|
|
Facility At-A-Glance Report |
|
|
[VIEW PRINTER FRIENDLY VERSION]
[EXPORT THIS REPORT TO EXCEL]
|
|
|
[REFINE SEARCH]
[NEW SEARCH]
[GLOSSARY]
Place ID 215086
|
|
|
|
|
|
General Information
|
Region |
Place ID |
Place Name |
Place Type |
Place Address |
Place County |
5S |
215086 |
Cold Springs Mobile Manor |
Mobile Home Park |
1525 Cold Springs Placerville, CA, 95667 |
El Dorado |
|
|
Related Parties
|
|
Total Related Parties: 3
|
|
|
Regulatory Measures
|
|
Total Reg Measures: 2
|
|
|
Violations
|
Violation ID |
Occurred Date |
Violation Type |
(-) Violation Description |
Corrective Action |
Status |
Classification |
Source |
1112185 |
01/09/2023 |
UAUTHDISC |
On 9 January 2023 Board staff received an OES report (attached) filed by a third party stating that a pump was being used during the night to pump wastewater from the facility’s ponds into the creek. Board staff also received video evidence of the pump. Board staff performed a site inspection in response later that day. At the time of the inspection Board staff observed the pump located on the berm of the treatment ponds adjacent to the creek. The intake hose was in Pond 2 and the discharge hose was in Pond 1. However, there was evidence that the discharge hose had been laying on the grass between the pump and the creek, and cinder blocks to hold the end of the hose were in the creek bed consistent with the photos provided in the complaint (see attached photo log). The onsite managers stated that El Dorado County Environmental Health (County) had been to the Facility earlier that day. They said at that time the pump’s intake hose had been in Pond 2 and the discharge hose had been running down the side of the berm into the creek. The County had asked that the discharge hose be removed from the creek, and the onsite managers had complied.
Based on the video evidence provided to Board staff, the onsite manager’s statement, and Board staff’s observations, the pump has caused or threatens to cause a violation of the following WDR requirements:
Discharge Prohibition A.1: “The direct discharge of wastes to surface waters or surface water drainage courses is prohibited.”
|
|
Violation |
B |
Complaint |
1112186 |
01/09/2023 |
UAUTHDISC |
On 9 January 2023 Board staff received an OES report (attached) filed by a third party stating that a pump was being used during the night to pump wastewater from the facility’s ponds into the creek. Board staff also received video evidence of the pump. Board staff performed a site inspection in response later that day. At the time of the inspection Board staff observed the pump located on the berm of the treatment ponds adjacent to the creek. The intake hose was in Pond 2 and the discharge hose was in Pond 1. However, there was evidence that the discharge hose had been laying on the grass between the pump and the creek, and cinder blocks to hold the end of the hose were in the creek bed consistent with the photos provided in the complaint (see attached photo log). The onsite managers stated that El Dorado County Environmental Health (County) had been to the Facility earlier that day. They said at that time the pump’s intake hose had been in Pond 2 and the discharge hose had been running down the side of the berm into the creek. The County had asked that the discharge hose be removed from the creek, and the onsite managers had complied.
Based on the video evidence provided to Board staff, the onsite manager’s statement, and Board staff’s observations, the pump has caused or threatens to cause a violation of the following WDR requirements:
Discharge Prohibition A.2: “The by-pass or overflow of untreated or partially treated waste is prohibited.” |
|
Violation |
B |
Complaint |
1112187 |
01/09/2023 |
UAUTHDISC |
On 9 January 2023 Board staff received an OES report (attached) filed by a third party stating that a pump was being used during the night to pump wastewater from the facility’s ponds into the creek. Board staff also received video evidence of the pump. Board staff performed a site inspection in response later that day. At the time of the inspection Board staff observed the pump located on the berm of the treatment ponds adjacent to the creek. The intake hose was in Pond 2 and the discharge hose was in Pond 1. However, there was evidence that the discharge hose had been laying on the grass between the pump and the creek, and cinder blocks to hold the end of the hose were in the creek bed consistent with the photos provided in the complaint (see attached photo log). The onsite managers stated that El Dorado County Environmental Health (County) had been to the Facility earlier that day. They said at that time the pump’s intake hose had been in Pond 2 and the discharge hose had been running down the side of the berm into the creek. The County had asked that the discharge hose be removed from the creek, and the onsite managers had complied.
Based on the video evidence provided to Board staff, the onsite manager’s statement, and Board staff’s observations, the pump has caused or threatens to cause a violation of the following WDR requirements:
Discharge Specification B.2: “The discharge shall not cause degradation of any water supply.” |
|
Violation |
B |
Complaint |
1112188 |
01/09/2023 |
UAUTHDISC |
On 9 January 2023 Board staff received an OES report (attached) filed by a third party stating that a pump was being used during the night to pump wastewater from the facility’s ponds into the creek. Board staff also received video evidence of the pump. Board staff performed a site inspection in response later that day. At the time of the inspection Board staff observed the pump located on the berm of the treatment ponds adjacent to the creek. The intake hose was in Pond 2 and the discharge hose was in Pond 1. However, there was evidence that the discharge hose had been laying on the grass between the pump and the creek, and cinder blocks to hold the end of the hose were in the creek bed consistent with the photos provided in the complaint (see attached photo log). The onsite managers stated that El Dorado County Environmental Health (County) had been to the Facility earlier that day. They said at that time the pump’s intake hose had been in Pond 2 and the discharge hose had been running down the side of the berm into the creek. The County had asked that the discharge hose be removed from the creek, and the onsite managers had complied.
Based on the video evidence provided to Board staff, the onsite manager’s statement, and Board staff’s observations, the pump has caused or threatens to cause a violation of the following WDR requirements:
Discharge Specification B.3: “The discharge shall remain within the designated disposal area at all times.” |
|
Violation |
B |
Complaint |
1080443 |
10/20/2020 |
Deficient Reporting |
Not included in AMR: ¿ Item B.7 of the MRP requires ¿A discussion of long range planning by the Discharger relative to expanding or abandoning the existing facility, community growth and wastewater flows versus facility capacity, and inflow/infiltration projections as a function of rainfall.¿ |
|
Violation |
B |
Report |
1080445 |
10/20/2020 |
Deficient Reporting |
¿ Effluent water samples are not being collected or reported at the required frequency. TDS, nitrate, and BOD, electrical conductivity, and total nitrogen are required to monitored monthly. TDS and chloride are also required to be sampled semi annually. However, it does not appear that an effluent sample has been collected since April of 2019. This is a violation of the WDRs. |
|
Violation |
B |
Report |
1080446 |
10/20/2020 |
Deficient Reporting |
¿ Reported influent flows appear to possibly include errors. In several cases the exact same flow in gallons per day is reported for multiple months in a row. Also, some dry weather flows, such as July 2020, are over 40% higher than average wet weather flows. |
|
Violation |
B |
Report |
1080444 |
10/20/2020 |
Deficient Reporting |
¿ Surface water samples are not being collected or reported at the required frequency. TDS, nitrate, and chloride are required to monitored monthly. However, only 3 surface water samples have been reported in the last 12 month. This is a violation of the WDRs. |
|
Violation |
B |
Report |
1080442 |
02/01/2020 |
Deficient Reporting |
Not included in AMR: Item B.6 of the MRP requires ¿A discussion of any data gaps or potential deficiencies/redundancies in the monitoring system or reporting program.¿ |
|
Violation |
B |
Report |
Report displays most recent five years of violations. Refer to the Interactive Violation Report for more data.
|
|
Total Violations: 9
|
Priority Violations: 0
|
*Click the "(+/-) Violation Description" link to expand and contract the violation description.
*As of 5/20/2010, the Water Board's Enforcement Policy requires that all violations be classified as 1, 2 or 3, with class 1 being the highest. Prior to this, violations were simply classified as Yes or No. If a 123 classification has been assigned to a violation that occurred before this date, that classification data will be displayed instead of the Yes/No data.
|
Violation Types |
Deficient Reporting = Deficient Reporting
|
UAUTHDISC = Unauthorized Discharge
|
|
|
|
Enforcement Actions
|
|
Total Enf Actions: 3
|
|
|
Inspections
|
Inspection ID |
Inspection Type |
Lead Inspector |
Actual End Date |
Planned |
Violations |
Attachment |
51901836 |
B Type compliance inspection |
Kenny Croyle |
05/24/2023 |
N |
0 |
Download |
50166845 |
B Type compliance inspection |
Kenny Croyle |
01/09/2023 |
N |
0 |
Download |
41842730 |
B Type compliance inspection |
Kenny Croyle |
07/30/2020 |
N |
0 |
N/A |
40685478 |
B Type compliance inspection |
Kenny Croyle |
06/17/2020 |
N |
0 |
N/A |
20979446 |
B Type compliance inspection |
Paul Sanders |
06/25/2015 |
N |
0 |
Download |
10537963 |
B Type compliance inspection |
Brendan Kenny |
12/04/2012 |
N |
0 |
N/A |
9628189 |
B Type compliance inspection |
Brendan Kenny |
09/10/2012 |
N |
0 |
N/A |
2137722 |
B Type compliance inspection |
Brendan Kenny |
03/04/2010 |
N |
0 |
N/A |
711806 |
B Type compliance inspection |
Brendan Kenny (Multiple) |
03/24/2006 |
N |
0 |
N/A |
335727 |
Complaint inspection |
Jim Martin |
08/31/2004 |
Y |
0 |
N/A |
325770 |
Follow-up inspection (enforcement) |
Nickolas Anderson |
08/06/2002 |
Y |
0 |
N/A |
325788 |
Complaint inspection |
George W Lockwood |
07/26/2002 |
Y |
0 |
N/A |
325790 |
Complaint inspection |
George W Lockwood |
07/16/2002 |
Y |
0 |
N/A |
308509 |
Complaint inspection |
George W Lockwood |
05/17/2002 |
Y |
0 |
N/A |
325787 |
B Type compliance inspection |
George W Lockwood |
01/22/2002 |
Y |
0 |
N/A |
308508 |
B Type compliance inspection |
George W Lockwood |
10/11/2000 |
Y |
0 |
N/A |
308510 |
Follow-up inspection (noncompliance) |
George W Lockwood |
01/21/1999 |
Y |
0 |
N/A |
308512 |
B Type compliance inspection |
Ethan Heilman |
07/10/1998 |
Y |
0 |
N/A |
308511 |
Follow-up inspection (enforcement) |
Bill Croyle |
03/23/1998 |
Y |
0 |
N/A |
|
Total Inspections: 19 |
Last Inspection: 05/24/2023 |
|
|
|
|
|
The current report was generated with data as of: 10/18/2024
Regional Boards are in the process of entering backlogged data.
As a result, data may be incomplete.
|
|
Back to Main Page
|
Back to Top of Page
|
|
|
|
|