Harm or Potential Harm to Beneficial Uses. A score between 0 and 5 is assigned based on a determination of whether the harm or potential for harm to beneficial uses is negligible (0) to major (5). For the violation, the potential harm to beneficial uses is above moderate (i.e., a score of 4). The discharge contained up to 2.6 mg/L residual chloramine, which is over 100 times the U.S. EPA’s acute water quality criterion of 0.019 mg/L. The chloraminated water killed at least 276 fish, including 70 rainbow trout /steelhead, 94 Sacramento sucker, 96 sculpin, and 16 xxxxxxx- back in San Mateo Creek. The dead fish were first observed on October 29, 2013, by San Francisco Public Utilities Commission (SFPUC) biologists in San Mateo Creek, about 0.8 miles downstream of the confluence of Xxxxxxxx and San Mateo creeks (See Attachment A, SFPUC biologist memo dated November 1, 2013). The California Department of Fish and Wildlife warden and biologists collected the dead fish on October 29 and 30, and November 1, 2013. Some of the dead fish were found displaced and stranded outside of the wet channel likely due to the temporary increase in flow resulting from the discharge. Additionally, the discharge also caused significant bank erosion in Xxxxxxxx Creek and subsequently sediment deposition in both Xxxxxxxx and San Mateo creeks. (See photographs 3-7 of Attachment B, Regional Water Board staff inspection report photographs dated November 1, 2013, documenting erosion and turbid water observed.) The average discharge flow rate was approximately 2,280 gallons per minute1, which is almost seven times higher than the ambient creek flow rate2. The increased discharge eroded the stream bed and banks thereby increasing turbidity and depositing sediment downstream. High turbidity can impair the feeding ability of fish and interfere with fish respiration; excessive sedimentation can impair fish spawning and rearing habitats. A score between 0 and 4 is assigned based on a determination of the risk or threat of the discharged material. For the violation, the risk or threat of the discharge is moderate (i.e., a score of 2). The discharge was potable water with chloramine at concentrations up to 2.6 mg/L. Chlorine or chloramine exhibits toxicity to aquatic life even at low concentrations, and the U.S. EPA Water Quality Criterion for chlorine or chloramine to prevent acute (lethal) effects to aquatic life is 0.019 mg/L. A score of 0 is assigned for this factor if 50 percent or more of the discharge is susceptible to cleanup or...
Harm or Potential Harm to Beneficial Uses. The Enforcement Policy specifies that a score between 0 and 5 be assigned based on a determination of whether direct or indirect harm, or potential for harm, from a violation is negligible (0) to major (5). The sediment-laden water that discharged to the Permanente Creek had the potential to cause harm to beneficial uses. The San Francisco Bay Basin Water Quality Control Plan lists the beneficial uses of Permanente Creek. The listed uses potentially impacted by the discharge are groundwater recharge (GWR), cold freshwater habitat (COLD), warm freshwater habitat (WARM), preservation of rare, threatened or endangered species (RARE), fish spawning (SPWN), wildlife habitat (WILD), contact water recreation (REC-1), non-contact water recreation (REC-2), and municipal and domestic water supply (MUN). The threat to beneficial uses is considered below moderate because although freshwater aquatic biota related to beneficial uses could have potentially been harmed by a sediment-laden discharge, the discharge occurred during a storm and most likely received dilution from Permanente Creek wet weather high water flow.
Harm or Potential Harm to Beneficial Uses. A score between 0 and 5 is assigned based on a determination of whether the harm or potential for harm to beneficial uses is negligible (0) to major (5). The potential harm to beneficial uses is below moderate (i.e., a score of 2). The Enforcement Policy defines below moderate for cases where “…impacts [to beneficial uses] are observed or reasonably expected [and] harm to beneficial uses is minor.” The beneficial uses of San Pablo Creek and its tributaries include freshwater and wildlife habitat, preservation of rare and endangered species, fish spawning, and fish migration. Elevated turbidity can impact these beneficial uses (as described below under Factor 2) particularly there is concentrated flow for a sustained period of time. The discharge of turbid storm water from the Xxxxxx Project lasted for between 4 and 24 hours during the 1.25 inch rain event on December 15, 2014. The runoff was opaque due to the entrained sediments (a submerged dark object was not visible below a depth of 1 inch). The overall harm to beneficial uses from this discharge is considered minor because the sediment-laden runoff was diluted by runoff from undisturbed areas of the San Pablo Creek watershed.
Harm or Potential Harm to Beneficial Uses. A score between 0 and 5 is assigned based on a determination of whether the harm or potential for harm to beneficial uses ranges from negligible (0) to major (5). During the 2-12 January 2017 incident, raw sewage was discharged to Cold Creek, a tributary to the Sacramento River, and a Water of the United States. The designated beneficial uses of the Sacramento River from its source to Box Canyon Reservoir that could be impacted by the unauthorized discharge include irrigation supply, stock watering, contact and non-contact recreation, cold freshwater habitat, and wildlife habitat. Raw sewage, containing pathogens, nitrogen, ammonia, and biological oxygen demand impacts cold freshwater habitat and wildlife habitat because fish are highly sensitive to even small concentrations of ammonia. In addition, raw sewage, adversely impacts contact and non-contact recreation because it contains pathogens which adversely effect human health. On 12 January 2017, the day the discharge was stopped, the Discharger began collecting water samples upstream and downstream of the spill. Results of the 12 January 2017 sample are shown in the table below. Additional data was collected at further downstream locations and is included in the Discharger’s 16 February 2017 technical report. Based on the analytical results, the spill influenced the water quality at downstream locations. Later sample results indicate that the downstream conditions improved shortly after the spill stopped, as heavy flows in Cold Creek washed out the raw wastewater. Total coliform organisms, MPN/100 mL 800 160,000 30,000 Fecal coliform organisms, MPN/100 mL 500 160,000 11,000 Ammonia –N, mg/L 0 0.64 0.14
Harm or Potential Harm to Beneficial Uses. The Enforcement Policy specifies that a score between 0 and 5 be assigned based on a determination of whether direct or indirect harm, or potential for harm, from a violation is negligible (0) to major (5). The potential harm to beneficial uses for the discharge is minor (1). The Enforcement Policy assigns “minor” when the violation results in a “low threat to beneficial uses (i.e., no observed impacts [to beneficial uses] but potential impacts to beneficial uses with no appreciable harm).” The sediment-laden and wood-impacted stormwater that discharged to the Bay had the potential to cause harm to the beneficial uses of the Bay. The San Francisco Bay Basin Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) lists beneficial uses of the Bay as: industrial service supply (IND), industrial process supply (PROC), commercial and sport fishing (COMM), shellfish harvesting (SHELL), estuarine habitat (EST), fish migration (MIGR), preservation of rare and endangered species (RARE), fish spawning (SPWN), wildlife habitat (WILD), water contact recreation (REC1), noncontact water recreation (REC2), and navigation (NAV). Beneficial uses of the Bay potentially affected by the discharge are IND, PROC, COMM, SHELL, EST, MIGR, RARE, SPWN, WILD, REC1, and REC2. The stormwater discharged from MDI’s site to the Bay was a xxxxxxx-xxxxx color. Xxxxxxxx contributed to the brown coloring of the stormwater, from dirt and debris entrained by runoff. The large quantity of logs, wood debris, and bark from site operations contributed to the reddish coloring of the stormwater, likely due to the leaching of tannins in the wood. Sediment and tannins are pollutants that threaten beneficial uses, as discussed under Factor 2 of Step 1, but the overall threat to aforementioned beneficial uses of the Bay is considered low because of the Bay’s assimilative capacity and the resilience of Bay ecosystems to wood and sediment in stormwater. San Francisco Bay Regional Water Quality Control Board (Regional Water Board) staff did not observe adverse impacts during site inspections on December 11 and 19, 2014 (collectively, “December 2014 inspections”), however, the absence of any observations of fish, invertebrate, or aquatic habitat injury (as explained below) during the inspections does not mean that such adverse impacts failed to occur, nor does the lack of such observations diminish the potential for such harm. Such adverse impacts could have occurred before, during, or after the Prosecution Team staff’s De...
Harm or Potential Harm to Beneficial Uses. A score between 0 and 5 is assigned based on a determination of whether the harm or potential for harm to beneficial uses is negligible (0) to major (5). For this violation, the potential harm to beneficial uses is moderate (i.e., a score of 3). The Enforcement Policy, at page 12, provides that harm is moderate where there is a “impacts are observed or reasonably expected and impacts to beneficial uses are moderate and likely to attenuate without appreciable acute or chronic effects.” The San Francisco Bay Basin Water Quality Control Plan (Basin Plan) designates groundwater in this basin (Napa-Sonoma Valley, Napa Valley Basin 2-2.01) as having the following existing beneficial uses: Municipal and Domestic Supply (MUN), Industrial Process Supply (PROC), Industrial Service Water Supply (IND), and Agricultural Water Supply (AGR). The discharge reached groundwater, where it contaminated the Plant’s onsite water well (GRD-001) and another well at a residence located immediately adjacent to the Plant (Teo Well, 83 Chaix Lane). The xxxxx contained elevated levels of indicator bacteria (total and fecal coliform bacteria). The City reported that a tenant at the 00 Xxxxx Xxxx property complained that the water flowing into his washing machine “smelled like sewer.” Due to the contamination, the City’s Plant employees discontinued use of the well which was being used for non-potable uses such as equipment washing and toilet flushing. A nearby well located approximately one-third of a mile west of Pond 1A (515 Chaix Lane) was unaffected. Although there was some impact to groundwater that occurred for a period of at least 5 days, the impacts to beneficial uses are moderate and likely to attenuate without appreciable acute or chronic effects. This is because the geographic extent of the harm was limited to an area containing 2 xxxxx: one neighboring residential and the City’s own well. Additionally, bacteria, one of the main pollutants in wastewater, have relatively short lifespans. In a World Bank report on water supply and sanitation, the typical survival time of coliform is cited as less than 60 days and usually more than 30 days in freshwater and wastewater1 at temperatures ranging from 68°F and 86°F. Since the groundwater temperatures in the Napa Valley region are about 62°F2, coliform bacteria likely persisted longer than 60 days but less than a few months. In the specific circumstances here, the Regional Water Board staff concludes that a finding that harm or pote...
Harm or Potential Harm to Beneficial Uses. This factor evaluates direct or indirect harm or potential for harm from the discharge. A score between 0 and 5 is assigned based on a determination of whether the harm or potential for harm to beneficial uses ranges from negligible (0) to major (5). “Major” harm to beneficial uses includes “high threat to beneficial uses (i.e., significant impacts to aquatic life or human health, long tern restrictions on beneficial uses (e.g., more than five days), high potential for chronic effects to human or ecological health).” (Enforcement Policy, at p.
Harm or Potential Harm to Beneficial Uses. The Enforcement Policy specifies that a score between 0 and 5 be assigned based on a determination of whether direct or indirect harm, or potential for harm, from a violation is negligible (0) to major (5). Stream 1 and Stream 2 are intermittent streams and tributaries to the perennially flowing Napa River. Stream 1 and Stream 2 flow during the wet season; they were flowing during Violations 1 through 3. The Basin Plan lists the following beneficial uses for the Napa River and its tributaries: agriculture, cold freshwater habitat, warm freshwater habitat, fish migration, preservation of rare and endangered species, fish spawning, and wildlife habitat and recreation. The Napa River is also suitable or potentially suitable for municipal or domestic supply.46 Discharges associated with Violations 1 through 3 may all have contributed to adverse impacts to a variety of fish and wildlife species as documented in a Fish 42 U.S. EPA National Recommended Water Quality Criteria for pH.
Harm or Potential Harm to Beneficial Uses. Moderate (3) The Discharger’s failure to meet the conditions of the 401 Certification likely resulted in project activities exceeding water quality standards. On the October 2, 2014 inspection, Regional Board staff observed the violations described above as Violations 6 through 8. Regional Board staff took turbidity measurements on October 2, 2014 and found that turbidity was 74% greater than the turbidity measured upgradient from project activities. The nature and extent of the sloppy and poor housekeeping measures, partial implementation of best management practices were likely the cause of elevated turbidity levels downstream of the project area. Impacts to beneficial uses are reasonably expected but are likely to attenuate without appreciable acute or chronic effects to beneficial uses. A moderate potential for harm or a score of 3 was assessed.
Harm or Potential Harm to Beneficial Uses. A score between 0 (negligible) and 5 (major) is assigned based on a determination of the harm or potential for harm to beneficial uses. The Facility discharges treated municipal wastewater to Old Alamo Creek, a tributary to New Alamo Creek which drains into Ulatis Creek. Old Alamo Creek, New Alamo Creek, and Ulatis Creek are all waters of the United States located within the Sacramento-San Xxxxxxx Delta. As described in the Water Quality Control Plan for the Sacramento River and San Joaquin River Basins, Fourth Edition, the designated beneficial uses for Old Alamo Creek that could be impacted by the spill of super-chlorinated wastewater include agricultural supply (irrigation and stock watering); industrial (process supply, service supply); recreation (contact, non-contact); freshwater habitat (warm); wildlife habitat; and navigation. The most sensitive beneficial use for this discharge is freshwater habitat (warm), due to the potential exposure to elevated levels of super-chlorinated effluent to aquatic life. The Waste Discharge Requirements (WDRs) contain residual chlorine effluent limits; the low values for these limits reflect the highly toxic nature of chlorine to aquatic organisms. The Discharger did not sample Old Alamo Creek during or after the discharge, but did calculate the chlorine concentration in the discharge itself. The table below provides the calculated concentrations as compared to the WDRs’ effluent limitations. 1-hour average 2.72 mg/L 0.019 mg/L 4-day average 0.028 mg/L 0.011 mg/L The Fact Sheet of the WDRs states that in the 1960’s, Alamo Creek was realigned. “Part of the original Alamo Creek channel was left in place and renamed Old Alamo Creek. The realignment of the creek cut off flows from the upper watershed to Old Alamo Creek leaving it dry with the exception of discharges from the Easterly WWTP, Xxxxxx-Xxxxxx groundwater remediation project, storm water runoff, and agricultural runoff.” At the time of the discharge, the Facility was the major source of water into Old Alamo Creek, and therefore there was little dilution to mitigate the super-chlorinated discharge. The potential harm to beneficial uses was determined to be “moderate,” which is defined as a “moderate threat to beneficial uses (i.e., impacts are observed or reasonably expected and impacts to beneficial uses are moderate and likely to attenuate without appreciable acute or chronic effects).” A score of 3 is assigned for this factor because the super-chlorinated dis...
