[Code 1991, § 18-160]
The DPW shall annually publish in the largest newspaper circulated
in the City a description of those industrial users in significant
noncompliance over the past 12 months with any condition of a permit
or any of the pretreatment requirements set forth in this article.
[Code 1991, § 18-161]
Whenever the DPW finds that any user has violated or is violating
this article, including a permit issued under this article, an order
issued pursuant to this article, or any other pretreatment requirement,
the DPW may serve upon such user a written notice of violation. Within
10 days from the receipt of such notice, the user shall submit an
explanation of the violation and a plan for satisfactory correction
and prevention thereof to the DPW. Submission of this plan shall in
no way relieve the user of liability for any violation occurring before
or after the receipt of such notice.
[Code 1991, § 18-162]
The DPW may order any user causing or contributing to a violation
of this article to appear before the DPW to show cause why an enforcement
action should not be taken. Notice shall be served on the user, specifying
the time and place for the hearing, the proposed enforcement action,
the reasons for such action, and a request that the user show cause
why the proposed enforcement action should not be taken. Notice of
the hearing shall be served personally or by certified mail (return
receipt requested) at least 10 days prior to the hearing. The notice
may be served on any principal officer or corporate officer of the
user. If the user does not appear, immediate enforcement action may
be pursued. At the hearing, testimony shall be taken under oath and
properly recorded. A transcript shall be made available to any party
of the hearing and to any member of the public upon payment of the
usual charges for duplication.
[Code 1991, § 18-163]
A.
When the DPW finds that a user has violated or continues to violate
this article, he may issue an order to the user directing that, following
a specific time period, sewer service to the user shall be discontinued
unless adequate treatment facilities, devices or other related appurtenances
have been installed and are properly operated. Orders may also contain
such other requirements as are reasonably necessary and appropriate
to address the noncompliance, including the installation of pretreatment
technology, additional self-monitoring, and improved management practices.
B.
The DPW is authorized to enter into consent orders establishing an
agreement with any user to ensure compliance with this article. Such
orders shall have the same force and effect as administrative orders
and shall be judicially enforceable.
[Code 1991, § 18-164]
A.
When the DPW finds that a user has violated or continues to violate
a permit or order issued by the DPW pursuant to this article, the
DPW may issue an order to cease and desist all such violations and
may direct the user in noncompliance to:
(1)
Comply forthwith;
(2)
Comply in accordance with a time schedule set forth in the order;
(3)
Take such appropriate remedial or preventive actions as may be needed
to properly address a continuing or threatened violation, including
halting operations and/or terminating the discharge; or
(4)
Suspend any further use of the municipal sewer system whenever such
suspension is necessary in order to stop an actual or threatened discharge
presenting or causing any of the following:
B.
Any user notified of a suspension of service pursuant to this section
shall immediately stop any contribution to the POTW. A hearing shall
be held within 15 days of notice of the suspension of the service
to determine if the suspension should be lifted or the user's
permit terminated. In the event of a failure of a user to comply voluntarily
with a suspension order, the DPW may take such steps as he deems necessary,
including immediate severance of the sewer connection, to prevent
damage to the POTW or the endangerment to any individual. The DPW
may reinstate service upon proof of the elimination of the dangerous
condition. The user shall submit to the DPW a detailed written statement
describing the causes of the harmful contribution and the measures
taken to prevent any future occurrence, prior to the date of any show
cause or termination hearing.
[Code 1991, § 18-165]
A.
The DPW may terminate an industrial discharge permit if the permittee
violates any of the following conditions of this article, a permit,
or any administrative, cease and desist, or other order issued under
this article:
(1)
A violation of permit conditions;
(2)
A failure to report accurately the constituents and characteristics
of its discharge;
(3)
A failure to report significant changes in operations or wastewater
volume, constituents, or characteristics prior to discharge; or
(4)
A refusal to provide reasonable access to the SIU's premises
for the purpose of inspection, monitoring, or sampling.
[Code 1991, § 18-166]
Whenever a user has violated or continues to violate any provision
of this article, a permit, any order issued under this article, or
any other pretreatment requirement, the DPW, through the City Attorney,
may petition the appropriate court for the issuance of a temporary
or permanent injunction, as may be appropriate, to restrain or compel
the specific performance of the permit, order, or other requirement
imposed by this article on activities of the user. Such other action
as may be appropriate for legal or equitable relief may also be sought
by the City. The court shall grant an injunction without requiring
a showing of a lack of an adequate remedy at law.
[Code 1991, § 18-167]
In addition to any other remedies provided by this article,
the City shall have the right, either administratively or judicially,
to recover all costs actually incurred by the City in the investigation
and enforcement of any violation of this article. Such costs shall
include, but not be limited to, reasonable attorney fees, court costs,
sampling and inspection costs, and any actual damages incurred by
the City.
[Code 1991, § 18-168]
A.
Any person who willfully or negligently violates any provision of
this article, including any order or permit issued under this article,
or any other pretreatment requirement, shall, upon conviction, be
guilty of a Class 1 misdemeanor.
B.
Any person who knowingly makes any false statement, representation,
or certification in any application, record, report, plan or other
document filed or required to be maintained pursuant to this article
or who falsifies, tampers with, or knowingly renders inaccurate any
monitoring device or method required under this article shall, upon
conviction, be guilty of a Class 1 misdemeanor.
[Code 1991, § 18-169]
Any person aggrieved by the refusal of the DPW to issue a permit,
by the terms contained therein, by any decision of the DPW interpreting
the provisions of this article, by the promulgation or enforcement
of any regulations issued by the DPW pursuant to this article, or
by any notice of violation or order issued pursuant to this division
shall have the right to appeal such action to the City Manager within
30 days thereof. The City Manager shall hold a hearing on such appeal
within 30 days thereafter, unless an extension is agreed to by the
appellant. At such hearing, the appellant shall have the right to
present evidence and witnesses and to be represented by counsel. The
failure of any aggrieved person to exhaust such an administrative
appeal shall preclude any further judicial relief.
[Code 1991, § 18-170]
A.
Upsets. An upset shall constitute an affirmative defense to an enforcement
action brought against a user for violating a categorical pretreatment
standard, provided the following conditions are met:
B.
Violations of § 74-231. A user shall have an affirmative defense to an enforcement action brought against it for noncompliance with the general and specific prohibitions in § 74-231 if it can prove that it did not know or have reason to know that its discharge would cause pass-through or interference and that either:
(1)
A local limit exists for each pollutant discharged and the user was
in compliance with such limit directly prior to and during the pass-through
or interference; or
(2)
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 VPDES permit, and in
the case of interference, in compliance with applicable sludge use
or disposal requirements.
C.
Bypasses. The intentional diversion of waste streams from any portion
of an industrial user's treatment facility shall be an affirmative
defense to an enforcement action against such user if it can demonstrate
that such bypass was unavoidable to prevent loss of life, personal
injury, or severe property damage. In order to be eligible for such
defense, the industrial user must demonstrate that there was no feasible
alternative to the bypass and that it had submitted notice of the
bypass, as required by 40 CFR 403.17.
