EPA v. BNM Trucking, Inc.

Case summary

* Inadequate or no prediction of equipment failure which could dresult in discharges. * Plan does not discuss appropriate containment/diversionary structures/equipment. * Inspections and tests required by 40 CFR Part 112 are not in accordance with written procedures developed for the facility. * No training on the applicable pollution control laws, rules, and regulations. * No training on the contents of the SPCC Plan. * Plan has inadequatae or no discussion of facility security. * Adequate records (or NPDES permit records) of drainage from diked areas not maintained. * Drainage from undiked areas do not flow into catchment basins ponds, or lagoons, or no diversion systems to retain or return a discharge to the facility. * Aboveground tanks are not subject to visual inspections. * Records of inspections (or customary business records) do not include inspections of tank supports/foundation, deterioration, discharges and/or accumulations of oil inside diked areas. * Causes of leaks resulting in accumulations of oil in diked areas are not promtly corrected.

Defendants (1)

• BNM Trucking, Inc.Named in complaintNamed in settlement

Facilities (1)

• BNM TRUCKING, INC.

  6414 E. HOUSTON, HOUSTON, TX, 77028

  Registry ID: 110018926064

Statutes cited

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

Enforcement conclusions (1)

• BNM Trucking, Inc.entered 2004-07-08

  Primary law: CWA

  Federal penalty: $1,450

Timeline (4 milestones)

• 2004-04-28Enforcement Action Data Entered
• 2004-07-08Enforcement Action Closed
• 2004-07-08Final Order Issued
• 2004-07-08Complaint Filed/Proposed Order