Utah Admin. Code R309-405-6 - Factors for Determining Amount of Penalties
The Director, in assessing or setting any administrative penalty, or in settling any claim for civil penalty, and the Board, in reviewing an administrative penalty settlement under Subsection 19-4-104(1)(c)(vii), may evaluate the following factors in determining the appropriate amount of the penalty:
(1) Economic benefit. The
costs a person or organization may save by delaying or avoiding compliance with
applicable laws or rules.
(2)
Gravity of the violation. This component of the calculation shall be based on:
(a) the extent of deviation from the Utah
Safe Drinking Water Act or rules;
(b) the potential for harm to drinking water
users, regardless of the extent of harm that in fact occurred; and
(c) the degree of willfulness, recklessness,
or negligence including how much control the respondent had over the violation
and the reasonable foreseeability of the events constituting the violation;
whether the respondent made or could have made reasonable efforts to prevent
the violation; whether the respondent knew, or should have known, of the legal
requirements which were violated; any facts suggesting that the violation was
intentional; and the degree of the respondent's recalcitrance.
(3) The duration of
non-compliance.
(4) Self-disclosure
of non-compliance by the water supplier.
(5) The degree of cooperation and good faith
efforts to comply. Good faith takes into account the openness in dealing with
the violations and promptness in providing notice, correcting violations, and
avoiding potential public harm.
(6)
By contrast with Subsection R309-405-6(5), the degree of recalcitrance,
non-cooperation, or delay associated with providing notice and appropriate
responses to the violations.
(7)
History of compliance or non-compliance. The penalty amount may be adjusted
upward in consideration of previous violations and the degree of recidivism.
Likewise, the penalty amount may be adjusted downward when it is shown that the
respondent has a good compliance record.
(8) Response and investigation costs incurred
by the state and others.
(9) The
possible deterrent effect of a penalty to prevent future violations by the
respondent or other suppliers.
(10)
The respondent's financial structure, revenue sources to pay penalties,
financial capabilities, and ability to pay or demonstrated inability to
pay.
(11) Any other aggravating or
mitigating circumstances that are relevant to the matter.
Notes
State regulations are updated quarterly; we currently have two versions available. Below is a comparison between our most recent version and the prior quarterly release. More comparison features will be added as we have more versions to compare.
No prior version found.