EPA v. BUMBLE BEE
Final Order With Penalty
Penalty assessed
$4,000
Case summary
****** FACILITY REPORTED ON ITS DMR THAT THERE WAS NO DISCHARGE IN MAY 2000, HOWEVER DURING AN INSPECTION DURING MAY 2000 THERE WAS A DISCHARGE, THAT THE FACILITY FAILED TO MONITOR ITS DISCHARGE AS REQUIRED BY THE PERMIT AND INACCURATELY REPORTED THE DISCHARGE. CID CHOSE NOT TO PROCESS CRIMINALLY ON THIS MATTER THEREFORE IT WILL BE HANDLED ADMINISTRATIVELY. ****** RESPONDENT FAILED TO SAMPLE AND REPORT EFFLUENT INFORMATION ON ITS MAY 2000 DMR. IT REPORTED NO DISCHARGE FOR OUTFALL 004 BUT AN EPA INSPECTOR OBSERVED A DISCHARGE FROM OUTFALL 004 DURING HIS INSPECTION OF THE FACILITY DURING THE MONTH AT ISSUE.
Defendants (1)
- BUMBLE BEENamed in complaintNamed in settlement
Facilities (1)
BUMBLE BEE PR INC
STATE NUMBER 1 RD 348 KM 5.9, MAYAGUEZ, PR, 00680
Registry ID: 110010600199
Statutes cited
- CWA 301 — NPDES Discharge without a Permit
Enforcement conclusions (1)
BUMBLE BEEentered 2002-01-18
Primary law: CWA
Federal penalty: $4,000
Timeline (4 milestones)
- 2001-09-28Complaint Filed/Proposed Order
- 2001-10-03Enforcement Action Data Entered
- 2002-01-18Final Order Issued
- 2002-01-18Enforcement Action Closed
Case metadata
- EPA activity ID
- 8412
- Case number
- 02-2001-3313
- Lead agency
- EPA
- HQ division
- WAT
- Branch
- WGL
- EPA region
- 02
- Multimedia
- No
- Voluntary self-disclosure
- No
- Primary statute
- NPDES Discharge without a Permit
Sourced verbatim from EPA ECHO Enforcement Case Report for case 02-2001-3313 . Bulk data: ICIS-FEC download summary.
This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.