess'of5 0 Oi',;'e m pl o y e e s at; the Lodi location,
The Company
has been in business
rt
this area for�-137 yedrs. Please consider that hundreds
EMPLOYEE,
of Goehring employees and
].;i heir, -.1 amilies work, live and/or purchase services
in the
community.
V
CITY
CHECK ONE NAME ADDRESS
GOEHRING
FAMILY:: INTERESTED
'EMPLOYEE
MEMBER OF', *MEMBER OF
GOEHRING',�. COHMUNITY
rt
EMPLOYEE,
5.
V
CITY
rt
5.
q
P EI I 'T' 1'0 N
TO; Lodi City, Council
We urge- you to vote in favor :of allowing
the City of Lodi to accept the effluent of
iGoehring Meat Co. The Company is a major economic force in the Community employing
in. excess of 500 employees at the Lodi location. The Company has been i.n business
in'this area for 37 years. Please I consider that hundreds of Goehring employees and
.their ,families .work, live and/or purchase services in the community.
CHECK ONE NAME ADDRESS CITY
GOEHRING FAMILY
EMPLOYEE MEMBER OF .."MUIBER OF
GOEHRING'COMMUNITY
FNPLOYEE%�""',
S
2.
--71� J ? 3
-Iva
P E T IT 1 0 N
, Mi�
Council
Lodi`�;�7.City
W6 a'vor'' U allowing 0-
$ Nx-�, - � 0
urge. -.---You - t - vote in owing t -he -City of Lodi to accept the effluent of
44,_
Go e hr i ng Meat..Co The...
ompa�ny is a. major' econotic f
orce in the Community employing
employees at: the Lodi' 'location. The.Company 'ins been
i n excess . 9 f 5 0 0. e m p 1 o in business
inthi'p.'area for :37 .years.,
Please consider that hundreds of Goehring employees and
their' f amilies. wo.rk live-an4/or: purchase, services in the community.
ADDRESS
CITY
4k 4, � P t �)C ,"0-6,f -, 0 ec-/ - 1 �J
3
ILI
4.
-L Z 7 CZ
..........
i
vo
S.,. 0, - k /b h
L,J .'
W6'urge'you-to vote'in.favor4of-allowing the.City of Lodil to accept the effluent of
r
Goehrng;Mean_Co., The Company. is a major economic force in the Community employing
n,,exce s`-"`of:500 employees at.the Lodi�Location. The Company has been in business
?in this." for 37 years. Please consider that hundreds of Goehring employees and
their'f '6ilies'wo'rk, live and/or purchase services in the`communfty.
-ZICHECK ONE NAME Allt)RESS CITY
rGOEHRING 5FAMILY INTERESTED "
EMPLOYEE 'MDIBER OF MEMBER OF
GOEHRING CUTTJNITY
EMPLOYEE
7-
t ��
2. ) o �� s r i �� c Lc� o �, �1 I rJ • D
NAME' ADDRESS
CHEM ONE NM
...... .................
'-'GOEHRINFAMILY ,f INTERESTED
EMPLOYEE ,9 OF MEMBER OF
`GOEHRING COMMUNITY
alPLOYEE
6
I
C4. () J, .
CITY
. .........
.. .. .................
T
V.......... ..
ZY
tb odl Counc
24,
We urge a You t:o,.! vote :in`f avor 'o f allowing
..
e
th' -City
of Lodi
to accept the effluent of
.G6ehrin -Meat'Co The Companyis a major
economic
force
in the Cornmunity employing
excess, of, 500 employees at .the Lodi location.
The Company
has beeii i n business
in'. this":area for .37.years. ' Please consider that
ht""ndreds
of (loehring' employees and
..�::their -families work, live: and/orpurchase'servicea
"'in the
cornmuni t y
CHECK ONE :NAME
GOEHRING FAMILY JNTERESTED
".'EMPLOYEE MEMBER '...OFA .J.'MEMBER . OF.:
GOEHRIN COMMINITY
C1,11,
t . 0 C ( s ,
5.
b.
lni&ei:r:i4t
j�l Well,
ji
V.......... ..
t . 0 C ( s ,
5.
b.
lni&ei:r:i4t
j�l Well,
ji
CITY
y�
P T I T I"0 N
'TO: Lodi City Council
Q}}
r
We urge you. to: vote in. favor of ,allowing the, City
o1, Lodi tc accept the effluent of
Goehring Meat Co. The Company., is a`major economic
force in the Community employing
k i`n ,.excess of 500 the Lodi ;location.
Tia Company pias been i n business
,e:mpl.oyees,..at
n �ti in this area fbr:37 Tears.: Please consider that
hu drPds of Gae':ring employees and
s.
their:famiiies.^work, live`°.and/or purchase services
in the community.
f
,
CHECK -ONE NAME
ADDRESS
"
GOEHRING FAMILY INTERESTED .
r 5WLOYEE
: MEMBER.:`OF MEMBER OF
l
GOEHRING _COMMUNITY
EMPLOYEE
CITY
y�
{ry P E T I> T 10 N j
F
i
'*�' T0. Lodi City Counc'i.l
i X j
We urge you to vote 'in favor of allowingthe Cit u£ Lodi to accept the ef£1
{s >' P effluent of
GoehrxngP:Meat Co. The Company is a major eCOI1pr111C Force in the Community employing
J Y L
"x- in:'excess of`SOO err,ployees at the Lodi location. The Company has been in business
�.:
;�t in this area for. 37 years, Please consider that hundreds of Coehring:employees and
-their.families .work ,,live and/or".purchase''services in the community.
1tn CHECK ONE _NA,SE ADDRESS CI"I'Y
J
GOEHRING. ~FAMILY INTERESTEA
'< WLOYEE MEMBER: OF . MEPIBER OF
trz a' GOEHRING COI`UfU2dITX .
EMPLOYEE
V�'
a
E' T I T 1, 0 N
TO:,' -';„Lodi City Council
TG,W e u', r g y o u ao vote in: favor .'of allowing the City
of Lodi to -accept the effluent of
Co Company .isa: major economic
force in the Community employing
in: excess.of 5OO employees at the Lodi location,
The Company has been in business
in this 'a f e a 1 o r, :3 7.,,: y e a r Please consider that hundreds
of Goehring employees and
t h6i r f amiii es work, live acrd/or purchase-- ser',/ices
in the community.
-�M
'CHEM ONE. NAME.
-ADDRESS
CITY
GOEHRING” MILY INTERESTED
EMPLOYEEIBM OF'MEMBER, OF
'GOFHRING COMMUITY
EMPLOYEE
V�'
a
L(
EMPLOYEE MEMBER OF MEMBER OF
-GOEHRING:��,:,COMMUNITY
alPLOYEE
2.
3.
it
rn
kN
12
L(
I
CITY
3.
E T I T I 0 N
wing the City of. Lodi to accept the effluent of
major economic force in the Community employing
di location. The Company has been in business
'onsider that hundreds of Goehring emp.loye.es and
chase sIervices in the community.
e
CITY
59/0 (f /gZr,77t o
CITY
Z
GOEHRING FAMILYINTERESTED
EMPLOYEE MEMBER OF MEMBER OF
GOEHRING CWtUNITY
EMPLOYEE
1,
I
CITY
Sn
AM,
T. I 0 N
CryCouncil
Lod t
T'O
'i e:. urge.::you :.:to in. favor of allowing the' .:pity of Lodi to accept the effluent of
iomic force in the Comintiiiity employing
in excess of 500 employees at the Lodi location. The Company has been in business
in this area for 37 years. Please consider that hundreds of Goeliring employee's and
.their families work, live and/or purchase services in the community,
ADDRESS
I
CITY
}
*�Loidi'p* City Council
allowing the City of Lodi to ncceyt the effluent '[
_.;Goehring Meat Co.', The Company is u major economic force in the Community employing
� Lodi location. rhe, Company has been in business
'...An this area fo'r;37 years.., Please consider that hundreds oE Coehring employees and
purchase- aervic6a' in the community.
`
CHECK- ONE
`
NAME ' � ' ADDRESS
_.`
3
P E T I T 1 0 N
TO:: Lodi City Council'
We 'urge you to vote in favor
of allowing the City of
Lodi to accept the effluent of
Goehring:Meat, Co, The Company is a major economic force
in trip Community employing
in excess of -500 employees
at the Lodi location. The
Company has been in business
i.n.this area for 37 years,.
Please consider that hundreds
of t;oehring employees and
their families work, live
and/or purchase'services.in
the community.
CHECK ONE
NAME
ADDRESS
CITY
'
GOEHRING FAMILY INTERESTED
EMPLOYEE MEMBER OF;, MEMBER OF
GOEHRINGI COMM1JNITY
' EMPLOYEE
k'
1
Z/
n„ r
�u�rk
a
3.
,
we�n in 1uvor,o1 allowing the City of Lodi to n t the effluent of
/Gomb ' The Company is u`major economic force in th mmuniLy pmyioyin8
�
,in excess c�t.5OO_'employees att e Lodi locatioo,
The Cnmpony been in business
in tbi;f �37 yeord-`` b Pleaseconsider that hundreds of Q rtn8 employees and
their families work, live and/or purchase services in the comm
ADDRESS
r
CHECK ONE
'
EMPLOYEE,IMEMBER
OF, MEMBER OF
2.
3.
ADDRESS
r
s
s
CITY
..vva�ct.n.�rrv' r,uru'tVirt t t
DIPLOYEE
CITY
P E T:. 1 T, 1 0
Lodi' City 'Council -
We: urge, you to:: vote in favor of allowing the City
of Lodi to accept the effluent of
Goehring:. Meat'.Co. The Company is a major economic
force in the Community employing
n,.excess::df500', employees -at..the Lodi location.
The Company has been in business
4n A. h.4 a M I. dis A'. Al- ' q7 , va a V- a 'PI -ase consider that hundreds
of Coehring employees and
families their' amili s work, live- and/or purchase'.2E ervices
i n t It e community,
CHECK ONEADDRESS
NAME
,Y
`t" GOEHRIIJG :.-:FAMILY- IN'T'ERESTED,
.-EMPLOYEE MEMBER ..OF MEMBER. OF.,
GOEHRING COMMUNITY
CITY
is
P`E T 1" T 1 0 N
TO Lod i".City :..Counci I
We -,urge i'you..to:vote in.:4avoir of -allowing the City of Lodi to nccept the effluent of
G6eh rin Medi�l Co The, Company is a major economic force in the Community eiii 1) L o y i n g
n if �`-500 employees cation. The Company has been
excess:o loyees at the Lodi lo"' in business
.-ib this:area ;for 1 37 years;: ;.Please consider that hundreds
of Coehring employees and
families 'work, 'live' 'and/or purchas ..'services in the community.
ADDRESS
Z1.12-7 0
CITY
—M,
CHECt' ONE
NAME
�,A3X
FAMILY
INTERESTED.:.
EMPLOYEE ;MEMBER
MEMBER OF
-777777777
WIMUNITYi:
EMPLOYEE•
tY
ij
Z
t9
3.
4.
E g
ADDRESS
Z1.12-7 0
CITY
P E T I T'I O N
TO: Lodi City.Council
We"urge-you to vote in favor of allowing the City of Lodi to accept the effluent of
Goehring. Meat Co. The Company is a major economic force in the Community employing
in excess'of 500 employees at the Lodi location. The Company has been in business
in thisarea for 37 years. Please consider that hundreds of Goehring employees and
their families work, live and/or purchase services :in the community.
CHECK ONE NAME ADDRESS
GOEHRING FAMILY INTERESTED
EMPLOYEE MEMBER' OF " MEMBER OF
GOEHRING COMMUNITY
EMPLOYEE
CITY
2.'—
CCi�__�� c.W-
P E T I T I' O N
T0: Lodi `City Council
{ We urge you.to vote in favor of allowing the City of I,,odi to accept the effluent: of:
Goehraneat:,Co'. The Company is a major economic force in the Community employing;
a;
In -excess of 500 employees 'at the Lodi location. the Company has been in business
in this.a;rea for 37 years. Please consider that hundreds of Coehring employees and
their families work, live and/or purchase services in the community.
:r.
,j"t
__-- CHECK ONE _ < t'AtIE ADDRESS
GOEHRING . FAMILY:, INTERESTED
R
n .... EKPLOYEE MEMBER OF:. AiE lBER. 01'.
GOI•WING� COMMUNITY
`DIPLOYEE
1
S
CITY
,
/`
IV &/^»^� � ' c�� /w~°~r' —
|
`
GOEHRING FAMILY INTERESTED
EMPLOYEEMEMBER OF MEMBER OF
GOEHRING COHNIUNITY
EMPLOYEE
Z?z
GOEHRING COMMUNITY
F)ffMU) %
1
P . E T"I T' 10 N
�t
E
n
� t
T0: Lodi City Council
La
r�
We urge'yo "vote in favor of allowing the City
of Lodi to accept the effluent of
V V y
Goehring Meat Co. The Company is a major economic
force in the Community employing
in excess of '50.0 employees at the Lodi location.
The Company has been in business
in ,this area ;,for 37 years. Please consider that hundreds
of Goehring employees and
their families ,work, live and/or pmxcJaase &e,rv. ,ce.s
in t -ho cam:muai�i.ty.
CHECK NAME
CHECK ONE
`iTy
GOEHRING FAMILY INTERESTED
EMPLOYEE MDIBER OF MEMBER OF
GOEHRING COMMUNITY
F)ffMU) %
2.
�t
E
n
� t
La
e5
z�
V V y
r.,
c�
2.r
d J e .L�-a
3.-
4.
p ::E T -I T, •I 0 N
S.
T0. .=:=Lodi, City" Council'
We urge you tovote
in favor
of allowing the City
of Lodi to accept the effluent of
Goehring Meat Co.
The Company
is a major economic
force in the Community employing
in excess'of 500
employees
at the Lodi location.
The Company has been.in business
in this area for
37 years':
Please consider that
hundreds of Coehring employees and
their:;families work,
live
and/or purchase services
in the community.
CHECK ONE
NAME
ADDRESS
CITY
GOEHRING 'YkMILY
INTERESTEll
EMPLOYEE. MEMBER OF..
MEMBER .'OF
GOEHRING
COMMUNITY
EMPLOYEE .,.,
`v/
1 •��.t1-� �ivv vv".�c�z.. ,
.rL f � ti
c�
2.r
d J e .L�-a
3.-
4.
S.
EMPLOYEE MEMBER OF MEMBER OF
GOEHRING COI CNITY
EMPLOYEE'
!/ 3 • 'TPer tet.. V "`"' , //-S c.c.0 e ✓ "' �.3 "� -- -=-a ----
T
TO.Li
-
w
e: urgi
1:in:—exci
thii
their:
nnVUDTMn
�HECK ONE, :NAME
I ARMLY IbITEBUM
EMBER. OF WIBER OF
OEHRING COMMUNITY
ADDRESS CITY
( 17
P E:T I T 1 0 N
TO
-o: Ladi City, :Council
We,urge'lyou'to vote in favur
of allowing the City of Lodi to accept the effluent of
Goehring'Mea t CO. The Company is a major economic force in the Goinmunity employing
in .excess of: 500�q employees -at the Lodi location, The Company ha:; been in business
in this' -area for years. Please consider that: hundreds of Goeliring employees and
t h ei r families "work, live and/or purchase services in the community,
-:"CHECK ONE NAME ADDRESS
GOEHRING FAMILY INTERESTED
EMPLOYEE µMUIBER OF MMBER OF
WE11RING COMMUNITY
EMPLOYEE
CITY
,�
r,
�,
. �'� ^ � �
+a%.. jvu fv, youe -, :Ln :,EavQr,,ox aivowing the, City of Lodi to accept the effluent r) f
GoehringMeat',-.do. . The'Company '
The'
.Company amajor(i
kc'onomic force in the Community employing
.1..,inexcess of �500ew.ployees.,at.-
the .:Lodi,',Iocation.
:�in this'--alrea,� for 37 P d The Company has been in business
years . lease,consi er�that hundreds of GoAring employees and
q
their families woxk li ve and/or p
urchase services in the commilflitv.
:CHECKONE'
NAME
2
z JA
/F.2,F� �7g
z
CITY
M
w
ry
S
CITY
P E T I T':1 O N
TO:' Lodi City, Council
We urge ;you to vote in favor of allowing the City of
Lodi to accept the affluent of
Goehring Neat Co., The Company is a major economic force
in the Community
employing
Pa ..
in excess of' 500 employees at the Lodi location. The
'for
Compa'uy ;las been in
business:
in this area37 years. Please consider that hundreds
of Goehri.ng employees and
their families work, live and/or purchase services in
the community.
CHECK ONE NAME
ADDRESS
GOEHRING FAMILY,- INTERESTED,:
EMPLOYEE MEMBER OF' MEMBER Or<,
GOEIRING ' COMMUNITY
EMPL.�.. UYEE
2.
3.
4.
j
S.
S
CITY
11 j. tj Y Q I'
.01: a-Liowing.the city of Lodi to accept the effluent of
Go'ehring Meat. Co.
heCompanyis a Major economic force in the Community employing
in -ex
cess,
of :'500. employees at the Lodi location. The Company has been in business
nL :.
t h i s areal::for 3TV'years. 'Please consider that 1,undreds of Goehring employees and
theirfamili 0. 1—
f.::. ive and/or purchase services in the
community,
CHECK ONE
NAME.
ADDRESS
CITY
i".- -A) I
HYD
./01)/
1�� r u — li��- -eL� J -L - 1-
z
P T I T I 0 N
CIl
---- ,— I — : vvt— —, 4avvr vi a.t..iowing the City of Lodi to accept the eff llie [It of
oehring -Meat' Co. The Company is a major economic force in the; Community employing
n 'excess of .500 employees at the Lodi location. The Company has been in,business
n this area for 37 years. Please consider that hundreds of Coehring employees and
heir fa31'
z
rn es work, live and/or purchase services in the comrrinnit•v.
ADDRESS CITY
7
We urge,
You to vote in; favor of
'�Goehring�Meat Co. The Company all
vwzng the City of Lodi to accept the of
is a major economic force in the Community employing
excess of 500 employees his,area' for :37 years. ,at the Lodi
location.
The Compuxy has been in business
:'their families work,
Please consider that hundreds of CoehrioQ empinyee«x'and
live and/or Durchuoe uervicao in the community.
CHECK 0
NE
'
N&�C ` y�
__ ` _ ADDRESS
GOEHRING FA
} ' `
--.'~.E~^~~alPLOYEE�'Y MEMBER OF
`rEouERI OF �
G°EHRIw* COMMUNITY
MPLOYEE
'
`
- l
'
2,
If I J--
�
�
1 416 '�Z52-q Z- C P�/
�
149
U4 i V2 Lid,
3.
5.
�
�
1 416 '�Z52-q Z- C P�/
�
149
U4 i V2 Lid,
or «1 allowing City of Lodi to accept the cf[loen� of
Company iseconomic force in the Community employing
�mf 500 employees at theLodit u. The Cbuo boen iu bnoioeoo
f 37 � 'Please �l Company
�thac hundreds of �oehrin8 ewployaoa and
ili ' kl and/or p eservices _i' the cnmmuoity'
iECK ONE NANC' ;
ADDKESS
`GOEHRING.
INTERESTED,:YAEMBER
OF,
MEMBER OFEMPLOYEECOMMUNITY
Weurge,Goehrinin
this
or «1 allowing City of Lodi to accept the cf[loen� of
Company iseconomic force in the Community employing
�mf 500 employees at theLodit u. The Cbuo boen iu bnoioeoo
f 37 � 'Please �l Company
�thac hundreds of �oehrin8 ewployaoa and
ili ' kl and/or p eservices _i' the cnmmuoity'
iECK ONE NANC' ;
ADDKESS
`GOEHRING.
INTERESTED,:YAEMBER
OF,
MEMBER OFEMPLOYEECOMMUNITY
�
' -
- P E T I T 1 0 N
TO.. Lodi, City Council
4.
e
in A.Avor., of allowing tno,,City of Lodi,: to,nccept the effluent of
G 0 ehrLinLjMeat` Co..
The:
Company
major%economic force.
' ' I : I in the Community employing
i;* 10 a
.,employees L CoMp* business
`} oft5004I at` 'Lod c tion. The any hns been in bius s
::"i n or 37 years. Please -,consider'.that hundr edS of-Goehring employees and
"exr,families '-work, live and/or purchase -services in the community.
CHECK ONE NAME
ADDRESS
GOEHRING :FAMILY INTERESTED
'EMPLOYEE MEMBER OF MEMBER OF
GOEHRING. COW-1UNITY
UIPLOYEE
CITY
-7
'Sr
S�-
_4 7
r)
- P E T I. Y 1 0 N
Lodi.Cjty COuncil'
CITY
04)Z:
urge9 .to vote in favor of allowing the.City
of J,odi
to accept the .effluent of
Go e h r i n eatiCo. The Company is a major economic
force
in the Community employing
in exces' es at:
-of 5QO employethe Lodi location.
111
The Company
has been in business
i s -�z
area in'th for:37 years: Please-consider!that hundreds
of Goebring employees and
their I a ��i es work, lixe and/or purchase services
in the
community.
CITY
04)Z:
CiTy
E�Tf`:T':IQ- N
OR . . ...
.,TOLodi City 'Council
a s
A VI.—
We"' urgeyou to vote in favor Of allowing the City of
Goehring Meat Co. The
Lodi to accept the effluent of
Company is a major, economic force
'in . excess of.500 .employees at the Lodi location.
in the Community employing
The
in this :.area :for 37.years. Please consider that hundreds.
their families
Company has been ill business
of Goehring employees
work live and/or purchase, 'services in
and
the community.
air
U?
CHECK ONE NAME
ADDRESS
GOEHRING FAMILY INTERESTED
'EMPLOYEE
- MEMBER OF MEMBER OF
GOEHRING COfflUNITY
EMPLOYEE
X
2.
3.
5.
CiTy
CITY
CITY
S.
.' .
. —
' 2,
�
. ..... . ...
_Uv �4
`
te in favor of allowing the City
Goehri
of Lodi
to accept the effluent of
eat Co. The Company is a major economic
i
force
i« tko Community cmp]oyi.ny
�i500�employeea at the Lodi Iocutioo,
The Company
has been in business
'in this: for 37years. 'Please` consider that hundreds
4 a,mi,lies work,
of Goebriug employees and
:their live and/or purchase 'services
in the
cnmmuoitv. .
.' .
. —
' 2,
�
. ..... . ...
_Uv �4
. ..... . ...
_Uv �4
of Lodi to accept the effluent of
c force in the Community employing
The Company has been in business
hundreds of Goehring employees and
s in the community.
ADDRESS
CITY
GOEHRING
FAHILY ,
INTERESTED
EMPLOYEE
IMEMBER OF
' PIEMBER OF
`
GOEHRIM' ..?COTUIUNITY
DIPLOYEE
r fir:` f
r
,3
rk y
� F
MINES
Any
.. ..
3.
t
1
5.
1 VIA
k"
1
ADDRESS
CITY
n.c urge you to vote-in favor of ailowing the City of Lodi to nccept the effluent of
Goehring Meat Co. The Company is a'major econornic force in the Community employing
in excess:."of 500 employees `at:t:he Lodi location.The Company has been in business
x. In this area for 37 years. Please consi er that hundreds of Goehring employees �11)c{
1. r
CITY
i to Accept the effluent of
1. ;n thr Coin inunity employing
npany has been in business
's of Goehring employees and
'e `community
RRSS
CITY
.
r' i
CITY
ifay;az of owingth ri tv�
of LA di to accept the effluent of
n The.:GRgigAny is a.,.major economic
for,.'& in the Commui-tity employing
MY,
t7,
'es. at thiez,Lodi Io6ation
n "excess 501 o i- 0 .employees.' emp oye,
The. opipany has been in business
-::in this a ea�ior37.,years,., Pi d
ease consider. :hundreds
of Goehring employees and
their am'ili:es.; work live. andlor purchase services
in the community.
"N
till
?
HECK ONE NAME
A D 1) R E S S,
CITY
ept the effluent of
Community employing
s been in business
17ring employees and
ity.
e Lk C 73,z
12utt
r
CITY
P E T I
T 'I•; O N
TO:, Lode - City Counc'iI
4.
�r°E
We. urge. you to vote in fav
e. allowing
the City .of
Lodi to <�
n `
Gaehring Meat Co.; -. The Company, is :a .major
economic; force
in th
_excess, of 500 ;emphoyeesat .:the :Lodi location..:
The
Company
in: thisI-area for 37 years: Please: consider
that_hundreads';of
G
their Jdmilieswork, live -and/or purchase'servicesin
the comm
CHECK ONE NAME
ADDRESS
�.
GOEHRING FAMILY INTERESTED
EMPLOYEE MEMBER OF, MEMBER OF
Y
GOEHRING COMMUNITY
EMPLOYEE
ept the effluent of
Community employing
s been in business
17ring employees and
ity.
e Lk C 73,z
12utt
r
CITY
P T I T 1 C N
P
�f
To: `Lodi City..councia.
' We.ur"ge you to vote in, favor of -allowing the City of L
Goeh,ring Meat'Co. The -Company is a, major economic for
n.; -of S00 employees at the Lodi location. The
in this area -for 37 `years. Please consider that hundr
z
their families work, 'live and/or.<purchase•services in
{
1
s
Ii to nccept the effluent of
in the Community employing
>mpany,has been in business
Is of Coehring employees and
1e community.
NAME A'UURESS CITY
D
F
t
PET ITION
Z--A-Z
&zz -
f
ZL
CITY
.�` P E T I T I 0 N
P'„�`
T0. Lodi City Council
We.,urge -you to vote in favor of allowing the City of Lodi to Accept the effluent of
,Goehring Meat Co The `Company is a major economic force in the Communty employing
'> in.exces� of 500 employees at the Lodi location. The Company has been in business
a in this.area for ,37 years. Please consider that hundreds of Goehring employees and
`+ their families work live and/or purchase services in the community.
r
r
CHECK ONE NAME A1)DRESS
�r GOEHRING FAMILY INTERESTED
EMPLOYEE ' MEMBER OF MEMBER OF
-GOEHRING COWUNITY
i EMPLOYEE
a.
Z Zei��
f.
2.
-. c-'/vw 0(-
CITY
` 2 VO
�75:?-116
T
PE T I TI 0 N
TO. Lodi City Council
We urge you to vote in favor of allowing the City of Lodi to accept the effiuent=.OF
Goehring Meat Co The.::Company is, a major economic force in the Community employing
.in.excess.of 500 erliployee.s at the Lodi location.
The Company has been in business
in 'this:area !for 37 -years. Please consider that hundreds of Coehring employees and
,
—their.families work, live and/or purchase- services in the community.
CHECK ONE NATE ADDRESS
GOEHRING FAMILY INTERESTED
DIPLOYEE MEMBER OF MEMBER OF
COEHRING CW1UNITY
DIPLOYEE
-\J1 z��--�-
CITY
AJk'_i
Yw
2
5 '
7/ -1 �21
CITY
LS« klLy of I OCIJ to accept. the effluent: of
ehring>'hleat` Co.' The Company is a major' economic forcein the Community employing
excess.ef.500 employees at the Lodi location. 7'he'C'omptny has been in Business
this :area for 37 years. Please consider that hundreds of Goehring employees and
eir families work, live and/or purchase services in the community.
CHECK ONE NAME ADDRESS
IRING FAMILY INTERESTED
,OYES ` MEMBER OF, MEMBER OF
GOEHRING CTMUNITY
DIPLOYEE
IV 4-
3.
5.
CITY
P E I T I 0 N ..
TO: ,Lodi City Council
i
CHECK ONE NAME ADDRESS
i f GOEHRING FAMILY INTERESTED
.CITY
EMPLOYEE MEMBER OF MEMBER OF
r GOEHRING COMMUNITY
EMPLOYEE
u
2.
lam'' 3 • r 1 La-
-7
V
y
-03
g C) ACIz- 17-1114
1/
t,J c"
We urge you to vote in favor of allowing the City
of Lodi
to <acc.ept the effluent of
Goehring Meat
Co. The Company i s a major economic,
force
in the Community employing
``•
M-
in excess of
S00 employees at the Lodi location.
The Company lias been in business
I
in this area
for 37 years. Please consider that hundreds
of Goehring employees and
their families
work, live and/or purchase services
in the
community.
i
CHECK ONE NAME ADDRESS
i f GOEHRING FAMILY INTERESTED
.CITY
EMPLOYEE MEMBER OF MEMBER OF
r GOEHRING COMMUNITY
EMPLOYEE
u
2.
lam'' 3 • r 1 La-
-7
V
y
-03
g C) ACIz- 17-1114
1/
t,J c"
of to accept the ef floent of
�
force, n the Community employing
rhe 'Company has been in hxoineoa
modredo of Goehring employees iod
;,.in tilt" community,
n
~'
of to accept the ef floent of
�
force, n the Community employing
rhe 'Company has been in hxoineoa
modredo of Goehring employees iod
;,.in tilt" community,
n
I
�
3.
C.I'TY
fk i 'P E T I T 1 0' N
��U ,
t
a Nv TO• �Lod'i City .Council';
-
4.
e urge you t`o vote in favor of all�owi.nb the. 'City
of Lodi to nccept the effluent
of
,.
�Goehri.n" The :Company is:'a major .economic
8 `Mean Co...
force in the Community
c-mp'Ioyiitg
�
im;excese of:.500 ;employees. at' the Lodi location,
The Company his been in
1)ustiress
in'ahis area :'for '37 ,years: Please consa,der.. that hundreds
of Goehrin$ employees
and
their families.,.work,- live and°/or : purchase services
in the cornmuni t y .
yy' S 3
rr ,
CHECK ONE NAME
ADDR G4S<.
GOEHRING =FAMILY INTERESTED
EMPLOYEE 41EMBER1OF MEMBER„'OF
,.. ;GOEHRING CW[UNITY
EMPLOYEE
C.I'TY
Fi
t
-
4.
rr ,
C.I'TY
L.t+.,ft3•�+um,snt.�r+ta�mrre..r�.rv,Jw•.M-xary �
'� 1 '�.,A - .. . ,.n ., .,fps. .. ,..
',1
N,
Lodi: City ,#Councx lk
k�M41 4 �. W y rf ti(is I '.A
urge you't:o rYote
favor ofallowing theCity cf£
the
Lodi to accept the effluent of
Goehrzng ;Meat'-Cq..: The: Company `is a major''economic force
in the employing
�n.excess of.'::500 employees" at; the .Lodi ocaton The'
Company"'has been in business
,
in t.hi.s"area,for,37-ye;ars.-`Please consider that hundreds
of t.oehring employees and
their fam�lie.`s work, five: and/or purchase• servi.ces.in
the comaunity.
y f
,
.$CHECk."69E;�J NAASE
ADDRESS CITY
GOEHRING`'`FAMILY INTERESTED
`���r EMPI'OYEE MEMBEROF -MEMBER-:"OF.,,
�� F ,GOEHRINGj, , :GOPf,IUNITY
EliPLOYEC
{
2.
1
..
3. 1
hit
P E T I T 1 0
N
2.
4
'Lodi City Council
Ali,
We
urgeyouto vote in favor
of allowing the City
of Lodi to accept the effluent of
.............
is a major economic
force in the Community :employing
yx
in
excess of:: 590,emplayesp
at the Lodi location.
The Company has been in I)LISirICISS
4 17
in
�'
t h'i sarea for 37years,
Please consider that hundreds
of (Ioeliring employees and
thei'r
families work, live
and/or purchase' services
i n the community
CHECK ONE
NAME
A 1) D R E S S CITY
hit
2.
4
Ali,
.............
4 17
Y
+ P E T I T I O N
,T,
a :`,Lodi':';`c ty::c
oaune r
g y,o:u:`''t:o:: vote 'i n': f:a:v.or'. of > allowing; the City of Lodi to nccept the effluent of
! Goehring..Meat.;Co. The Company: is a.ma_ior economic force in the Community employing
in. excess of 500 employees at the Lodi location, The Company has been in business
.;in this.:area Jor 37 years. Please consider that hundreds of Goehring employees and
their families work, live and/or purchase services in the community.
i
CHECK ONE NAME ADDRESS
�1 GOEHRING FAMILY
`
EMPLOYEE MEMBER OF
I GAEI3> NG
DfPLOYEE
t
4
INTERESTED
MEMBER OF
COMmIUNITY
CITY
2.
3.
5.
CHECK ONE
GOEHRING FAMILY INTERESTED
EMPLOYEE MEMBER OF MEMBER OF
GOEHRING COMMU N I TY
EMPLOYEE
NAME
ADDRESS
4
J
2,
J(
Z�c.
CITY
P E T I T 1 0 N
br
TO: Lodi City Council
yid
We urge;.You to vote in favor of allowing the City
of Lodi
to accept the effluent of
Goehring Meat Co. The Company is a major economic
force
i n the Community employingin
excess of 500 employees at the Lodi location.
The Company
has been i n business
in this area for 37 years. Please consider that hundreds
of Goehring employees and
their families work, live and/or purchase services
in the
community.
CHECK ONE
GOEHRING FAMILY INTERESTED
EMPLOYEE MEMBER OF MEMBER OF
GOEHRING COMMU N I TY
EMPLOYEE
NAME
ADDRESS
4
J
2,
J(
Z�c.
CITY
gas P `E T I T I 0 N S
Lodi City Council
=4 We urge you Lo vote in favor of allowing the City of Lodi to accept the effluent of
w€x,Goehring Meat Co.
The Company is .a major economic force in the Community employing
�`- in:excess of 500 employees at the Lodi location. The Company has been in business,
in this area for 37 years. Please consider that hundreds of rioehring employees and
their families work, live and/or purchase, services in the community.
t
14 ` CHECK ONE NAME Alli)RI SS
4' GOEHRING FAMILY INTERESTED
EMPLOYEE MEMBER OF MEMBER OF
GOEHRING COPDIUNITY
EMPLOYEE ^'
f f
tt o.r.i� i
-L'. X?
X? R°R R' r.aJ� Y ` `✓�� 8. 1� v fL• .
(r•
(
.. -
5.
3
`Y
M
�- k}
5.-
P E T I T I 0 N
F
'.
"Lodi City Council
We urge you to vote in favor of allowing
the City
of Lodi to accept the effluent of
Goehring hies;t Co. The Company is
a major economic
force in the Community employing
in excess of: 500 employees at the
Lodi location.
The Company has been in business
,'
in this-area'for 37 years. Please
consider that hundreds
of Goehring employees and
their famllres work, live and/or
purchase services
in the community.
CHECK ONE NAME
ADDRESS CITY
{ `
GOEHRING FAMILY. INTERESTED
EMPLOYEE:MEMBER"'OF. MEMBER OF
GOEHRING COMMUNITY
EMPLOYEE
zz 44W
5.-
P E T I T 1 0 N
TO.: Lodi CityCouncil
We urge You to -vote in favor of., allowing the City of e
Lodi to nccept ti effluent of
Goehring Meat Co.. The'Company is a major economic
force in the Community empl.0ying
In, excess.of $00 employees at the Lodi
location, The Company has been in business
in this area for..37years.
Please'consider that hundreds of Goehring employees and
their families work, live and/or purchase'services in the community.
CHECK ONE NAME ADDRESS
GOEHRING :FAMILY' INTERESTED
EMPLOYEE, MUGER OFMEMBER OF
GOEHRING . CW1UNITY
EMPLOYEE
J. ir
2.
3.
CITY
,tri S
3 9, fi7 P E T' `•I T I 0 N
�R TO Lodi City',Council
x� We urge you to vote in favor of allowing the City of Lodi to accept the effluent of
1 - Goehring Meat Co. The Company is a major economic force in the Community employing
in.excess of .500 employees at the Lodi location. The Company has been in business
in
.this area ''for 37 years. Please consider that hundreds of Goehring employees and
their families work, live and/or purchase' services in the community.
R{
CHECK ONE NAME A1)URESS
GOI;}iRING FAMILY INTERESTED
EMPLOYEEMl
MEMBER:'OF MDIBER' ! OF
;,,GOEH,RING COP>r1UNITY
EMPLOYEE
r .
3
S
CITY'
`•L.'%-01 Vti ��C ��./!'l f�t •y��' ��Y 4 V' .
f=-
,S
cY,
'TO. Lodi, City Council.
We urge you to vote in favor of allowing the City of Lodi to accept the effluent of
Goehring Meat Co, The Cornpany is a major economic force in the Community employing
in excess,of 500 employees at the Lodi location. The Company his been in business
in this area for 37 years. please consider that hundreds of Goehring employees and
their families work, live and/or purchase. services in the community,
CHECK ONE WIE ADDRESS
CI Tl
`� $/' o . t) � (fir / �P'+ �� f 1 d `��• �// / �/ /' �� . / !
4.
/
r �r-
5.
F,
P E. T I T 1 0 N
TO: Lodi City Council
yFr We urge YOU, tovote in favor 'of allowing
the City of I_o(li to accept the effluent of
Goehring Meat Co. The Company
is a major economic force in
the Community employing
in.exc'
ess of 500 employees at the Lodi.location.
The Company has been
'in this area f o r 37 vears. Please consider in business
their families that hundreds of Goehring employees and
work, services in the community.
live and/or purchase
CHECK. ONE
NAME
ADDRESS
GOEHRING -.FAMILY INTERESTED
EMPLOYEE MEMBER OF MEMBER 11 OF
GOEHRING COMMUNITY
EMPLOYEE
X..
17 J
C IT Y
T, C�
U C) 0
C-� E
0 Z: 0
4� f m 0 u
ri 0 -C
0 od -0
Q�c
u C: 0
ro u 41 0
= (D cri t.4 to
41 u 0
H Sr 0 10 w
to 0 1-4 '-f to
ri
'03 .,1 CZ -C
3 E -cl 0 U
0 0 u 34
4 co :I =3
co co 0 co
-IJ a) 0 w `� �\ �`
c. co co C:
> E to cn
m 0 0 w w
44 U a $-, >
co -r-f
.,q •H -4
E-
ER —X
41
0 0 0
0 > 0 0 c4 :t
00 0
0 L'I (4-4 co OUW
m
—4 CO 44 CC •r1u 04 0
0 0 w IH
-r-I
to ca S u u
00 to co
0 w C: 0 m 44
00 4 U r-I u w
C a Aj .,f HFI
0 0 f�i
o a; 0 r- = Z M
4j� 0
Z5
mu
/
TO Lodi City Counc,
W'
^ ~^u= You to vote nc of allowing the City of Lndi to occcpt xhe ctf}vrnt. oI-
--`.^ri"a Meat Cu Th6 Company is a major economic force in c/�c (:ommuoity ,m»1n?io8
in excess of zuu empl,oyees at the Lodi location. T6e Company �hna been in business
in"��u u�cu z '17Pleaae consider that
, hundreds Coehrin8 employeeo and zamz�z k, and/or Purchase service � imunity.
'
^ ^�
� k
_ CI]�
""E^u`Inox
� ' ,
�y��8CR��0n/
C0E8DING. DIPLOYEE.
�
-
^
2.
P -_'F a—v—iv
TO Loddii City Council
G ehu In rppu to vote in favor of allowing the City of r,
i o� roi Meat Co. The Company is a major economic fo
i of 500 employees at the Lodi location, Their
ea for 37 years. Please consider that hund
heir families work, live and/or purchase services in
i
to accept the efflu nt f
in 01e Community Mll1)go
oy Ong;
s pany ias been in business
e c°omm'urilirying anployees Land
vvnn+QQniivv �.vru iu�vi i a
3.
5.
s
CITY
TO Lodl�,City Council
|
eurge:you to: vote in favor of allowing the City
of Lodi to accept the efflucnc of
,a major economic forc in the Community omployioX
Lodi locution, 'Th Com
haa been in huuinesa
in this area,, f or' 37 years. Please conoider that hun Guehring employees and
their zamz��ea'nor�,�l1ve|auu/nr�'purchase services ln community.
` -
'
`
CHECK ONE NAME ADD8ESS
-/' FAMILY INTERESTED
EMPLOYEE MaIDER OF MEMBER OF
GOE8DI0G COMMUNITY
EMPLOYEE
i
_.-____________�
2,
_ 3,
g
�ENDLOYEE BE48ED OF MEM8R OF
� GOIO{RI0Q COHBDNI7Y �
/ ------------
234PL0YE3 �
'
m
r
i
l
2.
3.
PETITI00
TO: Lodi City Council
W urge you to vote i n favor of allowing the
City
of Lodi to accept the effluent of
Goehring Meat Co. The Company is u major economic
force in the Community employing
�n excess of 500 employees at the Lodi location.
The Cnmyany has been in business
in this area for 37 Please consider
that hundreds
of Qoehring employees an
.their
families work, live and/or purubuou services
iu the community^
ADDRESS
) /
80888U48 FAMILY INTERESTED
�
�ENDLOYEE BE48ED OF MEM8R OF
� GOIO{RI0Q COHBDNI7Y �
/ ------------
234PL0YE3 �
'
m
r
i
l
2.
3.
\
.��
CHECK ONE � N&88
{ORRMG FAMILY DNTBRE0TEED
EMPLOY E MEK48M OF MEMBER OF
INPLOYEE
, l
2
�
�� 3,
/'
'
/
`vf� P.
'E
'
.`T{\: Lodi ' City C / o 'il` `
|
�`�.`'
Ve urge You to vote in favor of allowing
Comhrinn"Heat` ` '�7he
the City
of Lodi
to accept the ei [) ocn� o[
Co . a
Cumpuny i
o mu ur economic
j
-
force
in the Community employing
inexcess of 500 employees at the
LoJilocation.
The Company
has been in business
�V '
in this area for 37 years. Please
their families
consider that hundreds
of Cuehring employees and
wurk, live and/or purchase
services
inthe
community,
\
.��
CHECK ONE � N&88
{ORRMG FAMILY DNTBRE0TEED
EMPLOY E MEK48M OF MEMBER OF
INPLOYEE
, l
2
�
�� 3,
/'
'
/
`vf� P.
4
/Z
I
CITY
P E T I
T 1 0 N
A �S
TO: Lodi -City Cou
h�b'i 1
f allowing
the City
of Lodi to nc c e j) t the effluent of
%joehring meat Co.
e Gamaany i -s Fv ms*j mr
economic
force in the Community eloploy j rig
i n excess of 500
employees
at the Lodi loo.ation,
Th e C o iii pa ii y .1in s b e. e n i n 1) u s i ii e s s
in this area for
3 T:years.
Please consid
;r that hundreds
of (Ioehrii)g employees and
services
irr the community.
CHECK ONE
'
A 1) 1) R 1SS1
IDIFLOYEE !EMBER OF
MEMBER OF
GOEHRING
GWIUNITY
EMPLOYEE
4
/Z
I
CITY
P E T I T I 0 N
y' T0::_ Lodi City Council
AIK
ars' We urge you to vote in favor of allowing the City of i,odi to accept the effluent of
Goehring"Meat.00 The Company is a major economic force i.n the Community employing
{ in: excess of 500 "employees at the Lodi location.The Company has been in business
-'rka in this area for 37 years. " Please consider that hundreds of Coehri.ng employees and
."4 their families work, live and/or purchase. services in the community.
CHECK ONE NAME ADDRESS 117'1
GOEHRING FAMILY" INTERESTED
7 EMPLOYEEMEMBER OF . MaIBER OF
k� GOEHRING COP6MUNITY
EMPLOYEE
r
:-
3.
TO. Lodi; City Council
`.' We urge you tq vote in _.'favo.r of allowing', the'. City of L
z `=Go6hring.;Meat `Co., The Company is a major economic for
`in.'exiteas`of 500,emp1oyees at the Lodi location The
in,kth2. area<:for- c37,:Years.' Please considerthat hundr
t
;.'their faimilies:work, live and/or vurchase•services in
CHECK ONE 'NAME
GOEHRING FAMILY ;:,INTERESTED `
EMPLOYEE- OF MEMBER_ -OF
",GOEHRING..': WDIUNITY
EMPLOYEE :: '.
to accept: the effluent of
n the Community employing
€BBY hfi§ b&6n in
of Coehring employees and
community.
�T
4.
s
1 -
I
2.
v�
to accept: the effluent of
n the Community employing
€BBY hfi§ b&6n in
of Coehring employees and
community.
�T
4.
s
5.
X"I
Gr 0 2 /
E T _I T -1 O N
City . Council
'
.ux t.
z ge you to vote ,in favor of .allowing th,e.City of Lodi to accept the effluent of
Goehring;Meat'Co.: The Company is'a major economic force in the Community employing
in:excess of S00:emplo`yees; at .theLodi Location. rhe Company has been in business
.in this .:area for 37:years.:,: Please consider"'that hundreds of C�oehring employees' and
their families work, live and/or purchase- services in the community,
CHECK; ONE " NAME ADDRESS
GOEHRING.: FAMILY.,:',;, INTERESTED
EMPLOYEE MEMBEW OF MEMBER OF
CITY
Jr. '
we:urge you ;to vote in:;.favor .of allowing the City of Lodi to accept the effluent of
iGoehrin&. Meat Co.' The`Company is a major:'economic force in the Community employing;
:in,. excess of: iS00 emplo`yee,s. at the Lodi location. The Compnny has been in business
'An .this;area`for"37 years. Please consider that hundreds of Goehring employees and
}their -families: work, live and/or purchase'services in the community.
CITY
2.
3
H.
- i A
• sp
5.
EMPLOYEE MEMBER OF `, MDIBER _ OF
GOEHRING -C%IMUNITY
`EMPLOYEE
CITY
„. P E T I T I `0 N
F
s TO Lodi''Ci.ty ' Council.
'.�E ;•
T
We: urge`you'to`vote �n fav'or'-ofallowing the'City of Lodi to accept the effluent_ of
Goehxing Meat Co. The.Company is a major economic force in the Community employing
j' ii►.excess of SO0 employees at"the Lodi location. The Company has been in business
.in`this area•for 37'yea'rs Please; considerthat hundreds of Goehring employees and
}'_ their`families `work,:liye.and/or'purchase• services in the community.
CHECK ONE NAME ADDRESS
GOEHRING; FAMILY . INTERESTEll:;
EMPLOYEE
MEMBER OF, ; MEMBER OF
GOEHRING COMLRJNITY
:EMPLOYEE
CITY
2:°
M .
;e
5
i Y'
CITY
' ... ....
t j E T I'T 1 0 N
t;
r_
T0. LOdi;:City Council
We urge you to vote in�£avor o£ allowing the City of Lodi to ,accept the effluent of
Goehring' Meat :Co The"Company is a, major economic fo rce in the Community employing
In: excess Of 500 .employees ,at, the, Lodi.Iocati.on.:. The Company ties been in business
itl this area :for37 years `Please .consider, :.that hund reds of f.�oetirin$ employees and
their famikies:work# live and/.or,.pu'rchase• services An the community.
CITY
7M�i. a�,
�•
y.
P E T I T I 0 N,
TO Lodi City Council
We urge you:: to vote in favor of, allowingthe City of Lodi to the effluent of
Goehring Meat Co. The Company is a major economic Force in the Community employing
An. excess"of:`500 emp o.yeesat the Lodi location. The Company has been in business
� in -this area for 37.years.; Please consider that hundreds of Coehring employees and
'x
their',.families work, live and/or purchase' services in the community.
r
44
CHECK `'ONE NAMEADDRESS
GOEHRING FAMILY INTERESTED
EMPLOYEE rIFT2BER
OF-:"MEMBER.',,Oj.WI
GaEHitING COFUYtUNITY ;
H''=;EFiRLOYEE
rr� ,
GiTY
1 r �. ���ly,i �ry,r.e-r t / / /l ! 1 /�� IJ/`F •�Jl.✓� (,. � �. ._ ^�, -_ ' L 1
• �rww+��..
2.
�� .ter-��+���+��,�-.���
3.
+.
sok:
X4-
5.
5.
T
' P E T I T I O N
We
r'T0: Lodi City G�uncilt
We .urge you. to vote infavor of allowing the City of
Lodi to
Gaehring;.'Meat: Co,. The Company is a` major economic force
in the
accept the effluent
Community
of
employing
,_.,in., excess Cof,:`500.e'm oyees'at the Lodi location. The
',
Company
has been in
business
ire this °area ,for 37years.: Please;consider that hundreds
of
Go.ehring employees
their families °work,.live':'and/or purchase services in
the community.
and
4 I
:. �4b(,
,Y ,t CHECK ONE W1
..,•
ADDRESS
Ll"I'Y
_.
�`
GOEHRING FAMILY IN'T'ERESTED .'
EMPLOYEE MET�IBI;R OF MEMBER OF.
.
GOEHRING COPir1UNITY
5
Y;xk EMPL Y
_.,.
S
1
f h�
f
2.
t
3.
{
v
1 S.
t i
V!,�-i i
,t
Gi T >
urge,, -you.,ro:, vote.:Ln,. tavor. of allowi,rig--the City of Lodi to accept the effluent of
Goehring1,.Meat,Co.'The' .,-Company i.s a:,majoreconomic force in tile Community employing
:.: "
in. excess of" 5WL,; employees` the Lodi*cation, Pm
oyqes, loThe C pany has been in business
in this_:�.
area '1`for �.,37. 'years'- �;:Please, consider that h u n d r
' I -6 r ki1V . . 1 � p of Coehring employees and
t h'e ir families '- ` - services . in c o mm u n i ty
/or,� purchase
CHECK: ONE NAME ADDRESS
GOEKRING'FAMILY INTERESTED
F
CITY
EMPLOYEE�'MEMBER OF
MEMBER OF
`GOEHRING,
COH11UNITY.
4.
EMPLOYEE
�g
2.
3.
F
CITY
4.
F
CITY
jy
4..
-PE T I T- ''I 0. N
ry i
I TO:- Lodi Cifty Council
�. Ri
��rWe.urge;you.to,vote in favor of allowing the City
of Lodi to accept the effluent
Goehring Meat Co. The. Company is a major economic
�J
of
force in the Community employing
in, excess- of SOO employees at..the Lodli location. -The
'Company pias been in business
in this;' area for 37
Ni",years Please consider';`that-hundreds
of Coehring employees and
„h their 4amilies work, live and/or; purchase- sarvices
in the community.
a
CHECK ONE NAME
ADDRESS Ci7'y
"r? GOEHRING '' FAMILY ` INTERESTED > -
EMPLOYEE :'MEMBER OF MEMBER ' OF
GOEHRING " C%1MUNITY
' EMPLOYEE
2
3.
..•�''.'Lt� "'���:;rs, ?w��j-a.so':�'y�nTmefzm,..�q ^ec7�'K..r .':+w�..T..c�+vrt , ver., ,"rr-•Y
`P. E T`1 •.T' 1�: 0 N.
�I 6 d Council`
u. r g e,,-,-- y 6u t
a 4 or:;*, 0f lowing the City ,of Lodi to accept the effluent of
Go eh r ing,M'eat,Co.. i The C
ompan,► I major .economic in the Community employing
--in f 5 "th-'
-.exc,ess-o 00 employeiis�,,at� odi 'location The Compirlyha s been in business
n tris ",a' e a f o r 37, years P
leas consider that hundreds of Goehring employees and
ami I i es.:I wo r k live e a
iheir:.J nd/or)"purchase- sery1ces in the community.
ADDRESS
L-,>- 10 kv
CITY
P ;E T 'I TJ 0 N
S
Lodi City Council:
;we llTge yoU'to. vote in,-'fav ar of allowing ;"the City
of Lodi to accept the effluent of
Ex�y� Goehring:MeatiCo. The'Company is a ma'jo.r economic
force in the Community employing
in.excess:•of ;500 employees at the Lodi location.
The Company has been in busines.,
in,this-area ,,for 37 years. Please consider that hundreds
of Goehring employees and
...� .their families work, live and/or purchase services
in the community.
CHECK ONE NAME
ADDRESS
CITY
GOEHRING FAMILY INTERESTED
EMPLOYEE MEMBER OF MEMBER OF
GOEHRING COWUNITY
' - EMPLOYEE
S•
d
i kir -
4 . y
3,
cJ
K..
Ali
5.
t
yj!
_ .. .'1 ... - rt'�s?'•`�'r r. �:4t+,��'C' i+•.t. '.^rF?T•+r.-!�.. .asri e,+r_��,",&v:??{;p�.D!Nf�.i�r*+e+�.Ffn;,rw.;rc+?K�1R 'iR,.,,?+.•:Y?Yie 3.:oC"�!%i"..11•7!�'lYin �?a'-'.���'.59'r....
?Yr:T+"'�!"".:QiFPTT^
rF
P E T I T'1 0 N
TO Lodi City Council
;.We urge,you to vote in favor of
kcoehring Meat Co. The Company
4
allowing the City of.Lodi to accent the effluent of
is a major economic force in the Community employing
"-=Acess..04-500 employees at the Lodi location., The Company has been in business
in this Area,f or 37 years Please consider
families that hundreds of Goehring employees and
:their'.
es work, live and/or.purchase'services in the com
NAME
ADDRESS
CITY
Zodl
2.
CITY
P E T I T I.0 N
T0: LodiCity., Council
We urge you to vote in favor of allowing the City of
Lodi
to accept the effluent of
f
Goehring;Meat` Co. The Company is a major economic force
in the Community employing
in excess of. 500 employees at the Lodi location. The
Company
gas been in business
in this.'area for 37 years. Please consider that hundreds
of: Goehring employees and
their families work, live and/or purchase services in
the
community.
CHECK ONE NAME
ADDRESS
CITY
t
GOEHRING FAMILY ..INTERESTED
FMPLOYEE1,.MEMBER OF :' MEMBER .0 '
G4EIiRING COMMUNITY
DIPLOYEE
}
ff
�
3
5.
l
J
' i
S
CITY
P E T I T 1 0 N
.,Lodi.,City: Council
We. o L, to 1..,,v ot e in favor of allowing the City
of Lodi to accept the effluent of
ehring,:-Meat, Co major
The Company is a jor economic
;-i-
in excess 3, OU, Lodi
500 employees the
force in the Community employing
. at location.,
The Company has been in business
t i's!-', a r e a f o r 37 years. Please 'consider''that hundreds
of Goehring employees and
-
their amil. es:' work live and/or purchase services
in the community.
CHECK ONE NAME
ADDRESS
GOEHR ING, FAMILY'- :INTERESTED
EMPLOYEE :MEMBER OF MEMBER OF
GOEHRING COMMUNITY
EMPLOY FIE
S
CITY
aE
`
)\'' - ----------`----------oc^===--�-�--
\/
0
P L 10 N
we,.-urge,."�yQ.14:t,g",.vote in tavor;ot,allowing the City of Lodi to accept the effluent of
G,oeh'iing''Meat"Co. The: Company, is,a major,economicforce in the Community employing
n e x c e s s,,,o j:,50 0 employees-atthe Lodi location, ation. The Company has been in business
.,-area 3 'f or 3 7 rs''.Please consider :that hundreds of Goehring employees and
in thi$.-, yea
their'families:
,work,:, ,;live and/or purchase services in the community.
7- -fl ,JA 1)
CITY
3.
f
...................
4.
.
�5_
2.
CITY
a:m
3.
4.
u4. aiLUwi118 tine 41cy of Lodi to accept the effluent of
Goehring cleat Co. 'The Company is a major economic force in the Community employing
in -ex ce6,sof S00 employee:r at she Lodi location. The Company has been in business
in•this.a`rea dor;37 years. Please :consider >that hundreds of Goehring employees and
their`fa"mi:lies' work l"
zye and/or purchase services in the community.
7
CITY
{ F E T 'I TI 0 N
:LodiCity Council
A :ria ur
$ eqou to vote Anfavor of allowing the'City or 1,odi to accept the effluent of
Goehring,Meat Co.; The.Company.is a.;;major economic force in the Community employing
in excess. of ;500 employees at the Lodi `'location,
The Company has been in business
;x in this: area', for, .37"y.ears. Please considerthat hundreds of Goehring employees and
their families work, live and/or purchase services in the community.
2
3.
�t
P E T I T I O N
°r t
1
TO:.- Lodi Cit Council y
We ur e
g you to vote in Favor of allowing the City
Goehrzng Meat Co. The,.
of Lodi to accept the effluent of
�
Company is'a major economic
in excess of 500: employees at the Lodi location.
force in the Community employing
°a
in this. area for 37 years. Please consider that hundreds
their, families
The Company has been in business;
of Goehring employees and
work, live and/or purchase services
in the community.
CHECK ONE NAME
ADDRESS
};
GOEHRZNG FAMILY INTERESTED
EMPLOYEE; MEMBER OF MEMBER`.. OF
is
GOEHRING COMMUNITY
'
EMPLOYEE
2.
3
-.�.. `.
CITY
CITY
.,. r
P E T I
T I O N
T0: L6d Cit ,.. . ,
., We urge`you t,o vote in favor of allowing
the City of
Lodi to '.ic.cept the effluent of
Go"ehring .Meat U, ° t tVampasy 3ja -a maj®i_
wcE@m(4h icp jf(ff(pe i n the Community employing
r.
in:;exess of 5M employees at the Lodi location. The
y ,'s en in business
CoMPnn1114'sle
in this area for37 years. Please consider that hundreds
of Goohring employees and
their;.families work, 'live and/or purchase
services. in
the community.
CHECK ONE NAME
AIPDRESS
'i
GOEHRING 1'AMILY INTERESTEA
EMPLOYEE "MEMBER OF:.:MDIBER": OF
GOEHRING COM11UNITY
EMPLOYEE
CITY
--n , 1 W ..,tea 11S.1dVV7 vi al.iowing the Gity of Lodi to accent the effluent of
" Goehring`Meat Co.; The Company is .a major economic force in the Community employing
in 'excess of 500 `employees at the Lodi location. The Company has been in businc>ss
in this.area for;37.yef.:i
.Goehrng employees and
±" the€�rs, Please consider that hundreds of f'1'
ami ies work., live and/or purchase services in the community.
I:
CHECK ONE NAME ADDRESS
GOEHRING I COMMUNITY
'EMPLOYEE
CITY
Y,:f.....
F' E T I T I 0 N
TO: Lodi City, Council
We,ur�e you .to vote in favor
of'allowing'the.City of
Lodi to accept the effluent of
{
Goehring Meat Co. The :Company
;is a;major economic force
in the Community employing
I excess: of.500 employees"at
the Lodi location. The
Company teas been in business
in thisare,a°for; 37 Years."
Please consider that hundreds
of Goehring employees and
their"families work,'"lave
and/or"purchase services in
the community.
CHECP" '"ONE
NAME'
ADDRESS
CITY
GOEHRING" FAMILY :IN'T'ERESTED
F1`iPLOYEE MEMBER OF MEMBER OF
i;OEHRING COMMUNITY
EMPLOYEE
3.
C
CITY
`
3.
____-�
- - ' '------'--
`
`
'
`
W e.urge you. to i n' favor of. allowing the Cityof
Lodi to accept the effluent of
major
economicGbehringMeat;: Co. The Company is a
force in Lho Community employing
location. ;
The Company has been in hoaineoo
derthat hundreds
of Goehrin8 employees and
their� families work, li aa*,'aerviceo'iu_the
community.
` `
_ N '� -��` �
ADDRESS
- '
GOEHRIN YAMILY INTERESTED
DIPLOYEE :MEMBER OF '--__- -�. .
�
-GOEHRING '. 'COWUNITY
CITY
`
3.
____-�
CHECK ONE N A',,l E
ADDRESS
GOEHRING FAMILY INTERESTED
EMPLOYEE,MEMBER OF MEMBER OF
GOEHRING COMWITY
EMPLOYEE
age
2. Gc 4L/
3.
5.
1
S
CITY
Y
PE T IT I O N
�4 Xt
& >.
T0, L Lodi` City` Council
fit
We urge you to vote zn:'favor of.allowing the. City
of Lodi
to accept the effluent of
Goeh"ring Meat'=Co. The Company is a: major economic:
force
J.n the'Community employing
='
in excess'of:5.00 employees at the Lodi Iocation
The Company
has limn in business
in,,: thisarea for 37 years. Pleaseconsider that hundreds
of Goehring employees and
aheir:.fatgilies ;xox live and/or .purchase services
in r,he
community.
1
S
CITY
EMPLOYEE MMER OF MEMBER OF
GOEHRING COMUNITY
FlIPLOYEE
CITY
I
f.
2.
LA1.n, Q f)T
_T I qoxk - I
CITY
6�7 d
TOO 11
low 4 how
FAT At
CITY
6�7 d
r
J
CI'T'Y
P E TI T I O N
J
Lodi City Council
sa, We urge you to vote in`-.fa.v�r of al1.lowing the City of
tGoehring.:Meat
Lodi to accept the effluent of
Co. The Company is a'major economic force
in.
it' the Community employing
excess of 500,employees -at the Lodi location. The
Company has been in business
in this area for 37 years. Please consider. that hundreds
..;� their families
of.` 'Coehring employees and
work, live and/or purchase services in
the community.
CHECK ONE NAME
AllT)KfiSS
GOEHRING FAMILY INTERESTED
EMPLOYEE MEMBER OF 'MEMBER OF
t GOEHRING COM?IUNITY
DIPLOYEE
Y
s�
wr -
t
CI'T'Y
CITY
P` E T IT I 0` N
%..,'L/ + _ l`-,-,
.-i. �� � ,r
Lam• t` ,., i
4,.
Lodi City Council'
x,
We urge you to vote in favor
Goehring heat Co. The..Company
of allowing the City
of Lodi'to
accept the effluent of.
xn.excess of 500 employees
is a major economic
at the Lodi location.
force in the
Community em pines
in .this 'area' for 37 years,
Please e consider that hundreds
The Com an
PY
of
h�:s been in
n business
Goehrinb employees
their families work, live,
and/or purchase services
in the community.
and
CHECK ONE
NAME
nDURESs
GOEHRING. FAMILY INTERESTED
"
EMPLOYEE MDIBER OF, MEMBER OF.
;GOEHRING COMMUNITY:
EMPLOYEE
Xl
CITY
%..,'L/ + _ l`-,-,
.-i. �� � ,r
Lam• t` ,., i
4,.
,;.
P E T I T 1 0 N
d'
Lodi C3ty_.,Cnuncil
r
,kt
We urge, you :to vote in 'favor .of allowing the. City. of
1,vdi to ncce(+t the effluent of
Goeh.ring :Meat, ;.Co. :The Company is a major economic force
in the Community employing
an..excess of 500 employees'at the Lodi location. The
Company has been in business
4�
in.this. :area for. 37 years.' Please consider that hundreds
of (ioehring employees and
their families work, live and/or purchase services. in
the community.
'
CHECK:ONE NAME
ADDRESS
CITY
GOEHRING.: FAMILY INTERESTED
EMPLOYEE '<.' MEMBER OF MEMBER •. OF.
GOEHRING COPIMNNITY
EPiPL____ 0_ YEL
`
._ . ..,._.. __.. 2
4.
5. .
q'.
t
a
+
r . , .; h.. . t .. . _. •.. ;¢i'"a' """g; -s t r- e� n� .c +w �c. r� -r- fi�±a , : .+Say- ,r,r•ryrs•^, : ri+ a ;e• a ^.r:-�w rrs v•sc,-• s+::qrar.»o.---r-xn -
n:,. -a -r* �
V
,
Lo'di''C2.ty Council 0Un
, U geyou C, or: of allowing the City of 'Lod-' accept the effluent of
�_ v
6h C the Community employing
The.:Company any is r, -economic force in
q r -in major p
n�. excess;��.-Ot-:5-00ploye
-'? em es,:a npatiy his been inbusinessbusiness,.
n: -a r e a �:_, Ior:..
3T.: -years nu
Please cosider: thata%d
hureds of Gueltring employees and
- s
theirfamilies.work
arid/or purchaseservicesin the community
FAMILY'
EMPLOYEE;.: MEMBER. OF..',:. MEMBER 01
GO9jjR'ING:. COMMUNITY
Jtftnoyt. k.
-574
A
CITY
/_ C, (`/ / ,
3.
A
CITY
/_ C, (`/ / ,
t ,..a•es�:��u-w� .v#.0 La favor oz atlowi.ng tile,Uity of Lodi to accept the effluent of
r Goehring Meat Co. The Company'is'a major economic force in the Community employing
x excess of-' 500 -,employees. at' the Lodi 'location. The Company has been in business
,`in this,area.for;'37 years. Please consider that hundreds of Goehring employees and
. their
tL 'i r t
families workt.'live':
and/or purchase - services in
the community.
4t S 3
r
� l a
CHECK ONE
NAME
ADDRESS
GOEHRING
FAMILY, INTERESTED
.
EMPLOYEE
:MEMBER OF 'MEMBER " OF
c
GOEHRING COWUNITY
x,
EMPLOYEE
.�,
3.
.s
r
a'`as
5•
aYry
CITY
cSPK 11'1,11ife ro
P E TI T ,I O N
i
�>
T0. Lodi City Council::
e urge you to vote fin favor of allowing the City of
Lodi to accept the effluent of
'
;Goehring' Meat; C,o.
The Company is a major economic : force
in the Community
employing
in.excess of,:,5W
employees at '-the Lodi location. the
Company has been in
business
in Chis area.,,.for.37
years. Please consider that hundreds
of Coehring employees
and
R
their'families�work,
live: and/or purchase, services in
the community.
fxkp
y
CHECK` ONE
NAME
ADDRESS
CITY
}'_
GOEHRING FAMILY
INTERESTED
'
EMPLOYEE
MWER ;OF '
MEMBER OF
s Y,
GOEHRING
COMMUNITY
rr
DIPLOYEE
"
� r
7�c CJ I
I c.,
r
z. �llR S
3.
�. Oin
�� t,
i
�t
E-fkT() GUt�
�
r tit
i
�6-
2.
f
P1. T I` T I>0 N
'
4
TO Lodi. C
ity Caunc�1
'
5.
°4
We urge ya:u to'vote in favor of allowing the City of .Lodz
Goehrin MeatiCo.
to accept the. effluent of
b
g The.`Company is a major`.economic force
inexcess' of 500 employees at
in the Community employing
the Lodi location, The Company
in this area for 37
;i as been in business
years. Please consider that hundreds
their families work live and/org
of Goehrin employees and
purchase services in the
community.
CHECK ONE NAME ADDRESS
t„ GOEHRING
FAMILY -INTERESTED
EMPLOYEE 'MEMBER OF MEMBER OF
GOEHRING COMMUNITY
EMPLOYEE
2.
3.
'
5.
CITY
QIIFY
,
ri2i�z,L�rc�,: f .�-1'li�� %!�/,f�
c `� L • ..li-
`lam71
T7
`j.
3 . , �-��,yt ��/i �.> �
-fig, 7�5 �-' `'t-'l�" C- ��/, �'
�-- = f..�' ,!:
� •�,�-.
,
CITY
."We:,urge you -"to vote in £avo'r, of allowing the City of 1,odi to accept: the effluent of
Coehring Meat Co. The Company is a major economic force in the Community employi ng
3n.excess_of 500 employees .'at the Lodi location, The Company has been in business
in"this. area fol' years. Please consider that hundreds of (;oehring anployees and
their":families wark.; live and/or' purchase services in the community.
CITY
1. ,� ,, ,.� ,.� � n, _ �- ;• ,-.- ���
i
2.
3.
4.
5.
CITY
P E T I T 1 0 N
TO: Lodi':City
,Council,
We urge -you to vote in favor
of allowing the' City of Lodi to accept the effluent of
G.o,e h r 3'. n g Meat Co.,
The C o.
mpany
s a major economic force in the Community employing
V
in excess of .5001
employees
at the Lodi location. The Company has been in business
i nemployees
this area � for
37, years.:
Pleaseconsider that hundreds of Coehringand
their families work,
live
and/or purchase,services in the community.
CHECK ONE
:NAME ADDRESS
GOEHRING "'FAMILY
INTERESTED.
'EMPLOYEEMEMBER OF
MEMBER ; OF-
GOEHRING
COMMUNITY
EMPLOYEE
CITY
TO: Lodi City Council'
We urge'you to vote in favor of allowing the City of.1'Lodi. to accept the effluent of
Goehring Meat` Co.; The Company is a major. economic force in the Community employing
in excess„of '500 employees`at'the Lodi location. The'Company has been in business
in this area 37 years Please:consid-er that hundreds of Coehring employees and
their families work,'live,and/or purchase services ii %the community.
C S#
CITY
2 •
Iz
`1
P'
E
T
I 5'
O
N
TO: Lodi City Council'
We urge'you to vote in favor of allowing the City of.1'Lodi. to accept the effluent of
Goehring Meat` Co.; The Company is a major. economic force in the Community employing
in excess„of '500 employees`at'the Lodi location. The'Company has been in business
in this area 37 years Please:consid-er that hundreds of Coehring employees and
their families work,'live,and/or purchase services ii %the community.
C S#
CITY
2 •
Iz
VA
�aacia "l 41uaxl-Lt:b worKiive'an(1/Or `purchase, sez-vices in the comlRuniCy.
i.;
`CHECK ONE NAMP. r`T•I•P
90EHRING COMUNITY
,EMPLOYEE
l
P E •T_,_I T, 10 N s
ttMY.y ,'xA1�S
on
TO Lodi City Council
" We urge you to vote in favor .of allowing .the City of Lodi to accept the effluent of
,dz/r,It Goehrin Meat Co.< The 'Com an is .a;,ma or. economic force in the Communis em Ile
,r g: P y_ J Y F ying
41,
"in.`excess of 500 empJoye'esat the Lodi location. The Company has Leen in business
in this area for `37 y ., - n - - �. d
� bit+ n - p � n i .i .. .. 4 L. .. 4 {. .. ...1 .� _ .1 _ _ C l� _ - t. _ _ 1
their,. families "work, "lxve and/or pus -_h s �r v1 in the �Qi1?.!Ilu?OtY.,
�.
F 4tA
144 _
_•: Mals:-t�'t�l�i
AD
CI'I'F
i
GOWING FAMILY INTERESTED
EMPLOYEE . MEMBER. OF MEl kk41 OF
GOEHItING CO�UIUNITY
'
EMPLOYEE-
MPLOYE
4
��.:a'• �/ _ /�
.,
56
t
.l
yy 2.
Ad
3.
1 '
: 4
5.
t *°
r 3 r
iY t
F l
r- i=
. l., . r I- r.. . .. `."�. bF.'l".;',ryriKi'AS+{q?r!!.;:.P.'ki:R'n•4Rlla',^@t�A?"•a'�GI"'S:f',�.:.'/+1:,^.^'.".... ,+.4n K .•.w�i. i'':'•. •.
L "'7."
.,... —. -,. ,..
P. E T r i r - 10 N
10 Lod i: Ci'tY,` Counci I
urge _you itQvote i -n, favor of .allowing ,the -City of Lodi to nccept the effluent of
�:
Gpph r 3. n ge' ,a �Co The dom'pany is . a major: or: economic force in the Community employing
-in :`excess of 5OO_'The Company has been in business
.emplqy'ee.s::at the, Lodi 1 ocati,on
n i�-thiav!; area':, I q rl"...37 :-.Years.:. -'P.1 ease, '� on' ider 't hundreds of Goehring employees and
C S, A
�,work liv6` andlor,:purchase- services in the community.
""7 Cr-
ONE ADDRESS
A
W
GOEHRING
= FAMILY ""INTERWED.'.
EMPLOYEE
MEMBER OF.,. MEMBER OF
*,.
-,;M`
'GOEHRIW's COMMUNITY
a"S I
UIPLOYEE-
3.
""7 Cr-
CITY
2.,
3.
E,
5.,
re
d,
CITY
YOU to vote in:.favor of allowing.the`City of Lodi to accept the effluent of
g.,Meat=Co.:- The Company is a major economic force in the CoMmunity employing
ss. of 50Q employees 'at the -Lodi location. The Company has been in business
area for 37 years. -Please consider that hundreds of Goehring employees and
amilies work, live and/or purchaseservices in the community_
ADDRESS
CITY
PE -T:; I,: T I:0 N
Lodi' City Coundil,.-_ .
J;. .
n"4:� v
ou,�I
We --urs w ng�,-:the:.: L
Cit" of `Lodi tot6ccept the effluent of
G 6 e h r i n Mea' Co. e: C
ompany.. s;a,`majo,r ;economic force in the Community employing
I n -excess -o e'mployees;.at the Lodi166ation., Tile Company has been in business
.,.
n chis area -,for 37 se S;that'
'con i*de-r' :hundreds of Goehring employees and
. �
live in the community.
,their, families.. work ive nd/or pu'rchase,,services
a
CHECK ONE
NAME ADDRESS
GOEHRING FAMILY INTERESTED
EMPLOYEE.._MFNRF.R.'.OF MPMER OF.
GOEHRING COMMUNITY
I
A4rAL
CITY
� q 3,o /v, t
CITY
Baum
AAC
3. .
{
Volvo! yo�
1
P E 'T. I 1 0 N
Lodi CityCouncil
We urge you to v n t- Ir
e in avor of allowing the City of Lodi to accept the effluent of
'.Goehring Meat Co.'. I
The Company is a majoreconomicforce in the Community employing
exces
slof 500'.dmployees at the Lodi lo'
in cation. The Com pilily )as been in business
this''area. for 37 years:. Please consider that hundreds of Goehring employees and
V,
ami lies work, live and/or purchase services in tile communi tv.
CHECK ONE
NAME
GOEHRING FAMILY :. INTERESTED
`EMPLOYEE'MEMBER OF MEMBER OF
.:.GOEHRING CWfUNITY
ur
2.
5,
ADDRESS CITY
V
CITY
P E T I T 1 0 N
ti
,TO: Lodi City.'. Council'
We urge you to vote in -favor of`,allowing t he City
allowin
of Lodi to accept the effluent of
Goehring,'Meat Co. The.,Company is a major economic
force in the Community employing
in. -excess of 500: -employees at the Lodi location.
The Company has been in business
.
An this area for37 y ears. Please'consider.that hundreds
of Goehring employees and
d
their'fam'ilies.. wo,rk,-,live and/or purchase-services.in
the community.
CHECK ONE NAME
ADDRESS
GOEHRING FAMILY INTERESTED
EMPLOYEE OF 'MEMBER OF
GOEHRING COMMUNITY:,
EMPLOYEE
Z
9z
2.
q V,
3
4.
CITY
1• •ry .4i'fl'�'+-':rid
yy;}pp:r • �;r =.. :.: Lodi :::City;'Council
g y to vote.in favor 'of allowing. the..City of
Lodi to accept the effluent
:GoehrinMeat.; Co. The Com an is ..a major economic force
excess'
in the Comintinity
of
employing
of ;500 employees`at the. Lodi location. 'rr�e
Company `r;rs been in
business
his; area ; for 37. years, : 'Please consider that hundreds
.:r,°•:,,.....their.
of (.;oelir•irig employees
and
families..'. work live :and/or.
,..:..1;,.,�r.�.,::•, ,'.....' � purchase- services in
the community
,
.
CHECK ONE NAME
r.
AllI)RESS
CITY
Y
; :GOEHRING FAI'iILY',. INTERESTED':.
x EMI' LOYEE MEMBER OF MEAiBER OF
R,rY
GOEHRING CORA :. IUNITY.
D 1PLOYEE
at rN
r f7
`
L '�!w Ci 1+ ..n
cc
,��. ,/ / .►...
.`L
fJ
2.
Id
4.
Q3� s G ad
LO
fL
v '
i
.:::• !;.!! y ..
s
J
P' E -T -I T I 0 N
a
TO:
Lodi City LouisC:.
_ F '
We urge,you t'o vot:e in favor of allowing the ':ity of Lodi to accept the effluent of
Goehring Meat" Co, The Company, is a u;?,7or economic force in the Community employing
in. excess of � 500' employees at the Lodi location.. The Company has Leen in business
in' this area :for 37years.; Please consider that hundreds of Goehring employees and
their families Work, live and/or purchase services in the community.
CHECK ONE NAME ADDRESS CITY
GOEHRING FAMILY : INTERESTED
EMPLOYEE 'MEMBER OF MEMBER -0F
'GOEHRING COMMUNITY
EMPLOYEE
2.
5.
i
nr
;r 4
... ... .........
P E T 1 T 1 0 N
-Council
TO: Lodi City
W
We urge. you, to vote in favor of allowing -the City
of Lodi to accept the effluent of
oebring , M, e at _C o The Company is a majorecon economic i c
force in the Community employing
in 'excess. of 500 employees., at the Lodi location.
The Company has been in business
in this area for 37 years. Jlease consider that hundreds
if Goehring employees and
their families -work, live and/or purchase services
in the community.
CHECKONE NAME
ADDRESS
GOEHRING FAMILY INTERESTED
EMPLOYEE, MEMBER 07.:MEMBER: OF
GOEHRING COMMUNITY
'EMPLOYEE
CITY
P E`.T I T 1 0 N
Lodi City Council..J
We e 111: f
u,rge'.y oul
M avor.�.,q. allowing the City
G 6 e h r i n Meat Co.
of Lodi
o
t nccept the effluent of
The ,Company . is.a major economic
in. excess o f ;500 employees Ployees at the"Lodi location.
force
The
in the Community employing
tiiin
,this
.h.iIs,a,
r'eI4,6r 37 years.. Please consider that hundreds
their familiestwork, 'and/or
Company
has been in business
of Goebring employees and
, livepurchaseservicesin
the
community.
Pmt
CHECK ONE
NAME
ADDRESS
GOEHR,ING, FAMILY INTERESTED..,
EMPLOYEE -MEMBER OF MERER OF�
G.OEHRING CO`DIUNITY
DIPLOYLE
CITY
/6wl
, I-
Six reasons why City should not accept Goehring Meat's wastes
o Against City policy
o Would set precedent
t
Sri
a
y
` -
`..,
'rY?�..1:.fJfl.�i.-'.�`'Y .f5.-:Y,�L��9 r'�i�C,xN�iYV++'P�IVa:J;�.kaW,ki�S r.Ki;&%i N,Y'�fkcr..v.. ."F 4�.� ,i !
.hs .- t,. ..... L,r.�. --. c i.•-_•
!.. ..., ... x..� ,. :,P.ni„i � V ..
:F.. ,-, ...� �.. --..
A
o City ordinance prohibits serving areas outside City limits
o Coehring Meat located north of Mokelumne River
� c f
� di .i --y �. I - vi.:ii,.•e-SaM1 -S�.R *.a'"i�:.e .
d
..����4L,,LL,,���� .may^ �.: F.�G ¢ r.,�'^Y, 1Cd..Z•Le�SJ' M1A.. .
r _
� L
t
3r
3
t
f
�
k
%
� c f
� di .i --y �. I - vi.:ii,.•e-SaM1 -S�.R *.a'"i�:.e .
d
..����4L,,LL,,���� .may^ �.: F.�G ¢ r.,�'^Y, 1Cd..Z•Le�SJ' M1A.. .
Would set precedent
o Would lose capacity which would otherwise be available
to located within City limits
o Industry located outside City limits not on tax rolls
o Could become a regional plant
o Growth policies outside City limits are decided by
o City does not have NPDES requirement for TDS now
o RWQCB has already notified City of Manteca that they may
act NPDES requirements on TDS
o City of Lodi has been told verbally that TDS could be added
to its next NPDES permit
o Existing and proposed N. Stockton municipal wells are
located down -gradient from City's disposal area
Reduce City's current margin of safety
o Current City effluent 440 mg/L and rising
o Industrial effluent TDS highly variable
o Additional 10% of TDS load would increase effluent TDS to
480 mg/L - very close to 500 mg/L
o "Dilution water" from other industries is not available year-
round
,).
'�r��"(�r�'.th�..�W tr'�'„!��'^'
a..},7,41v.X'x.u5y5 i�1',��•W��t. ...+. ....
.. ux....,n.a,. r'.. ..
..... f L %. .�... Ghw :.V tCI .�.. k .. '�
�iX,^,ae
1
Goehring Meat has other alternatives
o Tie-in to City was highest cost alternative
o Accor ding -to report, low rate irrigation on nearby lands was
less expensive
o At least two additional alternatives with potential to be less
expensive than tie-in to City have not been considered
On-site treatment and discharge to local irrigation.
distribution system
On-site treatment and
discharge to
Mokelumne
River
1
4 {
Y.
Unknowns regarding Goehrim� Meat's proposal
o Very little data exist on either the City's or Goehring Meat's
waste
Major concerns - flow and TDS
Other concerns - grease, odors, corrosion, pff, BOD
:.tel.. ,.':I,•�„�;:_
lil'i
M E M 0 R A H D U M
TO : Nonorabl e Mayor and
Members of the City Council
FROM: City Hanager
DATE: June 17, 1988
SUBJ : Goehring Meat Request
.:Ihe latest development in the Goehring Meat issue is briefly
surianarized in the attached num prepared by the Public Woks
Director. City staff, the City's consulting engineers and Goehring
Meat's engineers met in Walnut Creek shortly after the My 18 City
Council meeting, at which this matter was discussed in considerable
detail. After some discussion o f alternate approaches i t was
decided to send a joint letter to the State's Regional Water Quality
Control Board protesting the State's application to the Goehring
Meat issue of the little -used "Non-Degredation Policy." Since then,
Goehring's engineers have developed a modified alternate which may
satisfy the State. The joint letter will now not be sent pending an
answer from the State regarding the approval/disapproval of this
alternate. The fervent hope of all is that this latest recommended
solution is acceptable to the State thus putting this thorny issue
to rest.
JUN 1 ? '88
City Ma"'$er's Office.
TO : City Manager
FROM: Public Works Director
DATE: June 15, 1988
SUBJECT Status of Goehring Mea 's Request
At the request of Goehring Meat's engineer, "e are not sending the joint
letter to the Regional Water Quality Control Board. Nolte has now come up
with a modified new alternate which will allow them to do rapid
infiltration on their property. Nolte felt that they wanted to get an
answer on this alternate before the joint letter was sent. Attached is a
copy of their submittal to the Regional Board requesting approval of the
new alternate. Under this raw alternate, they will reduce their TDS to
less than 500 mg/l which is less than secondary drinking water standards.
Since this alternate does not involve Lodi, w have no major objections.
Please return the attachment for cur Public Wcd<s files.
Jack L. Ronsko
Public Works Director
JLR/ma
Attachment
cc: Water/Wastewater Superintendent
Black & Veatch
Max Burchett
MEMORANDUM
MEMO TO: Ken Jones,, Greg Lindstadt, Black & Veatcb,
FROM: Ron Crites, Richt a ®n, Nolte & Associates
(M -
SUBJECT: RESPONSE TO BLACK & VEATCH MEMO RE: PROPOSED
DISCHARGE OF GOEHRING PROCESS WASTEWATER TO
THE CITY OF LODI INDUSTRIAL WWTP
APR 7 1988
OF L (D D }
AU13L1C VkCRKS O-c?AF1T141ENT
DATE: 4/6/88
FILE: 2353-88-00
PAGE: 1 OF 3
Goehring Meat requests that the City of Lodi reconsider the proposed discharge
of process wastewater into the City industrial waste system under a new set of
conditions. A major change in Goehring Meat's approach to process wastewater
management has recently occurred. In -plant. modifications are planned to allow
the current process wastewater to be divided into iw o streams -- one, approxi-
mately 85 to 90 % of the process wastewater with a TDS concentration below
750 ma/l, and two, the remaining 10 to 15 % consisting of high TDS brine. The
low TDS waste stream would receive pretreatment consisting of fine screening
and dissolved air flotation for oil and grease removal prior to discharge to
the City industrial waste sewer. The high TDS brine would be treated at the
Goehring plant using energy intensive evaporation or double lined evaporation
ponds_
In response to your concerns that the Goehring waste has not been completely
characterized, enclosed for your review are recent laboratory reports contain-
ing the chemical analysis of the process wastewater (attachinent I). It is
evident from the reports that the Goehring process wastewater does not contain
toxicants in excess of the maximum allowable concentration contained in the
City ordinance. The estimated average concentration of other constituents of
concern were contained in our 2/22/88 memo. Based on additional flow data
(attachment 2) since our first memo in January, it appears that the 110,000 gpd
flow estimate used in our pr,vious memo represents a maximum month flow rate.
The annual average flow rate is estimated to be 90,000 gpd. Based on 90 % of
this flow being segregated with a low TDS, the total annual flow to be dis-
charged to the City would not exceed 31 Mgal per year.
The revised cost estimate for the proposed connection based on the lower flow
rate and lower TDS concentration is presented below in Table 1. With a lower
TDS level, discharge during the winter months would not present a problem in
the existing industrial waste storage ponds. Blending of the Goehring flow in
the 30 Mgal aerated pond and with infiltration in the industrial sewer, rain -
fail and secondary effluent would maintain 'the TDS concentration in the ponds
at acceptable levels. An estimated 15 Mgal of storage would be required for
the (1 in 10 wet year) for the Goehring flow. The volume of storage to be
Memo: Ken Jones, Greg Lindstat, Black and Veatch Page 2 of 03
Date: 4/6/88
provided at the Goehring plant, would be approximately 2 weeks flow for possible
emergencies or problems with the pretreatment facilities. With a lower total
annual flow, the additional land area required for irrigation for the Goehring
flow would be reduced from the previous estimate. However this would be offset
by additional land required for storage.
TABLE 1
SIY OF ESTIl4ATED COSTS
Item
Quantity
Estimated Cost,
In -plant Piping Modifications
I
Is
250,000
Brine Evaporation Process
1
Is
125,000
Land for Irrigation
25
ac
125,000
Additiona? Storage Pond Capacity
15
MG
50,000
Construction of Lined Storage
Ponds on Goehring's Property
I
ac
50,000
Onsite pH Monitoring Facility
11s
7,000
Pump Station and Force Main
4,500
if
120,000
Sludge Removal Equipment
1
Is
12,000
Memo: Kan Jones, Greg Lindstat, B1 ack and Veatch Page 3 of 03
Date: 4/6/88
stream on the industrial waste system will be minimal. On an annual average,
a TDS increase of approximately 12 mg/1, from 424 mg/l to 436 mg/l (about
20%) , would occur based on current estimates of TDS concentrations of the PCP
waste and the domestic effluent (see attached calculation). With the Goehring
waste discharge at 750 mg/1, the City's goal of limiting the TDS concentration
- to less than 500 mg/l in the effluent applied to the land disposal system
could be achieved with a comfortable margin of safety. --
Another concern expressed by the City is that the Regional Board will impose a
TGS limit on the effluent dischar4ed to the land disposal system. W have
contacted the Regional Board and the eve stated that there are curEEM no
to impose such a i imit OR the City of Lodi' effluent going to land.
In summary, Goehring is dropping their request that the City accept a high TDS
waste stream. Instead, Goehring is prepared to meet the 750 mg/1 TDS limit
currently contained in the City waste ordinance. Vt would still like the
opportunity to meet with you and the City staff to resolve technical issues
associated with the proposed Goehring connection. Goehring's Cease and Desist
Order requires that a long-term wastewater alternative be selected by June 1,
at which time a technical report must be submitted to the Regional Board.
Remaining technical issues to be negotiated include determination of the con-
nection fee and 0&M charges to be assessed to Goehring for the proposed
connection. These and an other outstanding issues should be resolved as soon
as possible to allow sufficient time for the City Council to make a decision
prior t o the June 1 deadline.
RGS/gjm (CM0032-N.5)
Enclosures
xc: Don Dennis, Goehring Meat Inc.
Mr. Jack Ronsko, City of Lodi
14 Fran Forkas, City of Lodi
Ms. Antoni a Vorster, CRWQCB
�.
r
In
NELSON LABORATO.KIES
ANXt l;CON ,[t.r:\x'1:5
TO: Goehring Meat Inc, PR a 519$8 Date: APr l 4. 198$
. P.0. Box 1A7 Report No. 2211
Lodi, CA 95240 101Tc Lab No. 2011
Attention-: K.D.
page 1 of 2 oases
copy to: George S. Nolte & Associates, 1730 "I" St., Suite 100, Sacramento, CA 95814-3002)
P_ttertion: Rich Stratton
Voll rim are the results cf analysis of a sample or sanples as received from you by this
abora9 : -
NAME OF MATERIAL water Received: 3-8-88
Goehring Samwle Identification:
(Sample rec'd 3/8/88)
Carbonate (CO3) , mpg/z
(as CaCO3) c10
Bicarbonate (HM3), iT9/L
(as CaCO3) 445
Chloride (Cl) ; mg/L 900
Sulfate (SC�),`mg/L 38
Total Kje dahl Nitrogen W 39
Nit .(M3) ,.' m3/L 2
NELS 3N LAB ORATO(I.JES
\S
ANAI 'i t V - Al. (A VSA%�!) C().\-SU!A'A • T
Goehrinq Meat Inc. Date: April 4, 1988
Lodi, CA Report No. 2011
Lab No. 2011
Fixed Dissolved Solids, mg/Lx
*Standard i4ethods for the
examination cf water and
wastewater 2098, 209D
5 -day B.O.D., mg/L
.Chemical Oxygen Demand, mcr/L
page 2 of 2 pages
Goehring Sanple Identification:
�-F;cation:
(Sample recd 3/8/88)
1940
560
920.
r
NELSON LABORATOi�.IES
ANALYTICAL CHE.NIISTSAND CONSULTANTS
March 29, 1988
Lab No.: 2091-1
Goehri ng Meat, Inc.
Post Office Box 147
Lodi , California 95240
Gentlemen:
RE: 'MATER ANALYSES
APR o 1 I988
JOLTE - SRCMM�^,T',
Presented below are the results of the analyses performed on your water
samples received on Match 22, 1988. The samples have been. described, as
received, along with the data.
DATA
Detection
"Before"
"After"
Limit
Arsenic, ug/1
ND
ND
50
Lead, ug/1
ND
ND
50
Mercury, ug/1
ND
ND
2
Nickel, ug/1
ND
PSD
100
Silver, ug/1_
ND
ND
50
- t tCE'V
NELSON LABORATORIES 'VAR 161988
ANALYTICAL CHEWSTS AND CONSULTANTS1P NOW '1'
To: Goehring Meat Inc.
P.O. Box 147
Lodi, CA 95240
Attention: K.D.
COPY to:. George S. Nolte & Associates,
Attention: Rich Stratton
Date: March 11, 1988
Report No. 00661
Lab No. 6 61
1730 ` . r. ` .. page 1 of two pages
1700=_"V' Street, Sacramento, CA
Following are the results of analysis of a sample or samples as received from you by this
laboratory =
L:PNE O F MTERTAL water Received: 2/23/88
Goehring Sample Identification:
007°880
Carbonate (Cp3}, mg/L
(as CaCO3) -c10
Bicarbonate (I-003) , mg/,L
(as Ca003)375
Chloride (Cl) , mg/L 680
NTE" SON LABO' TORMS
ANA LYTICA LCHEMISTS Atj'7(,pN$t1LTANTS
mate- March 11, 1988
Report No 00661
Lab NO. 661
page 2 of two pages
C,Oehring Sample Identification:
0079880
Fixed Dissolved Solids, mg/L*
1540
*Standard Meth -ods for the
examination of water and
wastewatter 209B, 209D
5-&y: B.O.D. , mg/L
770
Chemical Oxygen L?mt-4nti_ n,r•./r
1420
Copper'.._•(01 .: m9/I
< 0.05
Zinc (Zrn) ,,,..,mg/L
0.28
Cadmium (Cd) , mg/L
< 0.005
0.86
Hexavalent Chr.araii t : (Cr. mg/L 0.05
Arsen7.c (As} , mg/L < 0.03
Mercury (Hg} . m4/Li, < 0.001
eMeau.. ►pass than
e for
`chLot nated hydrocarbons
and .I enoli.c compounds.
TO: Goehring Meat Inc.
P.O. Box 147
Lodi, CA 95240
Attention: K.D.
5
ANALYTICAL CHEMISTS AND CONSULTANTS " _ 11 a
Date: March 1 b?r fwp
Report No. 00629
Lab No. 629
?i.~ •I page 1 of two pages
George S. Nolte & Associates, PW SW' Street, Sacramento, CA
Attention: Rich StrMor. �
Following are the results of analysis of a sample or sales as received frccn you by this
laboratory:
NAME OF jATERTAT. water Received: 2-19-88
Goehring Sample Identification
0070300 8:30 A.M. 2-19-88
<10
418
914
9
31
tl
28
24
29
0.68
31
850
3.96
6.8
insufffcient sample
480
i
' NELSON LABORATOk' IES
ANAL171CALCHEMISTS AND CONSULTANTS
Goehr= Meat Inc. Date: March 10, 1958
Lodi I CA - Report No. 00629
Lab No. 629
page 2 of two pages
Go—eh-ring Sa,-rvle Identification:
0070300 8:30 A.M. 2-19-88
Fixed Dissolved Solids, mg/L* 1960
*Standard Methods for the
examinaticn of w a t e r and
wastewater 209B, 209D
5 -day B.O.D., mg/L 1170
Chemical Oxygen• Demand, mg/L 2340
Copper (Cu) , *ag/L < 0.05
Zinc (Zn) , mg/L 0.19
Cadmium (0d), mg/L at 0.005
Cyanide (Cn), mg/L insufficient sample
<0.03
11 riC?+E 9.3,7 1266 /"` DEPORT NO. 92429
zS—:< CODE 209
NELSON LASORATORH S
AGRICULTURAL CHEMISTS AND CONSULTANTS page I of two pages
3948 BUOWEsSER COURT
oC r A �F.95205 January 26 19 $$
C. J - THIR I =
FF-TONu
TO 3 191888�'v to:l,Gt�crge S. Nolte S Associates
P Box 147 1700 i Street
- -- Sacramento, California
Lr,t�i, CA 95240 vOL'E Attention: Rich Stratton
FOLLOWING ARE THE RESULTS OF ANALYSIS OF A SAMPLE OR SAMPLES AS RECEIVED FROM YOU BY THIS
LASCRATORY:
water 1-5-88
NAME O F MATERIAL RECEIVED
Nelson Laboratories Sample Nos.
92429-1
92429-2
92429-3
92429-4
Your Sample Identification:
#A Sample
#1 Sample
#2 Sample
#3 Sample
12/28-12/29 12 Noon -
1 P.M. -
4 AM -
24 hrs.
8 P.M.
4 A. M.
12 Noon
125340
12/28 *.
0036630
33550
0025900
Carbonate (CO3), mg/L (as CaCO3)
none
none
none
none
Bicarbonate (HCO ), mg/L
3
350
190
380
430
{ (as CaCO3)
Chloride (Cl), mg/L
874
1631
1216
1137
Sulfate (SO4), mg/L
2
2
3
3
Total 1:;jeldahl Nitrogen (N), ttg/L
25
50
37
42
Nitrate (NO3) , mg/L
41
41
41
Ll
Total Phosphorus (P), mg/L
18
49
30
34
Calcium (Ca), mg/L
20
30
31
29
Magnesium (!fig), mg/L
24
28
28
30
Iron (Fe) , mg/L
0.41
1.01
0.80
0.85
t
Potassium (K), mg/L
25
38
33
37
Sodium (Na), mg/L
685
1220
950
870
Electrical Conductivity (E. C.)
3.60
7.50
4.86
4.74
a,hcs, cm
(**tat legible)
nued onPa e 2)lcanti
means .ss
than"
NELSON LABORATORIES
g..J:� �1t f255 cEoC:gT-..7 --
AhPA CODE 209
NELSON LABORATORIES
AGRICULTURAL CHEMISTS AND CONSULTANT'S Page 2 of two pages
3948 BUDWEISER COURT
STOCKTON. CALIF. 95205 January 26 ,9 88
GOEHRING HEAT INC.
TO copy to: George S. Nolte 6 associates
P.O. Box 147 t:"1700 "L" Street
Sacramento, California
Lodi, CA 95240 Attention: Rich Stratton
FOLL.^..wtNO ARE THE RESULTS OF ANALYSIS OF A SAMPLE OR SAMPLES AS .RECEIVED FROM YOU BY THIS
LABORATORY:
water 1-5-88
`uE O F MATERIAL RECEIVED
Nelson. Laboratories Sample Nos.
92429-1
32429-2
92429-3
92429-6
Your Sample Identification:
1A Sample
11 Sample
#2 Sample
#3 Sample
12/28-12/29
12 Soon -
8 P.M. -
4 A. H. -
24 hrs.
8 P.M.
4 A. M.
12 Noon
125340
12/28 -
0036630
33550
0025900
PH
6.8
5.8
6.6
6.8
it 6 Grease, mg/L
59
65
19
43
Suspended Solids, mg/L
179
200
100
1.60
Volatile Suspended Solids, mg/L
158
200
100
140
Fixed Dissolved Solids, mg/L*
2370
3600
2910
2790
5 -day B.O.D., mg/L
570
1060
630
600
Chemical Oxygen Demand, mg, L
980
1740
i1 iii:
960
*Standard Methods for the examination of water and wastewater 209B, 209D.
I
Z-'Ei--FETi:4RIPL 0- 1 Tl' Gim; # 1
FACSIMILE TRANSMISSION DETAIL,
NUMBER OF PACES, INCLUDING THIS FORM:
-1 J SJ 11 ' S;-,, it 4159Z494650" CCITT G3;#
City of Lodi
Gn ehrirg Meat Presentation
City Counc-1. Vele ing, May 18, 1988
0=13Mie oi. i,Ialior Point -3
I;. Introduction
A. Six reasons why City shvuld noT accept Goehring Meat's wastes
1. Against City policy
2. would set, precedent:
3. Expose City to unikncwn future :debility
4. Reduce City's carr ent margin of safe --y
-- _-E1 IT 41c -7934'3446i_1: CCITT W;#
F . Additional '!�DS load at irrigation site could !mad to TDS
requiret�ent iii i? r�lre
F. USEPA and`, State Drinkino rarer Sandayds = 500 mo
/L
J
G. Futuro changos in permit -_QcpAr,4ment8 rarard'_ng TDS would have
Ta;or economic impact or, both 11 t of %o3i and Goehr-4-g
,.feat
V. Reduce City's current margin of saf_ty
A. ^urrent City effluent- 440 mg/L• and rising
B. Industrial effluont TDS hi, -`-,1_Y Va='able range from 300 mg/L
to greater "Chan 000 mg/L from industz•ies already located in
City
C- Additional 105 of TDS load would increase effluent TDS to 480
«.g/L
1- Very close to 503 mg/ L
D. "Dilution water" from other industries mentioned in Goehring
Meat's engineering report is not available year-round
VI. Unlmowns regarding Goehring Meat's proposal
A. Very little data exist on either the City's or Goehring Meat'a
waste
I. Major concerns - f low and TDS
2. Other concerns - grease, odors, corrosion, _H, BOD
B. Can Goehring successful.y achieve segregation of wastss?
W.
C. What would be the impact if Goehring Meat expands its
operations in the future?
Current: estimates of buy -in costs in reports are very low
Change in white Slough WPCF of this magnitude may require an
a ' Y
N*
JeATE 9UwnT6X0X 04 9b'PU-STP PUP juaxquaaa eqTs-uo
VeOOT 04 957,2-q9STP P -We a:ITS-uo
PEaePTGUOD Ue9q 4OU aAvtt MTD C:L uT-9Tl UIPIZZ eATQuQd-x9
SS5T as o4 Tt-TWa4cd T41Trm SeAT�?TlaeaTw -lvU0T4Tpp-e o.-,, 4-9VOT
9ATIPUIGIT?
as PTnom ajaI4,1 a'eqa aAozd oa iDA2-4 P-LnQ,-,,
Fa,vo7pu- a -
r �3:DOY?*
e-ATFUedxq Ssej
sLrn spuel hqapru un U0T426T.:Zj-, 91-23 MOT '--,zodea o;
.aAT4?ua9'Tp 3SOD SPM A1TO 01- LIT-OTI
4
--paK bjTaqaC)n
� - ITLA
NtIrEJ :TT
M E i� t 0 R A P i D U M
T0: Honorable Mayor and
Members of the City Council
&ROM: City Manager
DATE : May 18, 1988
SUBJ : Goehri ng Meat, Inc. Request
MEMORANDUM, City of Lodi , Public Works Department
TO: File
FROM: Public Works Director
DATE : May 18, 1988 -
TiM4= 3:00 P.M.
SUBJECT: Discussion with Antonia Vorster, Senior Engineer, Regional Water
Qual ity Control Board
"NON -DEGRADATION POLICY"
This is a policy that has been in effect since the early 1970's. I asked
Ton whether the Resolution No. 68-16 would indicate that it was adopted in
1.968 and she said, "More than likely". She indicated that it was a very
important policy of the Regional Board and that it was public information
and has been known since its adoption.
In talking to Mw, with respect to this policy, Max indicated that it's
very unusual for this policy to be applied. ft said it's applied to areas
like Lake Tahoe and there would have been no reason that Nolte would have
known that this policy would have been applied to the Goehring Meat area.
Max has a real question whether they're applying the policy correctly.
ALTERNATES NO. 2 AND 3
Ton indicated that these were not acceptable as prcposed, that they needed
further explanation, and that based on the information submitted, there
was only one recommendation that they could make.
BOARD'S REQUEST FOR THREE COMPLETE ALTERNATES
Ton agreed that they had not met the full intent of the Regional Board's
requirement to provide three complete alternates. The Board's intent was
that if the City did not take Goehring Meat, one of the other two
alternates could be implemented immediately. She indicated that there is
considerable additional information that is needed and that there is also
information related to the City's groundwater that is not available. She
agreed that additional data is needed to do a good job of a complete
analysis of the three alternates.
REGIONAL PLANT
I explained to Ton that one of our concerns'was the precedent -setting
aspect of taking Goehring and the possibility of becoming a regional
plant. I pointed out the fact that there is a winery dust south of
Goehring. She interrupted, indicating "They are a great problem", "They
are poor managers of wastewater and in the 1 a s t year have be,n fined
p"6Mta+�5�.�.'Iv'P'k..lr 4..:wti �.i.{NL'��4iSR,°^D Khtwa'e t -0+w.:vLw. t •..r. '••. yy.WYad�!,
File
May File,
1988
Page 2
510,000". She indicated that they would definitely be a candidate for us
solving their problem and would expect them to want to tie- in once they
knew the City of Lodi was available.
Jack L. Ronsko
Publ i - Works Director
JLR/ma
STAT: OF CAUFORNIA GEORGE 0E VKMEJLtN. Gor*,n
CALIFORNIA REGIONAL WATER QUALITY CONTROL BOARD— wt CENTRAL VALLEY REGION
3543ROUnER ROAD SACRAMENTO, CA 45627-3098
SAY 1 8,88
' Cid Ma�eBers Office
13 Nay 1988
Mr. Richard Stratton
Nolte and :associates
1730 I Street
Sacramento, CA 95814
GOEHRING HEAT IMC., CEASE AND DESIST ORDER, LONG-TERM WASTEkATER TREATMENT
ALTERNATIVES, SAN JOAQUIN COUNTY (CASE #1430)
In response to your 6 April 1988 letter requesting clarification of Regional
Board policy regarding waste discharge requirements for discharges to land.
staff cites Resolution No. 65-16, known as the "Pion -degradation Policy". This
policy provides for the protection of high ouaiity waters by allowing the
Regional Board to approve of discharge limitations which are more stringent than
established water quality criteria.
Two of the three alternatives proposed as long-term wastewater disposal methods
for approximately E5: of Goehring Heat's total wastewater flow include some
form of land disposal. Your proposal bases design of land application treatment -
processes on the amount of wastewater which can percolate -'to the ground water
and hot exceed secondary drinking water standards. Applying this approach to
Goehring's wastewater, discharge requirements based on secondary drinking water
standards would allow a TDS concentratton of 500 mg/l.
Due to the high quality ground water. in this area•(I.e., background TDS is
approximately 150 mg/1) a dischar9e meeting secondary drinking water standards
will not be permitted. In fact citing the non -degradation policy, any dis-
charge which would have a noticeable impact on backgrciund water quality would be
disallowed.
The concentratton and loading o€,.TDS which could be discharged using land
application discharge methods without noticeably -changing background -levels must
consider factors such as the characteristics of the waste, soil conditions, uses
of the ground water, and effects of changes on -the water users. The resultant
concentration derived would then represent the value to be used in waste
discharge requirements. This criteria would be applied to all constituents of
E concern, not just TDS.
It should be pointed out that none-of.the long-term wastewater disposal alterna-
tives proposes any form of treatment. The In-house source control measures
being propased to segregate waste streams are good measures .to decrease the
volume of high TDS wastewater. ; Nawever, since land is not available for
Subchapter 15 ponds large enough for Goehring's entire wastewater flow it may be
necessary to use a treatment process to gain access to Lodi 's Industrial
Treatment Plant or meet requirements oflanddisposal methods.
i
Mr. Richard Stretton -2- 13 May 1988
in conclusion, the Regional Board would require any land application disposal
methods to produce no noticeable impact on the high quality ground waters
occurring naturally I o the vicinity of Goehring ,Meat.
If you have any questions please call David Brent at (916) 361-5067.
eC T0NIA K.J. VORSTER
nior Engineer
Lodi City Council
223 W. Pine St.
Lodi Ca. 9.5240
Dear City Council,
MAY 25,198B
I am writing this letter in compliance to an article that
I read in the LOOI NET'S SENTINEL on May 19,1988.The article was
ai.-out the request by theGoehring Meat Co. to join up with Lodi -Is
city seisage system.
I understand that the Goehring Company is not within the
Lodi city limits and that by hooking up with the city system
would raise the system's salt content to a possibly dangerous
levei,but you cannot overtook the economical impact that it would
have were to he shut down.
The Goehring Meat Co. ,which is the Lodi area's second larg-
est employer with 550 workers,has a payroll of between $11 mil-
lion and $12 million.They Buy about 43.5 million of products from
area suppliers9which results in the investment of about $250 mil-
lion in area financial institutions.
Knowing all of this,you can obviously see that the shutting
down of this company would be devistating tothe area's economy,
Lodi needs Goehring,but Goehring also needs L odi .I think that t h e
city should let them hook up,but maybe make modifications to ac-
comodate Cor the additional waste at the expense of the Goehring
C:ompary.I am sure that there is a compromise that can be found
that can solve this delemna nithout causing too much further grief.
Sincerely,
s.... .,. � , _..n. J`F 5. f, s._.. ..�...,. „, .. _...>.. ,,.eFrn vr_✓<ivchv4�E.4.w;:u...tiw;s'.
Lodi City Council
221 W. Pine 5t.
Lcdi CA. 95240
5 -25 -Btu
f,L1,, f+ F_f.!
SECS.
>b=:
or
--- --------
RE PIRODUMON OF UHS
DOMMEW, CANNA - BE
I IMPROVM DUE
IORIGINAL
CMITON, ori
T
A HE
an
)od x -
Paer^ f
(Continued fra
'
Cal <--�r I ciZt�y 4�OR i �Q J�jt 'N^-+v'7iti
x
�.. rFi N' :7' a
-said j ;
" Tto
he iiieat' company wilI'ask the fatty C =taoiiitet
to- ty's White SiougriWater PolluLonCautiCt of tla
to 7:30 p m Wednesday meeting at City ihYCit3raff hastio2fY
.Ig the"council reject the coinpany'S
it The city"code.currently prohibits sewerosu2ect=ons to2ilitb5
d- outside the city limits The council wouldYe%ewnte"i'hcle y
before Goeliring could hook"into the cit. `�5�ysi�n� =r
g- Public Works' Director:3aek Rt�nskasai �#i y crow
10 to aL'ow: Goehrli-ig Meat-fo loin the:q
u it more difficult to tau n down other rsqus Iroin deve�cipersS ou,
co . side7.odi
Co , ~��.,. y yy, ,#fit zY �-•
es
"we've already turned down a lot We�opers Sts iEn"
ile Ron..koSald
c .$s
Ronska said bis - biggest coicerix wttti : ;Goghniug to ,
"n. :. •eta , =. i -ns- +� s
lid setirgr spstbil�Is� that tti2 coiupany'� was ��lu$tx
amount uf,salt Gbehring'sae y E+ j�
' Into the
1 9 g q
to-
cityys Indtzstrtal haste system, whish f s ior,�rr�a�e3ai�.���A '
Ico
"They're saying the water is notdiaifs if It'S nux:3
with other flows," he said ""Tiiey'se mining s5�unnphoijs oti data
for
we tion'fthirilc is that accurate." - K
ed itQusko also is concerned,that:if Goehisig IS allowed to use the
to city's treatinfent plant, then_ e?uigiit riot to�n:iiewpdutries `
w�*uTi the city hmtts 'Tbe sewage plant xx '°neaeapacity t
ri-
and tbii'Ctty Coutncii liar banned the ati3>eica ofvv lidbsing de E
Id- . aelopments Iuntil the facility is.expadded�
(n -
ed tion, but he.said the council should take 1_i Xo aCeotmt t ie oaaomie
;r, Impactir4C 1C1Ctg.Meat hap An be.l t aiMa-
he ' ,Weeel we're a big econbmicF actor it tiz mw�it3' 71fa�iy
by of; our employees ii4 a in the city;" Goeiuig said: "'Tile city should
feel ainobligation to help.the companysw vtYe.';
rei:tmpaiiy:engineers havedevelapec ohet lc3ieth� fpr9 freatui�
hd the:wastewater, •but Goehring said ths.e altei4iativ s th .." tdo ex-
ult, penslVe CYC» a:fi�s `+s i t� ifias d tSgf + ,
Manager.,Tom Peterson said h� w riieetvv'it?t Bexi Goehr.`:
an : ing today and discuss the wastewaterprobleYat
.. \•. i. -'. s i;: t yin .:.(
on _ _ .
Appendix to
Council Communication
for
Goehring Meat's Request for City Seiier Service
The following is a list of the documents included:
Document Date
Document
May 9, 1988
Black & Veatch response to Nolte's
proposal of 4/6/88
April 6, 1988
Nolte's revised proposal
March 17, 1988
Memo from Public Works Director to
City Manager and
City Council
March 16, 1988
Black & Veatch response to Nolte's
proposal of 2/22/88
February 22, 1988
Nolte's proposal
L, February 15,'1988:�,
Black & Veatch response to Nolte's-recap
of meeting
with Black & Veatch
February. 3.9 1988
Nolte's recap of meeting with Black
& Veatch.held'on
'January 27, 1988
January 19, 1988 Nolte';s submittal of preliminary data
on Goehring's
wastewater
a xsb
• L
December 21,, 1987
Cal,i;forni'a Regional Water,Quality Control
Board letter
to.City of Manteca making :reference
to Lodi
r
tC,', '+moi :sytM, (•r'�T nc(y� d:V' ,,nH ��rr 1 ff rypa J }5' v'^" ttiTs•brltwJJn ...,n.:t ..W., .... 4 �..0 w , d.dt... nYA ( 4r a,1:. ) .FHr„9 MM]] f F W ly '1 Y
>� .53 d� rnH,.'GJ���`+R�u�� Jr} vV�W'A .y.5,.' �fbiv;.�i � �!•''Y'� �1Y'+ys71-13
El
BLACK er VEATCH
Black & Veatch
HEHORA.NDUH
Results of Review of 416188 Memorandum B&V Project 14279 ;
from Nolte 6 Assoc. Regarding Proposed May 9, 1988
Discharge of Goehring Heats Process ✓` v �'a 7
,tasCe�ater to the City of Lodi (
To: Rich Stratton, Nolte & Associates
From: Kan Jones, Black & Veatch
Nolte has requested that the City of Lodi reconsider its position on the
ro osed discharge wastewater p ar e p g of process ter in to the City's industrial Waste
sySCem. Goehring Feat Is proposing' to make fn -plant modifications to allow
the process wastewater to be divided into two streams, and to discharge 85
to 90 percent of their ,vas tNxater to Lodi's industrial sever. The proposed
discharge °,would have a total dissolved solids (TDS) concentration of
750 mg/l. The proposal dues not indicate how this division of waste
streams will be accomplished or if the flow and strengths proposed are
based on actual tests or art estimates.
A lab analysis of wastzvatei' sample's provided tiith Gochring'.s original
proposal indicated zinc levels in excess of concentrations acceptable by
City Ordinance. The current vastevater sample analyses, from December 3,
1987, to April 4, 1988, by Nelson Laboratories, du clot indicate excessive
toxicant levels. HOD- and pH do exceed acceptable levels in a fev
instances, hovever. Goelcring's ability to consistently meet the City's
limits on wastewater characteristics has not been adequately demonstrated.
Average annual flov estimates have been reduced Erom 110,000 gallons per
day (gpd) to 90,000 gpd with total annual discharge estimated at 31 million
gallons per year. This flow value is not substantiated by a discussion of
the planned division of waste streams or by a flow record, and so is open
to question. The volume reductiutt proposed has a `significant impact on.:the
sizing of the required facili ties and cannot be considered dependable: ti
the absence of supporting data.
haste discharge regulations have become more stringent oyer the past decade
and the City believes that this pattern could continue. In the near
future, the City of Lodi will consider revisions to their sewer ordinance.,
in order to reduce TDS levels, and may go to a limit of 450 mgll un their
industrial dischargers. As stated in cur March 16, 1988, memorandum, tills>
limit is being considered for several reasons:
1. The City of Hanteca effluent TDS level averages about 470 trig/1.
The California Regional Nater Quality Control Board (CRWQCB
recently advised Manteca to consider ways to reduce this TDS
level, and indicated that a TDS liiniC is being cvci,idered as a
condition of :heir expansion permit.
Q�i ID•'E3 10:14 EELAID,: Z VEt+TCH 003,
SLACK & YCATCH
Black & Veatch
MEMORANDUM
Results of Review of 4/6/88 Memo 2 Bbv Project 14273
from Nolte & Assoc. Regarding may 9, 1988
Proposed Discharge of Goehring
Heats Process Vastewater rc
the City of Lodi
2. TDS levels in the City's treated domestic effluent for the past
several months have varied between 420 mg/l and 454 Mg/l. The
average TDS level is expected to continue increasing in the
future due to increased use of water softeners by residents.
Industrial effluent TDS levels are also variable. At a January
14, 1988, meeting with City of Lodi and Black & Veatch personnel,
CRuQCB representatives discussed the possibility of imposing a
500 mg/1 TDS limit on discharge from the expanded treatment
plant. Even without the addition of Goehring Heats' 750 mg/l. TDS
wastewater, the City's combination of treated domestic and
Industrial effluent disposed of by irrigation is already
uncomfortably close to this limit givetc Elie variability of TOS
levels and the expected gradual rise .iri the average TDS level,.
3. The National Drinking Water Standards include a TDS g o d of 500
mg/1 on groundwater used for drinking water supplies.
California's Secondary Drinking water Standards include a
�..;recommended maximum TDS limit of 500 mgtl A here is evidence
that the percolated water from the City' rrlueut disposal area
may flow in Lice direction of existing and future municipal water
supply wells located in the North Stockton area. Lodi aust take
all reasonable steps to esisuz•e that future liability is avoided.
Our position remains unchanged. The City is.faced vith potential reduction
in TDS limits by regulatory agencies, expected increases in domestic
influent TDS levels, and incomplete informative. ou Goehriug's ability to
achieve the pzuposed flow separation and meet contaminant limits over the
long run The current land application of effluent provides the City with
the flexibility to meet changing conditions while still protecting the
environment. Sufficient margin of safety does not exist within these
constrictions to alluu the City to reduce their operational options by
accepting Goehring'y proposal. Any benefits of accepting Gothring Meats,
750 mg/1 process caste stream are more than offset by the considerable risk
of future.effluent discharge liability for the City and its citizens.
s; z
E
05/10/88 10:14
MLA CK at VLATCH
Black & Veatch
MEMORANDUM
Results of Review of 416188 Memo
from Nolte & Assoc. Rcgarding
Proposed Discharge of Goehring
Meats Process Vastewater to
the City of Lodi
BLACK & tIEATCH
0104
B&V Project 14279
Hay 9, 1988
Goehring's existing percolation ponds. These alternatives appear viable a;
the TDS level of the proposed waste stream, and local. disposal may be
achieved at a lower cost than that estimated for conveyance to Lodi's
treatment plant for disposal.
er
cc: J.L. Ronsko, Public Vorks Director
F. Forkas, Vtr/Ystwtr. Superintendent
M. Burchett. Whitley. Burchett & AsEo.
C
M E M 0 R A N D U M
MEMO TO: Ken Jones, Greg Lindstadt, Black & Veatch
FROM: Rcn Crites, Rich Xxat on. Nolte & Associates
SUBJECT: RESPONSE TO BLACK &&`VEATCH MEMO RE: PROPOSED
DISCHARCE OF UOEHRItiG PROCESS WASTEWATER TO
THE CITY OF IM P4X SIRIAL WWIP
r
APR 7 088
Q, 0Lii
PUBLIC :4CRKS DEPARTMENT
DATE: 4/6/88
FILE: 2353-88-00
PAGE: 1 OF 3
Goehring Meat requests that the City of Lodi reconsider the proposed discharge
of process wastewater into the City industrial waste system under a new set of
conditions. A major change in Goehring Meat's approach to process wastewater
management has recently occurred. In -plant modifications are planned to allow
the current process wastewater to be divided into two streams -- one, approxi-
mately 85 to 90 % of the process wastewater with a 'IDS concentration below
750 mg/1, and two, the remaining 10 to 15 % consisting of high 'IDS brine.The
low TDS waste stream would receive pretreatment consisting of fine screening
and dissolved air flotation for oil and grease removal prior to discharge to
the City industrial waste sewer. The high TDS brine would be treated at the
Goehring plant using energy intensive evaporation or double lined evaporation
ponds.
In response to your concerns that the Goehring waste has not been completely
the 0 in 10 wet year) for the Goehring flow. The volume of storage to be
L
characterized, enclosed for your review are recent laboratory reports contain-
ing the chemical analysis of the p; ocess wastewater (attachment 1). It is
evident from the reports that the Goehring process wastewater does not contain
in
toxicants excess of the maximum allowable concentration contained in the
City ordinance. The estimated average concentration of other constituents of
concern were contained in our 2/22/88 metro. Based on additional flow data
f
(attachment 2) since our first mam in January, it appears that the 110,000 gpd
flow estimate used in our previous mum represents a maximum month flow rate.
The annual average flow rate is estimated to be 90,000 gpd. Based on 90 % of
this flow being segregated with a low TDS, the total annual flow to be dis-
charged to the City would not exceed 31 Mgal per year. ;
The revised cost estimate for the proposed connection based on the lower flow
rate and lower 'IDS concentration is presented below in Table 1. With a lower
F
TDS level, discharge during the winter months would not present a problem in
-
the existing industrial waste storage ponds. Blending of the Goehring flow in
the 30 Mgal aerated pond and with infiltration in the industrial sewer, ra'.n-
fall and secondary effluent would maintain 'the 'IDS concentration in the ponds
at acceptable levels. An estimated 15 Mgal of storage would be required for
the 0 in 10 wet year) for the Goehring flow. The volume of storage to be
L
® }
NOLTE and. ASSOCIATES - -
EnKn.w+
- -. _ -
Memo: Ken Jones, Greg Lindstat, Black and Veatch
Date: 4/6/88
Page 2 of 03
provided at the Goehring plant would be approximately 2 weeks flow for possible
emergencies or problems with the pretreatment facilities. With a lower total
annual flow, the additional land area required for irrigation for the Goehring
flow would be reduced from the previous estimate. However this would be offset
by additional land required for storage.
TABLE 1
SUMMARY OF ESTIMATED COSTS
item Quantity Estimated Cost,
In -plant Piping Modifications 1 Is 250,000
Brine Evaporation Process 1 is 125,000
Land for Irrigation 25 ac 125,000
Additional Storage Pond Capacity 15 MG 50,000
Construction of Lined Storage
Ponds on Goehring's Property
1 ac
50,000
Onsite pH Monitoring Facility
1 is
7,000
Pump Station and Force Main
4,500 if
120,000
Sludge Removal Equipment
1 is
12,000
Charge for Use of Public
Pight of VIS
2,000 ft
47000
Buy in Cost of Conveyance
Facilities
1 is
50,000
Aeration Equipment
1 is
20,000
a TOTAE ESTIMATED CCST
81 ;000
1nyour March 30, 1988 memorandum,
you indicated that
the City of Lodi is
likely to"impose a Iimit'of 450 mg/1 TDS on their industrial.dischargers
in
=� the future, in order to achieve a 500 mg/l limit with
a reasonable factor of
.,.,,safety. At a concentration of 750
mg/l, the impact of
the Goehring waste
NOLTE and ASSOCIATES '.. "
:,...is
i&
Memo. Ken Jones, Greg Lindstat, Black and Veatch Page 3 of 03
Date: 4/6/88
stream on the industrial waste system will be minimal. On an annual average,
a TDS increase of approximately 12 mg/1 , from 424 mg/1 to 436 mg/1 (about
2.8%), would occur based on current estimates of TDS concentrations of the PCP
waste and the domestic effluent (see attached calculation). With the Goehring
waste discharge at 750 mg/1, the City's goal of limiting the TOS concentration
to less than 500 mg/1 in the effluent applied to the land disposal system
could be achieved with a comfortable margin of safety.
Another concern expressed by the City is that the Regional Board will impose a
TDS limit on the effluent discharged to the land disposal system. W have
contact e currenTT_ yea
p ans to impose such a limit on the City of Lodi effluent going tom
In summary, Goehring is dropping their request that the City accept a high TDS
waste stream. Instead, Soehring is prepared to meet the 750 mg/1 'IDS limit
currently contained in the City waste ordinance. We would still like the
opportunity to meet with you and the City staff to resolve technical issues
associated with the proposed Goehring connection. Goehring's Cease and Desist
Order requires that a long-term wastewater alternative be selected by June I,
at which time a technical report must be submitted to the Regional Board.
Remaining technical issues to be negotiated include determination of the con-
nection fee and O&M charges to be assessed to Goehring for the proposed
connection. These and any other outstanding issues should be resolved a s soon
as possible to allow sufficient time for the City Council to make a decision
prior to the June 1 deadline.
-3
ATTACHMENT I
NELSON LABORATO,<.IES
Q R
.kN x L x1r.1 . tAIV 1)t.ONNt 1. 1:i
0 TO Goehrincr Meat Inc. APR 0 51968 Date: April 4, 11988
P.O. Box 147 Report No. 2011
T -cd,:, Cl 95-5240 1OLTE Lab No. 2011
Att .. ention: K.D. SACRAMrt\,-r,-
copy to: George S. Nolte Associates, 1730 "1" St., Suite 100, Sacramento, CA 95814-33002
Following are the results of analysis of a stele or samples as rece:.*-,,,--d from you by this
laborator,j:
IE OF WATFRT-AL
water Received: 3-8-88
Goehring Sample Identification:
(Sa=le reed 3/8/88)
4-10
445
900
38
2.
21.1
18
25
0.52
NAMI
C-0ehrinq Meat Inc.
Lodi, CA
1\rELS'VN Li-1BORAT01.-JES
AN \1 1 I tt AL(. IVNI:tit.ti.l\Uta)\�('E.'I.1�t5
Date: April 4, 1988
Reoort No. 2011
Lab No. 2011
page 2 of 2 pages
Goehrirg Sample Identification
(Sample reed 3/8/88)
Fixed- Dissolved Sol:elk s, rig/Lx 1940
*Standard Methods for the
examination of water and
wastewater 209B, 209D
5 -day B.O.D.--, mg/L 560
Chnom.."d, rng/L 920
F 3918 ItUDWE:II)FR(:Ot, RI*.-. TOCE:tO..(<<1��t} t`,t►r})ri3t I'�tiri
a t)t1 lSE� )\ ( )F t-RL'I', GRf )t1 E.RS f: knok CUttl t\t:Rl:
NEL. )ON LABORATORIES
ANALN'TICAL CHEMISTS AND CONSULTANTS
Parch 29, 1988
Lab No.: 2091-1
Goehring Meat, Inc.
Post Office Box 147
Lodi, California 95240
Gentlemen:
RE: 'WATER ANALYSES
r
E�
APR 0 11988
SACRA," c,\17,_
Presented below are the results of the analyses performed on ycur water
samples received on March 22, .1988. The -samples have bcen described, as
received, along with the data.
DATA
Detection
t
Before" "After" Limit
Arsenic, ug/l ND ND 50
s
Lead, ug/l ND ND 50
Mercury, ug/l ND ND 2
Nickel, ug/l ND ND 100
Silver, ug/l Mu ND 5b'
s
Cyanide, ma/l ND ND 0.05:
f
ug/l = opb
..
mg/l = ppm
If you have any questions, please call or write.
,
{
Very truly yours,
FGL ENVIRONMENTAL, INC.
Kristi Robinson, B.S. John Quinn, Ph.D.
Environmental Chemist Environmental Chemist
-
KR/JQ:mel
ai►
cc: George S. Nolte Associates
F
t
3948 BUDWEISER COURT: STOCKTON. CA 13203 (209) 931-1266
A DIVISION OF FRUITGROWERS LABORATORY. INC.
NELSON LABORATORIES -VAR 1 61388
ANALYTICAL CHE.%IISTSAND CONSULTANTS *'k -
TO: Gcehri::a Meat Inc.
Data: March 11, 1988
P.O. F,ox 147 —
Report No. 00661
Lodi, cA 95240
Lab No. 661
Attention: K.D.
/
f 73a : -�..: = page 1 of ` two Doges
spy to:_'George S. Nolte & Associates, 1700_"L" Street, Sacramento, CA
- Attention: Rich Stratton
Following are the results of analysis of a sample or samples as received from you by this
laboratory:
1P1',!E OF M_AT_Ir1.L water
Received: 2/23/88
Goehring Sample Identification:
0079880
Carbonate (CO3) , mg/L
(as CaCO3)
<10
Bicarbonate (I CO3 } , ma/L
Cas CaCO3)
375
A.
Chloride (Cl), m3/L
680
f
Sulfate (SO4} . ing/L
3
.f
Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen (N), mg/L
64
Nitrate (NO3), mg/L
c 1
i<Total
Phosphorus (P) mg/L
25
Calcium (Ca), .rg/L
- 29
.�
i
=; n
(
Fta_Qnes'um (i`*S) , mg/L
28
Iron (Fe),Mg /L
#
0.55 #
Potassitum (K) , mg/L
27 .
Sodium (Na), rxglL
590
Electrical Conductivity (E.C.),.
y
mhos/an
;. 3.00
pli
7.1
3
CiI &Grease, mg/L
insufficient sample
-
3
Suspended Solids, mg/L
270 s
volatile Suspended Solids, mg/L
260 �
`
sp
means ."less than"
3948 BU COURT STC/CKTON. CA 93205 s ?(2U9) 931-1266 V -
" w .
Ak'14M{
...,. 1: x.e,.. ..r .: ...... r. ,.. .n .. ..-. ..
s
� �1.:..",,,.✓.=..., �.�Pi luz,: i�..f ■ ■ r' k . ..-... ..���i-_��"..'. _n_.!._• . x_
0 '
Goehrincg Neat Inc.
Locai, C2k
A
NELSON LABORATORIES
ANALYTICAL CHEMISTS A ND CONSULTANTS
AL Fixed Dissolved Solids, mg/L*
*Standard Methods for the
examination of water and
wastewater 209B, 209D
Date: March 11, 1988
Report NO- 00461
Lab No. 661
Page 2 of two pages
GoPI-xing Sample Identif-cation:
0079880
1540
5 -day B.O.D. , M/L 770
Chendcal Oxygen Demnd, ng/L 1420
Copper (Cu) , mg/L < 0.05
Zinc (Zn) , mg/L 0.28
CadmLta]t (Cd) , mg/L < 0.005
5
:Hexavalent Chromium (Cr ing/L
Arsenic (As) . mg/L
rrliry ma
3
0.05
< 0.03
0.001
. NELSON LABORATORIES, %,, ble
wmw�
ANALYTICAL CHEMISTS AND CONSULTANTS
Date: March 10, 1(7298�
Mz Coe --at inc.
lwj ncT M
P.O. Box 117 Report No. 00629
Lodi CA 95240 Lab No. 629
Attent'Lon: K.D.
L-opv to: Ge-crge S. Nolte & Associates,
Attention: Rich Stratton
;'71," 4r* page I of two pacTess
140 %V' Street, Sacramento, CA
FoLlowing are the results of analysis of a sample or samples as received frau you by this
lah-).ratory:
bWNa OF MTERIAL water Received: 2-i9-88
. . . . . . . . . . .
R
Goehring Sample Identification::
0070300 8:30 A.M. 2-19-88
Carbonate (00J, rmj/L
(as CaCO3)
-CIO
Bicarbonate (KC0 M./L
3
(as CaC103
418.
Chloride (Cl), mg/L
914
Sulfate (SO4) , rrig/L
Total Kjeldahl Nitrogen (N) m4
/14
31.
Nitrate mg/L
-cl
-Total
Phosphorus'(P) rq/L
.
28.
.. ....... .
Calcium. (CA) mg/L
.:.24.
kagnp xn.:. Qxig).-, Trig
Iron We) Ti
OA8
Potassium (K), rrig/L
: 31...
- ..................
...Sodium.'
(Na)- ng/L.
.850
,., ....................................
Electrical. v
3.96'
PH
..... ......
Gr6ase . .....
insuf f iclent'sampie
.
..
. ... ....
'Solids,
. ..........
8r
... .
........
I k
e'Sus pended,.,:S0 Nq
M.
470.
less:than Pe
. . . . . . . . . . .
R
oehrina Neat Inc.
Lcri i _ CA
NELSON LABORATORIES
ANALYTICAL CHEMISTS AND CONSULTANTS
Date: 'March 10, 1988
Report No. 00629
Lab No. 629
Page 2 of two pages
Goehring Sample identification:
0070300- 8:30 A.M. 2-19-88
Fixed Dissolved Solids, mg/L* 1960
*Standard Methods for the
examination of water and
wast_ -water 209B, 209D
! y B.O.D. , �/L 1170
s is .i Oxygen, . Demand, mg/L 2340
Caper (Cu) , rng/L <0.05
Zinc (Zn) . mg/L 0.19
Wd) ,. rq/L
6'0.005
Cyanide (Cn) , mg/L
insufficient sample
Lead. `(Pb) , rrg/L
<0.03
,eNickel (Ni) , -TnJ/L
< 0.1
Silver (Ag) . mg/L
< 0.03
Boron, (B) , mg/L
0.90
hexavalent tfirccnitun (Cry) , mg/L -
0.07
Arsenic (As) , mg/L
< 0.03
.Mercury (Hg), m3/L
< 0.001
means "less than"
:NOTE: insufficient sample for
-
chlorina.ed'hydrocarbons and
phenolic compounds.
N''II r 1 Z hFO
by
R. " Buchwitz-
3948 B f: DWEISER COURT. STOCKTON CA 95260 (209) 931-I2W, ,
ADWISION OF FRUITCRO�'4'ERS LABORATORY. INC
92429
1•. t• -PE 93; 1266
CoOE 209
NELSON LABORATORIES
AGRICULTURAL
CHEMISTS AND CONSULTANTS page 1 of two
pages
3948 SU DK E ISE R COV 0.T
STCpCjT V � p�/, At�F 35205 January 26
L.
i✓� C k
,y 88
TQ _� I>(_ 11 MEAT i iC.
�ey to: ,Geerge �.
f
�fQl to Associatesi��U
1700 "L"
St reef
?,. Box 147
Sacramento,
California
JnL-,rE Attention.:
Rich Stratton
UA 9r,140
FCLL:jWING ARE THE QESULTS OF ANALYSIS OF A SAMPLE OR SAMPLES AS RECEIVED FROM YOU BY TH15
LABORATORY:
I-�-88
water RECEIVED
NAME OF MATERIAL _—
Nelson Laboratories Sample ivies_
92429-1 92429-2
92429-3
92429-4
Your Sample Identification:
#A Sample 81 Sample
#2 Sample
83 Sample
12/28-12/29 12 Noon -
8 P.M. -
4 A.M. -
"3
24 hrs. 8 P.M.
4 A.M.
12 Noon
125340 12/28 - *
a036630
33550
0025900
Carbcnate (G03), mg/L (as CaCO3
none none
none
none
Bicarbonate (FCC, mg/L
350 190
380
430
tau CaCO3)
=
Chloride (Cl), mg/1.
874 1631
1216
1137
Sulfate 'SCI,), mg/L
2 2
3
3
46
s
Total.Kjeldahl Nitrogen (N), ag%L
25 50
37
42
z
\ . tT
C1 L1
L1
Ll
CILLLOLC k.,..3%, wo/ ..
Total Phosphorus.(P), mg/L
18 49
38
34
Calcium (Ca), mg/L
20 30
3l
`.29
Magnesium (Mg), mg/L
24 28
28
,30
__. Iron '_(Fe) , - mg/L
0.41 1.01
0.80
0.85.
..
Potassium (K), mg/L .
2s 38
33
37
d-9 6a) i mg/L
..:.........
68 1220
950
870
' -.Eleetrical., 'Corductivtty (E. C.)
3 '7:50
4.86
.,.74
(**1at legible)
(continued on page 2)
<means "less than"
.:
t�IELSON ;`LAS0RATJ R IES.
C %Jt✓.hwh
9Y_
s
AF,.E,:6 CODE 209
NELSON LABORATORIES
AGRICULTURAL CHEMISTS AND CONSULTANTS page 2 of two pages
3948 BUDWEISER COURT
STOCKTON. CALIF_ 95205 January 26 ,9 88
TO ` 07-HRING HEAT INC. copy Co: George S. Nolte & Associates
R.O. Sex I57
i,-"1700 "L" Street
Sacramento, California
Lodi, C? 95250 _ Attention: Rich Stratton
FOLLC'+YfNGe ARE THE RESULTS OF ANALYSIS OF A SAMPLE OR SAMPLES AS RECEIVED FROM You 9Y THIS
LABORATORY:
water 1-5-88
NAME CjF MATE:RIAL EWRECEIVED
Nelson Laboratories Sample Nos. 92429-1 92429-2 92429-3 92429-•'+
Your Sample Identificarlon:.
�A Sample
3 1 Sample
# Sample
P
Sample
�3 Sam $
12/28-12/29
12 Soon -
8 P.M. -
4 A. M. i
24 hrs.
8 P.M.
4 A.M.
I .Toon .
125340
12/28 -
0036630
33550
0025900
PN6.8
5.8
6.6
6.8
( 41 a Grease, mg/L
59
65
19
43 :.
Suspended Solids, mg/L
179
200
100
160
Volatile Suspended Solids, mg/L
158
200
100
140.
Vi,rori `Dissr,lvPd Selids. mg/Li
2370
3600
2910
27�''
5 -day B.O.D.. mg/L
570
lObO
630
600
"
chemical Oxygen Demand, me/,
gr0
1741
iL+Si:
960
*Standard 'Methods for the examination
of water and
wastewater 209B, 209D.
.N ELS O N
LABORATORIES :`
...
Y
e
i.
ti-
PHQ11'JE S31 1266 REPORT NO. 92075
AREA CODE 208 ('�� q
NELSDN LABORATORIES
AGRICULTURAL CHEMISTS AND CONSULTANTS
3948 SUOWEISER COURT
STOCKTON, CALIF. SS205 Decpm}1 r i 19 9_
TK] Goehring Heat Inc.
Attention: KD
P.O. Box 147
Lodi, CA 95240
FOLLOWING ARE THE RESULTS OF ANALYSIS OF A SAMPLE OR SAMPLES AS RECEIVED FROM Y93U SY THIS
L XBOR.0-ORY:
NAME OF MATERIAL Waste Water
RECEIVED 11-18'87
• A I' n -tv
J I.f
Z also; ,Tabovatmrims . 1e No. 9207.5
Goehring W;i1
Sm4ple rec'd 11-18c87
Total Dissolved Solids, wg/L
2040
(Gray. @ 180" C)
5 -day B.O.D., mg/L
530
Chemical Oxygen Demand (C.O.D.),
mg/L 4Ig
Sodium (Na), mg/L
620
Chloride (CI), mg/L
725
Sodium Chloride (NaCI),,mg/L*
IlSS 0, ria
Calcium (Ca) , mg/L
20
Magnesium (Mg), mg JL
15
ti
ITo4jiq-1 to w k(}, mg/L:
37
' assuming all chloride present, is in
the form of Sodium Chloride
t .
L
NELSON LABORATORIES
�'-► rnna�cr
it?
PHCQNE 931 1266
AREA CODE :09
NELSON LABORATORIES
AGRICULTURAL CHEMISTS AND CONSULTANTS
394a BUDWEISER COUFIT
STOCKTON. CALIF. 95205
REPORT NC. 34177
December 14
Goeirir.g heat Inc.
To — Attention: KD
P.O. Box 147
Lodi, CA 95240
19 a7
FOLLOWING ARE THE RESULTS OF ANALYSIS OF A SAMPLE OR SAMPLES AS RECEIVED FROM YOU BY THIS
LABORATORY:
NAME OF MA'CERIAL
,- ,.,. ;.,waste water
RECEIVED 11-18-87
Nelson Laboratories Sample No. 92075 - Analysis authorized by KD via telephone
on 12/9/87.
Goehring Meat Inc.
SaMDle recd 11-18-87
t Fixed Dissolved.Solids, mg/L
R' W—.. i3uchwitz
2-
6".6 6
ATTACHMENT
2
S
too
c
s r
:e .. �.-v.. -- .... .. ? .. ... ..�
Mom am
GOEHRING MEAT INC. - FLOw DATA
DURATION RECORDED VOLUME AVERAGE FLOW AVERAGE MONTH
DA -TE (days) (gallons) (gpd) (gpd)
12/4 - 12/7/87 J
233,930
77,9<7
1
131,840
1311840
f
124, 370
124,970
1
13,1 1000
131,000
12/11/88 1
126,730
126,730
12/29/88 1
125,340
125,340
12/30/88 1
96,100-
3€, 100
JANUARY
I2f31/8 3
748,650
83,183
7
826,770
118,110
7
656 1240
93,749
7
501,470
71,633
7
435,380
62,197
11
843,438
7€,676
107,774
2/19/88 1
70,300
70,300
O
124,510
41,503
1
73,880
79,880
156, 020
78,010
1
73,900
73,900
3
151,920
50,640
FEBRUARY.
-+a'
79,228
3/1 /88
1
110,030
110,030
1
112,330
112,330
1
100,740
100,740
1
115,110
115,110
3
214,620
71,540
1
1211760
121,760
1
116,820
116,820
1
105,850
105,850
1
113,060
113,060
3
219,620
73;207
I
124,570
124,570
1
130,000
130,040
1
112,870,
112,870
1
123,000
123,004
3
214,570
71,523.
1
184,660
184,660
1.
132,860
132,860
1
102,330
102, 0
1
93,630
93,630
43,210
35150,004
83,803
1501.000
1
171,260
171,260,
MARCH38
103, 4
4/1/88;'
1
133,000
133,000
®t 4 X4/88
3 - ':
256, 944
85, f,33
k y
"�-^�' • `
"t"�Ad>:oJ:t,/{d"3#'S:L`usldusYW.rb.rs::r�.:.Wtl4fhi7�}::ytlGsiis^.-7777
:5diil `�""' .ib t
F -4.Nf
;� .2[. \.ntrt .U. wra'.,,... ,.W ..,.._..�.
�� u. n .. a.xa.¢a•w..,r r�vn e_,.�<�..�R-.. gaS:4...�.. ,., ?;:. .. .w...t, '... :. C � '� z
4®\ NCLTE and ASSQ ATES
® Engineers/ Planners/ 5uiveyors
SUBJECT _
PIP-
vt
Co»n e c. 4-i f, Ao
JOB NO. 2353 -`8 S -00
DATE 4�/L
DESIGNED BY
CHECKED BY
T-1.1 d.C,S�r2--4 /
-X,-
31
,.
C
MEMORANDUM, City of Lodi , Public Works Department
T0: City Manager
City Council
-. FpOM: Public Works Director
DATE : March 17, 980
SUBJECT: Goehring Meat's Request to Cischarge and Mix their Processed
Water with Lodi `s Industrial Waste and Treated Domestic Sewage
The attached memorandum from our engineers, Black and Veatch, was sent to
Goehring Meat's engineers, Nolte and Associates, on March 16, 1988.
Goehring Meat has requested to discharge up to 40 million gallons per year
at an average total dissolved solids level of 2,000 mg; 1 . Total dissolved
solids (TDS) is a measurement of salt content. Currently, Lodi's domestic
effluent averages about 420 mg/1 and our industrial effluent is estimated
at 300 mg/l. Based on the TDS limit the Regional Board recently imposed
upon the City of Manteca as part of its expansion ppermit, vie can
anticipate a similar restriction cn TDS of 500 mg /l. Presently, the
Nationai Drinking Water Standard for 7D6 is 500, mg/l. Because north
Stockton`s water wells are down gradient of Lodi `s irrigation areas, we
5L A C K & V E A T�
MEMORANDUM
Results of review of 2/22/88 memorandum B&V Project 14279
from Nolte & Assoc. re: proposed discharge March 16, 1988
of Goehring Meats process wastevater to
the City of Lodi
To: Rich Stratton, Nolte & Associates
From: Ken Jones, Black & Veatch
Goehring Meats has requested permission to discharge its process
wastewater to the City of Lodi industrial sewer system. The proposed
Goehring discharge exceeds the flow and TDS limits set by the City Sever
Ordinance, and has not been completely characterized. The proposal by
Goehring requests a waiver of those limits and a permit to discharge to
the industrial system based on diluting their high TDS effluent in the
industrial influent from Pacific Coast Producers (PCP). On February 25,
1988, Black & Veatch met with City of Lodi staff to review the impact that
Goehring's proposal would have on White Slough water Qollution'oontrol
facility operations and Lodi's future discharge permitting and effluent
disposal options.
Lodi's industrial wastewater is disposed of by crop irrigation. The City
also irrigates to the maximum exient possible with treated domestic
effluent during the growing season. In 1986 the City disposed of about
520 million gallons of treated domestic effluent and about 300 million
gallons of industrial effluent by irrigation. The TDS concentration of
the industrial influent is not known precisely, but based on an average
water supply TDS of about 245 mg/l, it is estimated to be at least 300
mg/1. The TDS level in the domestic effluent currently averages about 420
mg/1. The City has been experiencing a gradual rise in this level and
expects this trend to continue over the next several years due to
increased use of water softeners by City residents. Goehring Meats would
like to discharge up to 40 million gallons per year at an average TDS
level of 2,000mg/1. At the current flow and TDS levels, the Goehring
Meat's waste would increase the City's estimated effluent TDS loading by
`
ZS percent.
Lodi has filed a permit application for a planned treatment facility
expansion with the California Regional Water Quality Control Board.
Discussions with Regional Board staff about this expansion and permit
indicate that the Board may impose stringent TDS limits on effluent
discharged to receiving waters or to groundwater as a condition of
approval. The Regional Board has recently indicated its intention to
impose a TDS limit on the City of Manteca as a condition of its expansion
permit, and has directed Manteca to consider ways to limit TDS in its
f.
wastewater.
X,
BLACK & V E A T,
MEMORANDUM
Results of review of 2/22/88 memo 2 B&V Project 14279
Erom Nolte & Assocs. Goehring, Lodi March 16, 1988
In addition to possible discharge limits to be set by the Regional Board,
the City of Lodi has concerns about impacts on the regional groundwater
supply. The National Drinking Water Standards include a TDS limit of 500
mg/l on groundwater used for drinking water supplies. The general area
groundwater flow is south to southeast, based on the latest San Joaquin
County groundvater maps and a study by the City of Lodi's Engineering
Division. This puts North Stockton's water supply wells down -gradient
from Lodi's ponds and irrigation areas. Regardless of the Regional
Board's action, it would be prudent for the City to limit irrigation water
TDS levels to less than 500 mg/1 to avoid fut>>.re liabilities. With this
in mind, Lodi intends to impose a limit of 450 mg/l TDS on their
industrial dischargers in the future in order to achieve a 500 mg/l limit
with a reasonable margin of safety.
The Goehring dilution proposal assumes that TDS levels and 1985 flows
would be consistent for the f,:ture. In 1987, however, the PCP discharge
into the industrial sewer was reduced to about 200 million gallons. PCP
has indicated that they espe^t their discharge to drop again in 1988 to
near 150 million gallons and remain at that level. In addition, City
tests have indicated that domestic effluent TDS levels have been gradually
increasing. Considering the reduced PCP flows, higher domestic TDS levels,
and reasonably conservative industrial influent TDS assumptions, accepting
the proposed Goehring wastewater discharge would result in irrigation .
^' water TDS levels above 500 mg/l.
In summary, the City is faced with an uncertain regulatory future, reduced
flows of lower TDS industrial influent, and expected increases in domestic
influent TDS levels. The incomplete characterization of the existing
industrial influent and proposed Goehring wastewater discharge, pstential
J for stringent Regional Board discharge limits, an3 regional groundwater
limitations make it impossible for_the.City to accept Goehring Heat's
process wastewater without incurring an unacceptable risk. Sufficient
margin of safety does not exist to allow consideration of Goehring's
proposal.
adg
cc: Mr. Jack L. Ronsko, Public Works Director
Mr. pian Forkas, W tr./Ws twtr. Suprintenden t
Mr. Max Burchett, Whitley, Burchett & Assoc.
Ms. Antonia Vorster, Sr. Engineer,
Central Valley Regn'l Wtr. Quality Control Board
FROr, S--ORaC S NOLTE SQC 70
(MON)02.22.'98 381
H E M 0 R A N D U X
MEMO TO: 'Ken Zones, Greg Lindstadt, Black and Veatch i DATE: 2/22/88
FROM: Ron Crites, Rich Stratton, Nolte & Associatel FILE: 2353-88-00
SUBJECT: Response to Comments Regarding Impacts of r PAGE: 1 of 05
the Goehring Process Wastewater on the City i
of Lodi Industrial Y!WTP
t '
Presented herein is our response to the specific concerns and comments raised
in your February 15, 1988 memorandun. We would like the opportunity to meet
with you and the City staff to discuss the items presented below. As you are
aware, Goehring's Cease and Desist Order requires that � commitment be made to
at least 2 alternatives by April 1_ Any remaining tech1nical issues need to be
resolved as soon as possible in order to meet the April I deadline.
1. Characteristics of Goehring's Process Wastewater
A Palmer -Bolus flume and composite sampler have �een in operation at the
Goehring plant. since December, 1987. A summary ofrepresentative process`�>
wastewater characteristics based on sampling to da' e is shown in Table 1
We will provide you with additional flow and wastewater characteristics
data as soon as it becomes available.
='< TABLE 1. PROCESS WASTEWATER CHARACTERIS ICS
}
Constituent Concentration, ma/1
Bicarbonate
350
�72
Sulfate
i
Nitrate
X21
Total . P
28
t.
Calcium
20
Magnesium
20
-
Iron
6.4
Potassium
25
Sodium
653
E.C.:
3:6
pH
6.8
Oil and.Grease
9
t
Suspended Solids
1 9
Volatile Suspended Solids
1 8
Total'. Di ssolved Solids (fixed)
20 0
BODS
5 0
COD
9 5
FROM GEORGE 5 NOLTE 52CTO <MON;02.2=.'98 18: N0. 13 PAGE S
1 .
Results of analysis of wastewater for the specific, constituents listed in
the City Ordinance will be available in approximately 2 weeks. Our
response to your concerns with specific constituents follows.
Threshold Odor. Color, and Turbidity: The high values for these con-
stituents indicated in the 1986 lab analysis deport is misleading
because these parameters were evaluated in th'co
ntext of potable
water criteria. When compared to industrial wastewater, the Goehring
process wastewater is very typical. Odor has' not been a problem with
the Goehring operation. Small floating aeratgrs have been used in
the ponds. Should odor ever become a problems the flexibility exists
to provide additional pretreatment through aeration in the storage
pond.
The meaning of the statement "Color and Turbi ity are bothersome" is
unclear. In the context of potable water: these constituents would
be bothersome. However, virtually all industrial or municipal waste-
waters contain color and turbidity. After dilutior with other waste-
water prior to land appl icatian, these constituents are not harmful.
Potential Pathogens: The Goehring process wastewater does not con-
tain human wastes or pathogens which would be of concern in a land
application system. The plant processes high quality bacon, ham and
sausage products under strict Federal Meat Inspection supervision.
Neither the product nor the process wastewater contains pathogenic
materials. Based on a preliminary review of tie Goehring process -
wastewater, the Regional Board does not see a problem with applying
the waste to land by combining it with either ,secondary effluent or
other industrial wastes. I'
1 wd Cffeases
• The oil and grease concentration in the process
wastewater was measured at 53mg/l in a 24 -ho# compositThe City
ordinance limits the concentratioc of oil and grease of animal cr
vegetable origin in industrial discharges to less than 300 mg/l..
Goehring neat will have no difficulty in meeting this requirement.
:;Ion halanc� of the Waste Stream: The ion. bat„aiii�ce::of .the December.>: ; >:
��^�1986sane lei# 58posftiVe.ions ;and 25;T�rieg�ttve �IHedtffence
...n...: .. .. P....::
:..
could he due :te lab error or silicates oresent� to the water. ' TFie
difference between the reported TDS and'the sit of the ions present
is due to the organics present in the wastewat r. The TDS test, is
rerformed by evaporating a sample at .lcu'C and measurinc all the.
residue that remains including any dissolved otganie material :.=This
fact is substantiated by the fixed solids test performed on the
December, 1987 sample in which the TDS was measured at 2040 mg/l and
the fixed solids at 1640 mg/l, a difference of nearly 400 mg/l.
Zinc limit: Zinc is not used in the meat processing operations at
Goehring Meat, Continued sampl Ing for zinc will be performed in
future composite samples submitted for lab analysis. Since the 1986
Elk
8 ... hOtTF'.and'AS 1ATES
f
tea..<?,."�`.•: �'�'�
112
40
FROM GEORGE S NOLT
E SQCTO (MOH)02 '88 18. H0.13 PFG_ a
i�
sample was a grab sample, it possible that the zinc measured was a
one time occurrence or another possibility Isla lab error.
Reaior:al Board: The Regional Board has not expressed concerns about
the groundwater quality in the land application system. They have,
however, requested that the City install a mopitoring system to
detect any problems due to harmful constituents leaking from the
storagge ponds. The Regional Board recognizes,the positive effect of
providing a flushing fraction during irr�gat4on to regenerate the
soil.
Cly Ordinance, The current ordinance -requiros that potential dis-
charges in excess of 50,000 gpd and/or with a;TDS conc-intration in
excess of 750 mg/l must apply for a Waste Discharge Permit. If the
'IDIS limit is reduced from 750 to 500 mg/1, Goehring would still be
required to apply for a permit. In our previous memo we were able to
show that treating the Goehring process wastet� ater in the City indus-
trial waste system will not have a detrimerita effect on that system.
Therefore, Goehring requests that the City walve their policy in
this situation as they nave for PCP, which exgeeds 50,000 gpd, and
allow the Goehring process wastewater to be heated on a contract
basis.
2. Characterization of Existing Industrial Influent ,
The TDS concentration In the industrial influent flows is estimated to.be
less than or equal to the secondary effluent sent to the land disposal
system. Generally, fruit and vegetable cannery operations have high 6®
and loW nutrient and salinity levels. Preliminary ;indications are that
sufficient dilution to obtain TDS levels less than 500 mg/l with a factor
of safety is possible. It is recommended that the pajor industrial dis-
chargers be required to measure TDS levels in their waste streams on a
regular basis. Once more information is available,! the proposed dilution
calculations will be revised appropriately i
3. Storage/Dilution/Irrigation Analysis
t
The preliminary water balance calculation is based on the 1987 irrigation
year in which 300 Mgal of industrial flow and W Ngal of secondary
effluent were applied to the land application systeo. This loading rate
corresponds to 3.85 feet per loading. In the water, balance contalned in
the 2/3/88 memo, the total of 3.85 feet per year wa distributed on a
monthly basis using crop evapotranspiration data c3 tained in D'A'R Bulletin
No. 113-3, "Vegetative Water Use in California". Rgvised water balance`
calculations based on an average year (3.75 ft per year) and the 1 1n 10
year wet year are attached. In a 1 in 10 wet year, l the amount of water
applied to the land would be reduced to about 3.5 f per year, however the
w idc itwooul nhavelagaben°ef1coialeeY ec on � iessoi�'y,, aIditional rainfall
FROM GEORGE 5 NOLIE SPCTO
<nON`a2.:2.'aa ISS v N0. 13 PAGE 3
I
Based on the wet year water balance, the amount of storage to be provided
on the Goehring site will be about 15.3 Mgal. The sizing and design of
the ponds will be subject to review by the Regiona`li Board. Since the
flow from Goehring will have toass through the new storage pond, the
storage pond will provide a buffer in the event the pretreatment faCi l -
ities are out of service. One day flow from the pant would represent
less than -0.8% of the storage capacity of the pond(s). The proposed
storage pond(s) would provide a more than sufficie� t buffer should there
be a temporary failure of the pretreatment system.!
1
The minimum dilution assumption of 10:1 is based on an estimated TDS level
in the industrial system cf 350 mg/l during the writer months. The actual
TDS level is almost certainly less than 400 mg/1 dye to groundwater infil-
tration into the line. Other flows that would ten¢ to increase the dilu-
tion of process wastewater stored in the City pond$ i s secondary effluent
diverted from the domestic WWTP and rainfall, In the months of November
through March, the total normal rainfall is 13 inches Over 60 acres of
ponds, this rainfall totals approximately 21 Mgal r about 4 Mgal per
month. Based ca the above, reducing the process w stewater flow to only
0.5 Mgal per month during the winter monthsprovides a reasonable factor
of safety against causing a TDS problem in the storage ponds.
4. Additional Costs Associated with Accepting Goehring tastewaters
A revised cost estimate for the connection -to the ;ty is shown in Table
2. The estimated costs for the additional items 1 sted in your mento are
included. The total estimated cost far the altern. tive of connecting to
the City of Ladi is in the range of $470,000 to VOGD00. The estimated
annual operating costs associated with this altern true are approximately
$30,000 ($2,500 per month), however we have not ye (received information
on 0&M costs from the City. 193$) ra4>
Since the land to be purchased for the process wasewater is a nonde pre-*
ciating income producing asset, Goehring would be illing to purchase thi
land and lease it to the City at'no cost. Alternatively, Goehring could
enter into an agreement with the City. providing fors reimbursement of the
fair market value .o the and aV such time GoehrinS disconnects from the
Sys The income produced from €arming the land should be used to
offset the operation and maintenance costs involves with handling the:
Goehring process wastewater.
3
'
°
NOLTE and ASSOCIATES
"
Inpneen /. PHnaen / Swvgws
`F
'
.,
PROM GEORGE 5 NOLTE SPCTO
Item
(MON)02.22.'88 18,10
Sis'�ARY OF ESRINATED COSTS
Onsite pH Monitoring Facility
Pump Station and Force Main
Sludge Removal Equipment
NO. 13 PAGE 6
Quantity 1 Cost Range, $
I is 5,000 - 7,000
4,500 ft 00,000 - 120,000
1 Is 8,000 - 12,000
3
D
U)
V
WEER MS MAT IMC. !
HATER BMJ4 CE FOR PROCESS WASTV ATER STORAGE PON06
i
NJCJOABE-YFJst.' ...:.
..
PROCESS WSTEMATER CROP
W..T CRW ET GOETt" FLOM
Dit3ITlt)N
NET FlJM TO
REWIRED
nix., RATE MIM ET Rf3ZW
PRECiP. ft 175 FtAWING TJl TO IRR. 'SY5T
RATIO
9T(3R. Pl)ti75
171071. VOl-.
MONTH
DAYS 11W MG IN. M,
IN. (21 IN. W, W1
X1 15J
HU f61
•
no
JAN
3t 0.11 3.41 0.903.40
5.0 (4) 0.50
10.0
3.to
9,10
FFB
28 r 0.11 3.06 1.70
2.70 5.0 Eat 0.50
10.0
2-70
11.178
'fb�R
31 -.0.11 .;3.41 3.20.
-:2.56 0.73 '14.0. 1.40
10.0
1.91
13. W2
- APR
30 0.11 3.30 4.50. :
1.211 3.70 70.6 2.%
23.9
0.00
13.02
MAY
31 0.11 3.41 6.50
0.66 6.05 128.0 4.92
26.0
-2.15
ti.67 '
- JW
30 0.11 3.30 7.50
0.13 8.65 161.5 6.21
26.0
-3.71
7.96
JUL
31 0.11 3.41 7.D0
0.03 9.12 170.3 G 55
26.0
-3.917
3.5+0
A(7O
31 0.11 3.41 6.60
0.03 " 7.71 144.0 5.54
26.0
-2. D4
1.14
SEP
30 3.30 4.00
0.29 5.:30 99.0 3.81
26.0
-1.00
0.14
OCT
31 0 11, 3.41 3.30:,.
0.80 2.04 ,53.0 3.29
16.1
-0.14
0. 00
0.11 3.30 1.50
<i.BS 5.0 141 0.50
10.0
2.84
2.84
DEC'
31 0.31 3.11 O:�Q
3.03 5.0 141 0.50.
30.0
3.16
6.00
363 40 49.00
16.91 45.00 1160 36.7
13.82
(wea)
1 .Crop,sT
data from DW Bulletin 113-3.
1
s2
Precipitation data for *man rainfall from DYR .'CAI
Ifornia Rainfall Summary.
3
Total area to Ila irrigated = 655 • 33 � 688 acres.
Flushing fraction a 17 X.
.During
winter, months, combined industrial, rainfall,
Md secondary affluent flow of at least 5 10 11ya1 per moth is divmYtmrd
into .the ponds instead of to irrigation.
3
Ding winter, somths, a min. 10:1 dilution requiromant is av uwW. During irrigation months, a min. dilution of approx. T�:1 is used.
ur
I.
i
6
Net flow to pond Includes ret rainfall or evaporation
from an assumed pond arta of 4 acres.
f
I
22rim4^Of!
MOLTS AND ASSOCIATES
FI1Etg4tpond
3
D
U)
V
FROM GEORGE 5 NOLTE SACTO
���i�F3-�S85tp
Tnrilncio+vir-=o c1 .0
I74N41;
I�IT J ; Nf`1
00 O �y000 yy077 y0��1�00
RS3�3oo��K3=�$
00 01'1 'f'.O �O Y'I i7 f 00
l
(MON)02.22.'88 18111
40.13 PRGE 8
L
>
o
b
O
V
1
g
o
�
N
a
t
�
� y
40.13 PRGE 8
y,
BLACK & V E A T i
Comments on Your Memc.randum B&V Project 14279
of February 3, 1988 February 15, 1988
To: Rich Stratton, Nolte and Associates
Fron: Ken Jones, Slack & Veatch
After further review of your 2/3/88 memo and discussions with the City of
Lodi, we have the following comments regarding impacts of the Goehring
process vastewater on the City's industrial waste system.
1. Characteristics of Goehring's Process Wastewater
W have insufficient information on general and specific characteristics
of the process wastewater to be confident that it can be accepted
without impact. We are concerned that there may very well be harmful
effects, i.e., buildup of grease in ditches, ponds, and land application
site; possible odors; etc. The following concerns are raised:
® The threshold odor, color, and turbidity are very high. What is
the source of the odor and how will it affect the irrigation
-, operation? Color and turbidity are bothersome.
a Because of the potential pathogens and blood type materials, will
the State Health Department and Regional Board approve of putting
this type of material directly on land without treatment?
s Grease and oil are not reported. W do not believe the DAF unit
is_ 100 pecrcent effective. Currently, Lodi has little or no
grease in their industrial system. Wliat assurance does the City
have that Goehring can continually meet the oil and grease
requirements of the City's existing ordinance?
B00 and suspended solids in the process wastewater are also --not.
1. reported.
When --.we add the ions from your report, we show 21.4 positive.'ions
and 26.7 negative ions; they should balance. What 'compounds ;
v are: not being reported? Similarly, adding Mg/L of minerals
reported gives 2016.8 while TDS is reported as 2,')Ins to nr
compounds (188 Mg/L) are not reported?
• Thezinc limit in the City Code is exceeded. The zinc impact is
a' limiting factor to Lodi's land disposal plan. The increased
deposit "of zinc ,will .therefore_ decrease the 1i_fe expectancy'of
their land facility.
Memo,3kl
BLACK & V EA 1 -I
Comments on Your Memorandum 2 B & V Project 14279
of February 3, 1988 February 15, 1988
• Has it been confirmed with the Regional Board that they have no
problem with your sentence, "The potential for salt buildup is
greatly reduced because the groundwater underlying the site is
discharged into the delta, preventing salt accumulation in the
soil"?
• Lodi's current ordinance will require revision due to the anti—
cipated change in their discharge permit which will establish
a TDS linit of 500 mg/1. Lodi's present policy on issuing
permits is to limit the discharge to the values outlined in
their ordfnance. Therefore, pretreatment may be required to
reduce Goehring's anticipated 2,000 mg/1 to 500 mg/1 while
maintaining the same estimated flow.
2. Characterization of the Existing Industrial Influent
Thera is not adequate data on the TDS characteristics of the existing
industrial influent flows, specifically the average TDS level and
degree of seasonal fluctuation in the TDS level. Until this
information is obtained, the appropriate dilution of Goehring waste—
water required to keep the combined TDS below 500, with a factor of
safety, cannot really by calculated.
3. Storage/Dilution/Irrigation Analysis
The 40 MG per year process wastewater flow discussed in the memo is
somewhat higher than the 110,000 gal per day estimated in your 1/19/88
letter to the City. The City currently irrigates 655 acres with
approximately 800 MG, or about 3.75 acre— feet per acre per..:year:;,>;:To
maintain this irrigation rate with an additional 40 HG would'.requiie
an additional 33 acres, not 30.
The wastewater dilution and storage capacity calculations...appear. to
Include several unsupparted assumptions. The storage of effluent
on Goehring property should be based on a worst—case scenario,.: not: or
an average basis:
The actual TDS level in the existing influent is unknown,.. and. the
minimum monthly flow is not necessarily 5 MG. Flows of 2.9 and
4.4 MG were shown on the 1986 record attached to the 2/3/88 memo.
Assuming an industrial influent of 4.4 MG with a TDS of 400, dilation
of Goehring wastewater would have to be more than 30:1 tc keep, the
combined TDS below the 500 mg/l limit by an acceptable factor of
safety, In addition, the precipitation and crop evapotranspiration
rates used in the water balance are not defined as maximinum, minimum,
or average. A worst case rate, i.e., wet year, should be used,
BLACK a, VEAT i
�iDioRa13DLI
Comments on Your '�emorandum 3 8&V Project 14279
of February 3, 1988 February 15, 1988
Should the City decide to accept a storage/dilution scheme if concerns
about other impacts can be eliminated, a water balance performed with
the above considerations will result in significantly greater storage
capacity requirements than the 11.5 MG identified in the memo.
It is also felt that Goehring Meat should be required to provide
additional storage for possible failure of their pretreatment
facilities. Presently, if PCP cannot meet their pretreatment
requirements, Lodi has the ability to control their inflow because
it's Lodi's water system. With Goehring Neat, they do not have that
control option.
4. Additional Costs Associated with Accepting Goehring Wastewaters
It
is felt that the following items should be included in the estimated
costs if these costs are going to be evaluated against other alterna-
t ives
•
Additional storage requirements at Goehrin6 Meat site (as
disccssed in comment 3 above).
o
Onsite monitoring facilities- -Monitoring facility to include
monitoring of flow, automatic sampling equipment, and continual
monitoring of pH.
It is critical that the pH be maintained in Lodi's industrial
waste outfall line since it is approximately 50 years old and
is nonreinforced concrete pipe with buttered joints.
e
Cost of force main between Goehring Meat site and City industrial
waste sewer.
' o
The State of California may have a charge for installation of
force main on the Mokelu=e River bridge and may require jacking
under Highway 99.
s
Presently, during the winter months the aeration equipment is
not in operation. Accepting Goehring Meat's flow would require
continuous operation of the aeration equipment. These additional
0&Mand power costs would have to be included.
a
Any additional staffing or operational costs associated with
monitoring and coordinating discharges to achieve acceptable
dilution should be considered.
e
Participation in sludge removal equipment for ponds --It is
estimated that additional equipment costing $40,000 to $50,000
W 111 be required; Goehring's share would be approximately $10,000.
'Memo3k3
BLACK R VEA', .4
MEMORANDUlK
Comments on Your Memorandum 4
S&V Project 14279
of February 3, 1988 February 15, 1988
Possible charge for use of public right - of- way - -Presently, the
City foes not allow private lines in the public right-of-way,
r.
If they were to allow their right-of-way to be used in this
manner, they would probably charge for its use as is now being
done by most public agencies in California.
As noted above, there remain many unresolved concerns which will have a
major impact on the City of Lodi`s ability to accept the Goehring process
wastewater. Black & Veatch will be happy to discuss these concerns with
you further, and to review your proposed approach to resolving them.
GLL:mit
FROM GEORGE S N'OLTE SPCTO tWED)021.03.'$8 17:2<1 N0. 12 PAGE 2
.�. MEMORANDUM
DATE February 3, 1988
MEMO TO: Mr. Don Dennis, Chief Operations Officer, Go -'.ring Meat Inc.
I-) FROM: Rich Stratton, Nolte and Associates
SUBJPCT: Summary of Meeting with alack and Veatch Regarding Connection
to the City of Lodi Industrial Waste System
A meeting was held on Wednesday January 27 between myself and Ken Jones
and Greg Lindstat cf Black and Veatch in Black and Veatch's Pleasant Hill
office. The purpose of the meeting was to discuss the potential impacts
of the Goehring process wastewater on the City of Lodi industrial waste
system and the facilities required to mitigate these impacts.
CITY OF LODI WASTE DISCHARGE REGULATIONS
Our initial discussion pertained to the following items in the City's
wastewater ordinance which apply to the Goehring process wastewater:
1. Pretreatment - The City ordinance requires that industrial. wastes
receive pretreatment which at a minimum must consist of screening.
Goehring's pretreatment system consists of Hyeor Roto -Screen (2 ft dia
by 4 ft length) and a dissolved air flotation unit (20 ft dia by 12 ft
depth) for removal of oil and grease. This pretreatment system is in
compliance with the City pretreatment requirements.
a. 2. Toxicants - The City ordinance limits the average daily
concentration of toxics entering the sewer discharge.
The Goehring wastewater was sampled and analyzed for most of the
specific toxicants listed in the ordinance (Attachment 1) and is in
compliance with these limits. The next 24-hour composite sample sent
to the lab will be analyzed for all the constituents in the City
ordinance.
3, Limitations on Wastewa� Strength - The City ordinance requires
that discharges in excess of 50,000 gpd and/or a TDS Concentration
in excess of 750 mg1l must obtain a Waste Discharge Permit that
specifically permits such waste discharge characteristics.
The Goehring process wastewater exceeds both of these limits.
Goehring will apply for a permit as soon as an application is released
by the City.
. A_. Sanitary District boundaries - The City does not allow entities
located outside of the City limits to connect to the sewer system.
Although the city received Clean Water Grant funds for portions of the
domestic WWTP and the land used for irri ation, the City is not
required to serve customers outside the City limit because their
wastewater system is not a regional system.
Goehring proposes that the process wastewater be treated by the City
industrial waste system on a contract basis with the approval of the
City council.
FROM GEORGE S NOLTE SACTO (WEU)02.03.'88 17:23 M0.!2 Rh GE 3
IMPACTS ON THE CITY OF LODI INDUSTRIAL WASTE SYSTEM
The Goehring process wastewater is estimated to have the following
specific impacts on the industrial waste system, based on a review of the
system by Ken Jones and Greg Lindstat and input from City staff:
I, Irrigation Rating of Reclaimed Water - The existing City
industrial waste system has been operating for over 15 years
without restriction due to good quality water and excellent soils
[Black and Veatch Report January, 19881. The potential for salt
buildup is greatly reduced because the groundwater underlying the site
is discharged into the delta, preventing salt accumulation in the
soil. Black and Veatch concluded in their evaluation of high salinity
brining waste on the City of Lodi facility, that a minor increase in
salinity level would not change the "overall irritation quality rating
of the effluent" applied to the land. --In our discussions in the
meeting, it was agreed that with proper blending of the Goehring waste
with the combined domestic and industrial waste effluent, there would
be no harmful effect on the industrial waste system. The area of
concern, however, is the problem with ensuring proper blending of the
wastes. Goehring's waste stream is generated at a nearly constant
rate year round whereas the domestic and industrial flows are
generated mainly in the late Summer when irrigation demand is the
greatest, To overcome this problem, storage of the Goehring waste
will be required during the non -irrigation season.
L-xn* fur Irrlaation -.The 40 MG (120 ac -ft) annual process
wastewater flow from the Goehring plant would require approximately 30
acres of land, based on an annual irrigation rate of 4 ac -ft per ac
per year. The City currently utilizes all of the total acreage (650
. ac) available to it for irrigation with both industrial waste and
effluent from the domestic WWTP. Addition of the Goehring process
wastewater would reduce the volume of secondary effluent which could
be applied to the land. It would be fair, therefore, for Goehring to
compensate the City for an additional 30 acres of land if the process
wastewater is allowed to be discharged into the City system.
3, Storaqe Capacity - The industrial waste system has a total storage
capaclty of 90 MG in approximately 60 acres of unlined ponds located
in the northeast portion of the plant site along Interstate 5. The
ponds are utilized to store both industrial wastes and domestic
secondary effluent during the non -irrigation season. The requirement
for storing secondary effluent has increased in recent years due to
the more stringent requirements placed on the City's waste discharge,
The ponds are used to store effluent: during periods of time when the
plant is unable to meet discharge requirements. The Goehring process
wastewater would need to be stored during the winter non- irrigation
seascn. A potential problem with storing the high TDS wastewater in
the winter is the lack of dilution the wastewater would receive.
Since the industrial waste ponds are unlined, the potential for
groundwater contamination exists from percolation of the high TDS
water into the groundwater. The City would prefer that Goehring store
the process wastewater In ponds on their own property and releasing
the wastewater during irrigation season when high dilution is
k possible
PROM GE+3RGE S NOLTE SACTO (WED)e2.£33.'8$ le:08 NO. 13 PAGE 2
Based on historical plant flow records (Attachment 2), a minimum of 5
mG per month enters the industrial system during the winter months.
In addition, ef;=luent from the domestic WWTP is diverted into the
ponds whenever there are plant upsets and waste discharge requirements
cannot be met. These combined flows would provide sufficient dilution
of a portion of vhe Goehring process flow to a TDS level below 500 j
mg/l, preventing any problems with contamination of the groundwater.
To achieve a TDS ievel less than 500 mg/l, a minimum dilution ratio of"\T-
10:1 will be required. Hence, about 0.5 MG per month (2.0 MG total)
of Goehring process haste ^ould be accepted during the winter months
without impact on the ponds. An advantage of storing the Goehring
waste in the City ponds is that the City staff would have better
control over ensuring proper blending of the stored water with the pGp
wastewater and secondary effluent pumped to the land irrigation
system. The winter storag.-i capacity required at the Goehring plant
site would be 11.5 MG, based on a water balance calculation
(Attachment 3) .
4. Miscellaneous Items -.Other items that may be impacted ,by the
I"- Juustrial waste sewer a the
Goehring wastewater flow ude the in and
yard piping within tle_ r_iant site. Goehring would be expected to pay
for their fair share ;.f the conveyance facilities required for
transporting their waste into and through the plant.
-. Aeration equipment may be required while the wastewater is stored in
the industrial ponds. However, based on the large size of the ponds
(60 acres) and the small volume of wastewater to be stored in the
winter, it is likely that supplemental aeration will not be required.
During the irrigation season, the wastewater can be diverted directly
to the land irrigation system without further treatment. The maximum
aeration capacity required would be about 35 horsepower. Goehring
would be required to cover the cost for any aeration equipment
considered necessary.
ESM ATED COSTS
The:. feasibility of connecting to the City industrial waste system will,
:d6rend on the cost of providing the facilities necessary to mitigate the
impacts describe6 above. A preliminary estimate of costs is presented
below. This estimate is still very rough, the estimated range of the
tota:l:. cost is between $330,000 and $570,000.
-------------------------------------- - ----------------
ITEZ✓ QTY UNfT;: .tOST RANGE, $
land for Irrigation 30 ac 100,000 - 200,000
4 onstructlon of Lined
'_torage Pond on
G� ehring Property 1 is 200,000 - 300,000
.Bt y in Cost of
:Con' eyance Facilities I Is 30,000 - 50,000
Aeration Equipment 1 is 0 - 20,000
TOTAL (range 330,000 - 570,000
..,-..._.:
M"
r1: ; -' lVie,41f:ILTE�ACTO
California WaterLeDspinc.i5
P. 0. BOX 4248
4430 CARPENTER LANE -- SUITE 0
MODESTO, CA 85332
PHONE (208) 527.4060 ,
I�-vflpor_ C-oehring Meats NTT:', Greg
c� ty Lpdi , CA Zi
Sample 12_D. waste wattle
Collected, Bys Pete Espinosa
RUSH
(silver)
Lab I. D. °-37200
Purchase Order
Date Collected: 11-28-86
General Mineral
Y&A
State
InorEanios
I
xgf1
State
esent
Allowable
Present
Alloxable
Calcium
E3.5 .�
.
F6. '
`bramia
< .01
t3Q50.4
Copper
< .1
110
Iron
2.4
0.3
Cadni=
< .005
0.01
Magnesium
27.9
No Std,
Chroc d=
< .01
0.03
Manganese
.032
0.05
Lead
< .01
0.05
< ,1
0.5
Mercury
< .001
0,002.
Sodi=
459.0
No Std.
Selenium
< .005
0,02
Zinc
6.6
5.0
Silver
< .005
0.03
Carbonat®If
No Std•
Nitrate ao N0�
1.0
45 as NO3
Bicarbonate
552
No Std,
Fluoride
2.1,•
1.0
Rydroxide Alh:alinity
NIL
No Std,
Total Hard=eas ae CaCo
274
�:� +A.
- - -
r�.,.,.,►t sn,v.tARZ
--- ---- --" --
units
State
,,.:
Present
Allowable
Total DiVaol^ved Solids
2,205
1000
Threshold Odor
> 200:
3
lata
21.8
500
Color.
> 50
i5
chloride.-
609.4
300.
iwrbidty
100.
3
pS
5.7
Pio Std.
Spaof.iia 'Conductance
2,940
1604:
(in mxaromhoa.per cmc
11-28-86
Date Started ll; -28.86
DaA, omvleted
9-5-86
_ '
i
_- - a�-�z„"Yu fi -_.�.�,- r.:`h tet✓ ., ..h' v. ycc l'° yr:s a c,:
jr::
Vootl
Z --
CITY
CITY OF I -
PUBLIC
WORKS DEN
V •" V iWtiD>02.03.'88 17:26
LOQ.%
•3R
NO. 12 PAGE 6
cto � aK
Alo Am
-- vidvsf-r►,(C-VtAvuaa O_
of -Xl6-
'Ie tu-
3,0
S
6,0
fd3
to.s
ts.�
.fib g
13A
7�. 7-
t. z
612-
LOQ.%
•3R
NO. 12 PAGE 6
cto � aK
Alo Am
of -Xl6-
GIFY
3,0
S
6,0
fd3
Y
.fib g
13A
//
G
713
t•1
S
6,0
fd3
Y
.fib g
13A
//
t. z
612-
/3,
!a
/Y. (
13.1 -
�
fo•o
4.1
Q
3�, z.
�o. �
1
9.1
o.t
8
5�•Z
� [, g�
to
5-7
/k.8'
its. i
7a• 1
0.7
0.2
.�
-- _ :
� • e..
_ �
spy. g
s7.�
_
laYE
�q•z
t.
y
X4.7 -
Sacramento
January 19, 1988
2353-87-01
Mr. Fran iorkas
City of Lodi, City Hall
221 West Pine Street
Call Box 3006
Lodi, CA 95241-1910
SUBJECT: IMPACT OF DISCHARGNG GOEHRING BMIS
TO LODE INDUSTRIAL WASTE SYSTEM
PROCESS WASTEWATER
Based on more up to date data on the Goehring Meat Inc. process wastewater, W
have assessed the impact of discharging the process wastewater to the indus-
trial wastewater system operated by the City o f Lodi. The process wastewater
estimated flow rate and wastewater characteristics are as follows (see attach-
ment).
Flow Range: 80,000 to 135,000 gal/day
Average Flows: 110,000 gal/day
} Constituent Concentration, ma/E
Sodium 653
Calcium 20 -
Magnesium 20
TKN 25
Sulfate 2
Chloride 725
TDS 2,000
Other chzracteristics of the wastewater are a fairly neutral pH of 6.7 and a
BOD of approximately 700 mg/L. Efforts are continuing to further reduce the
TDS, _.sodium and chloride concentrations. It should be noted, however, that a
2Q%.decrease`1n the -concentrations :of these constituents has been achieved
M 1986 Ex'tst' retrea+1' G h
tment facilitie t t' 1 t' 1 d
a
.4 ay ing p a s a oe rinn g p ainc u e
J AN 9 j
k-11
Y1 .i U
i
PROCESS WASTEWATER
Based on more up to date data on the Goehring Meat Inc. process wastewater, W
have assessed the impact of discharging the process wastewater to the indus-
trial wastewater system operated by the City o f Lodi. The process wastewater
estimated flow rate and wastewater characteristics are as follows (see attach-
ment).
Flow Range: 80,000 to 135,000 gal/day
Average Flows: 110,000 gal/day
} Constituent Concentration, ma/E
Sodium 653
Calcium 20 -
Magnesium 20
TKN 25
Sulfate 2
Chloride 725
TDS 2,000
Other chzracteristics of the wastewater are a fairly neutral pH of 6.7 and a
BOD of approximately 700 mg/L. Efforts are continuing to further reduce the
TDS, _.sodium and chloride concentrations. It should be noted, however, that a
2Q%.decrease`1n the -concentrations :of these constituents has been achieved
M 1986 Ex'tst' retrea+1' G h
tment facilitie t t' 1 t' 1 d
a
.4 ay ing p a s a oe rinn g p ainc u e
To: Nh Fran Forkas
January 19, 1985
Page 2
plant and accepts secondary effluent. from that system during portions of the
irrigation season. In 1987, 522 mg of effluent was diverted to the industrial
treatment system to be utilized for irrigation. Crops grown include' field
corn, pasture, and alfalfa. Soils are predominantly Hanford sandy loam.
The increases in concentration of critical chemical constituents are presented
in -Table 1, As indicated in Table I, these increases will not cause signifi-
cant impacts on the soil or the groundwater at the irrigation site.
TABLE 1
Current
Expected
Resultant
Chloride 84.0
Concentrationa
Increase
Concentration
Constituent
_ mo 41
mg/
M Impact�
Sodium
75.0
28
103.0 Minimal
Cal cium
55.0
121
53.0 Minimal
Magnesium
8.0
1
9.0 Positive
SAR 2.5
_ _ 3.44 Now
Chloride 84.0
31 111.0 None
TDS 450.0
75 525.01 - �ncrfase
g rac ion
by 5*
a. Based on 1981 report issued
by SWRCB.
....
The sodium increase causes a q1i
ht increase in the sodium adsorption ratio
(SAR). The resultant SAR of 3.44 will not cause permeability problems. in -the
soil [Ref. Design and Operation
of Farm Irrigation Systems, ASAE, 19801.- "The
TDS increase will Partially offset
the effects of the increased SAR. The
resultant TDS will not adversely
affect soil, crops or groundwater. The posi'
.'...
tive impacts o f winter rainfall
p
and effluent should-
dilution with municipal e
also be considered.
_
The neutral pH of th" ewater will add alkalinity to' the industrial
wastewater which will help offset the fruit acids discharged by Pacific Coast
Arms, Tkii§ 444101ty wily
as 1p pxoteCt WC integxity of the injawria1
wastewater sewer:
NOETEan&ASSOCIATES
Eng-rers < F9anne, i Sur.eror+. ;'.
To: Mr. Fran Forkas
Page 3
January 19, 1988
At a BOD concentration of 700rrig/L, the Goehring waste stream would
result in
a daily BOD loading of 642 lb/day requiring approximately 35 hp for
aeration
of the wastewater to prevent odors. Odors have not been a probfein in
the
existing ponds at the Goehring plant.
We look forward to your speedy review and approval o.the concept of
including
Goehring wastewater in the Lodi industrial wastewater system.
Very truly yours,
NOOLTE AND ASS6OCIATES
Richard Stratton
Project Engineer
/ace (CL0436-14)
xc: Don Dennis, Goehring Meat Inc.
David Brent, CRWQC8
'1 P.4 4E g71 l-64 QEPCRT NO �T--
AR�A COOS ;09
NELSON LABORATORIES
AGRICULTURAL CHEMISTS A-N.D 6ANSU6TANT8.
Pit ,nwslSFa ctlunr .. _. ..... .. _
87
STOCK TON, CALIF. 95205 December 14 g
TO Goezrirg Meac Inc.
Attention; KD
P.O. Box 147
Lodi, CA 95240
FOLLOWING ARE THE RESULTS OF ANALYSIS OF A SAMPLE OR SAMPLES AS RECEIVED FROM YOU BY THIS
LABORATORY:
vaste water
NAME OF MATERIAL RECEIVED-11-18-87-
Nelson
ECEIVED11-18-8TNelson Laboratories Sample No. 92075 - Analysis ''thorized by KD via telephone
on 12/9/87.
REPORT NO. 42015
AREA CODE 209
NELSON LABORATORIES
AGRICULTURAL CHEMISTS AND CONSULTANTS
3948 BUDWEISER COURT
STOCKTON. CALIF. 95205 I)PCPTnhPr 3 9 _-&7—
TO Goehrin,g Meat Inc.
Attention: KD
P.O. Box 147
Lodi. CA 95240
FOLiOWING ARE THE RESULTS OF ANALYSIS OF A SAMPLE OR SAMPLES AS RECEIVED FROM YOU EIY THIS
LABORATORY:
NAME OF MATERIAL wa5tpRECEIVED
1
Felson Laboratories Sample No. 92075
GDehring Meat Inc.
' Sample mc'd 11-18-87
5i,-- r st,:0PNiA
C _ FbRNIA REGIONAL WATER QUALITY CONTROL BOARD—
.EN i RAL VALLEY REGION
3443 ROUTIER ROAD
SACRAMENTO, CA 95827.3098
21 December 1987
Mr. Michael Brinton
Director of Public Forks
City of Manteca
1001 W. Cente- Street
Manteca, CA 95336
REQUEST FOR DISCHARGE LIMITS FOR YEAR ROUND DISCHARGE, CITY OF MANTECA,
SAN JOAQUIN COUNTY
-_ C
I have reviewed the last letter vie sent to you on 22 July 1986, and your response
dated 3 September 1987 pertaining to discharge limitations on future increases in
discharge flow from your wastewater treatment plant. Vlb have considered your
request to have the same discharge limitations that vie have imposed on the City of
Tracy and Stockton.
Tracy's treatment plant does not discharge to the San Joaquin River, but to Old
River, which provides water for the state and federal water projects. The water
in Old River is diverted from the San Joaquin River dust below your discharge
point. Therefore, your effluent, as well as Tracy's, must be of high quatity in
order to protect downgradient beneficial uses. W will review Tracy's per -mist
when the City expands its' facility using the same considerations.
The permits for the City of Stockton and Lodi are good examples of discharge
requirements that the Board will consider imposing on the City of Manteca.
Sockton's requirements read in part as:
A. Effluent Limitations:
1. The discharge of
effluent
in excess of the following
limits is
prohibited:
Monthly
Weekly
30 -Day
Daily
Constituents
Units
Average
Average
Median
Maximum
BOD
mgll
30
45
S0
Total Suspended
mg/l
30
45
50 .
Matter ;
2. During the period
1 August
through
31 October or when
dissolved
oxygen Ievels are less than
5.0 mg/l
in the San
Joaglin River down-
stream or upstream
of the
discharge,
the EOD
and Iotal
Suspended
Mattereffluent limitations
are -as follows:
Monthly
Weekly'
30 -Day
Daily
Constituents
Units
Average
..Avera2e
Median
Maximum
BOD
mg/l
-10
20
- 30
Total Suspended
ng/l
10
20
30
Matter
1777777777-7777
777
_ .,... w
.r . _ :.....
._.
Mr. Michael Brinton
-2-
21 December 1987
3. During the period 1 August through 31 October and when San Joaquin River
flow past station R-1 exceeds 3,000 cfs, the BOD and Total Suspended
Matter effluent limitations are as fo i lows:
Monthly Weekly 30 -Day Daily
Constituents Units Average Average Median Maximum
BOD mg/ 1 20 30 50
Total Suspended mg/1 30 45 50
Matter
Li
@rr Your information "e are also pproposin to revise Lodi's requirements forits
ew plant expansion to be similar to Stockton's requirements since its effluent is
jobarged into Dredger Cut which eventually discharges into the San Joaquin
iver.