Cleanup and Cooperation. The cleanup and cooperation multiplier ranges from 0.75 to 1.5, with a lower multiplier where there is exceptional cleanup and cooperation compared to what can reasonably be expected, and a higher multiplier where there is not. A multiplier of 1.2 is assigned for this violation because Regional Board staff observed the failure to properly implement erosion and sediment control BMPs during several inspections following the unauthorized discharge. Therefore, the Discharger did not take corrective action that would prevent a discharge in the future.
Cleanup and Cooperation. 1.0 This factor reflects the extent to which a discharger voluntarily cooperates in returning to compliance and correcting environmental damage. A multiplier between 0.75 and 1.5 is used, with a higher multiplier when there is a lack of cleanup or cooperation. In this case, the Discharger responded to each spill in a manner that is reasonable and prudent, and as expected for a sewer district of its size. The Discharger appropriately followed its Sanitary Sewer Overflow Response Plan, a component of the 2019 Sewer System Management Plan, as is expected of a discharger enrolled in the SSS WDR. Therefore, a neutral multiplier of 1.0 is assigned.
Cleanup and Cooperation. 1.0 This factor reflects the extent to which a discharger voluntarily cooperates with regulatory authorities in returning to compliance and correcting environmental damage after the violation. The cleanup and cooperation multiplier ranges from
Cleanup and Cooperation. 1.0 History of Violations: 1.1
Cleanup and Cooperation. 1.3
Step 1. Potential for Harm for Discharge Violation. Inapplicable to non-discharge violation.
Step 2. Assessments for Discharge Violation. Inapplicable to non-discharge violation.
Step 3. Per Day Assessments for Non-Discharge Violations: 0.55
Cleanup and Cooperation. A score of 1.1 (above neutral) is appropriate because the Discharger took seven days to return to compliance once it became aware of the violation. The Discharger eventually installed a “barrier corral” and an additional pump in Pond 5D, and increased dredging and pumping rates to reduce solids and comply with the Permit’s effluent limits. Total Base Liability $126,000 (rounded) The initial liability is multiplied by each factor related to the Discharger’s conduct to determine the Total Base Liability as follows: $126,034 = $86,600 x 1.2 (culpability) x 1.1 (history of violations) x 1.1 (cleanup and cooperation) Ability to Pay and Continue in Business No adjustment The Enforcement Policy provides that if there is sufficient financial information to assess the violator’s ability to pay the total base liability or to assess the effect of the total base liability on the violator’s ability to continue in business, then the liability may be adjusted downward if warranted. PBF Energy Inc., the Discharger’s parent corporation, is a large energy business with multiple refineries throughout the United States and did not raise the issue of the ability to pay during negotiations. Therefore, the Prosecution Team believes that the Discharger can pay the proposed liability without undue financial hardship.
Cleanup and Cooperation. Adherence to the terms of this Stipulation, including timely notification to all relevant agencies of an unplanned discharge and timely performance of all applicable cleanup, monitoring and assessment, should reflect a high degree of cooperation.
Cleanup and Cooperation. The Enforcement Policy provides for an adjustment to reflect the extent to which a discharger voluntarily cooperated in returning to compliance and correcting environmental damage. The adjustment is a multiplier between 0.75 and 1.5, with a higher multiplier where there is a lack of cooperation. Violations 1 through 4: The cleanup and cooperation multiplier is 1.0 because CalAtlantic was cooperative with inspections, willing to meet to discuss site conditions and Permit requirements, and responsive in providing weekly progress reports. The amount of time needed to comply with the Permit, over a period of approximately two months, was not due to lack of cooperation or effort as much as the amount of work and level of effort needed to stop sediment-laden discharges and fix or improve erosion and sediment controls.
Cleanup and Cooperation. The Enforcement Policy provides for an adjustment to reflect the extent to which a violator voluntarily cooperated in returning to compliance and correcting environmental damage. The adjustment is a multiplier between 0.75 and 1.5, with a higher multiplier where there is a lack of cooperation. Construction of a new 11.5 acre-foot (approximately 3.8 million gallon) retention basin at the Cement Plant is underway to accomplish the plan. Lehigh completed construction of the new basin in early 2016. Lehigh also implemented best management practices for erosion and sediment control measures at Discharge Point 006 (Pond 30). Such measures include the following: Cover all limestone surfaces with non-limestone materials; Hydroseed and stabilize slopes; Install approximately 10,000 feet of wattles to stabilize slopes; Remove all silt and vegetation from Ponds 30, 31A, and 31B to increase storage capacity; Remove all silt and vegetation from sedimentation basin 7 (SB7) and clean out the ditch that leads to SB7; Reconstruct the berm around the contractor parking area around Pond 30, including wire-backed silt fence; Install rock-lined stormwater channel, which check dams, along approximately 300 feet of eastern material storage area; and Construct of a new berm at the base of the new eastern material storage area slope above SB7. Furthermore, Lehigh constructed a reservoir to collect stormwater runoff from the facility to improve compliance and further reduce pollutant loading from Discharge Point No. 005. The construction of Pond 20 drainage area diversion pipelines is also in progress. In addition, Lehigh is investigating the possibility of installing “floc-logs” upstream of the pond to help reduce the TSS loading even further. Lehigh submitted required monitoring and other written reports consistent with the Permit (Order No. R2-2014-0010) and CDO (Order No. R2-2014-0011), and no credit is provided for complying with these requirements.
Cleanup and Cooperation. This assessment is based on the fact that the Discharger contracted with a certified laboratory immediately after it became aware that the laboratory it had been using was not properly certified. The Discharger has returned to compliance already. Therefore, the Prosecution Team assigned a cleanup and cooperation factor is 0.75. Even though the Discharger has been issued one TSO, two CDOs and three ACL Complaints under enforcement matters, the Discharger has no prior violations for the use of uncertified laboratories, a non-discharge violation. More importantly, NSD made reasonable attempts to document laboratory certification and was acting on the presumption that the obtained certifications were accurate. The loss of certification by the subject lab was related to a change in applicable regulations and virtually every permittee in Imperial County was similarly impacted by the loss of certification. Therefore, the Prosecution Team assigned a history of violation factor is 1.0.
