My WebLink
|
Help
|
About
|
Sign Out
Browse
Search
2004 AGN JAN 20 I17
Colton
>
CITY CLERK
>
City Council Agendas
>
Agenda Packets
>
2000 - 2009
>
2004
>
2004 January 20 Agenda Packet
>
2004 AGN JAN 20 I17
Metadata
Thumbnails
Annotations
Entry Properties
Last modified
2/24/2014 8:55:25 PM
Creation date
2/20/2014 2:19:45 PM
Metadata
Fields
Template:
General Documents
Created By
avillalba
DocType
Agendas
There are no annotations on this page.
Document management portal powered by Laserfiche WebLink 9 © 1998-2015
Laserfiche.
All rights reserved.
/
5
PDF
Print
Pages to print
Enter page numbers and/or page ranges separated by commas. For example, 1,3,5-12.
After downloading, print the document using a PDF reader (e.g. Adobe Reader).
View images
View plain text
CITY OF COLTON <br />AGENDA REPORT <br />For the Colton Utility Authority Meeting of January 20, 2004 <br />TO: HONORABLE CHAIRPERSON AND UTILITY AUTHORITY MEMBERS <br />FROM: ERIC R. FRASER, DIRECTOR OF WATER & WASTEWATER OPERATIONS <br />Item #17 <br />SUBJECT: APPROVAL OF AMENDMENT TO THE CONTRACT FOR INDUSTRIAL <br />PRETREATMENT INSPECTION AND ADMINISTRATION SERVICES TO G&G <br />ENVIRONMENTAL COMPLIANCE, INC., IN AN AMOUNT NOT -TO -EXCEED $50,000 <br />DATE: January 12, 2004 <br />BACKGROUND <br />The City of Colton's Pretreatment Program (Program) is required under existing federal pretreatment <br />program regulations (40CFR403) and NPDES Permit No. CA 0105236. California Regional Water <br />Quality Control Board, Santa Ana Region adopted Order No. 00-009 on May 19, 2000, which issued the <br />NPDES Permit. The essential program elements required under this permit include inspection, <br />monitoring, permitting, and enforcement. <br />DISCUSSION/ANALYSIS <br />G&G Environmental Compliance, Inc. (G&G) was retained earlier this year by the CUA to evaluate the <br />current program and provide pretreatment inspection services. <br />The City's program was audited by the EPA and Regional California Regional Water Quality Control <br />Board, Santa Ana Region in February 2003. The follow-up audit by G&G was needed to assess <br />program areas that had become deficient. <br />G&G was hired to identify and correct a wide range of deficiencies that included reissuing expired <br />permits; follow-up on enforcement actions; reviewing local limits; filing delinquent regulatory reports; <br />performing required inspections; and preparing a plan and budget for implementation of the program on <br />an annual basis. <br />The previous program included one full-time employee. Records indicated that the one-man program <br />was managed and implemented by a Grade I (CWEA) certified Environmental Compliance Inspector at <br />an annual cost of —$75,000 including benefits. This level of certification is more suitable for entry-level <br />inspectors. Programs are generally managed by Grade III or IV Certified Environmental Compliance <br />Inspectors. Key features of the City's program were designed by Krieger & Stewart over ten years ago in <br />response to the City being in violation of several pretreatment regulations. The program design includes <br />local limits development, legal authority development (ordinance), Enforcement Response Plan (ERP) <br />development, and establishing interjurisdictional agreements as needed for conditioning wastewater <br />received by contributing agencies. These documents are the basis for the legal authority to conduct <br />inspections, monitor compliance, and take progressive enforcement actions against those industries who <br />fail to comply with permit and/or ordinance provisions. <br />The preliminary assessment of the program revealed deficiencies in the implementation of several key <br />program areas. These deficiencies include: <br />• Existing Enforcement Response Plan (ERP) is not being followed; <br />• Inaccurate and Expired Permits (i.e. incorrect discharge limits, wrong addresses, inconsistent <br />requirements, delinquent reporting, etc.); <br />• Lack of a program Industrial User Listing or Database; <br />• Multiple instances of delinquent Program Reporting (Quarterly, Stormwater, etc.); <br />• Lack of an adequate compliance tracking mechanism (i.e. database, wipe board, or some <br />mechanism to ensure initial compliance orders are followed and reported on time); <br />
The URL can be used to link to this page
Your browser does not support the video tag.