EPA v. Apartment Builders, Inc.

Case summary

1. Inspections required by 40 CFR Part 112 are not in accordance with written procedures developed for the facility/ 2. Written procedures and a record of inspections are not signed by facility supervisor. 3. Written procedures and a record of inspections are not made part of the plan. 4. Written procedures and a araecord of inspections are not maintained for three years. 5. No training on the operation and maintenance of equipment to prevent discharges. 6. No training on the applicaboe laws, rules, and regulations. 7. Spill prevention briefings are not scheduled and conducted periodically. 8. Drainage from undiked areas not into ponds, lagoons, or cat6chment basins, or no diversion systems to return spills to the facility. 9. Facility not fully fenced and entrance gates are not locked and/or guarded when plant is unattended or not in production. 10. Facility lighting not commensurate with the type and location of facility to facilitate the discovery of spills during hours of darkness and to deter vandalism

Defendants (1)

• Apartment Builders, Inc.Named in complaintNamed in settlement

Facilities (1)

• APARTMENT BUILDERS, INC.

  3501 BAY OAK DRIVE, N. LITTLE ROCK, AR, 72115

  Registry ID: 110025031891

Statutes cited

• CWA 311J — SPCC and/or Federal Response Plan Violations

Enforcement conclusions (1)

• Apartment Builders, Incentered 2003-09-24

  Primary law: CWA

  Federal penalty: $850

Timeline (4 milestones)

• 2003-03-27Complaint Filed/Proposed Order
• 2003-04-04Enforcement Action Data Entered
• 2003-09-24Enforcement Action Closed
• 2003-09-24Final Order Issued