Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutReso 50-1997- RESOLUTION NO. 50-97 CITY COUNCIL, CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO, STATE OF CALIFORNIA RESOLUTION AUTHORIZING SETTLEMENT OF ACTION BROUGHT BY UNITED ANGLERS FOR ALLEGED VIOLATIONS OF THE FEDERAL CLEAN WATER ACT AT THE CITY'S WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT D/qD APPROVING AN AMENDMENT (NO.97-18) TO THE 1996-97 OPERATING BUDGET WHEREAS, the City is co-owner and operator of the Water Quality Control Plant ("the Plant") at 195 Belle Air Road, which is subject to National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System Permit No. CA0038130 ("the NPDES Permit"); and WHEREAS, at times operations at the Plant have been in violation of the NPDES Permit; and WHEREAS, the City has been in the process of planning and implementing substantial improvements to the Plant, has completed many improvements which would avoid most NPDES Permit violations during dry weather periods, and is planning to install an estimated $41 million in upgrades by the year 2000 which should avoid NPDES Permit violations during wet weather periods; and WHEREAS, United Anglers has nonetheless brought a citizen suit against the City pursuant to the federal Clean Water Act and has alleged over 1,000 violations of the NPDES Permit; and WHEREAS, the City disputes that there have been over 1,000 violations of the NPDES Permit, but concedes that there have been some violations of the NPDES Permit; and WHEREAS, the federal Clean Water Act authorizes federal courts to issue orders enjoining violations of NPDES Permits and assessing civil penalties to the federal treasury of up to $25,000 per day per violation, plus attorneys fees to prevailing plaintiffs; and WHEREAS, courts generally do not award maximum penalties against cities for treatment plant violations, but courts have awarded penalties against cities for treatment plant violations similar to those of the City in total amounts of $400,000 or greater; and WHEREAS, during settlement negotiations with United Anglers, the City offered to pay as penalties $100,000 to an environmental water quality remediation project to take place in South San Francisco; and WHERE,, United Anglers insisted, as a condition to settlement, on having the money paid to the State Water Pollution Cleanup and Abatement Account, with the intent that it be used to reimburse the Regional Water Quality Control Board for the Central Valley Regions for the monitoring of privately owned inactive and/or abandoned mines in the Central Valley with drainage to watersheds leading to San Francisco Bay; and WHEREAS, the City opposes in principle the use of its money for remediation projects to take place in the Central Valley, in areas having no nexus to any potential water quality problem which could possibly result from the City's discharges; and WHEREAS, the City further opposes the use by citizen groups of citizen suits under the Clean Water Act, and the associated threat of enormous civil penalties, to leverage contributions out of cities and other defendants to fund other causes important to the citizen groups but having no relationship to the defendants' activities; and WHEREAS, the City thus proposed that the entire $100,000 in penalties be paid directly to the federal treasury as penalties, in strict accordance with the provisions of the Clean Water Act; and WHEREAS, United Anglers, despite the City's objections, nonetheless continued to insist that the money be used for its Central Valley project as a condition of settlement (agreeing only to allow $10,000 to be paid as actual penalties to the federal treasury); and WHEREAS, given the great exposure to penalties, which could pose a potentially great burden on the public fisc, the City feels that it has no choice but to reluctantly agree to United Anglers' demands; and WHEREAS, United Anglers also seeks reimbursement of fees and costs in the amount of $37,956.39, which amount the court would be likely to award; and WHEREAS, the City has negotiated a settlement of United Anglers in accordance with the above terms, which would not require the City to make any improvements to the Plant in addition to the improvements it has already been planning to make since before this litigation was filed; and WHEREAS, the City has also negotiated terms which will drastically limit the ability of United Anglers to bring another Clean Water Act citizen suit against the City for future violations of the NPDES Permit, pending the City's completion of the planned improvements; and WHEREAS, United Anglers has already approved and executed a proposed Consent Judgment in accordance with the above terms, a copy of which is attached hereto. NOW, THEREFORE, BE IT RESOLVED by the City Council of the City of South San Francisco, that: 1. In order to settle the Clean Water Act litigation brought by United Anglers against the City in terms consistent with those set forth in the Recitals, legal counsel for the City is hereby authorized to execute the proposed Consent Judgment in a form substantially the same as the copy which is attached hereto, and any additional related documents to accomplish that purpose. 2. The City Council further authorizes an amendment to the 1996-97 Operating Budget (NO.97-18) Adding $137,956.39 from the Sewer Enterprise Reserve Fund for Payment of Settlement Costs. The City Manager is authorized to make all payments called for in the Consent Judgment, if and when it is approved by the Court. I hereby certify that the foregoing Resolution was regularly introduced and adopted by the City Council of the City of South San Francisco at a regular meeting held on the 14th day of May , 1997 by the following vote: AYES: Councilmembers James L. Datzman, Eugene R, Mu!lin, John R. P~nna, Robert Yee and Maj, or Joseph A. Fernekes NOES: None ABSTAIN: Nnn~ ABSENT: None ATTEST: A: \ SETTLMNT. RES 3 RESOLUTION NO. 50-97 Triggers Which Must Be Met Before United Anglers Can Bring a Citizen's Suit for Future NPDES Violations by the City NPDES Permit Current Parameter Limit United Anglers Cannot Sue for Violation Unless Violation Exceeds the Following Trigger Copper 17 ug/L 37 ug/L (two or more exceedances in any six month period) Cyanide I0 ug/L 25 ug/L (two or more exceedances in any six month period) Chlorine Residual 0.0 mg/L 0.5 mg/L (three or more exceedances in any six month period) Total Coliform 23 MPN/IO0 mi (summer median) 240 MPN/100 mi (winter median) 500 MPN/100 ml (two or more exceedances in any six month period) BOD, Suspended Solids 30 mg/L (monthly average) 40 mg/L (summer), 45 mg/L (winter) (two or more exceedances during any six month period not attributable to an upset or an unavoidable bypass) 45 mg/L (weekly average) 55 mg/L (summer), 60 mg/L (winter) (two or more exceedances during any six month period not attributable to an upset or an unavoidable bypass) 60 mg/L (daily marc) 80 mg/L (summer), 90 mg/L (winter) (two or more exceedances during any six month period not attributable to an upset or an unavoidable bypass) Settleable Solids 0.1 mi/L/hr (monthly average) 1.0 ml/Ijhr (summer), 2.0 ml/IJhr (winter) (two or more exceedances during any six month period not attributable to an upset, an unavoidable bypass, or a two-year (or greater) storm) 0.2 ml/IJhr (instant. max~) 2.0 ml/IJhr (summer), 4.0 ml/Idhr (winter) (two or more exceedances during any six month period not attributable to an upset, an unavoidable bypass, or a two-year (or greater) storm) Fish Toxicity 90% Survival (med.) 70% Survival (90%) Two consecutive violations which exceed the bioassay limits in the NPDES permit where the City fails to initiate a toxicity identification evaluation within 30 days and to file a toxicity identification ['valuation with the Regional Board within 30 days thereafter Overflows/Bypasses of Secondarily-treated Effluent Prohibited Two or more overflows or bypasses in any six month period greater than one hour duration during periods when wet weather flow does not exceed the firm pumping capacity of the pumping station (9.7,700 gpm) EXHIBIT Overflows/Bypasses of Other Effluent Other Effluent Limits Prohibited Various Two or more overflows or bypasses in any six month period greater than 1000 gallons which are not unavoidable due to (I) vandalism or an illegal discharge from a resident or business that damages or plugs a sewer; (2) severe wet-weather conditions; or (3) a natural disaster. The City shall have the burden of proving one of these exceptions. Two or more discharges during any six month period which exceed one of the effluent limitations set forth in the NPDES permit for pollutants not addressed above J:\WPD~M N RS~40.5'~1BMC~2 I~STAFFRPT.TRG 1 Steven T. Mattas, City Attorney, SBN: 154247 Rick W. Jarvis, SBN: 154479 2 MEYERS, NAVE, RIBACK, SILVER &. WILSON Gat _e~vay Plaza 3 777 Davis Street, Suite 300 San Leandro, California 94577 4 (510) 351-4300 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 [4 15 16 17 18 I9 2O 21 22 23 24 25 ._26 ~ .)7 28 Attorneys for Defendant City of South San Frandsco EXHIBIT B RESOLUTION NO. 50-97 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF CALIFORNIA UNITED ANGLERS, Plaintiff, v. CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO, Defendant. CASE NO.: C 96-3116 EFL r)% ~ S E D ] CONSENT MENT INTRODUCTION The City of South San Francisco ("the Cit,f') discharges from a wastewater treatment plant which is subject to National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System ("NPDES') Permit No. CA00S8130 ("the NPDES Permit"), issued by the Regional Water Quality Control Board for the San Frandsco Bay Region, pursuant to Section 402 of the Clean Water Act ("the Act~), 33 U.S.C. § 1342. The treatment plant is co-owned by the City and the City of San Bruno, and the treatment plant discharges directly to the North Bay Side Unit ("NBSI2') pump station and deep-water ouffall co-owned by the City, the City of San Bruno, the City of Millbrae, the City of Burlingame, and the San Francisco International Airport (collectively, "the NBSU Members"). Plaintiff United Anglers has filed this action pursuant to section 505 of the Act, 33 U.S.C. § 1365, alleging that the City has violated and is contln,,in~ tn ~qnlut~ [PROPOSED] CONSENT JUDGMENT (C96-3116 EFL) 1 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 ~14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 __26 27 28 the NPDES Permit in numerous respects. The alleged violations are set forth in a March 6, 1997 letter from counsel for United Anglers to the City's Public Works Director, a true and correct copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit A and incorporated herein by reference. This letter includes an attached table compiling a list of violations. Certain of the alleged violations (particularly the overflows to Colma Creek from the NBSU pump station and the chlorine residual violations) relate to the operation of facilities co-owned by the NBSU Members. United Anglers has brought this action as a citizen suit for the purpose of representing the public interest in the enforcement of the federal Clean Water Act, and not to represent any private pecuniary interest. The City has been in the process of planning and implementing substantial improvements to the wastewater treatment plant. The City plans to install an additional estimated $41 million in upgrades, which are expected to be complete by the spring of the year 2000. The Regional Board is expected to issue a Cease and Desist Order within the next few months establishing a schedule for the City to complete the upgrades. United Anglers and the City have consented to the entry of this Consent Judgment without trial of any issues, and hereby stipulate that, in order to settle the daims alleged against the City in the United Anglers' complaint, this Judgment should be entered. This Judgment constitutes a settlement of disputed claims. It is not an admission of iurisdiction over or liability for any claims or an admission of any fact. Should this Proposed Judgment fail to be entered for any reason, this Proposed Judgment, and any statement or other provision contained in this Proposed Judgment, shall have no legal effect and shall not be used for any purpose in any subsequent proceeding in this or any other litigation. /// /// /// [PROPOSED] CONSENT JUDGMENT (C96-3116 EFL) 2 ~ 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 2O 21 22 23 24 25 ~ 26 27 28 NOW, THEREFORE, is it hereby ORDERED, ADJUDGED, AND DECREED as follows: I. IURISDICTION 1. This Court has jurisdiction over the subject matter and the parties in this action pursuant to Section 505 of the Act, 33 U.S.C. § 1365. The complaint filed by United Anglers states a daim upon which relief can be granted pursuant to Section 505 of the Act, 33 U.S.C. § 1365. 2. Venue is proper in this District pursuant to Section 505(c)(1) of the Act, 33 U.S.C. § 1365(c)(1), because this District is the judicial district in which the City's wastewater treatment plant is located. II. APPLICABILITY AND BINDING EFFECT 3. This Consent Judgment shall apply to and be binding upon United Anglers, the City, and their respective employees, agents, successors, and assigns. To the extent that federal law (including federal principles of res judicata) allows, this Consent Judgment shall also be found binding upon other private parties who may hereafter file a citizen suit against the City or the other NBSU members for alleged violations of the Clean Water Act which have been alleged in this action. III. SETTLEMENT PAYMENT AND SUPPLEMENTAL ENVIRONMENTAL PROIECTS 4. In settlement of this action, within 15 days after entry of this judgment, the City shall pay $10,000 in penalties via check payable to and delivered to the United States Treasury, plus an additional $90,000 via check payable to the State Water Pollution Cleanup and Abatement Account and delivered to the State Water Resources Control Board for the State of California for the purposes set forth in Plaintiffs letter dated March 10, 1997, a copy of which is attached hereto as Exhibit B. The parties intend that, subject to paragraph 7, this payment shall constitute full and complete satisfaction of the potential liability of the City for civil penalties for the violations alleged by United Anglers, as set forth in Exhibit A hereto. [PROPOSED] CONSENT JUDGMENT (C96-3116 EFL) 3 -- 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 ~_ 26 ~ 27 28 IV. NON-WAIVER PROVISIONS $. This Consent Judgment in no way alters or relieves the City of its responsibility to comply with all applicable provisions of the Act and the NPDES Permit. In addition, the City shall mail to counsel for United Anglers reports of all overflows occurring within 365 days of the Parties' execution of this Consent Judgment. 6. This Consent Judgment shall not be construed to limit the authority of the United States under Section 309 of the Act, 33 U.S.C. § 1319, or of the California Regional Water Quality Control Board under California law. 7. This Consent Judgment shall not be construed to limit the remedies available to United Anglers under the Act except that: (1) The City's settlement payment under this judgment shall constitute full and complete satisfaction of all monetary claims against the City or the other NBSU Members for violations of the Act or the NPDES Permit alleged by United Anglers, as set forth in Exhibit A. This release is based on the accuracy of the self-monitoring data reported by the City and shall not apply with respect to any sampling results that are subsequently determined to have been erroneous. (2) United Anglers covenants not to sue the City or any of the other NBSU Members for civil penalties for alleged violations of the Act or Of the NPDES Permit occurring prior to lulY 1, 2000 (by which date the City anticipates completion of the pending upgrades to the wastewater treatment plant referenced above), except as set forth below:. i. This Consent Judgment does not bar a suit brought for discharges to the extent that the parameters set forth below are exceeded, although any such suit would be subiect to all other defenses and jurisdictional limitations applicable under the Act: [PROPOSED] CONSENT JUDGMENT (C96-3116 EFL) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 Copper Cyanide Chlorine Residual Total Coliform Two or more dischasges exceeding the daily maximum of 37 ug/L in any six month period Two or more discharges exceeding the daily maximum of 25 ug/E in any six month period Three or more days in _any six month period during which the chlorine residual exceeds .5 mg/L A five-sample median exceeding 500 MPN/100 ml occurring twice or more in any six month period 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 BOD monthly avg. Two or more months in any six month period during which average excedds 40 mg/L during the summer (May through SeptemlSer) or 45 mg/L during the Winter, not attributable to an upset (as defined in the NPDES permit) or an unavoidable bypass weeldy avg. Two or more weeks in any six month period during which average exceeds 55 mg/E during the summer or 60 mg/L during the Winter, not attributable to an upset or an unavoidable bypass Two or more disch_arges during any. six month period exceeding 80 mg/L duffng the summer or 90 mg/L during the Winter, not attributable to an upset or an unavoidable bypass Total Suspended Solids monthly avg. Two or more months in any six month period during which average excedds 40 mg/L during the stemmer or 45 mg/L duringthe Winter, not attributable to an up~et (as de-fined in the NPDES permit) or an unavoidable bypass weekly avg. Two or more weeks in any six month period during which average exc&ds 55 mg/E during the summer or 60 mg/L during the Winter, not attributable to an up'et or an'ixnavoidable bypass Two or more disch_arges during any six month period exceeding 80 mg/L duffng the summer or 90 mg/L during the ~vinter, not attributable to an up'et or an-unavoidable bypass Settleable Matter (Solids) monthly avg. Two or more months during any six month period during which averagi ex&eds 1.0 hal/l/hr during the summer-or 2.0 ml/l/hr [PROPOSED] CONSENT JUDGMENT (C96-3116 EFL) 5 1 2 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 during the winter, not attributable to an upset, an unavoidable bypass, or a two-year (or greater) storm instantaneous max. Two or more instances during any six month period exceeding 2.0 miA/hr durifig the summer or 4.0 miA/hr during the winter, not attributable to an upset, an unavoidable bypass, or a two-year (or greater) storm Fish Toxidty Two consecutive violations which exceed the bioassay limits in the NPDES permit where the City fails to initiate a toxidty identification evaluation within B0 days and to file a toxid_ty identification evaluation with the Regional Board within 30 days thereafter Overflows/Bypasses. of Secondarily-~treatect Effluent Two or more overflows or bypasses of wastewater that has been secondarily treated in any six month period greater than one hour duration during periods when wet weather flow does not exceed the firm pumping capackty of the pumping station {2T, 700 gpm) Overflows/Bypasses of Other Effluent Two or more overflows or bypasses in any six month period greatdr-than 10'00 gallons which ar~ not unavoidable due to (1) vandalism or an illegal discharge from a resident or buslness that 3amages or plugs a sewer; · (2) severe wet-weather conditions; or (3) a natural disaster. The City shall have the burden of proving one of these exceptions. Other Effluent Limits Two or more discharges during any six month period which exceed bne of thk effluent Iimitations set forth in the NPDES permit for pollutants not addressed above 23 24 25 ii. This Consent ludgment does not bar a suit for failure to comply with any monitoring, testing, or reporting requirements set forth in the NPDES Permit, including requirements to report overflows 26 27 28 and any other violations of effluent limitations. However, no suit shall be brought for violation of any applicable requirement to monitor receiving waters prior to September 30, 1997. [PROPOSED] CONSENT JUDGMENT (C96-3116 EFL) 6 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 ~14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 _ 26 27 28 United Anglers covenants not to sue the City for injunctive or declaratory relief regarding alleged violations of the NPDES Permit, provided that the City proceeds with construction of its currently planned improvements to the treatment plant (currently estimated to cost $41 million) in accordance either with the schedule set forth below, or with a schedule approved by the Regional Water Quality Control Board pursuant to an administrative Cease and Desist Order, as the same may be amended: Improvements to Water Quality Control Plant ~ (inCludes Joint NBSU Pump Sthtion) June 1, 1998 Complete Design July 1, 2000 Complete Construction Improvements to expand capacity of Deep-Water Outfall January 1, 1998 Complete Study of Land Section July 1, 1998 December 1, 1998 May 1, 1999 August 1, 1999 Complete Complete Complete Section Complete Section Study of Underwater Section Design of Land Section Design of Underwater Construction of Land January 1, 2000 Complete Construction of Underwater Section 8. Except as provided in the previous paragraph, United Anglers expressly reserves all remedies available to it for any violations of the Act or the NPDES Permit occurring subsequent to date counsel for the parties sign this Consent Judgment. V. ATTORNEY'S FEES AND COSTS 9. United Anglers has furnished the City with a summary of its attorney's fees and costs incurred in this action, Which total $37,956.39. This figure includes charges for: 97.6 hours of time incurred by United Anglers' counsel, Alan Beaven, at his hourly rate of $300 per hour; 12.4 hours of time by another attorney assisting [PROPOSED] CONSENT JUDGMENT (C96-3116 EFL) 7 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 ~--26 27 28 Mr. Beaven at her hourly rate of $250 per hour; an invoice for $5,000 from Plaintiff's expert, and miscellaneous expenses. ! 0. Within fifteen (15) days of entry of the Consent Judgment by the Court, the City agrees to pay United Anglers $37,956.39 to settle its claim for attorneys' fees and costs incurred in this action. The payment shall be made by check, payable to Berman, DeValerio, Pease & Tabacco, as trustees for United Anglers. Plaintiffs certify that its attorneys' fees and costs incurred in this action exceed the amount referenced in this paragraph. 11. The City shall bear its own attorneys' fees and costs. VI. NOTICE TO THE FEDERAL GOVERNMENT ! 2. The Parties acknowledge and agree that entry of this Consent Judgment is subject to the requirements of Section 505(c)(3) of the Act, 33 U.S.C. § 1365(c)(3), which provides that "[n]o consent judgment shall be entered in an action in which the United States is not a party prior to 45 days following receipt of a copy of the proposed consent judgment by the Attorney General and the [EPA] Administrator." Following the Parties' execution of this document, the City shall serve copies upon the EPA Administrator, the Attorney General, and the Regional Administrator of EPA Region IX in San Francisco, in accordance with 40 C.F.R. § 135.5(a). /// /// /// /// /// /// /// /// /// [PROPOSED] CONSENT JUDGMENT (C96-3116 EFL) 8 ~iRY-09-97 FRI 09:49 ~YERS, N~VE, RIBflCK&$1LV, F~ NO, 510 351 448] P, 02/02 1 7 8 g 10 11 12 13 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22. 23 25 26 27 28 VI. I:~T~'T][ON O1: IUKISDICTION 13. This Court shall r~tain jurisdiction to enfort~ the terms nnd conditions of this Consent Iudgm~nt and to resolve any disputes arising hereunder. In any action brought in this Cottrt to en[orce this Consent Judgment, the prevailing part), shall be entitled to Rs attorneys' fees and costs. Dated and entered into this ~ day o£ ,1997 tiU~liNll F. LYNCH United States District Judge WE HEREBY CONSENT tO Crttry of this Consult Judgment, subject to the notice requirements of 33 U.S.C. § 1365(c)(3) and 40 C.F.R. ii 135.5. DATED: DATED: FOR PLAINTIFF UNITED ANGLERS Alan l~aven Berman, D~Valerio, Pea.~ & Tab.acco 425 California St., Suite 2025 San Francisco CA 94104 FOR DEFENDANT CITY OF SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO By: Kick W. Jarls Meyers, .Nave, Rlback, Silver & Wilson 777 Davis Street, Suite 300 San Leandro CA 94577 /PROPOSED] CONSF..NT IUDGMENT (C96-3 ~ 16 F.~L) 9 TELEPHONE (415) 433-3200 FACSIMILE (415) 433-6.382 BERMAN, DEVALERIO, PEASE & TABACCO COUNSELLORS AT LAW 425 C~I n:ORNIA STREET, SUITE 2025 SAN FRANCISCO, CALIFORNIA 94104 BER=MAN, DEVALEKIO & PEASE ONE LIBERTY SQUARE ~OSTON, MA 02109 'r~t.~PHON~ (617) 542-~300 FACSIMII~ (617} 542-1194 March 6, 1997 CERTIFIED MAI1, - RETURN RECEIPT REQUESTED John Gibbs Director of Public Works City of South San Francisco 400 Grand Avenue South San Francisco, CA 94080 United Anglers v. City of South San Francisco; Second Notice l,etter Dear Mr. Gibbs: We refer you to our first notice letter dated June 20, 1996, a copy of which is incorporated by reference. We are particularly concerned by the City's ongoing overflows to Colma Creek and the City's failed bioassays. Enclosed please find a supplementary schedule of violations on which we intend to proceed at the trial of this action. In addition, there are: · Overflows on December 5, 10, 21, 16, 27 and 29, 1996 and January 1, 2, 3, 22, 23, 24, 25 and 26, 1997; · Improper bioassay testing, including a failed bioassay on January 24, 1997; · The absence of any monitoring of the receiving waters since September 1992; · Manipulation of effluent coliform sampling results; · Failure promptly to report, the volume of overflows and bypasses to Colma Creek to ttle regulatory authorities. We are puzzled at the current proposal for the City to accept wastewater flows from the San Francisco Airport wastewater treatment plant, when the City has insufficient capacity to manage its existing flows. EXHIBIT John Gibbs March 6, 1997 Page 2 We are hereby giving the City notice that at the trial of this action we intend to have penalties assessed against the City for all violations of the Clean Water Act between June 21, 1991 and the date of trial. Alan A. Beaven CC: E.P.A. Washington, D.C. - Carol M. Browner E.P.A. Region 9 - Felicia Marcus State Water Resources Control Board - Walt Pettit fi~shared~.$~gibbs2.1tr Date COMPILATION OF CLEAN WATER ACT VIOLATIONS AT THE SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO -SAN BRUNO WATER QUALITY CONTROL PLANT January 1990 - November 1996 Parameter Type Outfall Limit Violation No. Comments 11116~96 11/16/96 11/17/96 11/4/96 11/1/96 11/6/96 11/7/96 11/8/96 11/96 11/8/96 11/12~96 11/13~96 11/14/96 11/15~96 11/18~96 Overflow Overflow Overflow Cyanide Sett. Solids' Sett. Solids Sett. Solids Sett. Solids Sett. Solids Total Coliform Total Coliform Total Coliform Total Coliform Total Coliform Total Coliform daily daily daily daily daily daily daily daily monthly average median median median median median median 001 001 001 001 001 001 001 001 001 001 001 001 No bypass/overflow No bypass/overflow No bypass/overflow 10 ug/I 0.2 mi/l/hr 0.2 mi/l/hr 0.2 mi/l/hr 0.2 mi/l/hr · 0.1 mi/l/hr 240 MPN/100 mi 240 MPN/100 mi 240 MPN/lOO mi 240 MPN/100 mi 240 MPN/100 mi 240 MPN/100 mi 1 30,000 gal. overflow of 1 primary effluent overflow of secondary 1 effluent overflow of secondary 1 effluent 10.9 ug/I 1 .5 mi/l/hr 1 40.0 mi/l/hr 1 22.0 mi/l/hr 1 40.0 mi/l/hr 1 3.42 mi/I/hr 30 490 MPN/100 mi 1 490 MPN/100 mi 1 490 MPN/100 mi 1 490 MPN/100 mi 1 330 MPN/100 mi '1 330 MPN/100 mi 1 3 Date 11119~96 11/20/96 11117196 11/20/96 11/96 11/18~96 11119~96 11/20/96 11/96 11/17/96 - 11/23/96 11/30/96 10/1/96 10/29/96 10/30/96 10/31196 10~96 10/9/96 10~29~96 10/30/96 Parameter Total Coliform Total Coliform Susp. Matter Susp. Matter Susp. Matter BOD BOD BOD BOD BOD Chlorine resid. Cyanide Sett. Solids Sett. Solids Sett. Solids Sett. Solids Susp. Matter Susp. Matter .Susp. Matter Type median median daily daily monthly avg. daily daily daily monthly avg. 7-day avg. daily daily daily daily daily monthly avg. daily daily daily Outfall 001 001 001 001 001 001 001 001 001 001 002 001 001 001 001 001 001 001 001 Limit 240 MF;N/I'00 mi 240 MPN/100 mi 60 mg/I 60 mg/I 30 mg/I 60 mg/I 60 mg/I 60 mg/I 30 mg/I 45 mg/I 0 mg/I 10 ug/I 0.2 mi/l/hr 0.2 mi/l/hr 0.2 mi/l/hr 0.1 mi/l/hr 60 mg/I 60 mg/I 60 mg/I Violation 330 MPN/IO0 mi 700 MPN/IO0 mi 72 mg/I 63 mg/I 33 mg/I 75 mg/I 78 mg/I 73 mg/I 31 mg/I 49 mg/I .45 mg/I 11.1 ug/I 8.0 mi/l/hr 18.0 mi/l/hr 28.0 mi/l/hr 1.75 mi/l/hr 62 mg/I 83 mg/I 7{) mg/I No. 1 1 1 1 30 1 1 1 30 7 1 1 1 1 1 31 1 1 1 Comments 3 Date Parameter Type Outfall Limit Violation No. Comments 10~96 10~8~96 10/9/96 10/14/96 10/16/96 10/17/96 10~96 10/6/96- 10/12/96 - 10/13/96- 10/19/96 9/1/96 9/19~96 9/19~96 8~20~96 8/9/96 8/12/96 8/27/96 7/22/96 Susp. Matter BOD BOD BOD BOD BOD BOD BOD BOD Cyanide Sett. Solids Chlorine resid. Overflow Total Coliform Total Coliform Chlorine resid. Overflow Copper monthly avg. daily daily daily daily daily monthly avg. 7-day avg. 7-day avg. daily daily daily daily daily daily daily daily daily 001 001 001 001 001 001 001 001 001 001 001 001 001 001 OO2 001 30 mg/I 60 mg/I 60 mg/I 60 mg/I 60 mg/I 60 mg/I 30 mg/I 45 mg/I 45 mg/I 10 ug/I .02 mi/l/hr 0 mg/I n° bypass/overflow 240 MPN/100 mi 240 MPN/100 mi 0 mg/I no bypass/overflow 17 ug/I 3 38 mg/I 62 mg/I 69 mgll 65 mg/I 67 mg/I 62 mg/I · 39 mg/I 47 mg/I 52 mg/I 13.6 ug/I .5 mi/I/hr 3 mg/I 2700 gal. sewage overflow 330 MPN/100 mi 1100 MPN/100 mi .5 mg/I 5490 gal. sewage. overflow 17.5 ug/I 30 1 1 1 1 1 31 7 7 3 1 1 3 Date Parameter Type Outfall Limit Violation No. Comments 7/15/96 7/11/96 7/12/96 7/15/96 7/16/96 7/17/96 7/18/96 7/19/96 7/22/96 7/23/96 7/24/96 7/25/96 7/26/96 6/25/96 6/3/96 6/3/86 6/1/96 6/2/96 6/9/96 6/16/96 6/22/.qR Fish Toxicity Total Coliform Total Coliform Total Coliform Total Coliform Total Coliform Total Coliform Total Coliform Total Coliform Total Coliform Total Coliform Total Coliform Total Coliform Overflow Fish Toxicity Total Coliform Sulfides Sulfides Sulfides Sulfides Sulfides median daily median median median median median median median median median median median daily median median monitoring monitoring monitoring monitoring monitoring 001 001 001 001 001 001 001 001 001 001 001 001 001 001 001 001 001 001 001 001 90% survival 240 MPN/100 mi 23 MPN/100 mi 23 MPN/100 mi 23 MPN/100 mi 23 MPN/100 mi 23 MPN/100 mi 23 MPN/100 mi 23 MPN/100 mi 23 MPN/100 mi 23 MPN/100 mi 23 MPN/100 mi 23 MPN/100 mi no bypass/overflow 90% survival 23 MPN/100 mi monitor daily monitor daily monitor daily monitor daily monitor daily 85% survival 1 4 330 MPN/100 mi 1 50 MPN/100 mi 1 80 MPN/100 mi 1 80 MPN/100 mi 1 80 MPN/100 mi 1 70 MPN/100 mi 1 70 MPN/100 mi 1 70 MPN/100 mi 1 70 MPN/100 mi 1 70 MPN/100 mi 1 50 MPN/100 mi 1 50 MPN/100 mi 1 1700 gal. sewage 1 1 overflow 85% survival 1 50 MPN/100 mi 1 failure to monitor 1 5 failure to monitor 1 5 failure to monitor 1 5 failure to monitor 1 5 failure to monitor 1 5 Date 6/23/96 6/29/96 6/30/96 5/1/96 5/5/96 5/14/96 5/31/96 5~23~96 5124196 5~28~96 5~29~96 5~30~96 5/31/96 5/17/96 5/18~96 5/19~96 5/15~96 5~96 5/4~96 5~5~96 5/12/qR Parameter Sulfides Sulfides Sulfides Cyanide Fish Toxicity Sett. Solids Total Coliform Total Coliform Total Coliform Total Colif(~rm Total Coliform Total Coliform Total Coliform Sulfides Sulfides Sulfides Susp. Matter BOD Sulfides Sulfides Sulfides Type monitoring monitoring monitoring daily median daily daily median median median median median median monitoring monitoring monitoring daily monthly avg. monitoring monitoring monitoring Outfall 001 001 001 001 001 001 001 001 001 001 001 001 001 001 001 001 001 001 002 002 002 Limit monitor daily monitor daily monitor daily 10 ug/I 90% survival .02 mi/l/hr 240 MPN/100 mi 23 MPN/100 mi 23 MPN/100 mi 23 MPN/100 mi 23 MPN/100 mi 23 MPN/100 mi 23 MPN/100 mi monitor daily monitor daily monitor daily 60 mg/I 30 mg/I monitor daily monitor daily monitor daily Violation failure to monitor failure to monitor' failure to monitor 12.3 ug/I 85% survival .6 mi/I/hr 790 MPN/100 mi 80 MPN/100 mi 80 MPN/100 mi 80 MPN/100 mi 80 MPN/100 mi 80 MPN/100 mi 80 MPN/100 mi failure to monitor failure to monitor failure to monitor 75 mg/I 31 mg/I failure to monitor failure to monitor failure to monitor No. 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 31 Comments '~5 5 5 3 3 5 5 5 5 5 Date Parameter. Type Outfall Limit Violation No. Comments ' 5/18/96 5/19/96 5/25/96 5/26/96 5/27/96 5/28/96 5~29/96 5/30/96 5/31/96 4/15/96 4~5~96 4/7/96 3~4~96 3/12/96 313196 3/5/96 3/2/96 313196 3/9/96 3110196 Sulfides Sulfides Sulfides Sulfides Sulfides Sulfides Sulfides Sulfides Sulfides Fish Toxicity Chlorine resid. Chlorine resid. Overflow Overflow Sulfides Sulfides Sulfides Sulfides Sulfides Sulfides monitoring monitoring monitoring monitoring monitoring monitonng monitoring monitoring monitoring median daily daily daily daily monitoring monitoring monitoring monitoring monitoring monitoring 002 002 002 0.02 002 002 002 002 002 001 002 002 001 001 002 002. 002 002 monitor daily monitor' daily monitor daily monitor daily monitor daily monitor daily monitor daily monitor daily monitor, daily 90% survival 0 mg/I 0 mg/I no bypass/overflow no bypass/overflow monitor daily monitor daily monitor daily monitor daily monitor daily monitor daily R failure to monitor failure to monitor failure to monitor failure to monitor failure to monitor failure to monitor failure to monitor failure to monitor failure t° monitor 85% survival .2 mg/I 4.5 mg/I secondary effluent overflow secondary effluent overflow failure to monitor failure to monitor failure to monitor failure to monitor failure to monitor failure to monitor 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 1 1 5 5 5 5 5 5 Date Parameter Type Outfall Limit Violation No. Comments 3/16/96 3/17/96 3/23/96 3/24/96 3/31/96 2/96 2/96 2/21/96 2/5/96 2/21/96 2/21/96 2/21/96 2/3/96 2~4~96 2/10~96 2/17~96 2/18~96 2/19~96 1/96 1/96 Sulfides Sulfides Sulfides Sulfides Sulfides Overflow Overflow Total Coliform Sulfides Sulfides Susp. Matter Susp. Matter Sulfides Sulfides Sulfides Sulfides Sulfides Sulfides Overflow Overflow monitoring monitoring monitoring monitoring monitoring daily daily daily monitoring monitoring daily daily monitoring monitoring monitonng monitoring monitoring monitoring daily daily OO2 002 002 002 OO2 O01 001 001 001 001 002 002 0O2 002 002 002 monitor daily monitor daily monitor daily monitor daily monitor daily no bypass/overflow no bypass/overflow 2400 MPN/100 'mi monitor daily monitor daily 60 mg/I 3940 kg/d monitor daily monitor daily monitor daily monitor daily monitor daily monitor daily no bypass/overflow no bypass/overflow failure to monitor failure to monitor failure to-monitor failure to monitor failure to monitor sewage overflow secondary effluent overflow 3500 MPN/100 mi failure to monitor failure to monitor 101 mg/I 7099 kg/d failure to monitor failure to monitor failure to monitor failure to monitor failure to monitor failure to monitor sewage overflow secondary effluent overflow 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1' 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 -1 5 5 5 5 5 1,6 1,6 5 5 7 5 5 5 5 5 5 1,6 1,6 Date Parameter Type Outfall Limit Violation No. Comments 1/31/96 1/31/96 1/16/96 1/8/96 1/6/96 - 1/12~96 1/8/96 1/1/96 1/6/96 1/7/96 1/13/96 1/14/96 1/20/96 1/21/96 1/24/96 1/27/96 12/11/95 12112195 12/3/95 12/3/95 12/11/95 Sett. Solids Total Coliform Sulfides Susp. Matter Susp. Matter BOD Sulfides Sulfides Sulfides Sulfides Sulfides Sulfides Sulfides Sulfides Sulfides Overflow Overflow Copper Cyanide Total Coliform daily daily monitoring daily weekly avg. daily monitoring monitoring monitoring monitoring monitoring monitoring monitoring monitoring monitoring daily daily daily daily daily 001 001 001 001 001 001 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 002 001 001 001 .02 mi/l/hr 2400 MPN/100 mi monitor daily 60 mg/I 45 mg/I 60 mg/I monitor daily monitor daily monitor daily monitor daily monitor daily monitor daily monitor daily monitor daily monitor daily no bypass/overflow no bypass/overflow 17 ug/I 10 ug/I 2400 MPN/100 mi 8 1.5 mi/I/hr >24000 MPN/100 mi failure to monitor 117 mg/I 46 mg/I 78 mg/I failure to monitor failure to monitor failure to monitor failure to monitor failure to monitor failure to monitor failure to monitor failure to monitor failure to monitor sewage overflow secondary effluent overflow 20.1 ug/I 15.8 ug/I 9200 MPN/IO0 mi 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 5 1 1 3 3 Date 12/12/95 12/15/95 12/11/95 12/12/95 12/15/95 12/16/95 12/17~95 12/11/95 12~95 12/95 12/2/95 12~3~95 12/9/95 12/10/95 12/22/95 12/23/95 12/25/95 11/25/95 10~5~95 Parameter Total Coliform Total Coliform Sulfides Sulfides Sulfides Sulfides Sulfides Susp. Matter S.usp. Matter BOD Sulfides Sulfides Sulfides Sulfides Sulfides Sulfides Sulfides Cyanide Sett. Solids Chromium Type daily median monitoring monitoring monitoring monitoring monitoring daily monthly avg. monthly avg. monitoring monitoring monitoring monitoring monitoring monitoring monitoring daily daily daily Outfall 001 001 001 001 001 001 001 001 001 001 002 0O2 002 002 002 002 002 O01 001 001 .Limit 2400 MPN/100 mi 240 MPN/100 mi monitor daily monitor daily monitor daily monitor daily monitor daily 60 mg/I 30 mg/I 30 mg/I monitor daily. monitor daily monitor daily monitor daily monitor daily monitor daily monitor daily 10 ug/I .02 mi/l/hr 10 ug/I Violation No. Comments >24000 MPN/100 mi 1 940 MPN/100 mi 1 failure to monitor 1 5 failure to monitor I 5 failure to monitor 1 5 failure to monitor I 5 failure to monitor 1 5 66 mg/I 1 33 mg/I 31 34 mg/I 31 failure to monitor 1 5 failure to monitor 1 5 failure to monitor 1 5 failure to monitor 1 5 failure to monitor 1 5 failure to monitor 1 5 failure to monitor I 5 23.3 ug/I 1 3 .3 mi/l/hr 1 17.9 ug/I I 3 Date Parameter Type Outfall Limit Violation No. Comments 10/23/95 10/24/95 9/7/95 9/8/95 9/11/95 8/9/95 8/14/95 8/15/95 8/16~95 8/17/95 8/21195 8~22~95 8~23~95 5/19~95 5122195 5~23~95 5124195 4~4~95 4~3~95 3/95 BOD Chlorine resid. Total Coliform Total Coliform Total Coliform Copper Total Coliform Total Coliform Total Coliform Total 'Coliform Total Coliform Total Coliform Total Coliform Total Coliform Total Coliform Total Coliform Total Coliform Copper Chlorine resid. Overflow daily daily median median median daily median median median median median median median median median median median daily daily daily 001 002 001 001 001 001 001 001 001 001 001 001 001 001 001 001 001 001 002 60 mg/I 0 mg/I 23 MPN/100 mi 23 MPN/100 mi 23 MPN/100 mi 17 ug/I 23 MPN/100 mi 23 MPN/100 mi 23 MPN/100 mi 23 MPN/100 mi 23 MPN/100 mi 23 MPN/100 mi 23 MPN/100 mi 23 MPN/100 mi 23 MPN/100 mi 23 MPN/100 mi 23 MPN/100 mi 17 ug/I 0 mg/I no bypass/overflow 72 mg/I .3 mg/I 40 MPN/100 mi 40 MPN/100 mi 40 MPN/100 mi 17.1 ug/I 80 MPN/100 mi 80 MPN/100 mi 80 MPN/100 mi 110 MPN/100 mi 50 MPN/100 mi 36 MPN/100 mi 36 MPN/100 mi 50 MPN/100 mi 50 MPN/100 mi 50 MPN/100 mi 50 MPN/100 mi 20.6 ug/I .1 mg/I sewage overflows overflow 3 3 1,6 Date Parameter Type Outfall Limit Violation No. Comments 3/2/95 3/10/95 3/6/95 3/9/95 3/22/95 3/95 3/3/95 3/18/95 3/19/95 3~22~95 3123195 2/7/95 2~4~95 2~95 2~2~95 218195 1/95 Overflow Overflow Copper Total Coliform Total Coliform Susp. Matter Chlorine resid. Chlorine resid. Chlorine resid. Chlorine resid. Chlorine resid. Copper Susp. Matter BOD Chlorine resid. Chlorine resid. Overflow daily daily daily daily daily monthly avg. daily daily daily daily daily daily daily monthly avg. daily daily daily 001 001 001 001 002 002 002 002 002 001 001 001 002 002 no bypass/overflow no bypass/overflow 17 ug/I 2400 MPN/100 mi 2400 MPN/100 mi 30 mg/I 0 mg/I 0 mg/I 0 mg/I 0 mg/I 0 mg/I .17 ug/I 60 mg/I 30 mg/I 0 mg/I 0 mg/I no bypass/overflow i 100,000 to 200,000 gals primary treated effluent overflow overflow 500,000 gals primary treated effluent overflow overflow 1 1,6 1 1,6 19.1 ug/I 1 3 >24000 MPN/100 mi 1 9200 MPN/100 mi 1 32 mg/I 31 .1 mg/I 1 .2 mg/I 1 .3 mg/I 2 .3 mg/I 3 .7 mg/I 3 19.7 ug/I 1 3" 63 mg/I 1 37 mg/I 28 .2 mg/I .1 mg/I sewage overflow 1,6 Date 1/95 1/95 12/5/95 1/5/95 1/27/95 1/27/95 1/9/95 1/95 1/3/95 1/5/95 1/6/95 1/24/95 1/30/95 12/94 12/94 12/1/94 12/5/94 2/13/94 2/15/94 12/1 .... Parameter Overflow Overflow Fish Toxicity Sett. Solids Sett, Solids Total Coliform Susp. Matter BOD Chlorine resid. Chlorine resid. Chlorine resid. Chlorine resid. Chlorine resid. Overflow Overflow Copper Fish Toxicity Chlorine resid. Chlorine resid. Chlorine resid. Type daily daily 90th %-tile daily daily daily daily monthly avg. daily daily daily daily daily daily daily daily 90th %-tile daily daily daily Outfall 001 001 · 001 001 001 001 002 002 002 002 002 001 001 002 002 002 Limit no bypass/overflow no bypass/overflow 70% survival .02 mi/I/hr .02 mi/I/hr 2400 MPN/IO0 mi 60 mg/I 85% removal Violation site drainage overflow secondary treated effluent overflow 0% and 50% survival .9 mi/I/hr failure to monitor 9200 MPN/100 mi 66 mg/I <85% removal 0 mg/I 1.3 mg/I 0 mg/I .3 mg/I 0 mg/I .9 mg/I 0 mg/I .2 mg/I 0 mg/I .3 mg/I no bypass/overflow sewage overflow no bypass/overflow secondary - treated effluent overflow 17 ug/I 20 ug/I 70% survival 0% and 50% survival 0 mg/I .1 mg/I 0 mg/I .15 mg/I I 0 mg/I .1 mg/I No, 1 2 4 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 1 d Comments 1,6 1,6 8 1,6 1,6 3 Date Parameter Type Outfall Limit Violation No. Comments 11/94 11/94 10/94 10/94 10/94 9/94 9/94 8/94 8/94 8/94 7/94 7/94 7/94 6/94 6/94 6/94 6/94 6/94 5/94 5~94 5/94 5/"~ Fish Toxicity Chlorine resid. Fish Toxicity Chlorine resid. Copper Fish Toxicity Copper Fish Toxicity Chlorine resid. Copper Fish Toxicity Total Coliform Copper BOD BOD Fish Toxicity Total Coliform Copper BOD BOD Fish Toxicity Total C. oliform 90th %-tile daily 90th %-tile daily daily 90th %-tile daily 90th %-tile daily daily 90th %-tile median daily daily 7-day avg. 90th %-tile median daily daily 7-day avg. 90th %-tile daily 001 002 001 002 001 001 001 001 002 001 001 001 001 001 001 001 001 001 001 001 001 001 70% survival 0 mg/I 70% survival 0 mg/I 17 ug/I 70% survival 17 ug/I 70% survival 0 mg/I 17 ug/I 70% survival' 23 MPN/100 mi 17 ug/I 60 mg/I 45 mg/I 70% survival 23 MPN/100 mi 17 ug/I 60 mg/I 45 mg/I ' 70% survival ]240 MPN/IO0 mi <70% survival >0 mg/I <70% survival >0 mg/I > 17 ug/I <70% survival >17 ug/I <70% survival >0 mg/I >17 ug/I <70% survival >23 MPN/100 mi > 17 ug/I >60 mg/I >45 mg/I >70% survival >23 MPN/100 mi >17 ug/I >60 mg/I >45 mg/I >70% survival >240 MPN/100. mi 1 18 1 16 1 1 1 1 5 1 1 3 1 1 7 1 3 1 1 7 1 3 3 3 3 3 Date Parameter Type Outfall Limit Violation No. Comments 5/94 5/94 4/94 4/94 3/94 3/94 2/94 2/94 2/94 2/94 1/94 1/94 1/94 12/93 12/93 12/93 12/93 11/93 10/93 9/~-- Total Coliform Copper Chromium Copper CoPper Chlorine resid. BOD Susp. Matter Copper Chlorine resid. Fish Toxicity Copper Chlorine resid. BOD Susp. Matter Copper Chlorine resid. Chlorine resid. Chlorine resid. BOD median daily daily daily daily daily monthly avg. monthly .avg. daily daily median daily daily monthly avg. daily daily daily daily daily daily 001 001 001 001 001 002 001 001 001 O02 001 001 0O2 001 001 001 002 002 002 001 23 MPN/100 mi 17 ug/I 10 ug/I 17 ug/I 17 ug/I 0 mg/I 30 mg/I 30 mg/I 17 ug/I 0 mg/I 90% survival 17 ug/I 0 mg/I 30 mg/I 60 mg/I 17 ug/I 0 mg/i 0 mg/I 0 mg/I 60 mg/I >23 MPN/100 mi 9 >17 ug/I 1 3 >10 ug/I 1 3 >17 ug/I 1 3 >17 ug/I 1 3 >0 mg/I mg/I 5 >30 mg/I 28 >30 mg/I 28 > 17 ug/I 1 3 >0 mg/I 20 <90% survival 1 >17 ug/I ug/I 1 3 >0 mg/I 12 32 mg/I 31 64 mg/I 1 20 ug/I 1 3 >0 mg/I 32 >0 mg/I mg/I 2 >0 mg/I 5 73 mg/I Violation ~ Comments Parameter 9/93 Susp. Matter daily 9/93 Sett. Solids daily 9/93 Chlorine resid, daily 8/93 Copper daily 8/93 Cyanide daily 8/93 Chlorine resid, daily 7/93 Cyanide daily 7/93 Chlorine resid, daily 6/93 Total Coliform daily 6/93 Copper daily 6193 Chlorine resid, daily 5/93 Total Coliform median 5/93 Copper dai~y 5/93 Cyanide daily 5/93 Chlorine resid, daily 4/93 Copper daily 4/93 Chlorine resid, daily 3/93 BOD daily 3/93 BOD 7-day avg. 2/93 Copper daily 2/93 Cyanide daily 21(.' ...... Chlorine resid, daily Outfall 001 001 002' 001 001 002 001 002 001 001 002 001 001 001 002 001 002 001 001 001 001 002 60 mg/I .02 mi/I/hr 0 mgll 17 ug/I 10 ug/I 0 mg/I 10 ug/I 0 mg/I 240 MPNI100 mi 17 ug/I 0 mg/I 23 MPNI100 mi 17 ug/I 10 ug/I 0 mg/t 17 ug/I 0 mg/I 60 mg/I 45 mgll 17 ug/I 10 ug/I I 0 mgll 15 93 mg/I >.02 mi/I/hr mlNhr >0 mg/I >17 ug/I ug/I >10 ug/I >0 mg/I >10 ug/I >0 mg/I 1300 MPN/100 mi >17 ug/I >0 mg/I 50 MPN/100 mi >17 ug/I ug/t > 10 ug/I >0 mg/I >17 ug/I >0 mg/I 77 mg/I >45 mg/I >'17 ugll ug/I >10 ug/I >0 mgll 1 1 5 1 3 1 3 2 I 3 2 1 1 3 10 3 1 3 1 3 2 1 3 1 2 5 1 3 1 3 1' Date Parameter Type Outfall Limit Violation No. Comments 1/93 1/93 1/93 1/93 12/92 12/92 11/92 11/92 11/92 11/92 11/92 11/92 10~92 10/92 10~92 8~92 8~92 8~92 7/92 7/92 BOD Susp. Matter Copper Chlorine resid. Cyanide Chlorine resid. BOD Susp. Matter Sett. Solids Copper Cyanide Chlorine resid. Total Coliform Chlorine resid. Copper Total Coliform Copper Cyanide Total Coliform Total Coliform monthly avg. monthly avg. daily daily daily daily daily daily daily daily daily daily daily daily daily median daily daily daily median 001 001 001 002 001 002 001 001 001 001 001 002 001 002 001 001 001 001 001 001 85% removal 85% removal 17 ug/I 0 mg/I 10 ug/I 0 mg/I 60 mg/I 60 mg/I .02 mi/l/hr 17 ug/I 10 ug/I 0 mg/I 240 MPN/100 mi 0 mg/I 17 ug/I 23 MPN/100 mi 17 ug/I 10 ug/I 240 MPN/100 mi 23 MPN/100 mi 'IR <85% removal mg/I <85% removal mg/I > 17 ug/I 1 3 >0 mg/I 10 >10 ug/I I 3 >0 mg/I 27 77 mg/I 1 65 mg/I 2 >.02 mi/l/hr 1 >17 ug/I 1 3 >10 ug/I 1 3 >0 mg/I 5 330 MPN/100 mi 1 >0 mg/I 2 >17 ug/I I 3 50 MPN/100 mi 1 >17 ug/I 1 3 >10 ug/I 1 3 330 MPN/100 mi 1 50 MPN/100 mi 2 Outfall Limit Violation No. Comments Date 7/92 7/92 6/92 6/92 6/92 6/92 6/92 5/92 5/92 4/92 4~92 4192 3~92 2/92 12/91 12/91 12/91 12/91 12/91 11/91 Parameter Copper Chlorine resid. Susp. Matter Copper Cyanide Chromium Chlorine resid. Fish Toxicity Cyanide Fish Toxicity Fish Toxicity Chlorine resid. Chlorine resid. Chlorine resid. BOD BOD Susp. Matter Oil & Grease Chlorine resid. Total Coliform Total Coliform daily daily daily daily daily daily daily median daily median 90th %-tile daily daily daily daily 7-day avg. daily monthly avg. daily 001 002 001 001 001 001 002 001 001 001 001 002 002 002 001 001 001 001 002 001 001 17 ug/I 0 mg/I 60 mg/I 17 ug/I 10 ug/I 10 ug/I 0 mg/I 90% survival 10 ug/I 90% survival 70% survival 0 mg/I 0 mg/I 0 mg/I 60 mg/I 45 mg/I 60 mg/I 10 mg/I 0 mg/I >17 ug/I 1 3 >0 mg/I 4 64 mg/I >17 ug/I 1 3 >10 ug/I 1 3 >10 ug/I 1 3 >0 mg/I 3 80% survival 1 > 10 ug/I 1 3 80% survival 1 50% survival 1 >0 mg/I 2 >0 mg/I 2 >0 mg/I 8 72 mg/I 2 >45 mg/I 2 116 mg/I 2 10.6 mg/I 31 >0 mg/I 1 1 Date Parameter Type, Outfall Limit Violation No. Comments 8/91 8/91 6/91 3/91 1/91 7/90 6/90 5/90 5/90 5/90 4/90 3/90 3/90 2/90 1/90 Total Coliform Chlorine resid. Total Coliform Total Coliform Chlorine resid. Sett. Solids Total Coliform BOD Susp. Matter Sett. Solids Chlorine resid. pH Chlorine resid. Total Coliform Chlorine resid. daily daily daily daily daily daily daily daily daily daily 001 002 001 001 002 001 001 001 001 001 002 001 OO2 001 OO2 0 mg/I 0 mg/I .02 mi/l/hr kg/d 60 mg/I .02 mi/l/hr 0 mg/I 6 - 9 s.u. 0 mg/I 0 mg/I >0 mg/I >0 mg/I >.02 mi/I/hr kg/d 64 mg/I >.02 mi/I/hr >0 mg/I 5.7 s.u. >0 mg/I >0 mg/I TOTAL NO. OF VIOLATIONS 2 1 2 15 1 1 16 2 1 1 2 1 13 1 2 1,086 1 NOTES TO CLEAN WATER ACT VIOLATIONS AT THE SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO - SAN BRUNO WATER QUALITY CONTROL PLANT Discharge Prohibition A(2) of the permit prohibits bypasses and overflows. Finding 8 also states that "[any] 'such overflow or bypass is a violation of the requirements of this Order." In all cases it does not appear that the discharger complied with the 24 hour reporting requirement set forth in Provision C(10) of the Standard Provisions and Reporting Requirements section of the NPDES permit. In addition, it does not appear that the discharger complied with sections D(2) (d), D(2) (e), and/or G(2) of the Self- Monitoring Program section of the NPDES permit. These provisions require increased monitoring frequency (to daily) when a limit is exceeded. In some cases fish toxicity test showed acute toxicity of effluent (e.g., in November 1996 all the fish died). However, because the permit limit is calculated as an 11 sample median or 90th percentile value, 'the discharger did not report a violation. Pursuant to the permit provisions described in notes 2 and 3, the discharger should have re- tested the effluent on subsequent days. o Permit requires monitoring when Dissolved Oxygen value is less than 5.0 mg/1. The discharger does not specify days on which overflow occurred, or estimated volume of overflow. 7. See summary of violations, pg. 1 of SMRs. The apparent date for the Januar~ 1995 fish toxicity sample is December 5, 1995. It is possible that this is a typographical error. If not, then there may be a failure to monitor violation in January 1995. Individual monthly SMRs prior to January 1995 were not reviewed. The annual summaries and December SMRs were reviewed for calendar years 1991 - 1994. Additional overflow violations.may exist prior to January 1995. The discharger does not monitor for compliance with receiving water limits. In addition, there is no monitoring for several other effluent parameters. Per my conversation with Johnson Lam, I understand that there was an Executive Officer decision to suspend these permit provisions. The Executive Officer does not have authority under the Clean Water Act to suspend NPDES permit requirements absent compliance with permit modification procedures. BERMAN, DEVALERIO, PEASE & TABACCO 'COI.rN'$ELLOR$ AT LAW 425 CAI'~ORNI'A STREET, SUrl'~ 2025 $,~,~ FRAHC~CO, CALIFORNIA 94104 March I 0, 1997 State Water ResOui~ea Control I~oard · P~O. Box 100 ~ Sacramento, CA 9~812 RE: United.4ngIers v. 'City of $outh San Francisco Deax Betsy: · We repre-~ent plaintiff in .the above-referenced citizen suit. It is our intention as' part of the settlem~'nt that a check be written by the City of South San Francisco to the Stat~ Water PollutiOn Cleanup and Abatement Account It is our understanding tl~t a mb-account will be created Which will allow monitoring ofprlvately owned inactive and/or abandoned mines with drain~e to. watersheds leading to San Francisco Bay. Further, it is our understanding that stafffrom the R~gional Water. Q-aHty Confi'ol Board.. Region 5, and inPai'ticular, Bill .Croyle, will have the authority, within thirty (30) days of tendering the check to the State' Board, to draw ~n those funds and conduct mom'toring which the Regional Bog. d, in. it.s discretio, n, considers appropriate. , :The State Board agrees t6 report to the U.S. Department of Justice Envkonmcntal. and Natural Re~ource~ Division i final account as to the expenditure of the.settlement · funds .... Please advise us if you seek any clarification of the above. Sincerely, Alan A. Beaven