|
STAFF REPORT 5
<br /> COUNTY OF SAN JOAQUIN AND FOOTHILL SANITARY LANDFILL, INC.
<br /> SAN JOAQUIN COUNTY
<br /> CWC Section 13327 states:
<br /> "In determining the amount of civil liability, the regional board ... shall take into consideration the
<br /> nature, circumstance, extent, and gravity of the violation or violations, whether the discharge is
<br /> susceptible to cleanup or abatement, the degree of toxicity of the discharge, and, with respect to the
<br /> violator, the ability to pay, the effect on ability to continue in business, any voluntary cleanup efforts
<br /> undertaken, any prior history of violations, the degree of culpability, economic.benefit or savings, if
<br /> any, resulting from the violation, and other matters as justice may require."
<br /> The ACLC issued on 16 December 2003, requires that the Discharger pay$10,000 pursuant to Sections
<br /> 13268 and 13327 of the CWC. The ACLC required that payment be made by 6 January 2004, or a hearing
<br /> would be scheduled before the Regional Board. On 6 January 2004 the Discharger faxed a letter stating
<br /> that "...the County cannot, at this time, agree to pay the civil liability, nor are we willing to waive our
<br /> right to a Regional Board hearing on this matter."
<br /> In determining the amount of any civil liability pursuant to CWC Section 13327, the Regional Board
<br /> must take into account the nature, circumstances, extent, and gravity of the violation or violations,
<br /> whether the discharge is susceptible to cleanup or abatement, the degree of toxicity of the discharge,
<br /> and, with respect to the violator, the ability to pay, the effect on ability to continue in business, any
<br /> voluntary cleanup efforts undertaken, any prior history of violations, the degree of culpability,
<br /> economic savings, if any, resulting from the violation, and other matters as justice may require.
<br /> These factors were considered as follows:
<br /> Nature and Circumstances
<br /> The nature of the violation is that the Discharger was required by WDRs Order No. R5-2003-020 to
<br /> submit an Engineering Feasibility Study, which included the closure of Module "I." The Discharger
<br /> has failed to submit a Closure Plan for the unlined Module "I" that adequately addresses the minimum
<br /> requirements. This issue was discussed with the Discharger on several occasions upon which Regional
<br /> Board staff clearly stated the minimum requirements of WDRs and Title 27. The Discharger stated
<br /> that it was clearly understood, but did not agree that meeting the minimum closure requirements were
<br /> necessary. The circumstances are such that the Discharger was aware of the necessity to provide the
<br /> required reports in compliance with WDRs and Title 27, but failed to do so.
<br /> Extent
<br /> The extent of the violation is that the Discharger was required, pursuant to CWC Section 13267, to
<br /> submit the Engineering Feasibility Study, which includes the closure of Module"I" as prescribed in
<br /> WDRs. The report was submitted 5 months late (based on the Compliance date specified in WDRs)
<br /> and was not in compliance with WDRs and Title 27.
<br /> Gravity
<br /> The gravity of the violation is that failure to submit the required report has delayed the process towards
<br /> corrective action. The corrective action is closure of the unlined Unit. VOCs have been detected in
<br /> groundwater and the unsaturated zone. The Foothill Landfill is the only source of this pollution.
<br /> Without containment and source control, LFG will continue to leak from the unlined Module "I" until
<br />
|