SITE INFORMATION AND CORRESPONDENCE

Home Browse Search

California Rc, ional Water Quality C a►ntrol Board Central Valley Region ' C Robert Schneider,Chair Alan C.Lloyd Ph.D. �'�Arnold-Schwaruoegger Agency Secretary Sacramento Main Office Governor Internet Address: http://www.waterboards.ca.gov/centralvalley/ p; } - 2005 11020 Sun Center Drive,#200,Rancho Cordova,CA 95670.6114 Phone(916)464-3291 •FAX(916)464-4780 ENVIE 0NWIENT HEALTH 11 October 2005 PERMIT/SERVICES Tom Guido Triple E Produce P.O. Box 239 Tracy, CA 95378 NOTICE OF VIOLA TIONAND INSPECTION REPORT, TRIPLE E PRODUCE CORPORATION, SAN JOAQUIN COUNTY Staff inspected the Triple E Produce facility on 20 September 2005 to better understand the wastewater generation and disposal procedures. The inspection supplemented the information provided in the 12 August 2005 Facility Status Report prepared by Condor Earth Technologies that was submitted as part of the request to close Well MW-7. In addition, staff has reviewed the 2003 and 2004 Annual Reports, also prepared by Condor. Our review found violations of the Waste Discharge Requirements (WDRs) as described below. Violation of WDRs • Provision E.1 requires the Discharger to comply with the Monitoring and Reporting Program (MRP); however,not all the monitoring is being reported and follow-up sampling that is required was not performed. The following violations were noted for year 2003: o Influent settleable solids was not reported. o Effluent Total Dissolved Solids (TDS), Total Suspended Solids (TSS), and Settleable Solids (SS) were not reported. o The MRP requires monthly monitoring of chloroform during the processing year. Based on the daily flow report, the facility operated from July through November in 2003. Spray Field chloroform was not reported for July, September, or November; in addition, when chloroform was reported in August (1,300 Itg/L) and October(190 µg/L) the concentrations exceeded the Daily Maximum Value (100 µg/L) listed in Discharge Specification B.5. Follow-up samples for the months of August and October were not collected as required by the Effluent Monitoring section of the MRP which states, "If the effluent concentration is above the Daily Maximum Limitation, then the effluent shall be resampled to determine if the concentration exceeds the Monthly Average Limitation." o Only one soil Sample was collected rather than two Samples as required by the MRP. • Further violations of the MRP were noted for monitoring conducted in year 2004, as follows: o Influent chloroform, TDS, TSS, and SS analysis results were not reported. California Environmental Protection Agency �a Recycled Paper