The URL can be used to link to this page

Home My WebLink About1980-10-22COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA P. 0. BOX 8127. FOUNTAIN VALLEY . CALIFORNIA 92708 10844 ELLIS AVENUE (EUCLID OFF-RAMP. S AN DIEG O FREEWAY) October 16, 1980 NOTICE OF ADJOURNED REGULAR MEETING DISTRICT NO. 1 WEDNESDAY_, OCTOBER 22_, 1980 -4:30 P.M. 10844 ELLIS AVENUE FOUNTAIN VALLEY,, CALIFORNIA Pursuant to adjournment of the regular meeting of October 8, 19 80 , the Board of Directors of County Sanitation District No . 1 will meet in an adjourned regular meeting at the above hour and date to consider items continued from said meeting. JWS:rb TELEPHONES: AR EA CODE 714 540-291 o 962-2411 II BOARDS OF DIRECTORS County Sanitation DI strlcts of Or1n9e County, Califomla DISTRICT No. 1 ADJOURNED REGULAR MEETING OCTOBER 22, 1980 -4:30 P.M. (1) Roll call Post Office Box 8127 10844 Ellis Avenue Fountain Valley, Calif., 92708 Telephones: Area Code 714 540-2910 962-2411 AGENDA .(2) Consideration of motion to receive and file report of General Cotmsel re violation of District Industrial Waste Discharge Permit by Cherry Fasteners -Townsend Division of Textron, Inc. (Copy enclosed with agenda material) (3) Verbal staff report (4) Discussion (5) Consideration of action re violation of District Industrial Waste Discharge Permit by Cherry Fasteners -Townsend D~vision of Textr9n, Inc. (.6) Other business and coDDllWlications, if any (.7) Consideration of motion to adjourn II BOARDS OF DIRECTORS County Sanitation Districts of Orange County, California DISTRICT No. 1 ADJOURNED REGULAR MEETING OCTOBER 22) 1980 -4:30 P.M. (1) Roll call Post Off ice Box 8127 10844 Ellis Avenue Fountain Volley, Calif., 92708 Telephones: Area Code 714 540-2910 962-2411 AGENDA (2) /V\IS Consideration of motion to receive and file report of General Counsel re violation of District Industrial Waste Discharge Permit by Cherry Fasteners -Townsend Division of Textron, Inc . (Copy enclosed with agenda material) (c4) Di scussion c4 .;_,) c;:_µ. ~ ~ !b •. ~.3 ® Consideration of action re violation of District Industrial Waste Discharge Permit by Cherry Fasteners -Townsend Division of Textron, Inc. (7) Consideration of motion to adjourn f:I 5 ·. S<f ·--.....,,,; II BOARDS OF DIRECTORS County Sanitation Districts Post Office Box 8127 10844 Ellis Avenue Fountain Valley, Calif., 92708 Telephones: of Or1n9e County, Califomia (1) (2) (3) (4) (5) (.6) Roll call DISTRICT No. 1 ADJOURNED REGULAR MEETING OCTOBER 22, 1980 -4:30 P.M. Area Code 714 540-2910 962-2411 AGENDA Consideration of motion to receive and file report of General Co\Dlsel re violation of District Industrial Waste Discharge Permit by Cherry Fasteners -Townsend Division of Textron, Inc. (Copy enclosed with agenda material) Verbal staff report Discussion . , 1 Consideration of action re violation of District Industrial Waste Discharge Permit by Cherry Fasteners -Townsend Division of Textron, Inc. Other business and conmrunications, if any (7) Consideration of motion to adjourn · ~:(i -L/5~ .. -.,, ·' -. . ,, ( ~ COUNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA P. o. ecx Bl 27, F'OUNTAIN VALLEY, CALIF'ORNIA 92708 10844 ELLIS AVENUE ( EUCLIO CF'F'·RAMP. SAN DIEGO F'REEWAY) Cherry Fasteners Townsend Division Textron, Inc. 1224 East Warner Avenue Santa Ana, Ca. 92707 September 30, 1980 Attention: Mr. Edward J. Woolsey Project Engineer Dear Mr. Woolsey: TELEPHONES: AREA CODE '71 ... S4C•291D 962·2411 As a result of the conference at the County Sanitation District off ices on Septembe.r 24, 1980, my· Staff and that of the General Counsel of the District reviewed the Industrial Waste Discharge Permit issued to your firm, together with our present Staff findings and determinations relative to compliance or non- compliance by Cherry Fasteners w-ith the permit limitations. As you know, the District has, based on samples, determined that your firm has continually exceeded the interim limitations imposed upon you pursuant to the enforcement compliance schedule agree- ment as amended, particuarly by discharging excess quantities of cadmium, copper, nickel, lead and chromium. The District has also determined that despite representations by you and several members of your firm that the agreement would be complied with and the schedule for construction and implemention would be met, no such compliance has been met by this date, which i~ the expirat~on of the agreement. We have taken into consideratl.on your description of complexity· and cost to implement an on-site system that will in- sure that no future violations occur to the District• s system, but we are also cognizant of the fact that you were made aware of the limitations and the needs to undertake capital improve- ments to your facility as early as July 1, 1976. As a brief summary of important dates, I am attaching hereto the list of those times pertaining to issuance of permits and inspections by the District showing violations of the permit limitations. Based upon all of the criteria and evidence before us, it was recommended to the Executive Committee of the Board of Directors at their meeting of September 24, 1980, that they in- struct the General Counsel of the District to immediately institute legal proceedings to obtain the necessary restraining orders against the discharge of any waste which would be in violation of the permit limitations. The Executive Committee acted on that date to approve of the General Counsel filing such pro- ceedings based upon the record of compliance, and more parti~u larly noncompliance, by Cherry Fasteners. Under separate cover, the District's General Manager has, this date, prepared a cease and desist order as authorized by virtue of District Ordinance, and in the event your firm fails to comply therewith, the District will seek to recover both civil penalties and charges accruing for the excess dis- charge. We are now also in receipt of your letter dated September 26, 1980, in which you have offered a new compliance schedule stating a May 18, 1981 compliance date. Please be advised that the District considers that date to be totally unacceptable, and will seek to enforce the provisions of its Ordinance and State law, effective immediately, unless additional assurances are negotiated by y~ur legal counsel and the ~istrict's General Counsel for approval by the District's Board of Directors. The District Staff does stand ready to assist you in every way possible to obtain the necessary compliance, and if you have any particular requests or questions, please direct them to this office. As to any legal issues pertaining to this matter, all such questions will be ref erred to the District's General Counsel, and therefore you are requested to contact him directly in tha1:: regard. REL:pj Attachment cc: ~oard of Directors Mr. F.A. Harper Mr. J.W. Sylvester Thomas L. Woodruff, General Counsel Page TWO Very truly yours, ORIOf'llAL S'GNEt> RAY E. L...CWIS Ray E. Lewis Chief Engineer July 1, 1976 September, 1976· September 17, 1976 October, 1976 November, 1976 March, 1977 March, 1977 May, 1977 June, 1977 February, 1978 February· 24, 1978 April, 1978 June, 1978 August, 1978 October, 1978 Februaiy, 1979 April, 1979 December, 1979 January, 1980 March, 1980 April, 1980 July, 1980 for Use of District Sewerage Facilitiesn ordinance which becomes effective July l, 1976. . Permit No. l-330 issued incorporating the 1976 ordinance r~quirements·. 27.7 lbs. exc~ss cadmium over per.mit requirements. 6.6 lbs. over permit requirements in cadmium. 30 day compliance schedule issued by OCSD OCSD inf oJ:med by Che..n:y Fasteners of plans to meet compliance. 18.9 lbs over iii cadmium 18.5 lbs over in cyanide Request from Cherry Fasteners £or change in permit limitations. Pei:mit revised based upon March request. 31.4 lbs. over cadmium· 14.6 lbs. over cyanide 18.l lbs. over cadmium OCSD infor.med l::>y ~berry Fasteners of plans to meet 1978 limitations. 22 mgl over in chromium 180 day Enforcement Compliance Schedule Agreement to meet 1978 ordinance limitations. 22 lbs. over cadmium· Revised compliapce s~hedule per Cherry Fasteners' request. 5.2 lbs. over cadmium 14.4 lbs. over cadmium Enf orcemept Compliance Schedule Agreement signed committing to September 30, 1980 compliance of 1978 ordinance limitations. 14.6 lbs. over permit limitations on cadmium. 32.4 lbs. over cadmium limitations. 2.2 lbs. over chromium limitations. 20.l lbs. over on cadmium limitations 23. 7 lbs. over on copper limitations·. 3.9 lbs. over on nickel limitations. - •.. L:ouNTY SANITATION DISTRICTS OF ORANGE COUNTY, CALIFORNIA P. C. BOX 8127, F'CUNTAIN VALLEY, CALIF'CRNIA 92709 10844 ELLIS.AVENUE (EUCLIO CF'F'-RAMP, SAN OIEGO F'REEWAY) IN RE THE MATTER OF THE CEASE AND DESIST ORDER RE VIOLATIONS OF PERMIT LIMITATIONS CHERRY FASTENERS -TOWNSEND DIVISION OF TEXTRON, INC. TEL.EPHON ES: AREA CODE "71'4 540-2910 962-2411 TO: CHERRY FASTENERS ) TOWNSEND DIVISION OF ) TEXTRON, INC. ) CEASE AND DESIST ORDER RE VIOLATIONS OF PERMIT LIMITATIONS County Sanitation District No. l of Orange County, California hereby finds, determines and orders as follows: 1. That Cherry Fasteners -Townsend Division of Textron, Inc., hereinafter referred to as "Permittee•, was issued County Sanitation District Permit No. 1-330, pursuant to the provisions of District Ordinance No. 103 entitled nRegulations for Use of District Sewerage Facilitiesn. Said permit was issued July 1, 1976. 2. That Permit No. 1-330, established maximum limita- tions upon the discharges of wastewater from the facilities of Permittee·located at 1224 East Warner Avenue, Santa Ana, Califor- nia .• 3. That the limitations pertaining to heavy metal dis- charges established by the July 1, 1976 permit, were amended at the request of Permittee by District in May of-1977. 4. On February 24, 1978, Permittee advised District of its intent and ability to meet the limitations established by the District as required by the provisions of the U.S. Environ- mental Protection Agency and the State of California effective July 1, 1978. s. In June of 1978, an enforcement compliance schedule agreement was executed by Permittee with District, establishing 180 days for which Permittee must comply with the 1978 ordinance limitations. 6. In December of 1979, a request was submitted by Permittee based on extenuating circumstances to establish an enforcement compliance schedule, wherein Permittee would meet all 1978 ordinance limitations pertaining to waste discharge on or before September 30, 1980. 7. The specific discharge limits to which Permittee was bound were established by the enforcement compliance schedule agreement.and under the terms of District Ordinance No. 103 as follows: Cadmium: 13.0 pounds per day Copper: 9.4 pounds per day Nickel: 26.0 pounds per day Lead: 5.2 pounds per day 8. As of September 30, 1980, District ascertained that Permittee has neither designed, developed or installed necessary equipment and facilities required to insure that the waste dis- charge of Permittee would meet the 1978 limitations set forth in District ordinances~ and the limitations set forth in the enforce- ment compliance schedule agreement dated December, 1979. 9. That the waste discharge of Permittee, as of Septem- ber 30, 1980, exceeds the limitations of District ordinance and the enforcement compliance schedule, in that there is an excess discharge of heavy metals, including but not limited to, cadmium, copper, nickel and lead. 10. That the noncompliance with the discharge limitation of District ordinance and the enforcement compliance schedule agree- ~ ment by Permittee is willful and intentional. 11. The continued violations of permit and ordinance -2- ·. .· limitations by Permittee continue to place extreme burdens upon District and the treatment of i.ts wastewater, and to expose the District to the risk of violation of its NPDES permits issued by the·u.s. Environmental Protection Agency and the State of Cali- fornia for discharge of wastewater to the Pacific Ocean. 12. That Permittee has threatened to continue a dis- charge of wastewater from its industrial facility in violation of District Ordinance No. 103 and the previously-established en- forcement compliance schedule, with a resulting detrimental effect to the environment. IT IS HEREBY ORDERED:. l. That Cherry Fasteners -Townsend Division of Textron, Inc., shall cease and desist forthwith from discharging and threatening to discharge any wastes in violation of the requirements set forth in Permit No. 1-330, as amended. 2. That a report be submitted by Permittee to District on October 10, 1980, and every consecutive tenth day thereafter, setting forth in detail all actions taken or proposed to be taken, together with the then current anticipated time schedule for completion of any actions that will lead to compliance with the requirements of Permit No. 1-330, and to insure against any further violations thereof. 3. The General Counsel of the District is requested to undertake all necessary investigations and to make recommenda- tions seeking appropriate civil monetary penalties or other legal remedies available pursuant to law. Dated: September 30, 1980 --·~·.Fred ~~~anager -3- • TOWNSEND ti i =>:;it\•]: I Cherry Fasteners Townsend Division of Textron Inc. October 20, 1980 1224 East Warner Ave., Box 2157 Santa Ana, California 92707 714/545-5511 or 2131979-2121 TWX 910/ 595-1500 TELEX 678431 Mr. Ray E. Lewis, Chief Engineer County Sanitation Districts of Orange CoWlty P. o. Box 8127 Fountain Valley, CA 92708 Reference: Status Report Per Cease & Desist Order Dear Sir: ·'!'his memo summarizes our progress since our last report of October 9, 1980. 1. Changes in our facility for control of metals are complete. Monitoring of our effluent has taken place with first report indicating full compliance. Additional samples have been taken, however test results are not yet avail- able. 2. Our engineering· consultants have almost completed the piping segregation drawings -anticipate one more week. 3. The equipment supplier will be supplying final electrical diagrams· and treatment facili.ty piping layouts this week • 4. The waste treatment equipment has been placed on order with the 30 day cancellation contingency. We won't have to act on the contingency if Textron approves our capital. request by November 17, 1980. 5. We contacted two additional general contractors for bids on all construction of the waste treatment system. These bids are due October 24, 1980 •. We are proceeding with this project as quickly as possible. If there are specific questions, please contact this office. EJW:b cc: W.K.Kester J.A.Cousineau Yours very truly, <~;;> /' /// / _..-: / ' ' ··· /.1 // I · ,. ~ ·. ,t'. . ( ./ '-..... ~ . -, -. ' , ,,, .. --~ -. . / Edward J. Woolsey _,../ Project Engineer / MEETING DATE Oct. 22, 1980 TIM E 4:30 p.m . DISTRICTS -:-:-::::-:--:-:-::~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ --------- 1 DISTRICT 1 (S AL TARE LI-I ) ... SHARP ....•. ___L_ ----~YAMAMOTO) ..••. WARD,J .. :l'iJ;) ~ ---- RI LEY} .•....•. ANTHONY, l\l'· ---- CRANK) ..•..... HUTCH I SON . . ---- DI STRl CT 2 FR I ED) .•...... WEDAA •..... SEYMOUR) ..•.•• ROTH ...•... == == == WINTERS) .••••• BORNHOFT •.. GAMBINA) •.•.•• FO X •••••••. ------ ECK ENROD E) ..•. HOL T •..•.•• ------ ~ODL UM ) •••.••• KAWANAMI ... == ==== ==== WIEDER) ....... MILLER ••••. (C ULVER) ..•.... PERRY ...••• ------ (B EYER ) ..•..•.. SMITH .•.••• ------ (HOLLIND EN) .•.. STANTON •.•. ------ (CORB ETT ) •..•.• WARD,B •...• ------ (WARD ,J) •.••.•• YAMAMOTO •.. ------------ DISTR ICT 3 (CO LLINS) ••..•• VAN DYK E •.• ------ ROWAN) ..•••... EVANS .•.•.• --__ -- HO LLI ~DEN) •.•• AD LER ••.•.• --___ _ ROGE T •..•••.• CORBETT .•.• _____ _ PERRY ••.••.•. CULVER ••.•. KIRK PATRICK) .. FINLAYSON •• ------ MAND I C) .•••••• FIN LE Y ••.•. ------ FOX) •.••••..•• ISLES •.•.•. ------ SEITZ) .•••..•• LA SZLO ••.•. ========== DAVI s) ........ REESE ••••.. SEYMOUR) •..••. ROTH •..•••• == == == ZOMMICK) •.••.• SYLVIA ••.•• ROMAGNINO) ...• WHEELER ..•. ------ ~MI LLER) •••.•.• WIEDER .••.. ------ BORNHOfT) •.•.• WINTERS .••• ====== WARD , J) ••..••• YAMAMOTO ••• _____ _ DISTRICT 5 ~MAURER) ..•.••• HEATHER •••. ------ STRA USS) •.•..• COX ••.••.• ------ ANTHONY, P) ..•. R I LE Y •.••.• ------ DISTRICT 6 (C RANK). { •..•.• HUTCHISON .. --__ -- (HEATH!:RJ •. • .•• PLUMMER •.•• ____ -- (RI LEY) .•. ·• ••• ANT HONY,P .• ____ -- DISTR ICT 7 (B EYER) ..•• { ... SM!T H ••.••. ------ lSA L TARE!-LI J • • ·EDGA R. · • . · • ------ HEATHER) •••• ·. HART .•...•• ------ WIEDER) .• • •..• MI LLER··.·· ------ ANTHONY ,A)··· .VARDOULIS ·. ------ HANSON) •..•••. WAHNER •. • .• ------ (YA MAMOTO) ....• WARD ,J · •. · · ------ DISTRICT 11 ~BAILE Y) .••.•.• PATT INS ON .• ------ MACA LL! STER) •• BA I LEY •...• ------ M 1 LLER) .. • ..•. WIEDER ..••• ------ 10/8/80 JOINT BOARDS HOLLI t!D EN) .••.• ADLER ...... ---- RI LEY) •••....•• ANTHONY, P .• ---- MACA LL! STER) ••• BA ILE Y .•.. ·---- WINTERS) •.•..•. BORNHOFT •. ·---- ROGET) ....••... CORB ETT ••.. STRAUSS l ....... COX ..•••... ---- PERRY) ••..•.••• CULVER .••.• ---- SA LT AR EL LI) •... EDGAR ...... ---- ROWANJ .••••....• EVANS •.•... ---- Kl RKPATR I CK) ..• FINLAYSON •. ---- MANDJC) •••..•.• FINLE Y ••.•• ---- GAMBINA) • ••..•. FO X .......• ---- HEATHER) • ••••.• HART .•.••.• ---- MA URER ) •· •••••. HE ATH ER .•.. ---- ECKEN RODE } .••.• HOLT ......• ---- CRANK}··· ...•.• HUTCHISON.·==== FO X) •• • · · .••••• ISLES ..•... OD LUM ) .•.••.•• KA WANAMI ... ---- SEITZ}··· •.•.•• LASZLO .••.• ---- WI EDERi ·• .••.•. MILLER ...•• ---- BAILEY •••.•..• PATTINSOt~ .• ---- CULV ER ••••.••• PERRY •.•••• ---- HEATHER ) •••..•• PLUM MER •... ---- (DAV IS) •.•••.••• REE SE ••.•.• ---- (ANTHONY, P ) •.••• RILEY ...•• ·==== (SEYMO UR ) ·······ROTH ....... ---- (SA LT AR ELLI) •••• SHARP •.•.. ·---- BEYER)········ ·SMITH · .•.• ·----HOLLIND~N) ••· .• STANTON •.. ·---- ZOMMICK ·····.-SYLVIA .••. ·---- CO LLI NS ······-VAN DYKE .• ·---- AMTHONY ,A)···· ·VARDOULIS . ·---- HANSON)······· .\~AHN E R··.··---- (C ORBETT) •••••.. WARD,B •.•.• ---- (YAMAMOTO)····· ·WARD,J · • · · · ---- (FRIED)········ ·WEDAA· • • • · ·----~R OMAGNINO) ····-W HEEL ER··.·---- MIL LE R)······· -WIEDER ···.·---- BORNHOFT) ·····.\'/INTERS··.·-- (WARD,J) ········YAMAMO TO··· -- OTH ERS ~/wcLov f PwQ,Jo w ~ l<~.kt- HARPER· · • · • -lL- SY LVEST ER · ·~ LEWIS······-- CLARKE ·····-- BROW N· • • • · · _.:£._ ANDERSON... v BAKE R •.••.. -- CONA TS ER ••. DAWES •..•.• FATLAND •.. ·-- YOUNG .••.•• WOODR UFF .•. ~ HOHENER •.• ·-- HOWl'.\RD •. · · ·-- HUNT •....•. __ KEITH ••... ·-- LYNCH •••••. __ MARTINSON .. __ STEVENS ..•. __ MEETING DATE Oct . 22, 1980 Til"'E 4:30 p.m. D ,., !STRICTS -------- 1 DISTRICT 1 JOINT BOARDS ~SA LTARELyI) ..• SHARP .•...• ~----!HO LLIND EN ) •.•.• ADLER ...... --__ (YAMAMro .•... WARD ,J..... v ----RILEY) •.••.••.• ANTHONY,P. ·----t I LEY). · · · · • · ·ANTHONY, P. . / ----MA CALL! STE R) •.• BA I LEY •.... ___ _ -;;-;:CR~A;:-;:N:-;K::-:::-. -:" ·::-·-· -· -· -· H_u_T_CH __ I_S..:.O __ N_. _. --=~----=--=--=--i w I NTE Rs) ....... BORNHOFT ... ---- DISTRICT 2 (ROGE T ) ••..•..•. CORBETT ... ·---- (STRA USSl •..•.•. COX •••...•• (F RIED).~· .••..• \~E DAA ...•.. __ __ __ (P ER RY) ......... CUL VER ....• ---- (S EYMOUR .•.... ROTH....... (SA LTAR ELLI) ..•. EDGAR ...•.. ---- (WINT ERS .....• BORNHOFT ••• ------(ROWAN) •.••.•..•. EVANS ••.••. ---- (GAMB IN A) ..•.•. FOX •••....• ------(K IR KPATRICK) ..• FINLAYSON .• ---- (ECKENROD E) •••• HOLT ...•••• ------MANDIC) ··•· .... FINLEY ..••• ---- (O DLUM) •.•.... KAWANAM I .•• ------GAMB I NA) . • • ...• FOX .••.•.•• ---- (WI EDE R) ...•.•. MIL LER ••••• ------HE ATH ER)··· .•.• HAR T •.•.•• ·==== (C ULVER) ...•..• PERRY ..•••• ------MAUR ER ) •••• .. ·.HEATHER .••. (BEYER) .•..•..• SMI TH •.•••. ------ECKENROD E}· •••• HOLT •••.... ----(HO LLIND~N) .... STANTON •••• ------CRANK}·····.·· .HUTCHISON.·==== (CORBETT) ....•• WARD,B ••.•• ------FOX)·········· .ISLES ••.... (WA RD,J) ..•.•.. YAMAMO TO .•. ------ODLUM) • • • • • · • .KAWANAMI •.. ----------S EITZ}.· ...... -LASZLO ..... ---- DISTRICT 3 (CO LLI NS) .•...• VAN DYKE .•. ----- (ROWAN) •••••••• EVANS •.•••. ----__ (HOLLINDE N) •••• AD LE R .••••. --___ _ (ROGET} •.•..•.• CORBETT •.•• --___ _ ~PERRY) ..••...• CU LVER ••..• KIRK PATRI CK) .• F I NLA YSON •• ------ MANPIC) •..•... FINLE Y ..••• ------ (FOX) ••.•..•..• ISLES ••.••• ------ !SEITZ) •••.•.•. LASZLO .•.•• ------ DAVIS) ..•...•• REESE ..•... ------ SEYMOUR) •.•.•• ROTH .••••.• ====== ZOMM I CK) .•..•. SYLVIA .•.•. (ROMAGNINO) .•.. WH EELE R .••• ------ (M ILLER ) ••••••. WIEDER ...•• ------ (BORNHOfT) •...• WINTERS •... ====== (WARD ,J) ••••..• YAMAMO TO •.• ------ D I STR I CT 5 (MA URER ) .•...•. HEATHER •••• ------ (STRAUSS ) .••... COX ..•.•.• ------ (ANTH ONY, P) •.•. RI LEY •..•.• ------ DISTRICT 6 W!EDER i ·• •.••.. MIL LE R •...• ---- BAI LE Y ••..••.• PA TT INSON .. ---- CULVER ..••••.• PERRY ••.•.. ---- HEATHER) .•.••.• PLUMMER .•.• ---- (DAVIS) •••.•••.• REESE ••.•• :---- (AN TH ONY,P) .•..• RILEY ...•. ·==== (S EYMOUR)······ ·ROTH ..••.. ·--__ (S ALTARELLI) .••. SHA RP ••... ·--__ BEYER)········ ·SMI TH •.••• ·---- HOLL!NDEN) ·····STANTON ••. ·---- ZOMMICK} ·······SY LVIA .••• ·---- COLLINS)······ ·Y AN DYKE •• ·---- ANT HO NY ,A)···· ·YARDOUL!S. ·---- HANSON)······· ·WAHNER •••. ·---- ~CORB ETT ) ...••.. WA RD,B •.... ---- YAMAMO TO)····· ·WARD ,J • • · • ·---- FRIED)········ ·WEDAA· · · •• ·---- (ROMAGNINO) ·····WHEELER ····---- (MI LLER )······· ·W IEDE R ·····---- (BORN HOFT) ·····.\~INTERS···· ---- (WAR D,J) ········YAMAMOTO··· ---- OTHERS (CRANK).~ ••.••. HUTCH I SON •. __ __ __ JJ.r.m.ctK...,;;t.,, (H EATHERJ •• •• .• PLUMMER •.•. ------7' 16A:b/'\. HARPER····· ~ SY LVEST ER·· v' LEV/IS······-- CLARKE····· --BRO\~N· · • • • • J/ AN DER SON .•• ~ BAKER •••.•. CO NAT SER ••. == DAWES ..••.. __ (R !LE Y) •.• • .•.. ANTHONY,P .. ______ W'~,,,..v l \--· DISTRICT 7 (B EYER ) •••. ~ ••. SMITH •..•.• ------ (SA L TAR El-Ll J • • ·EDGAR . · ..•. ------ (HEATHER ) .•• ••• HART .•.•.. · ------ ~W I EDER).··.·· .MILLER·.··· ------ ANTHONY,A) .••. VARDOUL!S •. ------ HANSON) .••••.• WAHN ER •••.. ------ (YAMAMOTO) •••.• •t/A RD,J •..•• ------ DISTRICT 11 ~BAILEY) ..•.•.• PATTINSON •• ------ MACA LLISTER ) .• BAIL EY ..... ------ MI LLE R) •..•.•• WIEDER •.•.. ------ 10/8/80 FATLAND •.• ·-- YO UNG •••••• WOODRU F F··.~ HOH ENER .•. ·-- HOW ARD ·· •. ·-- HUNT •••..•. __ KEITH .•.•.. __ LYNCH .••.•• __ MAR T I NSON .• __ ST EVENS ... ·-- DISTRICT 1 ADJOURNED MTG . Oct. 22, 1980 ~ Discussion FAH asked if Directors had any questions regarding General Counsel 's report. There were none. Mr Harper then advised that the Districts just received a le tter from Cherry Fasteners dated October 20, 1980, giving a status report as required in the Cease & Desist Order which was issued to Cherry Fasteners . Said he had not discussed this letter with C.F . but did have a questions on the first item in letter . Read item, 1. as follows: Changes in our facility for control of metals are complete. Mon itoring of our eff luent has taken place with first report indicating full compliance. Additional samples have been taken, however, test results are not yet available. Asked representative from C.F. to respond. William Kester introduced himself . He said this is the first step they have taken on .cadmium going into the operation. They strip the cadmium off first and were doing this in an open barrel and the solution was going right into their drains. They are now doing it by electrolysis and in a captive tank . Said he didn't know how much affect ·that would have on total cadmium compliance. The first sampling brought them into compliance. Said, personally, he thought that this was a fluke and they w111 have periods that they will be in excess of the requirements. Sharp asked what they were going to do with the tanks . Kester advised they recyle and us e them several times and then haul it away to a disposal site. Sharp asked if there were any of those sites left . Kester stated that they have a permit to haul existing effluent away and that this would only be an interim procedure until they get their new plant built and in operation. Mr. Harper advised that the District 's Ordinance has been in effect since July , 1976. Requirements of the ordinance were staged type of requirements for industrial users. First requiremen ts were for good housekeeping. Were in effect for two years. Then the requirements did require, in some cases , changes to the onsite facilities and treatment. When they went into effect, Cherry Fasteners were not meeting the requirements . Said the first thing we did was to issue a permit that gave them some interim limits for certain period of time. At the end of that time they hadn't accomplished the reduction in their discharge of heavy metals , so then entered into an agreement that gave them a specific time that they were to comply. That expired September 30th and this is why Directors were there . Sharp asked if the s ystem they developed, when finished, would solve the problem on a permanent basis. Also asked if there was a way they could continue to do business and what we can expect from EPA re forcing them or us to do something. FAH said he didn 't think we could answer that. Thought the firm could get the expertise to come up with a system . Said the other matters are essentially l egal matters and revolve around the ordinance. The ordinance i s very specific on pena lties re specific material-per pound charge . We are bound to execute ordinance . Stated that they may need to discuss further in executive session after Directors have heard from Cherry Fasteners . Ward questioned interim solution with barrels . Asked if staff had reviewed interim solution and if it was in compliance . Mr. Harper replied that they hadn 't reviewed this. If that is the case and their control of metals are in compliance , then the only question is the penalty. Compliance has not been verified by our staff . Advised that sampl es examined on October 7 & 8 indicated cadmium was 37 .2 lbs. over , chrome 5.3 lbs. over and nickel 9.1 lbs. over the limit . Yamamoto questioned why the Directors from the City of Santa Ana hadn't been involved before now . Thought they might be able to deal with Cherry Fasteners on a one-on-one confrontation basis because they are within the City of Santa Ana. FAH replied that under the administrative procedures followed , the District entered into an agreeme nt with Cherry Fasteners and until the first part of September , we were unaware that they were not going to be in comp l iance . Yamamoto added that he thought it was to their best interest in the City of Santa Ana that they knew something about · this when the agreement was first entered into . FAR stated that in any future cases we will keep the Director from the city involved informed. Ward said he agreed with comments of Yamamoto but what they were here for was to take action on the default and should do so. Sharp commented that we could inform all cities of all agreements where they are working toward a deadline but don 't have a procedure to keep track of each user 's progress. This could be a cumbersome procedure to keep representatives of each city comprised of progress of these industries but perhaps should discuss this. Sharp then stated that Cherry Fasteners recent letter was just received 10/21 so maybe hasn't been enough time to analyze letter and fol l ow up to see if these things have been done . Asked if they should move for continuance on this or if they are bound to take action then . FAR answered that one of the things that isn 't answered here is the date in which the company will comply . If the first sentence under item 1 is correct, they are in compliance. Kester reiterated that it was his understanding in meeting with their engineers that the initial test sample came back indicating that they are within permanent limits. Repeated that he thought that probably was a fluke. Can't expect them to meet the limi ts at all times . Sharp then asked , if that situation prevails, then where are we legally? TLW replied with r espect to the Oct. 20th l etter from Textron, they have made 5 points. Items 2 , 3, 4 .& 5 are not only not knew but those are things that aren't doing anything except for the permanent solution . The same point were on the April and June letters . Both previous reports indicate that they will satisfy compliance schedule by September 30th . As to item No. 1, said he is now sure wh at t h at means . Said the problem we are faced with even when they put the new equipment in, will be ongoing monitoring. Will probably exceed limits . Said that we have made two s amples since Cease & Desist Order three weeks ago. If our laboratory analysis is correct, that is the highest ov~rage. Staff can only tell Directors what they have seen. Can't know what they mean by complete or by compliance. Sharp th en asked TLW i f it was his opinion that we are forced to take action because of the language of the ordinance and the data we have gathered? Tom didn't understand question but stated that we have direction about penalties . Our ordinance does not set the rate for excesses. Those are fees . We have separate provisions for penalties. Said some of his recommendations are to be considered by the Board in light of pending litigation. Said we do run the risk of EPA or Regional Board corning down on us for allowing this discharge. We are not in receipt of anything saying we have to do something with a spec ific company -2 - Ward asked if this Board could waive any charges. TLW answered we can't waive them but cou ld perhaps ma k e findings that maybe the exces ses d idn't occur on certain days s o adjustment of charges could be made. Blake Anderson advised tha t the permit is wri t t en in such a way to give the m leeway becaus e we recognize that you cannot meet absolute low limits day after day. Yamamoto q u es tioned charges. F AH explained that we have a charge based on volume, BOD a nd s u s pended solids. In addit ion, each permi t is written a llowing certain amounts of e x cess metals . The discha rge is not suppose to exceed tho se d i ffe r ent limi t s. In taking the g r ab sampl es , if we find an industry is exceed ing t h ose limits substantially , then we notify them and advise them that we are go i ng to have a 10-day period where their entire flow is mon itored for 24-hours a day. From that period we develop a charge for the exc ess during that particul ar time. They could then get a Cease and Desist Order and a b ill from the Sanitation Districts for that charge. In the case of this particular agency, so they wouldn't be penalized, we entered into an ~greement and gave them some interim limits to meet. If they are not in compliance, we charge for Districts services. Sharp asked if this might affect wa iver of sec o ndary treatment application in any way. FAH answered no, he didn't believe so. Sharp then asked Cherry Fasteners if they had completed presenting their case. Kester a dded that they apologize for the position they have put the District and the Board in. Can only take full responsibility for that. Said they are proceeding with building a plant and are sure it will mee t limits when done. Can't say it will always me e t limits . Have submitted capital request to corporate office for $1,900,000. Have to get approved. Can't authorize c o nstruction start until we get that approved. Director asked how long it had been since their engineering studies were compl e ted. Kester advised they were not complete yet. He was then asked why it was taking so long. He answered that the plant just became much more complex than they thought. Said even in June they thought they could meet limits but system because much too complex. Have to replumb most of their system in their plant. Don't want to get into litigation. Wan t to work with District to get this thing up and running. Ward asked if we take the full recommendation here, how would that affect Cherry Fasteners? Answered it wouldn't speed it up any more. Are already committed. Would just affect their profits. Added if Textron approve s request would probably be in about 3 we eks. Asked him what made him think they would approve within 3 weeks. He said he wasn't sure they would approve. Are a large corporation and Executive Board has to review it and then complete Board of Directors has to approve it. Have talked to their corporate people and group Vice President and are trying to get authorization to spend $1/4 million immediately. Vice President can approve that amount of money. Want to get started so they don't run ihto rainy season. Sharp stated it could take them at least a year if they didn't get a decision until November. Kester said they are projecting May, 1981 but are trying to cut it shorter. Ward asked if we were not getting the message across to Cherry Fasteners in the past. Asked if corrrrnunication from our staff had been adequate. Kester said as he understood it, Directors were going to be reviewing the legal situation. Thought legal procedure would be the only thing that would reaffirm their position. Said he believed they really didn't need that tho as they are going along as speedily as they coulp. -3- Sharp stated that he would like to get something done or continue for a short period of time so we can get something done. Are obligated to do something to protect us re ordinance. Ward agreed he would like to see some results too. Possibly to agree to submit engineering drawings and affirm agreement. Need a real positive show of good faith. Anthony said he would like a clarification of what the effect of the Cease and Desist Order is. Do they have to abide by it? TLW answered that they better. The General Manager has the authority to issue th~ C & D Order under the ordinance. Will probably need a court action also . Anthony commented that the District didn't have the police power to actually close them down but have put them on notice with the .order that you think they should stop. Anthony also asked what it took to envoke the charges against Cherry Fasteners. Tom said non-payment of invoices to start with. FAH then stated that the staff had an invoice to discuss with Directors later. The Directors then moved to adjourn to executive session. Advised that following that session would come back to order and discuss further and take some action to get this thing moving. Motion seconded and adjourned to executive session at 5:23 p.m. Returned to regular session at 5:56 p.m. · The Chair then asked the Board for a motion. Anthony moved (1) to continue this meeting to November 26, at 4:30 p.m. to allow time for Cherry Fasteners to work with our staff and 'to provide us with a detailed plan and schedule for both short-term and long-term corrective action; (2) to send to Cherry Fasteners the invoice the staff has prepared detailing past-due charges; (3) to order staff to do intensive testing to determine exact levels for charges from this time forward; and (4) to instruct the District's General Counsel to prepare necessary legal information and procedures that they would possibly want to consider at the November 26th meeting. Motion was seconded. Voice vote. Motion carried. -4- , . I