EPA v. CORSICANA, CITY OF

Case summary

THE CITY OF CORSICANA OPERATES A 4.5 MGD WASTEWATER TREATMENT PLANT REFERRED TO AS PLANT 2. PLANT 2 ACTUALLY CONSISTS OF THREE SEPARATE UNITS: THE 1958 PLANT--1.5 MGD; THE 1977 PLANT--2.0 MGD; THE OVERLAND FLOW PLANT--1.0 MGD. THE CITY REPEATEDLY VIOLATED EFFLUENT LKIMITS FOR BOD AND TSS FROM JANUARY 1980 THROUGH NOVEMBER 1983. FROM NOVEMBER 1983 THROUGH THE PRESENT, THE CITY HAS FAILED TO MEET THE DESIGN EFFLUENT LIMITS FOR THE OVERLAND FLOW PLANT (OUTFALL 002). HOWEVER, THE NPDES PERMIT WAS NOT MODIFIED TO INCLUDE LIMITS FOR THIS PLANT UNTIL JUNE OF 1984, THERE- FORE THE VIOLATIONS FROM THAT PLANT ONLY DATE FROM IN JULY, 1984. THE CITY HAS BEEN IN COMPLIANCE WITH LIMITS FOR OUTFALL 001 (THE CONVENTIONAL PLANTS), SINCE NOVEMBER 1983. THE THREE PLANTS UTILIZED BY THE CITY OPERATE IN PARALLEL. THE 1958 AND 1977 PLANTS CONSIST OF PRIMARY CLARIFIERS, AERATIONN BASINS AND FINAL CLARIFIERS. THE OVERLAND FLOW PLANT, CONSTRUCTED IN 1982, COLLECTS SOLIDS FROM THE TWO CONVENTIONAL PLANTS, TREATS THEM AND ULTIMATELY DEPOSITS THE WASTE ON THE CITY LANDFILL. ADDITIONALLY, THE CITY HAS HAD A PERMIT CONDITION SINCE 1979 THAT REQUIRES IT TO DEVELOP A PRETREATMENT PROGRAM. THE CITY HAS MADE LATE AND INCOMPLETE SUBMISSIONS TO THE REGION IN AN ATTEMPT TO DEVELOP AN APPROVABLE PROGRAM. THE REGION HAS ISSUED TWO ADMINISTRATIVE ORDERS TO THE CITY THIS YEAR REGARDING ITS FAILURE TO COMPLY WITH THE PERMIT CONDITION. IN ADDITION, THE REGION HAS BEEN IN STEADY CONTACT WITH THE CITY SINCE JANUARY 1981 REGARDING THE PRETREATMENT PROGRAM. CORSICANA HAS NOT SUBMITTEDA COMPLETE SURVEY OF ITS INDUSTRIAL CONTRIBUTORS TO THE REGION TO THIS DATE. INSPECTIONS BY BOTH EPA AND THE TEXAS DEPARTMENT OF WATER RESOURCES INDICATE THAT THE PROBLEMS THE CITY HAS ENCOUNTERED IN MEETING ITS PERMIT LIMITS CAN BE TRACED DIRECTLY TO INDUSTRY IN THE CITY WHICH CONTRIBUTES OVER HALF OF THE INFLUENT TO THE SYSTEM. THE REGION BELIEVES THAT THE EFFLUENT VIOLATIONS WILL CEASE WITH THE IMPLEMENTATION OF AN APPROVED PRETREATMENT PROGRAM. THE REGION IS SEEKING AN INJUNCTION TO PLACE THE CITY ON A SCHEDULE WHICH RESULT IN THE SUBMISSION, APPROVAL AND IMPLEMENTATION OF A PRETREATMENT PROGRAM. THE SCHEDULE WOULD IN GENERAL, TRACK THE REGULATION REQUIREMENTS FOR SUBMISSION OF SUCH PROGRAMS EXCEPT ON AN EXPEDITED BASIS. THE PROPOSED SCHEDULE WOULD RESULT IN THE CITY SUBMITTING AN APPROVABLE PRETREATMENT PROGRAM BY MARCH 31, 1985. IN ADDITIONN THE REGION IS SEEKING AN UP-FRONT CIVIL PENALTY WHICH IS BASED ON THE PAST EFFLUENT VIOLATIONS AND THE ESTIMATED COST SAVINGS FOR FAILING TO DEVELOP AND IMPLEMENT AND APPROVABLE PROGRAM. THE REGION IS ALSO SEEKING STIPULATED PENALTIES FOR FAILING TO MEET EACH OF THE 12 MILESTONE DATES CONTAINED IN THE PROGRAM DEVELOPMENT SCHEDULE. FINALLY, THE REGION SEEKS TO ENJOIN THE CITY FROM ACCEPTING THE DISCHARGE FROM NEW INDUSTRIAL USERS UNTIL THE PRETREATMENT PROGRAM HAS BEEN APPROVED AND SUCCESSFULLY IMPLEMENTED.

Defendants (2)

• CORSICANA, TEXAS CITY OFNamed in complaintNamed in settlement
• TEXAS, STATE OFNamed in complaintNamed in settlement

Facilities (1)

• CORSICANA CITY OF STP 0002

  E HWY 31 SOUTHSIDE HWY 31 1.7MI E OF I 45, CORSICANA, TX, 75110

  Registry ID: 110010654559

Statutes cited

• CWA 309 — Violation of Existing AO

Enforcement conclusions (1)

• CORSICANA, CITY OFentered 1986-02-07

  Primary law: CWA

  Federal penalty: $20,000

Timeline (9 milestones)

• 1984-09-13Enforcement Action Data Entered
• 1984-09-27Referred To Headquarters
• 1984-11-06Referred To Dept Of Justice
• 1984-12-14Referred TO U.S. Attorney
• 1984-12-18Complaint Filed With Court
• 1986-02-07Enforcement Action Closed
• 1986-02-07Concluded
• 1986-02-07Final Order Lodged
• 1986-02-07Final Order Entered