HomeMy WebLinkAbout1993-11-22 94-28 ORDERCOUNCIL ACTION aY2a-
em No.
Oats November 22, 1993
Item/Subject: Adopting Enforcement Response Plan Pursuant to
Chapter V, Article 9, Section 16.1 of Laws and Ordinances --
Public Sewers and Drains
Responsible Department: Legal
This Order is designed to complement the passage of the new Sewer
Use Ordinance (C.O. 93-157 as amended by substitution). in order
to have a fully staffed and functioning Industrial Pretreatment
Program, the EPA requires that Publicly Owned Treatment Works
(POW) prepare and utilize an Enforcement Response Plan. This Plan
Is designed to alert industrial users as to the City's likely
response to violations of its Sewer Use Ordinance. The Plan was
prepared by Al Jellison, Pretreatment Coordinator, pursuant to an
EPA guideline. It has been reviewed and found to be consistent
(cont'd on next page)
Department Read
-
s:Vwq..
I i City
Manager
Associated Information: Order, Enforcement Response Plan
Finance Director
Aity
Introduced For NEW BUSINESS f�
A Passage
First Reading
Referral Page 1 Of 13
96-28
ORDER, Adopting Enforcement Response Plan (cont'd)
with the new Sewer Use Ordinance by Bruce N. Shibles, Rest. City
Solicitor. It has been approved by the EPA and has been followed
within the last couple of months in response to violations by local
Industrial users. While the Plan focuses on industrial users, it
could conceivably be used to respond to any violation of the new
Sewer Use Ordinance by any user of the POM. Formal approval of
this Plan is required by the EPA and Section 16.1 of the new Sewer
Use Ordinance.
Aaeimed b CusncUor B1Anehette November 22, 1993
CITY OF BANGOR
or
Q�Tff.) �Yi1ET Adopting Enforcement Response Plan Pursuant
,.............. _....
to Chapter V, Article 9, Section 16.1 of the Laws and Ordinances
Of she City of Bangor
............. __.......... _.. _._ __.. .......
BYW City Cwtmit of W MV of Banmv
THAT pursuant to Chapter V, Article 9, Section 16.1 of
the Laws and Ordinances of the City of Bangor, the enforcement
Response Plan (BRP) attached hereto as Rxhibit A is hereby adopted
as the City's general procedure for the enforcement of Chapter V,
Article 9 of the Laws and Ordinances of the City of Bangor
regarding the use of public Beware and drains.
g 94-28
In City Council November 22,1993 0 R D E R
Passed
Title,
Adopting Enforcement Response Plan
CIt 'Cle[k Pursuant to Chapters Article 9,
Sec. 16.1 of the... Lava and Ordinance..........
of T [Y of.....7o...
Councilman
CITY OF BANGOR
ENFORCEMENT RESPONSE PLAN
1. PURPOSE
The purpose of this plan is to document a well defined,
legally defensible sequence of steps to be followed when
dealing with Industrial users
who a out of compliance with
the City of Rangor's Industrial Pretreatment Program
Ordinances. These formal enforcement actions, will help to
resolve any confusion between the City and its industrial
users s to the consequences of repeated or continuing n -
aompllance and are intended to ensure equitable treatment of
ll industrial users.
EPA regulations require the City to take specific enforcement
action against users
found to be
significant n c
- ompliance with ,the pretreatment ordinance•
This EnforcemeatResponse Plan defines the conditions under
which the City must cite a user for significant non-compliance
and lists appropriate enforcement measures to remedy such
situations.
EPA guidelines also require that the selected enforcement
,sponse be appropriate to the extent of the pretreatment
program violation. While a telephone call to the industry
might be appropriate for a late report submission, a more
severe response is
needed for aserious violation which,
for example, might Include a upsenf thetreatment plan
used by a industrial discharge. This EPA guideline based
Enforcement Response Plan will Consider the following criteria
when assessing the appropriateness of a particular response:
A. Magnitude of the violation;
E. Duration of the violation;
C. Effect of the violation on the receiving water;
D. Effect of the violation on the treatment plant;
E. Compliance history of the industrial user;
F. Good faith effects on the part of the industrial user;
G. Degree to user's responsibility for the violation.
The City will follow this Enforcement Response Plan to the
greatest extent possible when contemplating compliance with
and enforcement of Chapter V, Article 9 of the Laws and
Ordinances of the City of Bangor, however, nothing herein
will preclude or otherwise limit the City from taking any
action, including emergency actions or other enforcement
actions, prior to undertaking any initial enforcement
procedure noted herein, including issuance of a Notice of
Violation (NOV).
'snfoccament
Response
Plan
- 94-28
Page 2
-dA :eiuad he City i5eri_1i1, in::... mal use.. that are ix
significant non-compliance with the requirements of the
federal pretreatment program regulations. Users found to be
in significant n - ompliance a subject to EPA mandated
enforcement action by the City, and the annual publishing of
their violations in the area0s largest newspaper. Federal
regulations define significantnon-compliance (SNC) as
violations which meet at least one of the following criteria:
A. Violations of Industrial wastewater discharge permit
limits;
(1) Chronic violations - Sixty-six percent or more of
the license parameter menu exceed the
maximum limit or the average limit in asix month
period (any magnitude of excess).
(2) Technical Review Criteria (RRC) violations - Thirty
three percentor of the license parameter
measurements mix month periodceed the
maximum limit or thea rage limit by more than 40%
for BOD, TSS, fats, oils or grease; or by 20% for
all Other pollutants.
(3) Any other violations of effluent standards (average
or maximum) that the Superintendent believes has
caused alone ozin combination with other
discharges, interference with the treatment plan
processes, pass-through; or endangered the health
of sewage treatment personnel or the public.
(4) Any discharge of a pollutant that has caused
imminent endangerment to human health/welfare and
tothe environment and has resulted in the
treatment plant's exercise of Its emergency
authority to halt or prevent such a discharge.
B. Violations of any compliance schedule milestones
contained in an administrative order for starting
construction, completing construction, and attaining
final compliance by 90 days or more after the schedule
date.
C. Failure to provide reports for compliance schedules,
self-monitoring data, or categorical standards (baseline
monitoring reports, 90 -day compliance reports, and
Periodic reports) within 30 days from the due date.
D. Failure to accurately or expeditiously report non-
compliance.
E. Any other violation or group of violations that the
Superintendent considers to be significant.
'enforcement Response Plan
Pass
°4-28
Page
3
b)
Is
3.
SELECTION OF ENFORCEMENT RESPONSES
causing
Table 1 represents an Enforcement Response
Guide based
o
r measures
ended EPA response for varying
degrees
of
permit
permit violations. The Guide will be used
by the City
to
determine appropriate m n the event of
aviolation
of
the City's pretreatment requirements.
Selection
enforcement response will be
appropriate a
based on
hof
e
the
psEo
following steps:
A. The City will locate the type Of non-compliance in the
first column of the Response Guide.
B. Using column two, the City will identify theost
accurate description of the nature of the violation
C. The City will assess the appropriateness of the
recommended n
responses i column three. First offenders,
orthose demonstrating good faith progress may merit a
more lenient response. Similarly, repeat or frequent
offenders or these demonstrating negligence may require
more stringent response. Furthermore, the City will
judge the violation by seven additional criteria:
(1) Magnitude - Generally, as isolated instance of non-
compliance can be met with a informal response or
a Letter of Violation (LOV) n However, since even
an isolated violation could threaten publichealth
andthe environment, damage public and private
property, or threaten the integrity of Bangor's
Industrial Pretreatment Program (i.e., falsifying a
self-monitoring report, all instances of
significant non-compliance will be responded to
with an administrative order (AO) which requires a
return to compliance by a specific deadline.
(2) Duration - Violations, regardless of severity,
which continue over prolonged periods of time will
subject the violator to escalated enforcement
actions. Minor violations which are chronic In
nature are one form of significant non-compliance
o- ompliance
and will be dealt with through the use of
Administrative Orders (AOs).
(3) Effects of the Receiving Water - Any violation
which causes
environmental harm will be met at a
minimum with a administrative order and a fine.
Environmental farm will be presumed whenever an
industrial discharge:
a)
Pass
through
the City treatment
plant;
b)
Is
directly
responsible for
causing
violation of Bangor's NPDES permit, including
'Enforcement Response Plan
Page 4
its water quality standards; or
c) Has a toxic effect on the receiving waters,
such as a fish kill.
In addition, the response will be designed to
recover any NPDES fines paid by the City which are
the result of the industry's discharge.
(4) Effecton the POPOW- Any violation having a
negativeimpactothe treatment plant or
collection system (sucM1s treatment
costs, harm to treatmentpainincreasedpersonnel or
equipment, pipe corrosion, etc.), which hinders the
operation of the plant, or which contaminates the
plant's sludge thereby reducing sludge disposal
options will be met with a fine or civil penalty as
well as the recovery of the additional costs and
expenses involved.
(5) Compliance History of the User - A pattern of
curring violations (even of different program
requirements) may indicate either that the user's
treatment system is inadequate or that the user has
taken a lackadaisical approach to operating and
maintaining its treatment system. These
indications should alert the City to the likelihood
of future significant non-compliance. Accordingly,
stronger enforcement options should be applied
against users exhibiting consistent compliance
problems that against those with only an occasional
problem.
(6) Good Faith of the User - Generally, a
demonstrated willingness to comply should
Predispose the City to select one of the less
stringent enforcement actions specified provided
the violation has not caused a serious treatment
plant upset or resulted in environmental damage.
However, good faith does not eliminate the
ncessity of a enforcement action and compliance
win
th previousenforcement orders should not
necessarily be considered as good faith.
(7) Responsibility of the User - Although industrial
users should always be held accountable for their
violations, some consideration should be given to
whether the violation was the result of an
unforeseeableaccident, spreventable r was
intentional on the part of the user. Thiswill
affect the enforcement responsive selection by the
City from the range of responses provided.
',Enforcement
Response
Plan
- 94-28
Page 5
D. Column Four designated personnel who is responsible for
that action.
E. The City will document,rwriting to the the
rationale for selecting the particular enforcement
response applied.
F. The City will apply the enforcement response to the
violator. The City will specify the corrective action o
other response of the industrial over including response
time limits.
C. The City will document any industrial user's responses
and the resolution of non-compliance.
H. The City will follow-up with an escalated enforcement
action if an Industrial user
r esponse r not received
within 30 days, or sooner ifappropriate for severe
violations contlnoe.
1. The City normally will send out a NOV to the violator a
a first step In the enforcement proceedings. However,
the City may elect to bypass this step in favor of an AO
when it appears that the violation requires immediate
remedial action.
-Enforcement Respon a Plan 94-28
gage 6
KEY TO ACRONYMS AND ABBREVIATIONS
An Administrative Order.
Civil Civil litigation against the industrial user seeking
Litigation equitable relief, monetary penalties, and actual
damages.
Criminal Pursing punitive measures
against a individual
Prosecution and/or organizationthrough a court of law.
Fine Monetary penalty assessed by the City.
IU Industrial user.
Meeting Informal compliance meeting with the IU to resolve
recurring noncompliance.'
MOV Notice of Violation.
PC Pretreatment Coordinator.
S Superintendent or his/her authorized representative.
SV Significant Violation.
Show Cause - Formal meeting requiring the Iu to appear and
demonstrate why the City should not take a proposed
enforcement action against it. The meeting may
also serve as a forum to discuss corrective actions
and compliance schedules.
NONCOMPLIANCE Nature of Violation
TABLE 1 ENFORCEMENT RESPONSE GUIDE
A ILLEGAL DISCHARGE
1) Unpermitted discharge Discharger seaward of permit
(no permit) requirement; No harm to POW
or to the Envirofinent.
Results in violation of PON
NPOES permit, or dangerous
situation-Sigoificaut Non-
compliance.
on-
comply e.
2) Neckar, itted dichatge Failure to apply for permit
( expired permit) renewal. No damage tcPOTW or
Environment.
Results in violation of POW
NPOES permit, or dangerous
situation- Significant Non-
compliance.
E OISCEARGE PERMIT VIOLATIONS
1) Exceedance of discharge Isolated, Noun agora .....
limits. (local or
categorical)
Frequent, Done igni£icant
( repeated offense)
Significant Noncompliance
Caused known Environmental
r POW damage or worker
health hazard.
Initial Response; Follow-up
-------------------------
NOV and application or Administrative Order issued
within 14 days of identifying the violation: requires
a permit application wtbin 30 days and the results of
analysis• within 60 days: proposed fine
ofy$300-�a
$500.
Administrative Order issued as s passible, but
in any case within 5 days to immediately halt dlebhagge
Fine or civil litigation seeking penalties Of $1000 to
$2500 per day: Terminate service.
Telephone call and letter of Violation should be made
within 5 days of detection.
Administrative Orden issued a s possible, but
in any cage within 5 days to immedi as
halt discharge
Fine or civil litigation seeking penalties of $1000 to
$2500 per day: Terminate service. _
PC
PC
PC
5
PC
PC
S
Telephone cell and letter of Violation within 5 days PC
of receipt of laboratory results requiring written report
with corrective and preventitive:-action taken to prevent
recurrence. ( 1st/2nd offense)
He efing with violator orshow cause hearing requested within
14 days of detection of violation; Meeting will be held PC
within 30 days of detection of the vlolatlea.:Proposed Fine
of $300-$500..
Admiaistrative Order issued within 5 days with compliance PC
schedule: Fine of $1000 per day of violation or civil S
litigation Seeking Venality of $1000 to $2500 per day.
Administrative Order issued within 5 days to ihfoediately PC
halt discharge; Fine, civil litigation. Or criminal $
prosection.
2)
Slug load discharge
Isolated without known
continous;
damage.
Significant
Noncompliance
Isolated with known damage,
Complete failure to
Significant
interference. pass-through.
ample, monitogor
Significant Noncompliance
Recurring Significant Non-
compliance.
G.
SAMPLING, MONITORING, AND REPORTING VIOLATIONS
4)
I)
Minor aampling, monitor
-Isolated or infrequent.
ing or reporting
( 1st/2nd offense)
deficiencies.
compliance
Frequent or ¢mutinous
2)
Major sampling, monitor
Isolated or infrequent.
-ins or deficiencies.
( Ist/2M offense)
NOV; Administrative Odder iasued within 14 days to PC
develop a spill control plan within 30 days.
Fine or civil litigation seeking penalty of $500-$700 PC
and recovery of costs; Terminate service. 5
Fine or civil litigation seeking penalty Of $1000- PC
$2500 per day and recovery of costs; Terminate service a
Telephone call and NOV Issued within 14 days of detection
NOV issued within 5 days; Proposed Fine $100-$300. PC
NOV issued within 5 days of detection; Meeting with
violator requested within 14 days. Proposed $300-$500 PC
fines.
Meeting or show cause hearing requested within 14 days; PC
Fine Or civil litigation seeking penaltleeef $500. S
Administrative Order with compliance schedule issued within
5 days of detection of violation; Civil litigation and/or PC
criminal prosecution seeking penalties of $1000-$2500 per 5
day; Terminate service.
Fine; Civil litigation and/or criminal prosecution seeking 5
penalties of $1000-$2500 per day until schedule is filed.
NOV; Administrative Order issued within 14 days of detection Pe
Frequent or continued violation Show cause hearing requested within 14 days; AO issued PC
Significant Noncompliance. within 5 days of detection; Civil litigation seeking S
penalties Of $1000 per day per violation; Criminal
prosecution.
Frequent or
continous;
Significant
Noncompliance
3)
Complete failure to
Significant
Noncompliance.
ample, monitogor
repo[[ is n than
e
30 days late.
4)
Failure to submit
Violation of
Administrative
schedule of
Order
compliance
5)
Failure to otify of
Isolated or
infrequent, No
e£floent limit violation
known effects.
or slug discharge
NOV; Administrative Odder iasued within 14 days to PC
develop a spill control plan within 30 days.
Fine or civil litigation seeking penalty of $500-$700 PC
and recovery of costs; Terminate service. 5
Fine or civil litigation seeking penalty Of $1000- PC
$2500 per day and recovery of costs; Terminate service a
Telephone call and NOV Issued within 14 days of detection
NOV issued within 5 days; Proposed Fine $100-$300. PC
NOV issued within 5 days of detection; Meeting with
violator requested within 14 days. Proposed $300-$500 PC
fines.
Meeting or show cause hearing requested within 14 days; PC
Fine Or civil litigation seeking penaltleeef $500. S
Administrative Order with compliance schedule issued within
5 days of detection of violation; Civil litigation and/or PC
criminal prosecution seeking penalties of $1000-$2500 per 5
day; Terminate service.
Fine; Civil litigation and/or criminal prosecution seeking 5
penalties of $1000-$2500 per day until schedule is filed.
NOV; Administrative Order issued within 14 days of detection Pe
Frequent or continued violation Show cause hearing requested within 14 days; AO issued PC
Significant Noncompliance. within 5 days of detection; Civil litigation seeking S
penalties Of $1000 per day per violation; Criminal
prosecution.
6)
Evil... to
Install
Continued Significant
Non -
monitoring
equipment
.¢ pliant,.
D. COMPLIANCE SCNEONLE VIOLATIONS
1) Missed milestone date Will n effect other milestone
date, n: final data.
Will effect .that milestones or
final date.
Will affect other milestones or
final date. Violation our for
good cause.
2) Failure to Did not albeit report hot did
ompliaace schedule complete milestone:
reporting requirements
AN issued within 5 days of detection; Temporarily PC
suspend service if agreed upon compliance date is exceeded S
by 30 days.
Telephone call and NOV issued within 5 days of milestone PC
date passage.
Meeting requested ulthi, 14 days or prior to milestone PC
date; AO issued within 5 days of missed milesta a date. S
Show cause heating requested within 14 days or prior to PC
next milestone date; Pine or
seek civil penalties of $500- S
$2500 per day of violation.
Telephone call and NOV issued within 14 days of detection PC
violation.
Ofd not submit report or emplete
NOV; AN issued within 5 days of missed milestone date{
PC
milestone.
Proposed fines of $300-$500.
5
3) Missed final date
Good cause
Telephone call all NOV Segued within 5'days of rinsed date.
PC
30 days or more outstanding;
u
Show cause hearing requested within 14 days of detection;
PC
Failure o refusal[ mply
AO with fills; Tud ical action
S
without gold cause.
4) Reporting false
Any instance Significant Non-
Referral to prosecutor for criminal investigation; civil
S
information
Compliance
litigation and/or criminal prosecution seeking maximum
penalties allowed by State law ( at least $1000 per day
per Violation ); Termination of service.
E. Spill Incidence
1) Spill incident
Reported and investigated.
NOV issued at time of inspection; Meeting requested
PC
within 14 days of detection; AO
S
Failure to report spill
NOV; Meeting within 14 days of detection: AO with
PC
proposed fines of $3004500.
2) Repeated spills
Failure to develop or upgrade
NOV; AO with fines: eh IN cause hear L:N to be held within
PC
:
spill prevention pmgren
30 days of notification
1
0
Failure to act der of
Judicial aneion : Terminate ser,ice.
compliance meeting and results in
known environmental damage or POIN
damage.
P. VIOLATIONS DEMISE DURING FIELD INSPECTIONS/ INVESTIGATIONS
1) Mimr vloleri" of
any instanced
Telephone call and NOV issued within 14 days
PC
analytical Processes
of receipt ofmonitoring r sults.
2) Najor violation of
No evidence of negligence or
NOV; Heating to be held within 30 days of notification
PC
analytical procedures
intent
AD issued within 14 days of receipt of monitoring results.
Evidence of negligence or intent
AO or civil action and penality: Passible criminal
PC
Significant Non-compliance
prosecution.
S
3) Minor violation of
No evidence of neligmce or
NOV; AO for immediate collective action required
PC
permit condition
intent
Evidence of ,gliaenca or intent
AO or civil litigation and placidly: Feasible criminal
PC
prosecution{ Terminale services.
5
4) Major violation of
Evidence of negligence or intent
AO or civil litigation and penallty: Possible criminal
PC
permit condition
Significant Non-compliance
prose cu Cion( Terminate aefvicea.
5
G. OTHER PERMIT VIOLATIONS
I) Wastestreams are diluted Initial violation
AO with fines
PC
in lieu of treatment
0