Laserfiche WebLink
02 The facility was at the time being operated in a prudent and <br />workman -like manner _and in compliance with applicable operation <br />and maintenance rocedures• and <br />O The User has submitted the following information to the <br />Director within twenty-four 24 hours of becomin aware of the <br />upset--Cif this information is provided orally, a written submission <br />must be provided within five S days); <br />i A descri tion of the indirect discharge and cause of <br />noncompliance; <br />ii The veriod of noncompliance, includin exact dates <br />and times or if .not corrected the anticipated time the <br />noncompliance is-expected to continue; and <br />(iii Steps being taken and/or planned to reduce, eliminate, <br />and prevent recurrence of the noncom fiance. <br />In any enforcement vrocceding, the User seeking--to establish the <br />occurrence of an upset shall have the burden of proof. <br />Q Users shall have the opportunity„ for a judicial determination on any claim <br />of upset only in an enforcement action brought for noncompliance with <br />categorical Pretreatment Standards. <br />Users shall control production of all discharges to the extent necessary to <br />maintain compliance with categorical Pretreatment Standards u on reduction <br />loss or failure of its treatment facility until the facility is restored or an alternative <br />method of treatment is provided. This requirement applies in the situation where_ <br />among other things, the primary source- of power of the treatment facility is <br />reduced, lost or fails. <br />SECTION VII. Chapter 17, Article 2, Division 3, Section 17 -11 of the South Bend <br />Municipal Code shall be amended to read in its entirety as follows: <br />Sec. 17 -11 • Plans sp pretreatment <br />ifiention of f ,, UW , Administr at ■ <br />Pl Hli� • i�ve <br />Enforcement Remedies Costs Fees Director Reconsideration User Anneals, Judicial <br />Review. <br />68 <br />