§ 12.5-677.1 AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES TO UPSET ONLY IN FEDERAL COURT.

   A person shall be entitled to an affirmative defenses for a violation caused by an upset only if a cause of action is brought in federal court and the user demonstrates, through properly signed, contemporaneous operating logs, or other relevant evidence that:

   (a)   The user’s facility was at the time of the upset being operated in a prudent and workman-like manner and in compliance with applicable operation and maintenance procedures; and

   (b)   The user has submitted written notice with the information listed below to the director within 24 hours of becoming aware of the upset. If this notice is provided orally, a written notice must be provided within five days. The written notice must state:

      (1)   A description of the indirect discharge and cause of noncompliance;

      (2)   The period of noncompliance, including exact dates and times or, if not corrected, the anticipated time the noncompliance is expected to continue; and

      (3)   Steps being taken and/or planned to reduce, eliminate and prevent recurrence of the noncompliance.

(Ord. 20043-01-2012, § 12, passed 1-10-2012)

§ 12.5-677.2 OTHER AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES TO SPECIFIC PROHIBITED DISCHARGE STANDARDS ONLY IN FEDERAL COURT.

   A person shall be entitled to an affirmative defense for a cause of action brought only in federal court for noncompliance with the general prohibition of §§ 12.5-610(a), 12.5-610.1(a) or 12.5-610.2(a) or a specific prohibition of §§ 12.5-610(b)(3), (b)(5), (b)(6), (b)(7) or (b)(8), 12.5-610.1(b)(3), (b)(4), (b)(5), (b)(6) or (b)(7) or 12.5-610.2(b)(3), (b)(4), (b)(5), (b)(6) or (b)(7); or if the user can show that the user did not know, or have reason to know, that its discharge, alone or in conjunction with discharges from other sources, would cause pass through or interference and that either:

   (a)   A local limit exists for each pollutant discharged and the user was in compliance with each limit directly prior to, and during, the pass through or interference; or

   (b)   No local limit exists, but the discharge did not change substantially in nature or constituents from the user’s prior discharge when the city was regularly in compliance with its NPDES permit, and in the case of interference, was in compliance with applicable sludge use or disposal requirements.

(Ord. 20043-01-2012, § 12, passed 1-10-2012)

§ 12.5-678 NUISANCE.

   A discharge to the POTW in violation of any provision of this article, a wastewater discharge permit or any other pretreatment standard or requirement is hereby declared to be a public nuisance.

(Ord. 12274, § 1, passed 11-28-1995)

§§ 12.5-679—12.5-699 RESERVED.

ARTICLE VII: LIQUID WASTE

DIVISION 1: GENERAL PROVISIONS

§ 12.5-700 DEFINITIONS.

   Unless a provision explicitly states otherwise, the following terms and phrases, as used in this article, shall have the meanings hereinafter designated.

   DIRECTOR. The director of the department of water or the director’s authorized representative. When used in the context of inspections and enforcement actions, the term shall also mean the director of the department of environmental management or the director’s authorized representative.

(Ord. 12274, § 1, passed 11-28-1995)

§ 12.5-701 ADMINISTRATION.

   The director of the department of water and the director’s authorized representatives are authorized to administer, implement and enforce the provisions of this article. Additionally, the director of the department of environmental management and the director’s authorized representatives, are authorized to make inspections pursuant to this article and to take enforcement actions against violators.

(Ord. 12274, § 1, passed 11-28-1995)