Laserfiche WebLink
ORDER NO. -2- <br /> CITY OF STOCKTON <br /> SAN JOAQUIN COUNTY <br /> 10. The Executive Officer, on 12 July 1985, iss e c taint to the City <br /> proposing a $50,000.00 administrative civil 1 ab the violations <br /> during June. <br /> 11 . On 27 September 1985 in Stockton Calif la after due notice a City <br /> and other affected parties, the Board ucted a public hearing hich <br /> the City appeared and evidence was rec v d concerning the discharge. <br /> 12. The Board, after hearing all testimo considered the following factors in <br /> reaching a conclusion on whether r not civil lability was in order, and <br /> if so, the amount of the liabilit . <br /> The nature, circumstance, exten d g avity of the violation or <br /> violations, whether the discharge is s tible to cleanup or abatement, <br /> and, with respect to the violator, the ab to continue in business, any <br /> voluntary cleanup efforts undertaken, any p istory of violations, the <br /> degree of culpability, economic savings, i a resulting from the <br /> violation, and such o matters as justice require (Water Code <br /> Section 13327) . <br /> 13. The Board determined, i respect t e ors in Finding No. 12, the <br /> following: <br /> The nature of the violatio s c that the City should have prevented <br /> the discharge. The extent of i ation was such that the discharge was <br /> allowed to for 24-hour b ore it was corrected. The gravity was <br /> suchthat s were kill The discharge is not susceptible to <br /> cleanup abatem n The civ11 1 ability is not expected to affect the <br /> ability o the it to continue business. This discharge is not <br /> suscep i e to cl forts. With respect to prior history of viola- <br /> tions he City a o ively, 74 violations of daily coliform, <br /> chlor nd p fluent 1 m tions since June 1983. The City was <br /> culpable r iolations. The City has postponed expenditures for plant <br /> improvements hi h may have prevented the fish kill . <br /> 14. $ 0 admin r ive civil liability is appropriate based on the <br /> termin i s in Fi i 13. <br /> Issuance of Order is exempt from the provisions of the California <br /> Environmental Q a ity Act (Public Resources Code Section 21000, et seq. ) in <br /> ,accordance wit S ction 15321(a)(2), Chapter 3, Title 14 of the California <br /> inistrative <br />