Enforcement actions may result from a variety of scenarios, including inspections by the regulatory agency, complaints filed by employees or citizens, and monitoring reports submitted by the permittee to the regulatory agency. Under the CWA, self-monitoring is supposed to be the main enforcement method.
The primary responsibility for complying with the Clean Water Act and the terms of a permit rests with the permit holder. The permittee is also responsible for reporting any violations and taking corrective action.
Unfortunately, many permittees do not comply with their permit limits and, unless faced with a penalty, fail to take corrective action. Once a permittee fails to comply with its permit, EPD has the primary responsibility for enforcing that permit. If EPD documents a violation, it typically issues a notice of noncompliance to the violator. The most common tool for civil enforcement is the issuance of a civil penalty or fine. The Clean Water Act provides for penalties of up to $32,500 per violation per day. In addition to imposing fines, EPD may also:
While EPD has a range of options at its disposal, many of these options are rarely taken. For example, EPD rarely (if ever) assesses fines at the statutory maximum choosing instead to assess fines well below $32,500 per violation. Also note that each violation of each permit limitation is a separate and distinct violation. For example, if several pollutants are discharged above the limits on one day, each should be counted as a violation. If there are many days of violations, those also count as separate violations, even if the monitoring only occurs once during a specified time period. For example, if the permit lists a monthly average limit and that is violated, it counts as 28-31 violations depending on the month. Remember, fines serve a valuable purpose in deterring future violations. If the fines are significantly less than the cost of fixing the problem, then the violator has an incentive to just continue discharging harmful pollutants into the river.
Also, instead of requiring immediate action, EPD will typically require a violator to enter into a consent order which describes measures which must be taken, such as upgrading equipment or providing operator training, with a schedule for achieving compliance. Sometimes these compliance schedules allow the permittee two or three years to achieve compliance. Rarely, if ever, does EPD deny a permit, revoke a permit or refuse to renew a permit based on failure to comply with permit limitations.
EPD has a database of all enforcement actions available on the Web. Mail subscriptions to these notices are available at a cost of $50 per year. That fee provides the subscriber with all notices of proposed and executed orders issued from July 1 through June 30 of the following year. For information about subscriptions, call EPD at (404) 657-5947 inside Atlanta local dialing area or toll-free within Georgia at (888) 373-5947.
If you think that EPD did not do its job and is not preventing future violations, it is possible to bring a citizen suit against the polluter to have stronger restrictions imposed to protect water quality.
The CWA and state water quality statutes also contain criminal penalties for certain violations. Criminal prosecution is extremely rare and is typically reserved for severe violations. Criminal violations are prosecuted by United States attorneys, State attorneys general, or local district attorneys in the county in which the violation occurred. Criminal prosecutions are not based on strict liability. Instead, prosecutors generally base their decision on whether the violation was committed intentionally or negligently.
The most common criminal cases involve discharging without a permit, bypassing pollution control equipment, or falsifying discharge monitoring reports. Criminal penalties may include substantial monetary fines as well as significant terms of imprisonment for individuals found guilty.
Unfortunately, there are many occasions when a facility will continuously exceed its permit limits yet EPD fails to take any enforcement action against the facility, or EPD will take an action ordering the facility to take certain measures to protect water quality, but then continuously extend the time period in which the facility must comply with its permit. Fortunately, the Clean Water Act gives citizens the power to do something about that through citizen suits. Basically, when a polluter continually violates the Clean Water Act and the state fails to enforce the law by requiring the violator to come into compliance with the law, a citizen or group can file suit in to enforce compliance with the permit terms.
The Clean Water Act provides specific procedures for filing a citizen suit. After documenting a violation, citizens are required to provide a 60-day advance notice of their intent to sue. This notice must be sent to the polluter, EPD, EPA Region IV (Atlanta headquarters), EPA Main Office (Washington, D.C.), and the U.S. Attorney General. If these government officials fail to take action and the polluter fails to achieve compliance within sixty days, then the citizen can file a lawsuit.
As a result of citizens suits, the violator may be:
At this point, you may be wondering how to file a lawsuit. That is where GreenLaw can help you. GreenLaw works with nonprofit environmental organizations and helps them to understand the legal process. When possible, GreenLaw files citizen suits on behalf of citizens. Please contact us at firstname.lastname@example.org with questions!
Go to Step 5 here.