New Search
to utilize staff and equipment to contain, clean-up, and /or mitigate any water quality <br /> impacts of a violation the EC and this rule provide for the recovery of incurred costs <br /> through the nuisance abatement process. <br /> Comment 5: Implementation of the rule and the penalty matrix appears complex, <br /> confusing, and subject to arbitrary decisions. <br /> Finding:Due to the transient and variable nature of stormwater discharges, many <br /> factors and conditions must be weighed to determine the preventative measures, <br /> containment actions, and post discharge mitigation efforts taken by a party responsible for <br /> an illegal stormwater discharge. The penalty matrix is specifically designed to take the <br /> variety of conditions and factors into account in order to minimize discretionary or <br /> arbitrary decisions by enforcement staff. Terms such as "illegal /improper" and <br /> "significant" are specifically defined to reduce arbitrary interpretations. An appeal <br /> process is provided that allows for impartial assessment of decisions and determinations <br /> rendered by the City. The City has also developed a strong educational component that <br /> includes responding to requests for technical assistance related to stormwater discharges <br /> as well as site visits to provide the property or business owner with additional information <br /> and alternatives. The primary focus of the stormwater program's enforcement efforts is <br /> the achievement of voluntary compliance with the EC and this rule. When educational and <br /> technical assistance efforts fail to achieve this voluntary compliance, this rule provides the <br /> necessary enforcement tool. <br /> Comment 6: Issues of inadequate notice were raised. <br /> Finding: The notification process utilized by the City met EC requirements. <br /> Notice of Intended Rulemaking was published in the Register Guard for five consecutive <br /> days beginning May 12, 1996, followed by a 15-day comment period. In addition to the <br /> required notice, a letter was sent to current NPDES permit holders. Although the <br /> information number listed in the cover letter contained a wrong prefix, a general telephone <br /> number listed on the letterhead was correct and afforded recipients an alternative contact <br /> for more information. <br /> Based upon the above fmdings, which are hereby adopted, and pursuant to the authority <br /> of Section 2.019 and Chapter 6 of the Eugene Code, 1971, I do not intend to effect any changes <br /> to the proposed rule, and hereby adopt the following Stormwater System Administrative Rule: <br /> • <br /> Stormwater System Administrative Rule - 3 <br />