EPA v. COCA-COLA CO.

Case summary

NATURE OF THE CASE: THE COCA COLA COMPANY (COKE) OWNS AND OPERATES A PROCESSING PLANT IN AUBURNDALE, FLORIDA, INVOLVED IN THE PREPARATION OF CITRUS JUICE, ASSOCIATED BY-PRODUCTS, AND FORMULATED BEVERAGES. ON AUGUST 6, 1979, A NPDES PERMIT #FL0000418 WAS ISSUED. THIS PERMIT, AS WELL AS THE PREVIOUS PERMIT, CONTAINS EFFLU- ENT LIMITATIONS FOR DISCHARGES FROM TWO OUTFALLS AT THE AU- BURNDALE PLANT TO THE LAKE LENA RUN. IN ADDITION, THIS PER- MIT CONTAINS STRINGENT EFFLUENT LIMITATIONS, WHICH BECAME EFFECTIVE 04/01/83, WHICH ARE BASED ON STATE ESTABLISHED WA- TER QUALITY STANDARDS FOR THE LAKE LENA RUN. TO ENSURE THAT COKE MET THESE LIMITS, THE PERMIT CONTAINS A SCHEDULE FOR COMPLIANCE WITH MILESTONE DATES TO ASSIST COKE IN CONSTRUCT- ING THE NECESSARY TREATMENT TECHNOLOGY. COKE HAS BEEN OUT OF COMPLIANCE ON AT LEAST SOME EFFLUENT PARAMETERS EVERY QUARTER SINCE 1978. IN AN ATTEMPT TO MEET ITS PERMIT REQUIREMENTS, COKE, IN 1980, CONSTRUCTED A LARGE SPRAY IRRIGATION SYSTEM TO AID IN TREATMENT. SINCE THAT TIME, COKE HAS ADDED TO ITS SPRAY IRRIGATION SYSTEM AND HAS EXPERIENCED NUMEROUS PROBLEMS WITH THIS SYSTEM INCLUDING RE- SULTING UNPERMITTED DISCHARGES AND FURTHER EFFLUENT VIOLA- TIONS. IN RESPONSE, EPA ISSUED AN ADMINISTRATIVE ORDER TO COKE, REQUIRING A PERMIT APPLICATION FOR THE UNPERMITTED DISCHARGE AS WELL AS ESTABLISHING MONITORING, SAMPLING, AND REPORTING REQUIREMENTS CONSISTENT WITH THEIR CURRENT PERMIT. ALTHOUGH AN APPLICATION WAS RECEIVED, COKE FAILED TO MONITOR AND SAMPLE THIS OUTFALL AND REPORT THE RESULTS IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE ORDER, FOR OVER A YEAR. ON 12/22/83, A SHOW CAUSE MEETING WAS HELD WITH COMPANY REPRESENATIVES. AS A RESULT OF THAT MEETING, COKE PROPOSED MINOR IMPROVEMENTS TO THE WASTEWATER TREATMENT SYSTEM. EXTENSIVE EFFORTS HAVE BEEN MADE, SINCE 1978, TO BRING COKE INTO COMPLIANCE,INCLUDING SEVERAL NOTICES OF VIOLA- TIONS, THREE SHOW CAUSE MEETINGS, AND AN ADMINISTRATIVE ORDER. DESPITE THIS, EFFLUENT VIOLATIONS HAVE CONTINUED AND FURTHER CONSTRUCTION APPEARS TO BE NECESSARY. IT IS APPARENT THAT ADMINSITRATIVE REMEDIES ARE NOT VIABLE IN THIS CASE. RECOMMENDED ACTION: THIS SUIT SHOULD SEEK CIVIL PEN- ALTIES AND INJUNCTIVE RELIEF PURSUANT TO SECTION 309 OF THE CWA WHICH WOULD ADDRESS THE EFFLUENT VIOLATIONS AND UNPER- MITTED DISCHARGES. WE REQUEST THAT THIS CASE BE REFERRED TO THE DOJ AS SOON AS POSSIBLE SO THAT WE MAY BEGIN SETTLEMENT NEGOTIATIONS.

Defendants (1)

• COCA COLA COMPANYNamed in complaintNamed in settlement

Facilities (4)

• CUTRALE CITRUS JUICES USA INCORPORATED

  602 MCKEAN ST., AUBURNDALE, FL, 33823

  Registry ID: 110000364944

• CUTRALE CITRUS JUICES USA INCORPORATED

  602 MCKEAN ST., AUBURNDALE, FL, 33823

  Registry ID: 110000364944

• CUTRALE CITRUS JUICES USA INCORPORATED

  602 MCKEAN ST., AUBURNDALE, FL, 33823

  Registry ID: 110000364944

• CUTRALE CITRUS JUICES USA INCORPORATED

  602 MCKEAN ST., AUBURNDALE, FL, 33823

  Registry ID: 110000364944

Statutes cited

• CWA 309 — Violation of Existing AO
• CWA 402 — Clean Water Act
• CWA 301 — NPDES Discharge without a Permit

Enforcement conclusions (1)

• COCA-COLA COMPANYentered 1987-09-24

  Primary law: CWA

  Federal penalty: $50,000

Timeline (7 milestones)

• 1984-03-16Referred To Headquarters
• 1984-04-25Referred To Dept Of Justice
• 1984-07-31Complaint Filed With Court
• 1987-09-24Final Order Lodged
• 1987-09-24Final Order Entered
• 1987-09-24Concluded
• 1988-10-28Enforcement Action Closed