Laserfiche WebLink
aovenxoxG. BP~Jx. <br /> (; 'lHa � •�•rR�R Me*'Pew ROOP,011E2 <br /> NOV �( 0 Er SP W�TAS nmccnox <br /> Water Boards �►�Rop U _ __ <br /> qi <br /> Central Valley Regional Water Quality Control Board?�SFR11CTRr Cq <br /> 6 November 2017 <br /> CERTIFIED MAIL <br /> Walter Galacki 91 7199 9991 7035 8361 2317 <br /> SPX Corporation <br /> 13320 Ballantyne Corporate Place <br /> Charlotte, NC 28277 <br /> ADMINISTRATIVE CIVIL LIABILITY COMPLAINT R5-2017-0529 FOR ASSESSMENT <br /> OF MANDATORY MINIMUM PENALTIES, SPX CORPORATION, SPX MARLEY <br /> COOLING TECHNOLOGIES, SAN JOAQUIN COUNTY <br /> Enclosed is an Administrative Civil Liability Complaint (Complaint), issued pursuant to California <br /> Water Code section 13385, for violations of Waste Discharge Requirements (WDRs) Orders <br /> R5-2008-0170 and R5-2014-0013 (NPDES CA0081787) by SPX Corporation, SPX Cooling <br /> Technologies (Discharger), from its Groundwater Extraction and Treatment System (GETS or <br /> Facility) at the Former Marley Cooling Tower Facility. The Complaint charges the Discharger <br /> with administrative civil liability in the amount of twenty seven thousand dollars ($27,000), <br /> which represents the sum of Mandatory Minimum Penalties (MMPs) for effluent limitation <br /> violations (identified in Attachment A of the Complaint) that occurred from 1 January 2014 <br /> through 30 June 2017. The Complaint alleges one total dissolved solids, six chromium VI, and <br /> two copper effluent limitation violations subject to MMPs. <br /> On 15 March 2017, Central Valley Water Board staff issued a draft Record of Violations (ROV) <br /> for effluent limitation violations which occurred between 1 January 2014 and <br /> 31 December 2016. On 13 October 2017, Central Valley Water Board staff issued a revised <br /> ROV which extended the review period and contains additional effluent limitation violations <br /> which occurred at the Facility from 1 January 2014 through 30 June 2017. As of the date of this <br /> Complaint issuance, the Discharger has not responded to the revised 13 October 2017 ROV. <br /> The Discharger responded to the 15 March 2017 ROV and stated that they agreed with all <br /> violations except the 31 October 2016 chromium VI violation. The Discharger argues that <br /> because the violation occurred as a result of adding a polymer while troubleshooting a chronic <br /> toxicity issue, Regional Board staff should consider the event as a Facility "upset' and the <br /> chromium VI violation should not be subject to MMPs. Regional Board staff does not agree that <br /> the polymer addition meets the definition of a "single operational upset' and that the violation is <br /> not subject to MMPs. U.S. EPA defines "single operational upset' as: <br /> "an exceptional incident which causes simultaneous, unintentional, temporary <br /> noncompliance with more than one Clean Water Act effluent discharge pollutant <br /> parameter." <br /> KARL E. LONOLEy SOD, P.E., OHAM 1 PAMELA C. CHEEDON P.E., BCEE. Exfcl ivr orriom <br /> 11020 Sun Canter Drlvd 0200,Randho Cordova,CA 85610 1 www.welarboarda.oa.gov/cOmralvallay <br /> PEoruso raven ' <br />