All News Releases By Date

EPA Issued Complaint to PRASA for Bypasses of Puerto Nuevo Plant; PRASA Ordered to Immediately Comply; Faces Penalties of up to $137,500

Release Date: 07/18/2001
Contact Information:

(#01079) San Juan, Puerto Rico – The Puerto Rico Aqueduct and Sewer Authority (PRASA) and Compañía de Aguas face $137,500 in fines and must immediately fix problems that have resulted in frequent discharges of sewage and industrial wastewater from a manhole cover located in the parking lot of a local business in Puerto Nuevo, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) announced today. The EPA cited PRASA and its management contractor, Campañía de Aguas, after repeated attempts on the parts of both the Agency and the Puerto Rico Environmental Quality Board (EQB) to compel them to stop the overflow of domestic sewage and industrial wastewater from Suiza Dairy Inc. to the Puerto Nuevo Regional Sewage Treatment Plant. "EPA has been trying to get PRASA to deal with this problem since last November, and still the problem is not resolved, despite PRASA’s claims otherwise," said William J. Muszynski, EPA’s Acting Regional Administrator. "The pipes were clogged and apparently do not have enough capacity to handle the waste flow from local industries that goes, along with domestic sewage, to the Puerto Nuevo plant. We know this mixture is ending up in Josefina Creek, which is not acceptable and is in direct violation of PRASA’s wastewater discharge permit." The problem first came to EPA’s attention in September 2000, when EPA received a letter from EQB stating that wastes from a PRASA sanitary sewage line was overflowing into the parking lot of the Kupey Auto Distributor. This waste was ultimately washed away with storm water into the Josefina Creek. This business is located near a condominium, which is also connected via sewage line to the Puerto Nuevo waste water treatment plant. According to the letter, EQB had been requiring CAPR to solve the problem since November 1999, but PRASA had not responded. In October 2000, EPA conducted an inspection of the manhole and discovered that the canal within the manhole was clogged with debris and that there were signs that waste had overflowed around the manhole cover. EPA also found that in 1998 PRASA had authorized Suiza Dairy Inc. to increase the industrial discharge from 80,000 to 100,000 gallons per day in total disregard to the capacity of the sewer line. EPA conducted a die test, introducing a die into the sewage and industrial wastewater further up the sewage line and confirmed that this die flowed into the manhole and overflowed into the storm water system, which ultimately discharged into the Josefina Creek. PRASA had not reported any raw sewage discharges. In November 2000, EPA issued an Order to PRASA requiring an immediate cease discharges of pollutants from the manhole; repair, unclog and clean all sewer lines causing the bypass; provide a report to EPA describing its actions with a detailed schedule for repairs; conduct a sewer pipeline evaluation and implement a preventative maintenance plan. EPA continued to receive numerous complaints about sewage and industrial wastewater overflows from the manhole, as well as a bypass notification from PRASA admitting that raw sewage and wastewater overflow. EPA conducted numerous followup inspections between mid-November 2000 and mid-January 2001. EPA inspectors observed the discharge of pollutants from the manhole cover. In December 2000, PRASA responded to EPA’s Order, stating that it had been aware of the problem for some time, had repaired the line, and had modified Suiza Dairy’s pretreatment permit requiring flow equalization and that it anticipated that the root of the flow problem would be determined by the end of January 2001. CAPR, however, later informed EPA that Suiza Dairy had appealed the permit modification. Suiza Dairy, which is in the milk and fruit drink business, discharges its wastewater in two batches - one in the morning and one in the evening. According to PRASA, the dairy discharges 35,000 to 40,000 gallons of industrial waste in approximately 45 minutes, and this flow overwhelms the system. This answer was not satisfactory to EPA because PRASA could not give the Agency a time frame by which the flow problem would be addressed. In March 2001, PRASA again responded to EPA’s Order, stating that the bypasses of the Puerto Nuevo Regional Sewage Treatment Plant would be eliminated once Suiza Dairy had modified its discharge, but again PRASA could not commit to a time frame, once Suiza Dairy had appealed the modification of the pretreatment permit. It is PRASA’s responsibility, along with Compañía de Aguas, to ensure that industries that discharge into one of its wastewater treatment plants not cause any upsets at the plant or any violations of environmental law. PRASA issues permits, called "pretreatment" permits to industrial facilities that discharge into its plants and PRASA is responsible for both developing these permits and enforcing them. EPA found that PRASA and Compañia de Aguas violated the Clean Water Act in 197 instances. PRASA faces a penalty of $137,500 for these violations and must respond to the complaint within 30 days.