EPA v. PRASA CAMUY/HATILLO WWTP

Case summary

******** PRASA HAS VIOLATED GENERAL CONDITION C1 OF THE CAMUY - HATILLO WWTP PERMIT WHICH REQUIRES THE PERMITTEE (PRASA) TO COMPLY WITH ALL CONDITIONS OF THE NPDES PERMIT. ADDITIONALLY, PRASA VIOLATED GENERAL CONDITION C.5 OF THE CAMUY - HATILLO WWTP NPDES PERMIT BY FAILING TO PROPERLY OPERATE AND MAINTAIN ALL TREATMENT FACILITIES (AND RELATED APPURTENANCES) WHICH ARE USED BY THE PERMITTEE TO ACHIEVE COMPLIANCE WITH CONDITIONS OF THE PERMIT. PRASA VIOLATED GENERAL CONDITION C.4 OF PART II OF THE CAMUY-HATILLO NPDES PERMIT WHICH PROVIDES THAT THE PERMITTEE SHALL TAKE ALL REASONABLE STEPS TO MINIMIZE OR PREVENT ANY DISCHARGE IN VIOLATION OF ITS PERMIT WHICH HAS A REASONABLE LIKELIHOOD OF ADVERSELY AFFECTING HUMAN HEALTY AND/OR THE ENVIRONMENT. IN ADDITION, EPA FINDS THAT THE CAMUY-HATILLO WWTP HAS NOT MET EFFLUENT LIMITS SET OUT IN THE PERMIT. ********** EPA conducted compliance evaluation inspections at the Camuy-Hatillo Wastewater Treatment Plant ( the facility ) on June 27, 2000 and November 1, 2000, observed deficiencies and that the facility had not been adequately operated and maintained as required by its NPDES permit, thereby concluding that the Facility was not incompliance with its NPDES permit. As a result, EPA issued a non-penalty administrative orders:(1) administrative order, CWA-02-2000-3109 dated September 1, 2000, against PRASA for violations to effluent limitations established in the Facility NPDES permit, failure to provide proper Operation and Maintenance at the Facility and for the deficiencies observed. Based upon information received from PRASA as well as information in EPA's possession, EPA found that the Facility had not met the effluent limits set out in the permit and on September 28, 2001, therefore, EPA Region 2 issued against PRASA/CAPR the instant Administrative Penalty Complaint, Docket No. CWA-02-2001-3410 ( Complaint ). Specifically, EPA reviewed the Discharge Monitoring Reports ( DMRs ) submitted by PRASA from July 200 thru May 2001 which indicate that PRASA consistently had not met its final effluent limitations as required by its NPDES permit. The penalty Complaint proposed a penalty of $129,375.00. During settlement negotiations between the parties, Respondents recognized EPA's allegations and requested a quick settlement resolution.

Defendants (2)

• PRASA CAMUY/HATILLO WWTPNamed in complaintNamed in settlement
• Compania de AguasNamed in complaintNamed in settlement

Facilities (1)

• PRASA PUERTO NUEVO

  JOHN F KENNEDY AVENUE, SAN JUAN, PR, 00926

  Registry ID: 110006622823

Statutes cited

• CWA 301 — NPDES Discharge without a Permit

Enforcement conclusions (1)

• PRASA Camuy-Hatillo WWTPentered 2002-06-20

  Primary law: CWA

  Federal penalty: $99,000

Timeline (4 milestones)

• 2001-09-28Complaint Filed/Proposed Order
• 2001-10-05Enforcement Action Data Entered
• 2002-06-20Final Order Issued
• 2002-06-20Enforcement Action Closed