Loading...
SUPPLEMENTAL ENFORCEMENT ACTION
The Wastewater Superintendent may decline to reissue a wastewater discharge permit to any user which has failed to comply with the provisions of this chapter, a previous wastewater discharge permit, or order issued hereunder, or any other pretreatment standard or requirement, unless such user first files a satisfactory bond, payable to the town, in a sum not to exceed a value determined by the Wastewater Superintendent to be necessary to achieve consistent compliance.
(1996 Code, § 168-62)
The Wastewater Superintendent may decline to reissue a wastewater discharge permit to any user who has failed to comply with any provision of this chapter, a previous wastewater discharge permit, or order issued hereunder, or any other pretreatment standard or requirement, unless the user first submits proof that it has obtained financial assurances sufficient to restore or repair damage to the POTW caused by its discharge.
(1996 Code, § 168-63)
(A) Whenever a user has violated or continues to violate any provision of this chapter, a wastewater discharge permit, or order issued hereunder, or any other pretreatment standard or requirement, water service to the user may be severed.
(B) Service will only recommence, at the user’s expense, after it has satisfactorily demonstrated its ability to comply.
(1996 Code, § 168-64)
A violation of any provision of this chapter, a wastewater discharge permit or order issued hereunder, or any other pretreatment standard or requirement, is hereby declared a public nuisance and shall be corrected or abated as directed by the Wastewater Superintendent. Any person(s) creating a public nuisance shall be subject to the provisions governing such nuisances, including reimbursing the town for any costs incurred in removing, abating or remedying said nuisance.
(1996 Code, § 168-65) Penalty, see § 52.999
AFFIRMATIVE DEFENSES TO DISCHARGE VIOLATIONS
(A) For the purposes of this section, UPSET means an exceptional incident in which there is unintentional and temporary noncompliance with categorical pretreatment standards because of factors beyond the reasonable control of the user. An UPSET does not include noncompliance to the extent caused by operational error, improperly designed treatment facilities, inadequate treatment facilities, lack of preventive maintenance or careless or improper operation.
(B) An upset shall constitute an affirmative defense to an action brought for noncompliance with categorical pretreatment standards if the requirements of division (c) below are met.
(C) A user who wishes to establish the affirmative defense of upset shall demonstrate, through properly signed, contemporaneous operating logs, or other relevant evidence that:
(1) An upset occurred and the user can identify the cause(s) of the upset;
(2) The facility was at the time being operated in a prudent and workmanlike manner and in compliance with applicable operation and maintenance procedures; and
(3) The user has submitted the following information to the Wastewater Superintendent within 24 hours of becoming aware of the upset (if this information is provided orally, a written submission must be provided within five days):
(a) A description of the indirect discharge and cause of noncompliance;
(b) The period of noncompliance, including exact dates and times or, if not corrected, the anticipated time the noncompliance is expected to continue; and
(c) Steps being taken and/or planned to reduce, eliminate and prevent recurrence of the noncompliance.
(D) In any enforcement proceeding, the user seeking to establish the occurrence of an upset shall have the burden of proof.
(E) Users will have the opportunity for a judicial determination on any claim of upset only in an enforcement action brought for noncompliance with categorical pretreatment standards.
(F) Users shall control production or all discharges to the extent necessary to maintain compliance with categorical pretreatment standards upon reduction, loss or failure of its treatment facility until the facility is restored or an alternative method of treatment is provided. This requirement applies in the situation where, among other things, the primary source of power of the treatment facility is reduced, lost or fails.
(1996 Code, § 168-66)
A user shall have an affirmative defense to an enforcement action brought against it for noncompliance with the general prohibitions in § 52.015(A) or the specific prohibitions in § 52.015(B)(1)(a) through (B)(1)(r) if it can prove that it 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 town was regularly in compliance with its VPDES permit, and in the case of interference, was in compliance with applicable sludge use or disposal requirements.
(1996 Code, § 168-67)
Loading...