SITE INFORMATION AND CORRESPONDENCE

Home Browse Search

ADMINISTRATIVE CIVIL LIABILITY COMPLAINT NO.R5-2004-0534 _5_ MUSCO FAMILY OLIVE COMPANY AND THE STUDLEY COMPANY SAN JOAQUIN COUNTY 13. In total, the Discharger was in violation of TSO Tasks during 795 days from 1 February 2002 through 31 May 2004. Attachment A contains a day-by-day summary of violations that occurred during this time period that are considered a part of this Complaint. CIVIL LIABILITY 14. The TSO, as revised, is a schedule issued pursuant to CWC Section 13308 (c),which states: Any person who fails to achieve compliance in accordance with the schedule established in an order issued pursuant to subdivision(a) shall be liable civilly in an amount not to exceed the amount prescribed by the order. The regional board may impose the penalty administratively in accordance with Article 2.5 (commencing with Section 13323). If the regional board imposes the penalty in an amount less than the amount prescribed in the order issued pursuant to subdivision (a), the regional board shall make express findings setting forth the reasons for its action based on the specific factors required to be considered pursuant to Section 13327. 15. Section 13323 (a) of the CWC states: Any executive officer of a regional board may issue a complaint to any person on whom administrative civil liability may be imposed pursuant to this article. The complaint shall allege the act or failure to act that constitutes a violation of law,the provision of law authorizing civil liability to be imposed pursuant to this article, and the proposed civil liability. 16. The Executive Officer finds that the Discharger has failed to achieve compliance with the schedules set forth in TSO No. 115-2002-0014 and TSO No. R5-2002-0014-ROI. 17. The maximum administrative civil liability that can be imposed for every failure of the Discharger to comply with each requirement is the penalty amount specified in TSO No. R5-2002-0014 and TSO No. R5-2002-0014-ROI, and for the violations cited in Finding 12 totals 52,317,500. 18. Section 13327 of the CWC states: In determining the amount of civil liability, the regional board ... shall take into consideration the nature, circumstance, extent, and gravity of the violation or violations, whether the discharge is susceptible to cleanup or abatement, the degree of toxicity of the discharge, and, with respect to the violator, the ability to pay, the effect on ability to continue in business, any voluntary cleanup efforts undertaken, any prior history of violations, the degree of culpability, economic benefit or savings, if any, resulting from the violation, and other matters as justice may require. 19. The Executive Officer considered the factors of Section 13327 of the CWC and finds that a reduction in financial penalties resulting from the Discharger's violations of Tasks 1, 5, and 8 are appropriate for the following reasons: a. The violations of Task 1 concern chronic omissions of data. The missing data generally concern lengthy periods of inoperable monitoring equipment (e.g., for continuously monitoring discharge flow and electrical conductivity) and entire weekends when Musco did not provide staff data to ensure compliance with monitoring requirements. Musco was issued an NOV on 8 May 2002 for submitting incomplete SMRs for January through March 2002. The NOV described SMR deficiencies in detail and directed the Discharger to submit by 15 May 2002 a report describing changes to the monitoring and reporting procedures to