“EPA alleges Respondent violated Section V.A.3 of the Washington and Oregon Permit by exceeding the annual weight of seafood processing waste residue listed on their NOI (9,240,000 pounds) twice: 9,343,749 pounds in 2019 and 9,503,552 pounds in 2020.”

💡 The company dumped over 260,000 pounds more waste than authorized, directly violating its permit and polluting federal waters.

“EPA alleges that Respondent violated Sections IV.A.3 and VI.B.4.d of the Washington and Oregon Permit by failing to submit an updated NOI and failing to include the updated NOI in the Annual Report when the annual weight of seafood processing waste residue discharge exceeded the authorized levels in 2019 and 2020.”

💡 Starbound hid its excess discharges from regulators by not updating its permit documents, blocking EPA oversight.

“EPA alleges Respondent violated Sections V.B.7.a of the Washington and Oregon Permit by failing to collect representative effluent samples and analyze the samples for the parameters listed in Table 1 during Quarter 2 of 2020; and Quarter 2, Quarter 3, and Quarter 4 of 2021.”

💡 Without water quality testing for five quarters, regulators had no independent verification of pollution levels entering the ocean.

“EPA alleges Respondent violated Sections V.B.7.b of the Washington and Oregon Permit by failing to collect and analyze an annual stickwater sample for the parameters listed in Table 1 in 2021.”

💡 Stickwater is a gelatinous fish waste that depletes oxygen in seawater, and the company skipped mandatory annual testing.

“EPA alleges Respondent violated Sections V.B.7.f and VIII.B.a of the Washington and Oregon Permit by failing to timely submit quarterly DMRs for Quarter 3 and Quarter 4 of 2019; Quarter 1, Quarter 3, and Quarter 4 of 2020; and for Quarter 1 of 2021. Further, EPA alleges Respondent violated Sections V.B.7.c and VIII.B.a of the Washington and Oregon Permit by failing to submit quarterly DMRs at all for Quarter 2 of 2020 and for Quarter 2, Quarter 3, and Quarter 4 of 2021.”

💡 The company blocked real-time oversight by submitting nine quarterly pollution reports late or not at all.

“EPA alleges that Respondent operated within the boundaries of the Quileute Indian Tribe’s and the Quinault Indian Nation’s usual and accustomed fishing area boundaries in 2019 and 2020. EPA alleges that Respondent submitted the 2019 and 2020 Annual Reports to the Quileute Indian Tribe and the Quinault Indian Nation in August of 2022. EPA therefore alleges that Respondent violated Section VI.B.5 of the Washington and Oregon General Permit by failing to timely submit the 2019 and 2020 Annual Reports to the Quileute Indian Tribe and the Quinault Indian Nation.”

💡 Starbound denied tribal governments legally required pollution data for two and a half years, blocking tribes from protecting their treaty waters.

“EPA alleges Respondent violated Section V.B.4 of the Washington and Oregon Permit by failing to conduct and maintain a log of the pre-operational check of the outfall system at the beginning of the 2021 processing season.”

💡 The company never verified that its discharge equipment worked properly before dumping seafood waste in 2021.

“Respondent neither admits nor denies the specific factual allegations contained in this Consent Agreement.”

💡 Starbound avoided any public acknowledgment of the EPA’s allegations while settling the case.

“As required by CWA Section 309(g)(3), 33 U.S.C. § 1319(g)(3), EPA has taken into account the nature, circumstances, extent and gravity of the violation, or violations, and, with respect to the violator, ability to pay, any prior history of such violations, the degree of culpability, economic benefit or savings (if any) resulting from the violation, and such other matters as justice may require. After considering all of these factors as they apply to this case, EPA has determined that an appropriate penalty to settle this action is $168,000.”

💡 EPA set the penalty well below the statutory maximum, suggesting the agency prioritized settlement over maximum deterrence.

“CWA Section 301(a), 33 U.S.C. § 1311(a), prohibits the discharge of pollutants by any person from any point source into waters of the United States except, inter alia, as authorized by a National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permit issued pursuant to CWA Section 402, 33 U.S.C. § 1342.”

💡 The Clean Water Act bans unpermitted pollution, and Starbound’s excess discharges violated that core legal safeguard.

“Section IV.A.3 of the Washington and Oregon Permit requires the Respondent to submit to the EPA an updated and/or amended NOI when any material change occurs, which may include, but is not limited to, increases in the amount of pollutants above presently authorized levels.”

💡 The permit depends on companies honestly disclosing changes, a system Starbound allegedly exploited by staying silent.

“Section VI.B of the Washington and Oregon Permit requires the Respondent to prepare and submit a complete and accurate Annual Report to the EPA, the Washington Department of Ecology, and the Oregon Department of Environmental Quality by February 14th of the year following each year of operation and discharge under the Permit. In addition, when operating within the boundaries of the Olympic Coast National Marine Sanctuary, the Quileute Tribe’s usual and accustomed fishing area boundaries, and/or the Quinault Indian Nation’s usual and accustomed fishing area boundaries, Section VI.B of the Washington and Oregon Permit requires the Respondent to submit the Annual Report by February 14th of the year following each year of operation and discharge under the Permit to the Olympic Coast National Marine Sanctuary, the Quileute Indian Tribe, and/or the Quinault Tribe, respectively.”

💡 The permit explicitly required Starbound to keep tribal governments informed, a duty the company allegedly ignored for years.

“EPA alleges Respondent violated Sections VI.B.1 and VI.B.3 of the 2019 Alaska Permit by submitting the 2019 and 2020 Annual Reports to EPA on August 22, 2022, which is after the required deadlines for each report.”

💡 In Alaska waters, Starbound also delayed annual reports by up to two and a half years, repeating the pattern of obstruction.

“As part of the cooking process, the Facility generated and discharged gelatinous waste, known as stickwater.”

💡 Stickwater is a particularly harmful waste byproduct that consumes oxygen and threatens marine life when released in large quantities.

“The Consent Agreement and this Final Order constitute a settlement by EPA of all claims for civil penalties pursuant to the Clean Water Act (CWA) for the violations alleged in Part III of the Consent Agreement. In accordance with 40 C.F.R. § 22.31(a), nothing in this Final Order shall affect the right of EPA or the United States to pursue appropriate injunctive or other equitable relief or criminal sanctions for any violations of law.”

💡 The settlement requires only a cash payment with no operational reforms, leaving the same compliance gaps in place.