SITE INFORMATION AND CORRESPONDENCE_CASE 2

Home Browse Search

CALIFORNIA'I&GIONAL WATER QUALITY CONtI l6l, BOARD • CENTRAL VALLEY REGION ORDER NO. R5-2005-0143 ADMINISTRATIVE CIVIL LIABILITY ORDER IN THE MATTER OF CITY OF TRACY SAN JOAQUIN COUNTY This Order for Administrative Civil Liability is issued to the City of Tracy, (hereafter Discharger) based on a finding of violations of NPDES Waste Discharge Requirements Order No. 96-104, pursuant to California Water Code (CWC)section 13385, which authorizes the imposition of Administrative Civil Liability. The Regional Water Quality Control Board, Central Valley Region(Regional Board) finds, with respect to the Discharger's acts, or failure to act, the following: 1. The Discharger owns and operates the City of Tracy Wastewater Treatment Plant and accompanying collection and disposal systems,which provide sewerage service to the City of Tracy. Treated municipal wastewater is discharged to Old River, a water of the United States, and part of the Sacramento-San Joaquin Delta. 2. On 3 May 1996 the Regional Board adopted Waste Discharge Requirements Order No. 96-104 (NPDES No. CA0079154)prescribing waste discharge requirements for the City of Tracy Wastewater Treatment Plant. 3. On 21 October 2003 the City of Tracy Wastewater Treatment Plant experienced a failure of the sulfur dioxide(SO2) feed system,which provides dechlorination of the effluent prior to final discharge to Old River. This resulted in the discharge estimated to be approximately 585,000 gallons of chlorinated effluent to Old River, over a 95 minute period, with an average chlorine residual of 6.7 mg/L. 4. The Discharger failed to properly document the nature and impact of the chlorine release on the receiving water. Although the Discharger reported that no adverse effects to aquatic life were observed and their monitoring indicated a chlorine residual of<0.1 mg/L in Old River,the Discharger waited 13 hours after the discovery of the release before visually inspecting the receiving water and waited 19 hours to collect in-stream samples for total chlorine residual. Due to the slow response and inadequate monitoring, the effect of the chlorine release on aquatic life is not known. 5. The discharge violated Section B.1 of the Effluent Limitations of Order No. 96-104,which includes a daily maximum effluent limitation for chlorine residual of 0.1 mg/L. The discharge was reported to contain an average total residual chlorine of 6.7 mg/L. 6. The discharge violated Section EA of the Receiving Water Limitations of Order No. 96-104. Section EA states, "the discharge shall not cause concentrations of any materials in the receiving waters which are deleterious to human, aquatic, or plant life". The USEPA