COMPLIANCE INFO_1989-1996 - Laserfiche WebLink

Home Browse Search

State Inspection- Austin RoaRandfill Site Page 5 of 6 Facility No.- 39-AA-0001 COMMENTS: Violations PRC 44014(b) Permit, Terms and Conditions- The 5-Year Permit Review (5/21/90) noted that "significant changes" in the design and operation of this facility have occurred. These changes include hours of operation, increased tonnage, types of wastes received and prohibited, the installation of a landfill gas collection system, the operation of a methane to energy plant, and the implementation of a hazardous waste screening program. At this time the LEA ". . .determined that the significant changes of the existing permit will require a permit revision. A CE )A review will also be required." The LEA also reported that the 2/1/83 SWFP significantly reduced the daily tonnage from 512 tpd (RDSI, 1977) to 280 tpd. Discussions between the LEA and Board Permit staff led to an agreement that the operator may receive up to 512 tpd under a modified SWFP. (Note: This arrangement was noted in the 8/90 State Inspection. ) The LEA issued a Notice and order (N&O, 4/2/91) to the City of Stockton (operator) which identified a violation of PRC 44004(a) (exceeding the authorized daily permitted tonnage of 280 tpd) and ordered the operator to revise the SWFP. The LEA established, based on information contained in a 1977 SWFP application, a peak daily tonnage of 700 tons during the permit revision process. The N&O reported that a CEQA review was completed and a negative declaration approved (12/90) for a permit revision. On 12/21/91 the LEA submitted an Application for Revision of a Permit dated 4/90 and a Report of Disposal Site Information (RDSI) dated 10/91. Board staff provided the LEA with comments on 1/28/92 regarding the submitted RDSI. A proposal for a Final Revised Permit, accompanied by an 8/12/92 Amendment to the 10/91 RDSI, was received at the Board on 9/21/92. Board correspondence of 10/20/92 acknowledged the LEA's request to withdraw the proposed SWFP from consideration of concurrence by the Board until the operator demonstrates conformance with Financial Assurance requirements. 14 CCR 17704 Leachate Control- Groundwater testing results indicate a degradation of groundwater quality at the landfill. Volatile organic compounds (VOCs) , in concentrations above State Action Levels, have been detected (1/89) and verified (3/89, 2/91) in the first- encountered water-bearing zone of the landfill. Recent monitoring results (Verification Monitoring Program and Conceptual Corrective Action Plan, EMCON, 4/91) indicate that a contaminated groundwater plume runs along the northern edge of the landfill and extends 1,000 feet downgradient to the northeast of the landfill. Waste Discharge Requirements for a Ground Water Treatment System and Storm Water Discharge for the Austin Road Landfill were issued during the RWQCB's 8/14/92 meeting. The operator is currently in the process of obtaining the necessary permits required prior to the construction of a Groundwater Treatment Facility. operator correspondence of 9/28/92 to the RWQCB noted that "we are working to complete permitting of the facility. . .We are waiting to receive our State Reclamation Board [permit] before going to the City Council for approval to call for bids. We expect to get this permit very soon." This correspondence concluded with a tentative 1/18/93 construction date based on receiving the necessary permit and City authorized bidding process. This standard will remain in violation until corrective measures are initiated and the off-site migration of contaminants is controlled at the landfill property boundary. (Note: In 6/3/92 correspondence the LEA stated that "the City of Stockton, as operator of the Austin Road Landfill is hereby notified that as of October 9, 1993 the return of gas condensate to the landfill is prohibited. This includes any and all gas condensate returned to the landfill through leach lines, condensate traps and by any other means." In response to milestones set forth in this directive, condensate testing results were submitted to the LEA on 7/29/92 [note: 10/19/92 correspondence indicated that "items marked 'NR' were inadvertently not tested for, even though a TCLP was specifically requested on our purchase order. Therefore, we will rerun and resubmit the landfill gas condensate test by November 30, 1992. ] . As required by the 6/92 LEA directive, condensate disposal options were outlined in correspondence submitted to the LEA on 10/19/92. A further compliance milestone of the 6/92 directive requires a 1/29/93 report with quarterly updates (4/30/93 & 7/30/93) specifying the preferred disposal method. Additional hazardous waste testing of the condensate is required by 4/1/93 and the 6/92 LEA directive states, "if test results indicate the condensate is a hazardous waste, the continued disposal of condensate to the landfill will be immediately prohibited, irrespective of the October 9, 1993 deadline.") Waste Management Speciali