Loading...
HomeMy WebLinkAboutENFORCEMENT ORDER 2013-2TE OF CALIFORM� CITY OF BAINL-RSFIELD CERTlFIED- UMPlEED PROGRAiM AGENCY In the Matter of. COSTCO WHOLESALE CORPORATION A Cal#ornia Corporation # 01587907 Respondent TO THE ABOVE RESPONDENT: Docket No.: 2013-2 STA-IJFEMENT TO RESPONDENT Enforcement Order An Enforcement Order ("Order") is attached to this statement and is hereby served upon you. The Order has been filed by the City of Bakersfield Certified Unified Program Agency (CUPA). Unless a written request for a hearing signed by you or on your behalf is delivered or mailed to the CUPA�vith,`Lln fifteen (15) days after you have received a copy of the Order, you will be deemed to have waived your right to a hearing in this matter. If you do not file a timely hearing request, the Order becomes final automatically. The request for a hearing may be rude by delivering or mailing one copy of the enclosed form entitled "Notice of Defense;" or by delivering or mailing a Notice of Defense as provided in Section 1 566 of the Government Code to: Mm Joshua Rudnick Deputy City Attorney City Attorney's Office City of Balkersfield th 1600 Truxtun Avenue 4 Floor Bakersfield, California 93301 Telephone: (661) 326-3721 T The enclosed Notice of Defense, i'szi gried and piled with the CUPA, is deemed a you, not be permitted to raise any specific d.=n;.1a,,,','- of all parts of the Order, objection to the form of the Order unless you file a further Notice of Defense as provided in Section11506 of the Governrnent Code within fifteen (15) days after service of the Order upon you. the If you file a Notice of Defianse within the tinne permitted, a hearing on allegations made in the Order will be conducted by the Office of Administrative Hearings of the Department of General Services in accordance with the procedures specified in Health and Safety Code section 25187 and Government Code sections 11507, at seq. The hearing may be postponed for good cause. K you have good cause, you must notif y the CUPA within ten (10) working days after you discover the good cause. Failure to notify the CUPA oji�thin -ten (10) working days wM deprive you of a postponement. Copies of Government Code Sections 11507.5, 11507.6 and 11507.7 are attached. If you desire the names and adidresses of witnesses or an opportunity to inspect and copy items in possession, custody or control of the CUPA, you may contact: Mr. Joshua Rudnick Deputy Cit'y Attorney City Attorr--ey's Office City of Bakersfield th 1600 Tru'.-,."tun Avenue 4 Floor Bakersfieid, California 93301 Telephone: (661) 326-3721 Whether or not you have a hearing, you may confer informally with the CUPA to discuss the alleged pacts, determina'E'.,ons, rl--,orrecltive actions and penalty. An informal conference does not, however, postpone the fifteen (15) day period you have to request a hearing on the Order. An informal conference may be pursued simultaneously with the hearing process. 7 You rnay, but are not reqiu,,insd, tc be represented, by ncounl,-Dei at any or afl sages S �. 01'.1 Lhese proCeedings. INFORMAL CONFFRENCE �i if you wish to disciuss this matter %ftl]-th th� C'UB'A, 2n W'Crrna� Crom ;,Frerence has been schedu,18d for: Date: Time: Wednesday January 23, 2013 IL 0: 00 AMY,, Location: Bakersfi&'d Fire Department Prevention Services Division City of Ba',kersfield 2101 H Street Blakarsfi6d, California 93301 (661) 326-3979 You may in-form the CUPA at the confairence whether you livish to pursue a formal hearing or waive your right to aforma11 hearing, as explained below. FORN-iiAL HEAR�NG RIGHTS YOU MUST FILE A WRPfTEN REQUEST FOR A HEARING iTHIN FIFTEEN (15) D"S W YOU WISH TO HAVE A FORMIAL HEARdNG. 3 STATE OF CALIFORNIA CITY OF BAKERSFIELD CERTIFlED UNI]FlED PROGRAM AGENCY In the Miatter of: I Docket No.: 2013-2 COST,,r-'.O WHOLESALE CORPORATION I ENIFORCEMENT ORDER A CALIFORNIA CORPORATION# C158790-7 Health and Safety Code Section 25187 Respondent. INTRODUCTION 1. Parties. The Office of Prevazntion Servn,ces for the City of Bakersfie;d Fire Department, a, Certified Unified Program Agency (CUPA) authorized by the Secret an] of the California Environmental Protection Agency (Cal/EPA) to administer and enforce the Hazardous Substances Act in the City of Bakersfield, issues this Enforcement Order (Order) to COSTCO WHOLESALE number 688, doing business in the City of Bakersfield. 1-2. Owner I Operator. Respondent owns and operates this business at 3,800 Rosedale Highway in Bakersfield, California 93308. 1.3 Generator. The Respondent generated the following hazardous wastes: Silver and/or silver compounds, an organic persistent and bioaccumulative toxic hazardous waste pursuant to title 22 of the California Code of Regulations (CCR), section 66261.24 1.4 Jurisdiction. Section 25187 of the Health and Safety Code (HSC) authorizes the CUPA to order action necessanj to correct violations and assess a penalty when the CUPA determines that any person has violated specified provisions of the Health and Safety Code or any permit, rule, regulation, standard, or requirement issued or adopted pursuant thereto. DETERMINATION OF VIOLATIONS 2. The CUPA hereby determines that Respondent violated: 2.1 The Hazardous Waste Control Law, California Health and Safety Code section 25113(1), to wit: The discharge, deposit, injection, dumping, spillin leaking, or [olacina of any waste so that that the waste or any constituent of the waste i is or mav be emitted into the air or discharged into or on aw land or waters, including groundwater, or rn-av otheirwise enter the environment. 2.2 For the sarnpIfing period Octc�ber 3311 to November 1, 2012, this facility exceeds the hazardous waste limit of 5 mg/L For silver and/or silver compounds. The result ova wastewa-Aer scarnpliling ev&nts, were sent to, you in a st✓p2,ratre Notice ol" Viola-Ition dCalt`ed December 21, 2012. SCHEDULE FOR COMPLIANCE 3. Based on the forgoing DETERUNATION OF VIOLATibNS, IT IS HEREBY' 3.1 The Respondent shall make arrangements to properly comply w�,th the requirements of the December 21, 2012 Ndotit--* of. Violation issued by the Wastewater Division of the Bakersfield Public Works Department. 3.2 Submittals. A copy of the required documernitation designed to demonstrate full compliance wVL-h both this Enforcement Order and the December 21, 2012 Notice of Violation, shall be forwarded within fifteen (15) days from thy; date of this Order to: Mr. Howard H. Wines, M PG 7239 Director of Prevention Services City of Bakersfield 2101 H Street Ba'61ersfieId, California 93301 3.3 Communications. All approvals and decisions of the CUPA made regarding submittals and notifications will be communicated to Respondent in writing by the Director of Prevention Services or his/her designee. No informal advice, guidance, suggestions, or comments by the CUPA regarding reports, plans, specifications, schedules, or any writings by the Respondent shall be construed to relieve Respondent of the obligation to obtain such formal approvals as may be required. 3.4 CUPA Review and Approval. If the CUPA determines that the schedule, I or other submitted for approval pursuant to this order fails to comply with the order or fails to protect public health or safety or the environment, the CUPA may: 6 a. Modify the docurnertt as deemad ntscessary and approv8= the document as modified, or b. Return the document to Respondent �,.,Mth recommended changes and a date by which Respondent with recommended changes and a date by which Respondent must submit to the CUPA a revised document incorporating the recommended ch&nges. 3.5 Compliance with Applicable Laws. Respondent shall carry out this Order in compliance with all local, State, and federai requirements, including but not limited to requirements to obtain permits and to assure worker safety. 3.6 Endangerment during lnriplementation. In the event that the CUPA determines that any circa rnstances or activity (whet�her or not pursued in compliance with this Order) are creating an imminent or substantial endangerment to the health or wellffare of people on the site or in the surrounding area or to the environment, the CUPA may order Respondent to stop further irnplernentation of this Order for such period of time as needed to abate the endangerment, Any deadline in this Order directly alf-Tected by a Stop Work Order under this section shall Lie extended for the term of the Stop Work Order. 3.7 Liability. Nothing in this Order shall constitute or be construed as a satisfaction or release from liability for any conditions or claims arising as a result of past, current, or future operations of Respondent oth,,.--.r than those violations alleged in section 2 of this order. Notwithstanding compliance with the terms of this Order, Respondent may be required to take further actions as are inecessanj to protect public health or welfare or the environment. 3.8 Data and Document Availabijily.,. Respondent shall permit the CUPA and its authorized representatives to inspect and copy all sampling, testing, monitoring, and other data generated by Respondent or on Respond [ ent's behalf in any way pertaining to work undertaken pursuant to this Order. Respondent shall allow the CUPA and its authorized representatives to take duplicates of any samples collected by Respondent pursuant to this Order. Respondent shall maintain a central depository of the data, reports, and other documents prepared pursuant to this Order. All such da"Lla, reports, and other documents shall be preseirved by Respondent for a minimurm of three years after the conclusion of all 3 D 9L- k I A � TV 4. -1.P'he CUP A assesses aa, panafty o,' four thciu-sand ($ 4,000). Payirnen.r,,',, of the tota,'9 panafty of four thousand ($ 4,00-0) is: duqs "J"Jit'.1hin thirty days from the efqective date of the Order. Respondent's checllr< sha,111i be made payabie to the City of Bakersfiedd, Certified Unified Program Agency and shal!! jdantify the Respondent and the Docket Nunnber, as shovljn In the headinc oT f this c-,se. Respondent shallflll deliver the penalty gi payment to: Ms. Toni Crosby� Business Mann g6nr Cif ,of Bakersfield Fire Department 2101 H Street eet Bakersfield, Cafiforma 93301 A photocopy of then check shcaIl be sent tc, M . Howard H. Wines, III PG 7239 Dire for of Prevention Services 2101 H Street Bakersfield, Caiifornia 93301 5. This Order is final and effective upon execution by the City and Respondent. 6. "Days" for purposes of tleh,is 0rderrjiaars calendar days. Date of Issuance: January 4, 2013 Mr. Howard H. Wines III PG 7239 Date Director of Prevention Services City of Bakersfield COSTCO WHOLESALE Date Typed or Printed Name of Respondent's Representative cc: Mr. Joshua Rudnick Deputy City Attorney 5 2013-02-04 14:40 425 313 8114 CbS7W. __MVHOLESALE 999 Lake Drive Issaquah, WA 98027 DATE: Tyr 4 AM RE: February 4, 2013 Howard H. Wines, III Director of Prevention Services City of Bakersfield (661) 852-2170 Laura Wai Costoo Wholesale, Legal Department (425) 313-2053 Order on Consent Agreement 425 313 8114 >> Fax Server P 1/15 NO, OF PAGES BEING SENT: (Including this cover sheet) NO HARD COPY WILL BE SENT, FAX TRANSMISSION ONLY —Z'ORIGINAL TO BE SENT BY. -- -7� <L qvp delivery Interoffice Wil 7'ho information contained In this 42cslrnile transmission Is privilagod and confidendal, Intended only for use of the porson(s) so identified above or its agont If the reader otihis cover pogo Is not the intended reciplent or its agont, you aro haroby nodfied that any disseminedon, distribution or copying of this communication orthe inrormattan conra�ned herein is strictly proh(bited. if you have recolvod this communication in error, pleaso immediately notify us by telephone, and rotum this lacsimlle to us at the address obovo via the U.S. Postal Service. Thank you, 2013-02-04 14:40 425 313 8114 425 313 8114 >> Fax Server P 2/15 Cos, mbmwnk_v Writer's Mect Nkirrben Fax February 4, 201$ VIA FAX im)-8$2-2170 AND UPS -EXPRESS Howard H. Wines, III Director of Prevention Services City of Bakersfield 2101 "H" Street Bakersfield, CA 933(11 Re: Order on Consent Agreement Dear Mr. Wines.- )427-7015 )313.8114 Thank you for meeting with us last week to discuss the Enforcement Orde r issued in connection with the Notice of Violation dated December 21, 2012, issued to our Costco�akersfield warehouse. Enclosed please find a copy of the fully executed Order on Consent Agreement ("Order"), a copy of the check issued to the City of Bakersfield and a copy of the letter documenting compliance I with the Order. If you require additional information to demonstrate compliance in accordance with the terms of the Order, please advise. As we mentioned in our meeting last week, Costco welcomes the opportunity to wok with the Office of Prevention Services for the City of Bakersfield Fire Department to answer questions about our environmental compliance programs in California. Please feel free to contact our6irector of Environmental Compliance, Glenda Tuttle, with any questions or concerns. Her busines's card is enclosed for your reference. I Very truly yours, COSTCO WHOLESALE pliannuron a c)rpc)ra rporate Counsel CC: Glenda Tuttle, Director of Environmental Compliance Glenn Hutchinson, Operations Manager Steve Bannister, Director of Photo Operations Mguel Gallardo, Environmental Compliance Officer Toni Crosby, Business Manager, Bakersfield FD 2013-02-04 14:40 Pax Server 425 313 8114 425 313 8114 >> 2/1/2013 9:32:45 AM PAGE 2/006 Fax Server P 3/15 Fax Server STATE OF CALIFORNIA CITY OF BAKERSFIELD CERTIRED UNIFIED PROGRAM AG�Ney In the Matter of Docket No.: 2013-2 COSTCO WHOLESALE CORPORATION ORDER ON CONSENT A CALIFORNIA CORPORATION 4 01587907 AGREEMENT Health and- Safety Code Section Respondent 25187 INTRQDUCTI! N 1. EadjU. The Office of Prevenfion Services for the City Of Bakersfield I Department, a Certified Uriffied Program Agency (CUPA) authofted by the Secrewy of the Caftmia Environmental Protection Agency (Cal/EPA) to administer and enfome the I Hazardous Substances Act In the City of Bakerglerd, issues this Order on Consent Agreement (Orde* to COSTCO WHOLESALE number 688, doing business in the city of Bakersfield. 1.2. Respondent owns and oporatm this b"Iness, at 380'0 Rosedale Highway in 136kerdeld, Califtnia 93308. 1.3 Gene Mr. The Respondent generated ft following hazardous wastes: Silver and/or sliver compounds, an organic persistent and blooccumulative toxic I hazardoUs waste pursuant to title 22 of the California Code of Regulationtj (CCR), notion 66261.24 1.4 JUrisdic6on. Section 26187 of the Health and Safety Code (H C) ay - -i- I as the CUPA to order action neomary to correct violations and amss a penafty whbn the CUPA detern-tines that any person has AoWed speciflad provisions of the Health abd Safety Code or any parrs k rule, regulation, standard, or requirement issued or adopted Pursuant thereto, 2EMRMI NATION OEyjQjAT1 _ , 2. The CUPA hereby determines that Re3pondent violated: 2.1 The Hazardom Watfim rtm+mi i --AAir uA.w. .- 1 2013 -02-04 14:41 425 313 8114 425 313 8114 >> Fax Server P 4/15 Fax server 2/1/2013 3 :32:45 AM PA02 31006 Fax sex`ver l nduclin rocs r rwise nter the environment. 2.2 For the sampling period October 31 to November 1, 2012, this facility exceeds the t ardo�ls waste limit of 5 mg /L, for sliver and /car silver compounds. 'Che result Of wastewater sampling events, were seat to you in a $operate Hsi i Of Violation dated Dewriber 21, 2012. + taEDUL . i;C CCIIAPLIA CE used on the lbrgaing 0E1r=Rill INA"fi0N OF VIOLATIONS, IT IS HEREBY ORDERED THAT: 3.1 The Respondent shall make arrangements fp properly comply with the requirements of the December 21, 2012 Notice of lfiolatioM issued by the Vftsbw4ker 1 Division of the Bakersfield Public Works Department, 3.2 Su. _ .bmittals A copy of the required documentation designed to demonst full compliance with both tNs Enforcement Order and the Qecernber 21, 2012 Notical of Violation, shall be forwarder) within frFteen (15) days from the djate of V* Order to: Mr. Howarth H.1i'li'irtes, 011 FAG; 7239 Director of Prevention Services City of Bakersfield 2101 H Street Bakersfield, Callbrnla 93:301 3.3 C ioafivns All approvals and decisions of the CUPA made rregaml1119 subrnittals aril notifications wlll be communicated to Respondignt in writing by the Direc#or of Pmvention Services or his/her designee. No informal advim guidance, s+ugge4onsJor Comments by the CUPA regarding reports, plans, specifit;ations, schedules. or any writings by the Reupondent stall be consirued to relieve Respondent of the obligation to obtain such f0rma6 app(Mls as may be required. 3.4 CUPA Review ano Approval If ft CUPA determines that the schedule, I 2 2013 -02 -04 14:41 425 313 8114 425 313 8114 >> Fax Server P 5/15 Fax Server Z/1/2013 8:32:45 AM PAGE 4/006 Fax Server or other subrniftd for approval p mua nt to this order fails to COmPly wit the order or fill to prcdact public health or saf or the environment, the CUPA amy; I a, Modify idle domment as deemed necenary and approve the document modified, or b_ Retum the document to Raspondent with r+emmmended changes and a by which Respondent with recommended changes and a date by whicb Respondent submit to the CUPA a revised document fr=rporating the recommended charges, 3.b lian e with ! Laws. Respondent shall carry out this Order) in compliance with all local, State, and federal te+quiremrrts, including but oot lim'ftd to requirements to obtain permits and to assure worker safety. I 3. 6 ga d2nger urine Imnlem alation. In the avOnt that the CUPA determinI es that any circumstances or activity (whether car not prirsued in cprnpiiance with this Order) are creating an Immfnerrt or substantial endangerment to the heQ th or welfare of people on the site of in flea surrounding area or to the environment, the CUPA may order RaWondent to stop further implementation of this Order for such period of ;lime as needed to abate tho endangerment Any deadline in this Order +direotiy affected by,a Stop WO* Order under tills sedan shalt be extended for the terra of the stop Work Order. 3. 7 Li bi t, , Nothing In this Order stall consfiW or be construed as a saftfaction or releaw from liablity for any condifions or claims arising as a result of pest, current, or future operations of Respondent other than those Violations alleged in secuori 2 of this order. Notwtthdanding compliance with the terms of this Order, Respondent may be required to tape further actions as are necessary to protect public health or Wafte or the environment 3.8 Data-and-Document - Avaftffity, Respondent shall permit the CUPA and its authorized repra entatnres to inspect and copy all sampling, testing, rnoriitoring, and other data generated by Respondent or on Respondent's behalf in any wary pertaining to wdrk undertaken pursuant to this Order. Respondont shall allow the CUPA and its authorized representatives to take duplicates of any samples oollected bye Resp+ dent pursuant to fts Order. Respondent shall maintain a central depository of the data, repoft, and +ather 3 1 2013 -02 -04 14 :41 425 313 8114 425 313 8114 >> Fax Server P 6/15 Fax Server 2/l/2013 9:32:4 AM PACE 5/006 Fa.x Server documents prepared pursuent to this Order. All such data, NPorts, and otter documents strati be preserrr+ed by Respondent for a minimum +of three years .after the conoluslor) o1 all activities under this Order. If the CUPA requests that some or all of these documents be preserved for a longer period of tirne, Respondent shag either COMPly with that request, deliver the dowments to the CUPA, or permit the CUPA to copy the documents p6or! to +d+estruc:tlorw. i 3.9 GovernnientUabilftes. The City of 3akers lo shall not be liable for Injuries or damages to persons or property resulting from acte or ornissions by Respon dent or related parde s spec fled in paragraph 3,18 in charming out aotivities pursuant to this 0 r, nor shall the City of Baker ld be held as a P" to any contract entered into 1by Respondent or its agents in c sMing Out activities pursuant to the Order. 3.10 M dRional EnforcernantAdons.. By issuance of this Order, the CUPA does not waive the right to shake farther enforcement actions. 8.11 1 r rat' p and -Repo r'ls. Ail plansi schedules, and reports that require CUPA approval and are submitted by responderyt pursuant to this Order are incoTporatead in this Order upon aPPMVei by the CUPA` 3.12 Extonsion f eo If Respondent is unable to perform any activifty or subtrit any docurr nt within, the time required under this Order, the Respondent may, pnor to exPIraWn of ft time, regmest an extension of tiMe in writ. The extension request all Include a justifiMflon far the delay, 3.13 ExLension APRrovals. If the CUPA determines that good cause eAsts.fer Ln extension. it will grant they request and epees' in writing a now compliance schedule. I 3.14 Peffilfim, for, noncompliance. Failure to comply with the 'tears of this Order May also sub jW Respondent to costs, penalties, and/or punitive damages for any costs Incurred by the CUPA or o ter government agencies as a result of such Nijure, as prcrvid�d by HSC section 25188 and other applicable provisions of law. 3.18 'ar i, s Bound. 'fiats Order shall apply to and be binding upon Respondent, and its officers, directors and agents, including but not limited to Individuals and I ft 4 2013-02-04 14:41 425 313 8114 425 313 8114 >> Fax Server P 7/15 Fax Server 2/1/2013 9:32:45 AM PAGE 61006 Fax Server CUPA and any successor agency that may have responsibility for and jurisdiction over t subjOct Matter of this order. PSNALTY 4. The CUPA assesses a penalty of two Chousand ($ 20000). Payment of t&al penalty of two thousand ($ 2%000) is due within thirty (30) days from the effective of the Order, Respondents check shall be made payable to the City of Bakers Ce4fied Unified Program Agency and shall Identify the Respondent and the 04 Number, as shown in ft heading of this case. Respondent shall deriver ft tae payment to; Ms. Tard Crosby Business Manager CRY of Bakersfield Fire Depeirftmnt 2101 H St met Bakersfield, California W301 . A photocopy of the check shall bo sent to: Mr. Howard H. Wines, III PG 7239 Director of Pmventlon rvim 2101 H Street Bakersfield, California 93301 5. This Order Is final and effLaefive upon execution by the Cky and Respondent. 6. VaW for purposes of this Order means calendar days, Gaits of tssua;"ce: January 23, 2013 1/S 1/1 -3 Mr Hdward H. Wines III PG 7239 Date Director of Preventkm Smices City of @@kersfietd COSTOO W ESALE Date Typed or Printed Name of Respondent's Representative D144T:,7104 '91- 6-AIV140NMEWM4- 0V Mr. Joshua Rudnick Deputy City Attorney 2013-02-04 14:42 425 313 8114 425 313 8114 >> NOWLEDGMENT OF RECEIPT Fax Server P 8/15 Without admitting the violations, I acknowledge receipt of this Enforcement i brder, Statement to Respondent, Government Code, and two copies of the form entitled Ndfice of Defense. DATED: Slgnature*�;� Pint dame -end Title A04e&-V7;V- 2013-02-04 14:42 425 313 8114 425 313 8114 >> Fax Server P 9/15 EAVIMILESALE WrItOr's direct Number. (425) 427-7015 Fax; (425) 3138114 February 4, 2013 MAU PS EXPRESS Ton! Crosby Business Manager City of Bakersfield Fire Department 2101 "H" Street Bakersfield, CA 93301 Re: Order on Consent Agreement Docket No. 2013-2 Dear W. Crosby. Enclosed please find a copy of the executed Order On Consent Agreement for the above referenced matter and a check in the amount of $2,000.00 payable to the City of Bakersfield:. Please feel free to contact me if you have any additional questions or concerns. Very truly yours, CCU CO WHOLESALE riann EBIuron orporate Counsel Henry Wines Glenda Tuttle 2013 -02 -04 14:42 FINE2013 + 211/20/3 425 313 8114 425 313 8114 >> Fax Sarver P 10/15 ' I , t '� Approval by ?ullann Sumn Ire Lm l Department x7a'IB P,,aoo.aa $0.00 $2,oaa.aa Will I I ' .i' t.,' t,.... • M• • •' M C 3 'w • • '�' v- ,•.fir •� .•- -'.. • ' -• '. , wt , .� .,. �_ *Glld�parc* 8nnk, N.A, CNOCFC�; ; iF f r ^ ,:;�> !<% iti �;• ..�` . r,;:l' "•t�: }�' >S,'�i':�•y .:.y ;':.fi• .t.."� r r ;''' g�yypp �+ !,� ,y �y h•. ••'r r. 51,; .t Ti. .'•,f `Ny,..� �t it 4" S1,4 4 •F7r�,�� iar�h• ••y• .,:a• ,•, f:; ` ,: i � . } ' °t'... ::. '•L 'ov'. ,,'' c 3.^ ',•, �I . x• A �i4• f SSW Y Ng *, I► `µ •• •.� ' , • yam"'!'- :w... ^Y�.S•ey.''1 '1 t1 ,.f,;•V.j1.YFY.w -i Cwj4 ?�•1' 7 •?'4t:lt l {` :�a' },.4i'.i, ,i�j'�A •4,- .�, n. !.+t.... '7 -Eti '''C9'.r :fi:.. J � . � i:: 3+; ,r!",`.,`'r. •' _ ::4•.� +•^.••, +';h' r �y 5: F.n,fna t. 1. ',<<y 'i:i: •:f ..:.. ti 3'f' �y:i.. ,�yr+. .. i' >: V �$� ' ly, tiy:. r:± ;�,$ •Srti', . r ;i '• ' .r!+ '{`'' !:% ;C:' •.u.rM'!• �5C• :4y •:., . IY' � \ ':4 •�•r.; +,..j , �` W:. �} ,,t, �tiy !,4 t> :1 , +�..{::..., -''2� :t•:2- • rA t i :c.. '' }t .sr ' P; �` •,'•, ;'2 }:.•a{� ,•''ti' r (�' �I..f:. i' •:uti }.',:..'. 4 }. , II . +,'r.'', .'�i, , .' !(7i������ �LJ� �e q't'r' •','"J� 't. " ...y, ,• -` 4 t :'1. 9F1 ■Y,.Y�i i '' `••s;" •�f�•• i.r• r��• •:�.`t$"~ 4 "aj!h; • -'t ( y +.. ' .. • .r ••,. - ' � � +�a�I�ry'' ■l �y •�, 'fir /��y �y�u/�•, ♦�,'/'6 ' 'r f .ty[.a.i- YY1LV./V'f.4.�'�!Y_iJ/+, 1.01 PAY T4'Tmfi om%a or ~• •:+ Y• 'City tf Sker�eldlro "Ly,y� ySyS , {♦r.S, i ,i rrtn''IAt'•• r' ,.r , -•�. '. 'ifM��'j� j�j,j'y'' •'1 � ^'' tk� . • i . n . •'Y�. r1 i ''S• �••y' •T: •.,<::: y^ '.* ' 1 Q��!3..11(t1� � �i�'Si+;1:.TF.• `(. ?,'r • .•.i.ic'}'la'Y . , "I•tdw" .S,iy .'� i, `;t' H � 4n1:+f�f�Y14R::, : .•h. .,r .<' +' u,'(•�� �,+. +'Y`i4. .• �•'•y1y� ,: }. �•�■ ''y.•. :.� „sk?'.fi=,• '; l.. ::�^M1" - � �� y'Sip I Ft;y ': >yJ, ! �nl : <':ry '.C: S p S .i . •+„I,1'+�dk��. `l „” f•� . a , r . , l . - _ v .•w''�. Y�,; ?:}t•<'' .;'xK'rv.. X�' +.i: •, '� r M- at ■ t I u" 2 60 48 4 L1'II* It:0 4 12 0 38 2 1: CISO O 128 28 7110 2013-02-04 14:42 425 313 8114 425 313 8114 >> Fax Server P 11/15 j ...MANMESALE January 10, 201 S Ralph Braboy, Acting Wastewater Manager Wastewater Division Bakersfield Public Works Department 6901 McCutchen Road Bakersfield, CA 93313 Dear Mr. Braboyl This letter responds to the Notice of Violation ("NOV"), dated December 21, 20121 issued to our Costco #688 Bakersfield Warehouse. As confirmed in your NOV, our Bakersfield Warehouse complied with the November 20, 2012 Cease and Desist Order on the day the order was issued. As inspector Chang observed, the warehouse immediately rep(aced the existing pretreatment silver recovery columns with new silver recovery columns. The corrective action taken by our Bakersfield Photo Department on November 20, 2012 restored the silver discharge level to comply with the silver discharge end of process limit of 5 rng/L. The NOV states that our Bakersfield Warehouse is in violation our Industrial Wastewater Discharge Permit's Standard Provisions and Reporting Requirements Part 111.6, for failure to submit a written response within 5 days of -learning of the noncompliance. At the time of the inspection, our copy of the Industrial Wastewater Discharge Permit issued to our Bakersfield Warehouse did not contain a Part 111.5 - Standard Provisions and Reporting Requirements (the "Standard Terms"). Our team in Bakersfield was therefore unaware that they were required to provide a written report explaining the circumstances surrounding the violation and also confirming the corrective actions taken to prevent recurrence, The Warehouse team believed that the silver Matter had been resolved on November 20, when the silver columns were replaced and the Inspector Chang authorized photo processing operations to resume. After receiving the NOV, we obtained a copy of the Standard Terms from your offices, We have incorporated the requirements of the Standard terms into our operating procedures for the photo department. In accordance with Part 111.5 of the Standard Terms, we provide an explanation of the circumstances surrounding the violations and confirming the corrective actions taken to prevent recurrence below. We also provide an overview of our silver recovery system. $88 Bakersfield Response 1 D/W 13 C. Worit 999 trlkw D1.1yu - 1".�o(pok WA 980?/ , 4261313-9)00 w%v",,,-.us1ru,ront 2013-02-04 14:43 425 313 8114 425 313 8114 >> Fax Server P 12/15 IMMM __ Over view of Costco*s Silver Recovery System C08tcO uses a system of silver recovery columns to remove silver from thq photo effluent before It is discharged. The effluent filters through a first column, which removes most of the silver. The effluent then filters through a second and sometimes a third WILIMn, which capture additional silver so that thAsilver levels' are below 5 parts per million ("ppm") before discharge. (A third colOrhn is used when the volume of product being processed warrants additional treatment), Costco's monitoring and testing protocol for the silver effluent is highly sensitive and goes well beyond the testing used by many other generators of silver waste, The sample collection, however, is performed by warehouse personnel who are not trained laboratory technicians, and the sample analysis is performed at an internal lab that is not certified to perform these analyses. This sampling is therefore performed solely for internal compliance assurance, and is not intended for use in demonstrating compliance with the permit. Our goal is to identify and promptly correct any exceedance within a short period, rather than waiting for the more rigorous quarterly sampling required by the permit, The sensitivity and sophistication of the monitoring and testing protocol sometimes produces a non-representative result that suggests excessive levels in the effluent when such excessive levels are not in fact present, This happ9na, for example, if there is a flake of silver or a particle of sludge in the test sample. Ordinarily, flushing the fine prevents this, but these non-representative spikes in the testing process can occasionally occur, Ir addition, as explained in the test results, we provided, non-representative results oan also occur when there are recording errors (i.e., where test reSLIft from column 1 are inadvertently recorded as test results for column 3). To identify test exceedances, which are due to non- representative spikes from inadequate flushing or due to column test results being incorrectly recorded, silver columns are replaced only after the consecutive week's re-testing confirms an exceedance, Furthermore, SiII00 CUr test sampler, are taken at the end of filtering, they have higher silver concentrations than would test samples taken at the end of pipe. The effluent is tested at end of filtering to ensure that R does not exceed the discharge, limit even though the discharge will be further diluted at end of pipe, We view the weekly testing of the silver effluent as one method to ensure that the silver discharge limit will not be exceoded and to ensure maximurn efficiencies of our silver recovery systern. In addition to the weekly testing of the silver effluent, Costco also tracks the volume of photo processing to determine whether a third or fourth column should be added to ensure that the discharge limit is not exceeded. 688 BAkersfield Response 2014 1/1012013 C, West 999 tcl�-o D115'e. 0 hSelf?I)OA, WA 98021 • 42-11313-9100 v 2013-02-04 14:43 425 313 8114 425 313 8114 >> Fax Server P 13/15 MWAMM Aloft Silver Logs Sept. 24 — Dec. 14, 20121 Explanation of Circumstances of Violation Once our Quality Assurance Lab determines that the silver test results confirm that an exceedance has occurred, the Lab notifies the respective location that a column needs to be changed out to meet the silver discharge limit set by the local jurisdiction and to ensure maximum efficiencies of our silver recovery systel-►. As requested, attached are the test results for the period September 24 to December 14, 2012. Four of the weekly test results indicate silver levels in excess of 5 PPM. The exceedance recorded for 10/22112, was a nonrepresentative test. We have confirmed that this result was due to a non-representative spike in the testing process and does not indicate that effluent was discharged with silver levels exceeding the 5 ppm regulatory standard. This conclusion was reached by examining the test result obtained from sampling the same columns in the preceding and succeeding weeks. In both the preoeding week, 10/17112 and succeeding week, 10130112, the test results were substantially below the discharge limit. The exceedence recorded for 11106/12, was viewed as a non-representative spike, because it was almost twenty times higher Lhan the preceding week. On 11/12112, the test results also showed an exceedance: however, our QA Lab concluded that the first column had been sampled twice because the values reported for column$ one and two were essentially the same. Ordinarily the results for the second COILIMn would be notably lower than the results for the first, The OA Lab therefore decided to wait and examine the Succeeding weeks test results, On 11120112, when the test results also identified an exceedance, the QA Lab instructed the Bakersfield Photo Dept. to change out the columns and a third column was added for additional assurance. In addition to changing out the columns on November 20, 2012, the following changes in Costoo's protocols for silver effluent monitoring/testing have been implemented to ensure that silver discharge exceedances do not occurs. Corrective Actions: ■ All Photo employees have been retrained in silver effluent testing and protocols at Costco's Bakersfield Warehouse to ensure valid test samples. • A third silver recovery column has been added to the Bakersfield Photo processing system to ensure that the silver discharge limit is not exceeded when processing demand is high. 686 Sakorafield Rosponse 3014 1110120,13 C. Wa*t 999 Lake DrM! • Issoquali, WA 96027 * A 2513 t 3.8 100 # wtyw cosico.com 1 2013-02-04 14:43 425 313 8114 425 313 8114 >> Fax Server P 14/15 =HFUM ESA A E • Silver testing was conrjucted for three consecutive weeks fallowing the October 31 — November I test exceed8nce. These test results Vvere analyzed by a certified lab, Hallmark Refining. The test results confirm that the silver discharge levels were below the 5 Pprn discharge limit. COPIes of those test results were provided to Inspector Chang. I would be Pleased to answer any questions you may have. Plead ,!* call me at (425) 427-3874 if I may be Of assistance, Wk Regards, Cathy West Environmental & OSHA Compliance Manager - US Costco Wholesale Corporation CC: Eric Tallman, Warehouse Manager Costco Wholesale Bakersfield Warehouse Debbie Sarter, Operations Admin Manager LOS Angeles Region, COStCO Wholesale Corporation Glenda Tuttle, Director of Environmental Compliance — Callfornfa COStcc, Wholesale Corporation Liss Simpson, Licensing Supervisor Costco Wholesale Corporation 688 Rzokersfitild Response 4 of q 111012013C, Wesi 9VF Loki: Onv& * hrsqqvoh, WA 98027 0 42,11.713.8 100 eas)co.eom 2013-02-04 14:44 425 313 8114 425 313 8114 >> Fax Server P 15/15 i'il 17, R 's le t ii N, 1w cs ICJ Ci m fp cc 00 C5 C; co fly f% En tA Ln CR L9 4" R C 0 (U .2— rq m fN 4%j N ew FV OV r%l P4 N rw oj rid Mj ri t=k In Ar izz Alp g uj�l M C 0 � C CD n 0 0 0 E 3 —1 .n 0 cn CD v pr CD CD cn CD 0 i Of CD i CD C a0 w = 2L CD CD CD M O 0 CA 0 --{ O CCDD W CD O 'U X C-) 0 O p CD N o Q- m < C w 0 '< CCDD < CD o m < co sz vi O CD O Q. 00 0 X n CD O -s ® o CD � CD 2013-01-17 16:34 425 313 8114 425 313 8114 >> Fax Server P 1/1 -71 r f.t: .7y AL Writer's Urect Number (425) 416-V07 Fax,, (425) 313-8114 January 17, 2013 VIA FAX (6611852-2170 Howard H. Wines, III Bakersfield Fire Department 2101 "H" Street Bakersfield, CA 93301 Re: Costco Wholesale Corporation Docket No.: 2013-2 Dear I*. Wines: Please let this confirm our attendance at the conference scheduled on Wednesday, January 23, 2013, at 10:00am. In attendance from Costco Wholesale will be myself, Operations Manager Glen Hutchinson, Director of Photo Operations Move Bannister. Environmental Compliance Officer Miguel Gallardo, and Mark Osborn of Hallmark Refining. We look forward to meeting with you in person and discussing this matter further, Very WY youm, COSTCO WHOLESALE J) ann Buren Corporate Counsel January 4, 2013 Ms. Lisa Sim-oson, I Licensing Supervisor P.O. Box ' 35005 Seattle, WA. 98124-3405 Douglas R. Greener Certified Mail Fire Chief Deputy Chief Tyler Hartley RE: COST,'.-.'O WHOLESALE CORPORATION Docket No: 201' )-2 Operations/Training/Arson 661-326-3655 Deputy Chief Tim Lyach Dear; Ms. Simpson Fire Safety /Prevention Services Enclosed is an Enforcement Order concerning violations of 251 13(l) of 661-326-3652 the California Hea'11th a-irid Safety Code for Costco 688 in Bakersfield, California. Your, -facility was found to exceed the hazardous waste limit 2101 "H" Street of 5 mg/L, fOr silver and/or silver compounds. Bakersfield, CA 93301 (661) 326-3911 You are invited to attend an informal conference at 10:00 am on (661) 852-2170 (-fsix) Wednesday January 23, 2013 at 2101 H Street. 11' you have any questions, please 'feel free to call. HOWARD, H. WZNES-� 11Z DIRECTOR Sincerely, PREVENTION SERVICES 2101 "H" Street Bakersfield, CA 93301 VOICE (661) 326-3979 FAX: (661) 852-2171 Howard H. Wines, III PG 7239 Director of Prevention Services Enclosures cc: J. Rudnick, City Attorney's Office R. Kelly, Deputy Fire Chief T. Crosby, Business Manager "Serving the Community for more than a Centuxy-" Mal Without admitting the violations, I acknowledge receipt of this Enforcement Order, Statement to Respondent, Government Code, and two copies of the form entitled Notice of Defense. I= A In the Matter of: CITY OF BAKERSFiELD CERTlF,IED UNi'FIED PROGRAM AGFENCY Docket No.: 2013-2 COST CO WHOLESALE CORPORATiON I NOTiCE OF DEFENSE A California Corporation # CI58 907 Health and Safety Code Section 25187 Respondent. i, the undersigned Respondent, acknowledge receipt of a copy of the Enforcement Order, Statement to Respondent, Government Code sections 11507.5, 11507.6 and 11507.7, and two copies of this Notice of Defense. I request a hearing to permit me to present my defense to the allegations contained in the Enforcement Order. Dated: (Signature of Respondent) Please Type or Print the Name and Mailing Address ofRespondent (Name) (Street Address) (City) (State) (zip) (Telephone Number 'r L Code Section 115,07.5 C-7over iamen,`- The provisions of Section 11507.6 -provide the exclusive right to and method of discovery as to any proceeding governed by this chapter. Government Code Section 11507.6 After initiation of a proceeding in which a respondent or other party is entitled to a hearing on the merits, a party, upon written request made to another party, prior to the hearing and within 30 days after service by the agency of the initial pleading or within 15 days after the service of an additional pleading, is entitled to ()L) obtain the names and addresses of witnesses to the extent known to the other party, including, but not limited to, those intended to be called to testify at the hearing, and (2) inspect and make a copy of any of the following in the possession or custody or under the control of the other party: (a) A statement of a person, other than the respondent., named in the initial administrative pleading, or in any additional pleading, when it is claimed that the act or omission of the -respondent as to this -person is the basis for the administrative proceeding; (b) A statement pertaining to the subject matter of the proceeding made by any party to another party or person; (c) Statements of w then hen proposed to be called by the party - LI and of other persons having personal knowledge of the acts, omissions or events which are the basis for the proceeding, not included in (a) or (b) above; (d) All writings, including, but not limited to, reports of mental, physical and blood examinations and things which the party then proposes to offer in evidence; (e) Any other writing or thing which is relevant and which would be admissible in evidence; (f) investigative reports made by or on behalf of the agency or other party pertaining to the subject matter of the proceeding, to the extent that these reports (1) contain the names and addresses of witnesses or of persons having personal knowledge of the acts, omissions or events which are the basis for the proceeding, or (2) reflect matters perceived by the investigator in the course of his or her investigation, or (3) contain or include by attachment any statement or writing described in (a) to (e), inclusive, or summary thereof. For the purpose of this section, "statements" include written statements by the person signed or otherwise authenticated by him or her, stenographic, mechanical, electrical or other recordings, or transcripts thereof, of oral statements by the person, and written reports or summaries of these oral statements. Nothing in this section shall authorize the inspection or copying of any writing or thing which is privileged from disclosure by law or otherwise made confidential or protected as the attorney's work ioroduct. Government Code Sect on 115,07.7 (a) y party claiming the party's request for discovery pursuant to a) An L_ -I - Section 11507.6 has not been complied with may serve and file with the administrative law judge a motio-_­i to compel discovery, naming as respondent the party re-fusing or failing to comply with Section 11507.6. The motion shall state facts showing the respondent party failed or refused to comply with Section 11507.6, a description of the matters sought to be discovered, the reason or reasons why the matter is discoverable under that section, that a reasonable and good with attempt to contact the respondent for an informal resolution of the issue has been made, and the ground or grounds of respondent's refusal so -far as known to the moving party. (b) The motion shall he served upon respondent party and filed within 15 days after the respondent party first evidenced failure or refusal to comply with Section, 11507.6 or within 30 days after request was made and the party has failed to reply to the request, or within another time provided by stipulation, whichever period is longer. (c) The hearing on the motion to compel discovery shall be held within 15 days after the motion is made, or a later time that the administrative law judge may on the judge's own motion for good cause determine. The respondent party shall have the right to serve and file a written answer or other response to the motion before or at the time of the hearing. (d) Where the matter sought to be discovered is under the custody or control of the respondent party and the respondent party asserts that the matter is not a discoverable matter under the Provisions of Section 11507.6, or is privileged against disclosure under those provisions, the administrative law judge may order lodged with it matters provided in subdivision (b) of Section 915 of the Evidence Code and examine the matters in accordance with its provisions. (e) The administrative law judge shall decide the case on the matters examined in camera, the papers filed by the parties, and such oral argument and additional evide-n-ce as the administrative law judge may allow. (f) Unless otherwise stipulated by the parties, the administrative law judge shall no later than 15 days after the hearing make its order denying or granting the motion. The order shall be in writing setting forth the matters the moving party is entitled to discover under Section 11507.6. A copy of the order shall forthwith be served by mail by the administrative law judge upon the -parties. Where the order grants the mot-Ion in whole or in -part, the order shall not become effective until 10 days after the date the order is served. Where the order denies relief to the moving party, the order shall be effective on the date it is served. Laboratories, Inc. Environmental Testing Laboratory Since 1949 City of Bakersfield Reported: 12/1312012 16:31 Wastewater Division, 6901 McCutchen Project-, Water Samples Bakersfield, CA 93313 Project Number: [none] Project Manager: lac Meyer I Metals Analysis BCL Sample ID: 1222504-01 Client Sample Name: 121120AC-GI,11/20/2012 2:28:OOPM,A.Chang/M.Moore Constituent Result Units POL MDL Method MB Lab Sias Quals Run # Total Recoverable silver 510000 uglL 5000 660 EPA-200.7 ND AOI Run Oc Run # Method Prep Date Date/Time Analyst Instrument Dilution Batch ID 1 EPA-200.7 11126112 11/27112 12:31 JRG PE-OP2 500 BVK1737 F- r 20, ,VATEP The results in this report apply to the samples analyzed in accordance with the chain of custody document. This analytical report must be reproth4ced in its entirety. All results listed in this report are for the exclusive use of the submitting part} BC Laboratories, Inc. assumes no responsibility for report alteratiog separation, detachment or third pa• interpretation 4100 Atlas Court Bakersfield, CA 93308 (661) 327-4911 FAX (661) 327-1918 www.bclabs,com Page 7 of 12 California Code of Regulations Page 1 of 4 AdmWstr aUve Law Hlame Most Recent Update- Search Delp Welcome to the onHine source for the California Code of Regulatlans 22 CA ADC § 66272.62 § 66272.62. Determining the Initial Penalty for Each Violation. Term w 22 CCR §X66272.62 Cal. Admin. Code tit. 22, § 66272.62 Barclays Official California Code of Regulations Currentness Title 22. Social Security Division 4.5. Environmental Health Standards for the Management of Hazardous Waste Chapter 22. Enforcement, Inspections, and Informant Rewards Article 3. Assessment of Administrative Penalties 66272.62. Determining the Initial Penalty for Each Violation. (a) The Enforcement Agency shall determine an initial penalty for each violation, considering potential harm and the extent of deviation from hazardous waste management requirements. The Enforcement Agency shall use the matrix set forth in Subsection 66272.62(d) to determine the initial penalty for each violation. (b) Potential Harm of the Violation (1) The Enforcement Agency shall consider potential harm to public health and safety and the environment when using the matrix. (2) The categories for degree of potential harm are defined as follows: (A) Major - The characteristics and /or amount of the substance involved present a major threat to human health or safety or the environment and the circumstances of the violation indicate a high potential for harm or, in the case of a violation of financial requirements, coverage is lacking or substantially below the required amount or it is certain or probable that the coverage would be absent or inadequate; (B) Moderate - The characteristics and /or amount of the substance involved do not present a major threat to human health or safety or the environment, and the circumstances of the violation do not indicate a high potential for harm or, in the case of a violation of financial requirements, coverage is significantly below the required amount or it is possible that the coverage would be absent or inadequate; (C) Minimal - The threat presented by the characteristics and the amount of the substance or by the circumstances of the violation are low or, in the case of a violation of financial requirements, coverage is slightly below the required amount or it is unlikely that the coverage would be absent or inadequate. (3) In determining the degree of potential harm, the Enforcement Agency shall consider the following factors: (A) The characteristics of the substance involved, (B) The amount of the substance involved, (C) The extent to which human life or health is threatened, (D) The extent to which animal life is threatened, (E) The extent to which the environment is threatened, and (F) The extent to which potable water supplies are threatened. http: / /weblinks.westlaw.com/ result /default.aspx ?action = Search &cf d =1 &cnt-- DOC&db= CA %2DADC&... 12/11/2012 Califoruia Cade of Page 2 of (4) Potential harm for violations or financial requirements shall be determined by considering the amount of closure, postclosure, or corrective action costs for which there is no financial assurance or the amount of required liability coverage that is absent, and the likelihood that injury or damages, if they occur, will not be compensated due to an inadequacy in the coverage. (5) A violation must involve the actual management of hazardous waste including the absence of adequate financial assurance for closure, postc|oaure, corrective action or financial liability coverage, as distinguished from being e "record -keeping" violation, for the violation to have a major potential for harm. "Record-keeping," for purposes of this article, means a requirement to record information, to retain records, and to have documents available for inspection. "Record -keeping°does not include a substantive requirement such as the requirement to have a contingency plan, a waste analysis plan, or closure plan. The following examples illustrate what is considered "record-keeping" and what is considered a violation that could have a major potential for harm. (A) A failure to record inspections that were in fact completed is a record-keeping violation and would not have a major potential for harm. A failure to conduct inspections according to the schedule is not e record-keeping violation ` and could have a major potential for harm depending onthe circumstances. / ` (B) Afai|une to retain a copy of manifest is a record-keeping violation and would not have e major potential for ` harm. A failure to use a manifest for a shipment ofhazardous waste is not record-keeping violation and could have a major potential for harm depending on the circumstances. (C)A failure to have available for inspection a waste analysis plan that does in fact exist isa record-keeping violation and would not have a major potential for harm. A failure to have a waste analysis plan, ora failure to have awaste analysis plan available to staff who are to implement the plan, is not a record-keeping violation and could have a major potential for harm depending on the circumstances. (8) Financial violations that are strictly paperwork errors or omissions that do not affect actual functioning of adequate financial assurance for closure, postcosure, corrective action, or financial liability coverage are record- keeping violations. Violations involving the absence of adequate financial assurance for closure, postc|osure, corrective action, or financial liability coverage are hazardous waste management violations, not record-keeping (7) Groundwater monitoring record-keeping is a fundamental part of the groundwater monitoring requirements. Groundwater monitoring record-keeping violations may have a major, moderate, or minimal potential for harm. The category selected for potential henn shall be based on the extent to which the violation may lead directly to environmental harm, have a potential for harm, or cause an inability to detect releases to groundwater. (c) Extent of Deviation of the Violation (1) The Enforcement Agency shall consider the extent of deviation from hazardous waste management requirements when using the matrix set forth in this section. (2) The categories for extent of deviation from requirements are defined as follows: (A) Major - The act deviates from the requirement to such an extent that the requirement is completely ignored and none of its provisions are complied with, or the function of the requirement is rendered ineffective because some of its provisions are not complied with. (B) Moderate - The act deviates from the requirement, but it functions to some extent although not all of its important provisions are complied with. (C) Minimal -The act deviates somewhat from the requirement. The requirement functions nearly as intended, but not as well as if all provisions had been met. (3) For requirements with more than one part, the Enforcement Agency shall consider the extent of violation in terms of the most significant requirement. (4) For a single requirement, the range of potential deviation from the requirement may vary. For example, if facility has no contingency plan, the deviation would be major. If facility has a contingency plan but significant elements are omitted, the deviation would be moderate. Ifafacility has e contingency plan with only one or two minor elements missing, the deviation would be minimal. (d) The matrix set forth in this subsection shall be used to determine the initial penalty for a violation. The Enforcement Agency shall select a penalty amount from the range provided in the matrix cell that corresponds to the appropriate extent of deviation and the potential harm categories. The numbers in parenthesis in each oaU of the following matrix are }ttp://weblinks.westlaw.00mlresultldefault. Search&cfld=l&cnt--DO &_}2/}]/20l2 California Code o-F Regulations the midpoints of the range, Determination of Initial Penalty Matrix [in dollars) Extent ofDeviation Potential Harm Major Moderate Minimal 251000 20,000 15,000 Major (22,500) (17,500) (10,500) 20,000 15,000 6,000 20,000 151,000 6,000 Moderate (17,500) (10,500) (4,000) 151000 6,000 2,000 15,000 6,000 2,000 Minimal (10,500) (4,000) (1,000) 6,000 2,000 O Page 3 of Note: Authority cited: Sections 25150 and 58012, Health and Safety Code. Reference: Sections 25187 and 25189.2, Health and Safety Code; and Section 11425.50, Government Code. HISTORY 1 New section filed 7-15'97; operative 7-1-97 (Register 97, No. 29). This interim regulation is exempt from most of the procedural requirements of the Administrative Procedure Act and from review by the Office of Administrative Law pursuant to Government Code section 11400.30 and will expire on December 31, 1998 unless earlier terminated or replaced by, or readopted as, permanent regulations. 2. Expired by its own terms on 12-31'98 (Register 99, No. 3). 3. New section filed 1-14-99 as an emergency; operative 1-14-99 (Register 99, No. 3). A Certificate of Compliance must be transmitted to OAL by 5-14'99 or emergency language will be repealed by operation of law on the following day. 4. New section ref|ed 5-10-99 as an emergency; operative 5-10-99 (Register 99, No. 20). A Certificate of Compliance must be transmitted to OAL by 9-7-99 or emergency language will be repealed by operation of law on the following day. S. New section refi|ed 9-7-99 as an emergency; operative 9-7-99 (Register 99, No. 37). A Certificate of Compliance must be transmitted to OAL by 1-5-2000 or emergency language will be repealed by operation of law on the following day. 6. Repealed by operation of Government Code section 11346.1(g) (Register 2000, No. 38). 7. New section filed 12-13-3000 as an emergency; operative 12-13-2000 (Register 2000, No. 50). ACertificate of Compliance must be transmitted to OAL by 4-12-2001 or emergency language will be repealed by operation of law on the following day. 8. New section ref|ed 3-30-2001 as an emergency; operative 4-13-2001 (Register 2001, No. 13). ACartificate of Compliance must be transmitted to OAL by 8-13-2001 or emergency language will be repealed by operation of law on the following day. 9. Certificate of Compliance as to 3-30-2001 order, including amendment of section, transmitted to OAL 7-19-2001 and filed 8-28-2001 (Register 2001, No. 35}. 22 CCR § 66272.82, 22 -4-CA ADC § 66272=1w.-4-62 -W This database is current through 11/30/12 Register 2012, No. 48 END OF DOCUMENT UTerm @ 2012 Thomson Reuters. No Claim to Orig. U.S. Govt. Works. PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT WASTEWATER DIVISION 6901 McCUTCHEN ROAD BAKERSFIELD, CALIFORNIA 93313 (661) 326 -3249 RAUL M. ROJAS, DIRECTOR . CITY ENGINEER December 21, 2012 VIA CERTIFIED MAIL Return Receipt Requested Ms. Lisa Simpson Licensing Supervisor Legal Department P.O. BOX 35005 Seattle, WA 98124 -3405 Re: Notice of Violation for Exceeding Permit Silver Limit and Warning for Late Reporting by Costco Wholesale #688, Inc. located at 3800 Rosedale Highway, Bakersfield, California located Dear Ms. Simpson: This notice is hereby issued based on the following: Legal Authority The following findings are made and Notice issued pursuant to the authority vested in the City Engineer of the City of Bakersfield (City), under Section 14.12.050 of the Bakersfield Municipal Code (Code). This notice is based on findings of violation of Chapter 14.12 of the City's Code and /or the Industrial Wastewater Discharge permit issued to your facility. Findings Costco Wholesale #688, Inc. (Costco #688) was found to be in violation of: • Industrial Wastewater Discharge Permit No. 3- BK -PO45 for a sample exceeding the silver discharge end of process limit of 5 mg /L. Sample Period Silver (mg /L) October 31 to November 1, 2012 43 • Until the canisters were replaced on November 20, 2012 Costco #688 exceeded its permitted silver levels for at least 20 days. • The permit's Standard Provisions and Reporting Requirements, Part 111.5 for failure to submit a written response within 5 days of learning of the noncompliance (November 20). Mfr'" 7' b 4� x 'yr y ' ins >.��,, PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT WASTEWATER DIVISION 6901 McCUTCHEN ROAD BAKERSFIELD, CALIFORNIA 93313 (661) 326 -3249 RAUL M. ROJAS, DIRECTOR . CITY ENGINEER December 21, 2012 VIA CERTIFIED MAIL Return Receipt Requested Ms. Lisa Simpson Licensing Supervisor Legal Department P.O. BOX 35005 Seattle, WA 98124 -3405 Re: Notice of Violation for Exceeding Permit Silver Limit and Warning for Late Reporting by Costco Wholesale #688, Inc. located at 3800 Rosedale Highway, Bakersfield, California located Dear Ms. Simpson: This notice is hereby issued based on the following: Legal Authority The following findings are made and Notice issued pursuant to the authority vested in the City Engineer of the City of Bakersfield (City), under Section 14.12.050 of the Bakersfield Municipal Code (Code). This notice is based on findings of violation of Chapter 14.12 of the City's Code and /or the Industrial Wastewater Discharge permit issued to your facility. Findings Costco Wholesale #688, Inc. (Costco #688) was found to be in violation of: • Industrial Wastewater Discharge Permit No. 3- BK -PO45 for a sample exceeding the silver discharge end of process limit of 5 mg /L. Sample Period Silver (mg /L) October 31 to November 1, 2012 43 • Until the canisters were replaced on November 20, 2012 Costco #688 exceeded its permitted silver levels for at least 20 days. • The permit's Standard Provisions and Reporting Requirements, Part 111.5 for failure to submit a written response within 5 days of learning of the noncompliance (November 20). Notice Costco #688 is required to comply with the following items: CEASE AND DESIST ALL DISCHARGE (OF FIXER WASTE) INTO THE CITY 'S SANITARY SEWER. The facility complied by collecting its discharge when verbally informed of the violation on November 20, 2012. The City returned the someday to issue afield notice after contacting the regional representative regarding the violation. When the City arrived photoprocessing personnel was replacing the old canisters of its pretreatment setup with new ones. The City allowed discharge to resume. Per the facility's Standard Provisions and Reporting Requirements, Part 111.5, Costco #688 was to submit a written report within 5 days explaining the circumstances surrounding the violation and list the corrective actions taken to prevent recurrence. The report should address the proper treatment of the industrial waste discharged to the sewer. The City did not receive any written response after Costco #688 was informed of its violation. This notice will serve as a warning for the late reporting. However, the City expects Costco #688's response to explain and list corrective action(s) for both the silver and the late reporting violations. The report is due by January 4, 2013. Costco #688 collects weekly "check" samples of its pretreatment setup's effectiveness. The samples are sent to a laboratory for silver analysis and it sends Costco #688 a -mails notifying that samples were compliant or noncompliant. Costco #688 is to provide to the City the results (narrative and numerical) of these samples from the period of September 24 to December 14, 2012. Per the Standard Provisions and Reporting Requirements Part 111.3, Costco #688 was to re- sample for silver immediately and submit the result within 30 days. This verification sampling is in addition to the facility's scheduled self- monitoring. The City waives Costco #688 from verification sampling because the City collected grab samples on November 20 and on December 4, 2012. The waiver does not excuse Costco #688 from its regular quarterly self - monitoring requirement. • Notify the City of its next self - monitoring event(s) so the City observes the facility's self- monitoring activities. Failure to comply with this order shall also constitute a further violation of BMC Chapter 14.12 and may subject Costco #688 to civil or criminal penalties or such other enforcement response as may be appropriate. Please see BMC 14.12.410 et seq. :.:, ..7 �.'.,3,ii, i•,Jj. This Notice shall be effective upon receipt. The requirements in this Notice must be submitted to the City by January 4, 2013 unless specified otherwise. Failure to respond will lead to progressive enforcement actions. Please see BMC 14.12.410 et seq. A Notice of Violation basic fee of $69 will be assessed. Compliance with the requirements of this Notice does not excuse prior violations nor prevent collection of penalties or damages at a later time. You may request a hearing before the City Engineer or designee. Such written request must be delivered and received by the City Clerk at 1600 Truxtun Avenue, Bakersfield, California 93301, by the close of business on the tenth (10th) calendar day after the issuance of the notice of violation. Facsimile, e -mail, or other electronic filing will not be accepted. If you have any questions regarding this matter, please contact Alice Chang at (661) 326 -3249. Very truly yours, RAUL M. ROJAS Public Works Director By Ralph Braboy Acting Wastewater Man er ac Enclosure cc: Rich Olin, Vice President / Assistant Secretary, 999 Lake Drive, Issaquah, WA 98027 Rhonda Irmen, Costco Wholesale #688, 3800 Rosedale Hwy, Bakersfield, CA 93308 Rosanne Padley, Revenue Program Supervisor, Wastewater Administration Craig Perkins, Hazardous Materials Specialist, Bakersfield Fire Department Business Search - Business Entities - Business Programs Page 1 of 1 Secretary of State Administration Elections Business Programs Political Reform Archives Registries Business Entities (BE) Business Entity Detail Online Services - Business Search - Disclosure Search - E-File Statements - Processing Times Main Page Service Options Name Availability Forms, Samples & Fees Annual/Biennial Statements Filing Tips Information Requests (certificates, copies & status reports) Service of Process FAQs Contact Information Resources - Business Resources - Tax Information - Starting A Business - International Business Relations Program Customer Alerts - Business Identity Theft - Misleading Business Solicitations Data is updated weekly and is current as of Friday, December 07, 2012. It is not a complete or certified record of the entity. Entity Name: COSTCO WHOLESALE CORPORATION Entity Number: C1587907 Date Filed: 06/05/1987 Status: ACTIVE Jurisdiction: WASHINGTON Entity Address: PO BOX 35005 Entity City, State, Zip: SEATTLE WA 98124-3405 Agent for Service of Process: C T CORPORATION SYSTEM Agent Address: 818 W SEVENTH ST Agent City, State, Zip: LOS ANGELES CA 90017 * Indicates the information is not contained in the California Secretary of State's database. • If the status of the corporation is "Surrender," the agent for service of process is automatically revoked. Please refer to California Corporations Code section 21.1.4. for information relating to service upon corporations that have surrendered. • For information on checking or reserving a name, refer to Name Availability. ........................... ­. ............................ • For information on ordering certificates, copies of documents and/or status reports or to request a more extensive search, refer to Information Requests. .... .......... * • For help with searching an entity name, refer to Search..Tip§. *** .......... ** ­­- • For descriptions of the various fields and status types, refer to Field Descrip�!99,�..#!jg Status .......................................... ............. Definitions. M ®i1if .Search New ..... Search Back to ..Search ..Res.ul..ts .P.ri.v..a ,cy.,St..a .t.. e .m.....e... 9-t .. I F.. .r.. .e...e ... D... -o... -q.. u... .m.... .e... -n... -t . Readers ... ... .. ... ... . .. Copyright © 2012 California Secretary of State http://kepler.sos.ca.gov/cbs.aspx 12/10/2012 1g=i1wqlL Laboratories Inc. L Environmental Testing Laboratory Since 1949 City of Bakersfield Reported: 11/09/2012 15:08 Wastewater Division, 6901 McCutchen Project: Waste Water Bakersfield, CA 93313 Project Number: [none] Project Manager: Zac Meyer Water Analysis (Metals) BCL Sample ID: 1221069 -02 Client Sample Name: 121101AC2 -C, 11/1/2012 10:45:OOAM, A. Chang, R. Keo MB Lab Constituent Result Units PQL MDL Method Bias Quals Run # The results in this report apply to the samples analyzed in accordance with the chain of custody document. This analytical report must be reproduced in its entirety. All results listed in this report are for the exclusive use of the submitting party. BC Laboratories, Inc. assumes no responsibility for report alteration separation, detachment or third party interpretation 4100 Atlas Court Bakersfield, CA 93308 (661) 327 -4911 FAX (661) 327 -1918 www.bclabs.com Page 7 of 11 i" 8 A K E R S F I E L D PUBLIC WORKS DEPARTMENT WASTEWATER DtV StON 8101 ASHE RD BAKERSFIELD, CA 93313 Phone: (661)'326 -3249 Fax: (661) 852 -2125 Field Notice Date: APhi: n to Category: FEE. J Dear As the owner/operator of the above referenced faculty,. this NOTICE is ta► advise you that an inspection of this facility on the date given above found the following condition(s) ) which require your immediate attention- • {"" "'`«n �,.. tk' 'a.`+:.4, y'w,i ,S i .{✓$ .', i .$y`'�a B'."" °!i Fn9 �1'.r± E... «.,. #nx �' "a, Y'" a. a - s� { i, vt",+, 1�i` IJ -3` t F�'�," . �G •."� �A �a� 4 �(^ �i g r -gyp #` F Please note that in order to avoJJd further enforcement action, you are required to correct and /or provide the items listed above on / :20 f 41— . Be advised that failure to comply with this notice may result in progressive enforcement actions: Please see BMC 14.12.41 a et seq. (deceived by � � Issued by" Industrial Waste Inspector'' �4 Title White Copy - User Yellow - City File Craig T. Perkins From: Alice Chang Sent: Wednesday, December 05, 2012 4:22 PM To: Craig T. Perkins Cc: Malcolm W. Moore Subject: RE: Henley's & Costco Attachments: Henley's Field Notice 12.04.12.pdf, Costco Field Notice 11.20.12.pdf Hi Craig, Here's Henley's field notice issued yesterday and Costco's field notice from 11/20/12. We're still waiting for Henley's official results. As for Costco, the Photo Department changed two columns when we informed its personnel of the violation on 11/20/12 so we allow discharge to continue. We took two samples -one before and one after the columns were changed. Unofficial lab results verified that prior to replacement Costco exceeded it permit limit (5 mg /L silver) for at least 20 days. We have not issued a NOV yet, but we did discuss the violation with the Photo Manager, Rhonda Irmen yesterday and took another sample to check. We do not expect a violation since a third column was added on 11/29/12, but we'll see what comes up. From: Craig T. Perkins Sent: Wednesday, December 05, 2012 11:20 AM To: Alice Chang Subject: RE: Henley's Thanks Alice. When you get a chance, please send me a copy of the lab results and we'll start an enforcement case. Also what was the outcome of Costco on Rosedale Hwy? I have a copy of the lab report but you had mentioned that you were going to talk to them about their photo processing system. Craig Perkins, Haz -Mat Specialist Bakersfield FIRE Department Office: (661) 326 -3684 Fax: (661) 852 -2171 ctperkins @bakersfieldfire.us From: Alice Chang Sent: Tuesday, December 04, 2012 4:24 PM To: Craig T. Perkins Cc: Malcolm W. Moore Subject: Henley's Hi Craig, Malcolm and I stopped by at Henley's to review its records but the photo supervisor was away on a doctor's appointment. We had another reason for the visit and that was to inform the office manager to cease and desist its silver discharge from the sewer. Henley's promptly disconnected the setup. Henley's was asked to disconnect because the unofficial results from the lab was over 700 mg /L for silver. We'll send you a copy of the field notice we issued to Henley's tomorrow. By the way, the office manager asked us to relay to you that as of today, Henley's complied with the items Fire requested to be fixed except for the permit number which it is waiting to be issued. If you have any questions, please call us tomorrow at x3249 between 7:30 -8:30. EironLaboratoriegs, fnw- rnental Testing Laboratory Since 1949 Env of Bakersfield astewater Division, 6901 McCutchen Bakersfield, CA 93313 Reported: 12/13/2012 16:31 Project: Water Samples Project Number: [none] Project Manager: Zac Meyer V Metals Analysis BCL Sample ID: 1222504-02 Client Sample Name: 121120AC-G2,11120/2012 2:50:OOPM, A.ChangiM.Moore MB Lab Constituent Result Units POL MDL Method Bias --- Qualls Run # Total Recoverable Silver 5.9 U91L 'lU 71.15 =1-,K-AUVJ. f Run QC Run # Met-hod Prep Date DatefTime Analyst Instrument Dilution Batch ID EPA-200.7 11126/12 11/27/12 15:32 JRG PE-OP2 1 BVK1737 IJ RE C E: 2 V E DEC 20 2012 WASTE wxrER DIVISION CITY 01;: BAKERSF!ELD The results in this report apply to the samples anabaed in accordance with the chain of custody document. This analytical report must be reproduced in its entirety. All results listed in this report are for the exclusive use of the submitting party BC Laboratories, In.C. USUrnes no responsibility for report alteratioq separation, detachment or third party interpretation 4100 Atlas Court Bakersfield, CA 93308 (661) 327-4911 FAX (661) 327-1918 www.bctabs.com Page 8 of 12 Writer's Direct wunboc (42e ) 427-7015 Fax: (425) 313-8114 February 4'2O13 VIA FAX (661) 852-2170 AND UPS EXPRESS Howard H. Wines, N Director of Prevention Services City ofBakersfield 21O1"H"Street Bakersfield, CAQ33O1 Re: Order xxmConsent Agreement Dear Mr. Wines: Thank you for meeting with us |mat week to dkyoumo the Enforcement order issued in connection with the Notice of Violation dated December 21. 2012. issued to our CostooBakersfield warehouse. Enclosed please find a copy of the fully executed Order on Consent Agreement ("Order"), a copy of the check issued to the City of Bakersfield and a copy of the letter documenting compliance with the Order. If you require additional information todemonstrate compliance in accordance with the terms of the Order, please advise. As we mentioned in our meeting last week, Costco welcomes the opportunity to work with the (JfDoe of Prevention Services for the City of BokmnyDe|d Fine Department to anmwarqueetions about our environmental compliance programs in California. Please feel free to contact our Director of Environmental Cornp|ianne, Glenda TutUe, with any questions or concerns. Her business card is enclosed for your reference. CC: Glenda Tuttle, Director of Environmental Compliance Glenn Hutchinson, Operations ManaQmr Steve Bannister. Director mfPhoto Operations Miguel GaUardo, Environmental Compliance Officer Toni Crosby, Business Manager, Bakersfield FD Writer's Direct Number: (425) 427-7015 Fax: (425) 313-8114 February 4, 2013 VIA UPS EXPRESS Toni Crosby Business Manager City of Bakersfield Fire Department 2101 "H" Street Bakersfield, CA 93301 Re: Order on Consent Agreement Docket No. 2013-2 Dear Ms. Crosby: Enclosed please find a copy of the executed Order On Consent Agreement for the above referenced matter and a check in the amount of $2,000.00 payable to the City of Bakersfield. Please feel free to contact me if you have any additional questions or concerns. Henry Wines Glenda Tuttle 19 ru ca ru .m 0 0 cA Cr r,u CO rm 0 ru r4M .r 0 cil rLi S. EWHOLESALE January 10, 2013 Ralph Braboy, Acting Wastewater Manager Wastewater Division Bakersfield Public Works Department 6901 McCutchen Road Bakersfield, CA 93313 Dear Mr. Braboy, This letter responds to the Notice of Violation ("NOV"), dated December 21, 2012, issued to our Costco #688 Bakersfield Warehouse. As confirmed in your NOV, our Bakersfield Warehouse complied with the November 20, 2012 Cease and Desist Order on the day the order was. issued. As Inspector Chang observed, the warehouse immediately replaced the existing pretreatment silver recovery columns with new silver recovery columns. The corrective action taken by our Bakersfield Photo Department on November 20, 2012 restored the silver discharge level to comply with the silver discharge end of process limit of 5 mg/l-. The NOV states that our Bakersfield Warehouse is in violation our Industrial Wastewater Discharge Permit's Standard Provisions and Reporting Requirements, Part 111.5, for failure to submit a written response within 5 days of learning of the noncompliance. At the time of the inspection, our copy of the Industrial Wastewater Discharge Permit issued to our Bakersfield Warehouse did not contain a Part 111.5 - Standard Provisions and Reporting Requirements (the "Standard Terms"). Our team in Bakersfield was therefore unaware that they were required to provide a written report explaining the circumstances surrounding the violation and also confirming the corrective actions taken to prevent recurrence. The Warehouse team believed that the silver matter had been resolved on November 20, when the silver COlUmns were replaced and the Inspector Chang authorized photo processing operations to resume. After receiving the NOV, we obtained a copy of the Standard Terms from your offices. We have incorporated the requirements of the Standard terms into our operating procedures for the photo department. In accordance with Part 111.5 of the Standard Terms, we provide an explanation of the circumstances surrounding the violations and confirming the corrective actions taken to prevent recurrence below. We also provide an overview of our silver recovery system. 688 Bakersfield Response I of 1110/2013 C. West 999 Lake Drive - lssoquali, WA 98027 o 4251373-8100 o www.costco.coni N, 0""AL Er Over view of Costco's Silver Recovery System Costco uses a system of silver recovery columns to remove silver from the photo effluent before it is discharged. The effluent filters through a first column, which removes most of the silver. The effluent then filters through a second and sometimes a third column, which capture additional silver so that the silver levels' are below 5 parts per million ('pprn") before discharge. (A third column is used when the Volume of product being processed warrants additional treatment). Costco's monitoring and testing protocol for the silver effluent is highly sensitive and goes well beyond the testing Used by many other generators of silver waste. The sample collection, however, is performed by warehouse personnel who are not trained laboratory technicians., and the sample analysis is performed at an internal lab that is not certified to perform these analyses. This sampling is therefore performed solely for internal compliance assurance, and is not intended for use in demonstrating compliance with the permit. Our goal is to identify and promptly correct any exceedance within a short period, rather than waiting for the more rigorous quarterly sampling required by the permit. The sensitivity and sophistication of the monitoring and testing protocol sometimes produces a non-representative result that Suggests excessive levels in the effluent when such excessive levels are not in fact present. This happens, for example, if there is a flake of silver or a particle of sludge in the test sample. Ordinarily, flushing the line prevents this, but these non-representative spikes in the testing process can occasionally occur. In addition, as explained in the test results, we provided, non-representative results can also occur when there are recording errors (i.e., where test results from column 1 are inadvertently recorded as test results for Column 3). To identify test exceedances, which are due to non- representative spikes from inadequate flushing or due to column test results being incorrectly recorded, silver columns are replaced only after the consecutive week's re-testing confirms an exceedance. Furthermore, since Our test samples are taken at the end of filtering, they have higher silver concentrations than would test samples taken at the end of pipe. The effluent is tested at end of filtering to ensure that it does not exceed the discharge limit even though the discharge will be further diluted at end of pipe. We view the weekly testing of the silver effluent as one method to ensure that the silver discharge limit will not be exceeded and to ensure maximum efficiencies of our silver recovery system. In addition to the weekly testing of the silver effluent, Costco also tracks the volume of photo processing to determine whether a third or fourth column should be added to ensure that the discharge limit is not exceeded. 688 Bakersfield Response 2 of 4 1/1012013 C. West 0 1-1 9 La, -5/3.73P84100 Ae Drive , 1-sscjquali, 11VA 9802" - 42 . . . . . . . ...... Silver Logs Sept. 24 — Dec. 14, 2012/ Explanation cif .Circumstances of Violation Once our Quality Assurance Lab determines that the silver test results confirm that an exceedance has occurred, the Lab notifies the respective location that a column needs to be changed out to meet the silver discharge limit set by the local jurisdiction and to ensure maximum efficiencies of our silver recovery system. As requested, attached are the test results for the period September 24 to December 14, 2012. Four of the weekly test results indicate silver levels in excess of 5 ppm. The exceedance recorded for 10/22/12, was a non-representative test. We have confirmed that this result was due to a non-representative spike in the testing process and does not indicate that effluent was discharged with silver levels exceeding the 5 pprn regulatory standard. This conclusion was reached by examining the test result obtained from sampling the same columns in the preceding and succeeding weeks. In both the preceding week, 10/17/12 and succeeding week, 10/30/12, the test results were substantially below the discharge limit. The exceedance recorded for 11/06112, was viewed as a non-representative spike, because it was almost twenty times higher than the preceding week. On 11/12/12, the test results also showed an exceedance; however, our QA Lab concluded that the first column had been sampled twice because the values reported for columns one and two were essentially the same, Ordinarily the results for the second column would be notably lower than the results for the first. The QA Lab therefore decided to wait and examine the succeeding week's test results, On 11 /20112, when the test results also identified an exceedance, the QA Lab instructed the Bakersfield Photo Dept. to change out the columns and a third column was added for additional assurance. In addition to changing out the columns on November 20, 2012, the following changes in Costco's protocols for silver effluent monitoring/testing have been implemented to ensure that silver discharge exceedances do not occur: Corrective Actions: All Photo employees have been retrained in silver effluent testing and protocols at Costco's Bakersfield Warehouse to ensure valid test samples. A third silver recovery column has been added to the Bakersfield Photo processing system to ensure that the silver discharge limit is not exceeded when processing demand is high. 688 Bakersfield Response 3 of 4 1110/2013 C. West 999 Lake Drive a issaquah� VIA 9802 7 -0 242-:13, 13-8 100 a v",w.costco.com I E = Silver testing was conducted for three consecutive weeks following the October 31 — November I test exceedance. These test results were analyzed by a certified lab, Hallmark Refining. The test results confirm that the silver discharge levels were below the 5 ppm discharge limit. Copies of those test results were provided to Inspector Chang. I Would be pleased to answer any questions you may have. Please call rile at (425) 427-3874 if I may be of assistance. Regards, Cathy West Environmental & OSHA Compliance Manager - US Costco Wholesale Corporation Cc- Eric Tallman, Warehouse Manager Costco Wholesale Bakersfield Warehouse Debbie Sarter, Operations Admin Manager Los Angeles Region, Costco Wholesale Corporation Glenda Tuttle, Director of Environmental Compliance — California Costco, Wholesale Corporation Lisa Simpson, Licensing Supervisor Costco Wholesale Corporation 6818 Bakersfield Response 4 of 4 1/10/2013 C. West 099 Lcnk-e Drive o hqsoquaii, V/A 4802 7 Q .42 }, .? 1 3-8 100 costco. corn co E he 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 0 > > uj in V) cn- Fn LI) Lo V) 2 x ci fu u 2 0 :3 aj 0 U cu CO Ca C7 c C� 0 C� C) � 1-1 m 00 LQ -N i rll� ca C) Cl ro 00 CN rl% ON s m r" N car C) r14 kn ko CN CD C� C> CD 0 rN m w cv C> rt tics rn R Ln Ln C. to CL. Ca m I'D tlo rT a en C? Ln an Ln M 2 v- CD all CD Cl C> C) 1-4 ,may 1.4 CD Ca hit C) 4) crt CIA E ui U'5 S, 1.1 Cl C) C) C) CD C� C7 0 M U- CCU CN (n r a,: QL tJ R a rW t? CD Lu C) CD m 2�1 CO w —4 1-4 ca UJ > 0 < tn LU U 41 '4(-' r*4 nt rJ (N ra r-4 CN ry 1-4 1-1 T--i —4 1-1 -4 1� E C:) (.,�) C) C� CD rN r- rU r.s ry CN 0 0, Ln C) rq ;�6 8� 00 Q0 E CD rq CD (N CY c 0 m -j cx CC -j U) C> CY) I-t Cl C"li --i 14— 0 ors cr