Protecting the Public and the Environment
Through Innovative Approaches
Fiscal Year 2001
Enforcement and Compliance Assurance
Accomplishments Report
It
-------
U.S.
Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance (2201 A)
Washington, D,C.
EPA300-R-02-010 http://www.epa.gov/compliance
-------
Fiscal Year 2001
Assurance
From the Administrator 2
From the Assista nt Ad mi nistrator 3
What We Do 5
Meeting EPA's Strategic Goals 7
Environmental Gains at a Glance 9
Maximizing Results Through Partnerships 11
I nteg rated Strateg ies 12
Addressing Environmental Problems 18
Nationa Priorities 18
Regional Priorities 31
Superfund Cleanup Enforcement 39
OurCore Programs 45
International Enforcement Program 55
Environmental Justice 56
The Nationa Environmental Policy Act Program 59
Appendices 62
Appendix A: Acronyms 62
Appendix B: Charts 64
Appendix C: Compliance Assistance Centers 74
Appendix D: Useful Web sites 75
Appendix E: Contact Information 76
-------
This past year we witnessed events unlike any our nation has ever experienced and
which we will never forget.
While our country focused on the aftermath of the September 11 th attacks in New York
City, at the Pentagon, and in Pennsylvania, EPA was there—playing a critical role in
the investigation, monitoring, and cleanup. I want to thank the men and women of
EPA's Enforcement and Compliance Assurance team who worked closely with other
federal law enforcement agencies as part of the federal government's response to the
attacks. EPA's criminal investigators and forensics staff are still providing crisis manage-
ment support to other federal agencies to combat domestic terrorism. I am very proud of
their service to our country in these uncertain times.
I'm also proud of last year's accomplishments in our enforcement and compliance
program. This strong program is leading the charge toward our goal of providing all
Americans with a cleaner, safer, and healthier environment. Last year we set our sights
high, focusing on areas that posed serious threats to health and the environment.
We focused on building partnerships with those who share our goals to find workable
and flexible solutions to our nation's most difficult environmental challenges. And we
actively pursued those who failed to comply with the law and took swift and appropriate
enforcement action when warranted.
As we look toward the future, we will continue to look ior ne1 / and innovative
approaches to achieve measurable and better environ"1'".-tr results in our enforcement
and compliance efforts. That work is underway and we're starting to see rea environ-
mental results. I'm confident we will continue to make significant progress as we enter
a new era in environmental protection.
-------
Fiscal Year 2001
Assurance
am pleased to report the successes of our enforcement and compliance assurance
program for FY2001.
This report highlights EPA's commitment to ensure full compliance with the law through
civi, criminal, and administrative enforcement actions as well as encourage improved
compliance through assistance and incentives.
In FY2001, we continued our ongoing collaboration with our state and tribal partners
to provide information and assistance to facilities to help them comply with environmen-
tal laws. We completed numerous agreements with facilities and companies to conduct
their own self-audits and to report and correct violations. And we took significant civi
and crimina enforcement actions to address serious environmental problems and ensure
fairness in the marketplace.
Reducing pollution is a primary goal for the enforcement and compliance program.
Last year we and our partners prevented millions of pounds of harmful pollutants from
being released into the environment and ensured that billions of pounds of pollutants
were safely treated and managed. We also required violators to spend nearly $1 billion
on environmental improvement projects—up 60 percent from the previous year.
We understand the challenges regulated entities face to comply with the multitude of
complex environmental regulations. These challenges require us to be innovative and
to "think outside the box."
As an example, we're employing what we term "integrated strategies," whereby we use
a combination of tools to improve environmental management by regulated entities,
maximize compliance, and increase environmental protection. These integrated strategy
tools include:
-------
* Voluntary compliance incentives such as the Audit, Small Business, and Small
Communities Policies to encourage self-auditing, reporting and correction;
^ Assistance designed to prevent violations;
* Monitoring to identify violations; and
* Strong enforcement to correct and deter noncompliance.
In my new capacity, I look forward to working hand-in-hand with the dedicated
professionals of the Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance, EPA regional
and program offices, and, most importantly, our partners across the nation to vigorously
enforce our environmental laws, protect Americans and future generations, and help
ensure clean air, pure water, and better protected land.
-------
Fiscal Year 2001
Assurance
EPA's enforcement and compliance assurance program's mission is to protect human
health and the environment by ensuring that regulated entities, federal, state, tribal, and
local governments comply with our nation's environmental requirements for keeping our
air, land, and water clean. EPA's Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance
(OECA) achieves these goals by working in partnership with state governments, tribal
governments and other federal agencies, and using an integrated approach of compli-
ance assistance, compliance incentives, and innovative civi and criminal enforcement.
of (OC) assists industries and other regulated entities to improve
their compliance with environmental laws. OC also works with EPA regions and head-
quarters to establish national enforcement and compliance priorities, monitor compli-
ance, develop and track performance, and measure and evaluate results.
The of Pofcoyci, and Training (OCEf'f] directs EPAs
criminal program, provides technical and forensic services for civil and crimina
investigative support, and provides training for federal, state, and local environmen-
tal professionals. OCEFT also provides investigative and technical support to the
federal government's homeland security program.
of (OFA) reviews all federal Environmental Impact State-
ments (EIS) prepared under the Nationa Environmental Policy Act (NEPA); maintains
a national EIS filing system; assures that EPA's own actions comply with NEPA and
other environmental requirements; provides technical assistance, compliance
assistance, enforcement, and capacity building.
of IQEj) provides a central point for the Agency
to address environmental and human health concerns in minority communities and/
-------
or low-income communities—a segment of the population, that has been dispropor-
tionately exposed to environmental harms and risks.
The of works with states, EPA regional offices,
tribes, and otherfederal agencies to assure compliance with the nation's environ-
mental laws by investigating violations, deterring violations of federal environmental
laws through civil enforcement actions, and providing incentives to those members
of the regulated community to comply with the law.
The of Site facilitates, coordinates,
and evaluates the enforcement of EPA's nationa hazardous waste cleanup programs:
Comprehensive Environmental Response (Superfund), Resource Conservation
and Recovery Act, Oil Pollution Act, and Underground Storage Tanks.
of
recommends national policy on issues pertaining to environmental enforcement
and compliance and addresses emerging and crosscutting issues, such as innova-
tion in OECA's programs.
is responsible for ensuring that federal
facilities take all necessary actions to prevent, control, and abate environmental
pollution.
-------
Fiscal Year 2001
Assurance
EPA's Strategic Plan charts a course for protecting human health and the environment.
To transform this ambitious mandate into concrete actions with measurable results,
EPA has identified 10 goals, each of which is a high priority for all Agency offices.
One of the goals—Goal 9, which mandates compliance with environmental laws—is
the responsibility of the Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance and relates
almost exclusively to OECA's mission.
Two other goals also represent important parts of OECA's mission: Goal 7 expands
public involvement in environmental protection by giving citizens easy access to
information about their local environment, and Goal 5 ensures that wastes will be
managed in an environmentally protective manner and that polluted sites will be
cleaned up or restored.
EPA's enforcement and compliance assurance program is focused on producing measurable
results to protect public health and the environment. The program has always tracked traditional
measures, such as the number of inspections and enforcement actions. EPA has implemented
the National Performance Measures Strategy which, while continuing some reporting on
traditional activity or output measures, increases the number of outcome measures (e.g., pounds
of pollutants reduced as a result of an enforcement action). EPA is now actively engaged in
using outcome data to improve program effectiveness and ensure accountability to the public.
The accomplishments of the enforcement and compliance assurance program are reported
in a variety of measures and documents on OECA's Web sites.
-------
Pollutants with the Largest Reductions Reported for EPA Enforcement Settlements
800
700
c
o
600
II
-2 C
"o .2
Q_ =
500
400
E
300
200
100
At the conclusion of its enforcement settlements,
EPA calculates the amount of pollution that will
be eliminated or treated.
Pmlt.JMlM
rWNHHU
Dredge & Fill
Toxin Contaminated Soil
SO2
NOx
Volatile Organic Compounds
Contaminated Groundwater
Petroleum Refinery Sludge
Brine
Volatile Organic Compounds
Particulate Matter
Saltwater
Toluene
PCB Waste
Wastewater
Carbon Monoxide
Dioxin Contaminated Waste
Mine Tailings
Sulfate Turpentine
Oil Waste
Total Suspended Solids
Sodium Hydroxide
Uu. Reduced
720,797,600
541,606,300
370,340,600
316,028,200
149,940,000
103,158,000
96,408,800
61,213,300
34,589,400
28,991,300
21,126,200
1 7,226,500
14,715,100
12,896,000
5,663,500
4,719,600
4,326,000
4,075,400
2,563,850
2,034,000
-------
Fiscal Year 2001
Assurance
SjgHL
EPA's enforcement and compliance program directly impacts our environment, and
the quality of the air we breathe, the water we drink, and the land on which we live.
Here are a few of the program's major accomplishments in FY2001:
In FY01, EPA secured commitments for an estimated reduction of more than 660 million
pounds of harmful pollutants, and the treatment and safe management of an estimated
record 1.84 billion pounds of pollutants. This includes:
370 million pounds of SO2
149 million pounds of contaminated ground water
In FY2001 as a result of enforcement actions, violators will spend:
4> $4.39 billion on pollution controls and environmental cleanup—nearly double from
the previous year
4» $89 million on supplemental environmental improvement projects resulting from
settlements—up 60 percent from FY2000
-------
More than a million individuals and businesses were helped by EPA through
its compliance assistance programs and centers.
-------
Fiscal Year 2001
Assurance
In its compliance monitoring and enforcement programs, EPA works closely with states, local,
and tribal governments in conducting inspections and in development of cases.
States bearthe lion's share of responsibility for implementing federal programs. EPA also
receives assistance in its enforcement activities from tribal governments as well as other
federal agencies. EPA works with states to make effective use of resources to achieve the
greatest environmental results possible. Together, we set goals and priorities and implement
strategies to solve environmental problems. Annually, EPA grants millions of dollars to state
enforcement programs. These grant resources help states and tribes build their capacity
to implement effective compliance assurance programs that lead to measurable results.
EPA uses a number of mechanisms to implement environmental programs and support
these partnerships: Memorandum of Agreements, Performance Partnership Agreements,
Performance Partnership Grant Agreements, and Categorical Grant Agreements. EPAalso
has a close working re ationship with many national and local organizations such as the
National Association of Attorneys General, the Environmental Counci of States, and the
International Association of the Chiefs of Police.
EPA is responsible for ensuring that federal environmental programs designed to protect
human health and the environment are carried out across the United States, including Indian
Country. In FY1984, EPA completed its Indian Policy describing the Agency's government-
to-government relationship and overall commitments to environmental protection for
federally-recognized Indian tribes. In July 2001, Administrator Whitman reaffirmed the
Indian Policy's recognition of "tribal governments as the primary parties for setting stan-
dards, making environmental policy decisions, and managing [environmental] programs ...
consistent with Agency standards and regulations." EPA remains committed to partnering
with tribes in addressing enforcement and compliance issues in Indian country.
-------
Using all available tools to improve compliance and increase environmental protection,
EPA is increasing the use of integrated strategies to address environmental compliance
problems. An integrated strategy involves a strategic approach, which gives thoughtful,
up-front consideration to what tool or tools—compliance assistance, incentives, monitor-
ing, or enforcement—to use when addressing identified environmental problems. These
strategies contain clear measures to evaluate their effectiveness in resolving compliance
problems and achieving environmental results.
The Agency's experience with integrated strategies has shown they can be quite effective
in addressing environmental compliance problems. EPA is currently testing a framework
for its regions and programs to use as a guide when developing and implementing
integrated strategies. This will enable the Agency to better consider the best tools,
approaches, outreach, and measures to resolving specific environmental problems.
Determining the appropriate mix of activities to apply to an environmental problem and
measuring the overall effectiveness of these combined efforts can be a challenging
exercise. While strong enforcement by EPA and its partners is needed to correct and
deter noncompliance, EPA also needs to more strategically target its compliance
assistance efforts towards areas where regulated entities are having problems under-
standing how to comply with regulatory requirements. EPA also needs to thoroughly
monitor and inspect facilities to identify violations and determine noncompliance trends.
In addition, the Agency will continue to offer voluntary incentives for compliance through
the Audit, Small Business, and Small Communities Policies. Using these various compli-
ant assurance tools with other innovative "beyond compliance" tools such as pollution
•<=!> n and environmental management systems should help EPA to not only
=;r""* compliance but improve environmental performance as well.
-------
Fiscal Year 2001
Assurance
EPA has focused much attention on developing tools to help facilities understand
the laws and regulations with which they must comply. The tools of compliance
assistance include:
4> Printed information, such as compliance guides and fact sheets;
^ In-person tools, including meetings, seminars, workshops, and on-site assistance;
and
«•» Hotlines, Web sites and virtual compliance assistance centers that support specific
industry sectors and environmenta program priorities.
In FY01, EPA provided compliance assistance to more than 550,000 businesses,
and sponsored partnerships to support 10 Internet-based Compliance Assistance Centers
created to help small-and medium-sized businesses, local governments, and federal
facilities. That same year, the public and regulated entities visited the centers more than
485,000 times, an increase of 19 percent from FY2000. These visits included more than
150,000 requests for compliance documents. Other compliance assistance tools such
as hotlines, workshops, and guidance materials effectively reached more than one-half
million regulated entities.
Also, in FY2001, EPA launched the Nationa Compliance Assistance Clearinghouse.
The Clearinghouse is a Web-based searchable reference tool that provides quick access
to compliance assistance materials and a means for the user to interact with EPA, states,
and other compliance assistance providers. In FY01, EPA issued its first Compliance
Assistance Activity Plan, cataloging 368 assistance projects and activities planned for
FY2001 across all EPA. The plan helps states and other assistance providers focus their
resources, avoid duplication, and find opportunities for collaboration with EPA.
-------
Complementing its civi and criminal enforcement authorities are EPA's compliance
incentive programs developed to encourage industries to self-audit their facilities and
correct violations.
These incentives include the Audit, Small Business and Small Communities Policies. EPA
developed the Audit Policy [Incentives for Self-Policing: Discovery, Disclosure, Correction
and Prevention of Violations, 65 Fed. Reg. 1961 86 (April 11, 2000)] to encourage
voluntary auditing and self-disc osure of environmental violations and to provide a
uniform enforcement response toward such disclosures. The Audit Policy provides
incentives for companies to develop environmental audit and compliance management
systems to detect, disclose, and correct environmental violations. When companies
voluntarily discover and promptly disclose environmental violations to EPA (and meet
other specified conditions of the policy), EPA will waive or substantially reduce gravity-
based civil penalties by 75 percent or, in most cases, by 100 percent. For those meeting
the policy's conditions, where applicable, EPA will not recommend the companies for
criminal prosecution.
In FY2001, 304 companies disclosed potential violations at nearly 1,754 facilities under
EPA's Audit Policy. These facilities corrected violations found and disclosed through self-
auditing.
Enforcement:
Environmental enforcement is a comprehensive program involving federal, state, local,
and tribal governments working togetherto enforce federal environmental laws. The term
"enforcement" covers all efforts to compel compliance with environmental laws. EPA and
each state have an enforcement program to ensure that laws lead to the results that
Congress and the public want. Enforcement actions compel a person or company to
comply with environmental laws and regulations. These actions include civi and
-------
.to*"-
./"•---j'fi*
'J*£r>*Ji
Fiscal Year 2001
Assurance
criminal prosecution in courts, administrative orders, and otherforms of action that take
place after a violation has occurred. Although directed at a specific violator, enforce-
ment causes a deterrent effect that motivates other people and companies to comply
and ensures a level playing field for those companies that do not violate the law.
Virtually every federal environmental law allows state governments to develop their
own programs to enforce that law. EPA must determine that a state program meets
federal requirements before approving it. Such programs may be called "delegated,"
"approved," or "authorized" programs, depending on the environmenta statute. Under
this arrangement, the states apply nationa standards and regulations by issuing and
enforcing their own rules and permits. State governments carry out most environmental
enforcement actions.
In FY2001, EPA saw a civil enforcement program that resulted in many successes
including injunctive re ief valued at $4.3 billion that will undo past harm and prevent
future damage to the environment. Violators also paid $ 125 million in civi penalties
with an additional $25.5 million going to states in shared penalties. Assessing civi
penalties establishes deterrence and a leve playing field for regulated entities by elimi-
nating economic advantage gained through noncompliance. EPA settled 222 civil
judicial cases and issued 3,228 administrative orders and field citations involving
violations of a single statute or multiple statutes.
During FY2001, EPA maintained a strong criminal enforcement program to bring to
justice those who violated the law knowingly or willfully. Over the year, among other
enforcement accomplishments, the criminal program initiated 482 cases, referred 256
cases to the Department of Justice, and charged 372 defendants. The guilty paid nearly
$95 million in fines and restitution and were sentenced to 256 years in prison—an
increase of more than 100 years from FY2000.
-------
Compliance monitoring includes all of the activities EPA conducts to determine whether
an individual facility or group of facilities is in compliance with environmenta laws and
regulations. In FY2001, EPA conducted 1 7,560 compliance inspections, 366 complex
investigations, and 895 inspections specifically targeted to assist states. EPA also
responded to over 9,700 complaints received from citizens by phone, in writing, or in
person. These activities represent a significant field and monitoring presence to deter
both on-going and future violations.
EPA's compliance monitoring includes:
4> Performing compliance inspections, surveillance, and investigations;
*• Collecting, analyzing, evaluating, and managing compliance data;
4> Targeting, gathering information, and developing enforcement strategies;
<•* Collecting and analyzing environmental samples;
4» Reviewing and evaluating self-reported documents, permits, and records; and
4> Responding to citizen complaints and referrals from other governmental entities
inspections, surveillance, and investigations.
In FY2001, EPA continued to emphasize complex investigations in addition to compliance
inspections to uncover serious environmental problems. The investigations revealed a
number of different types of serious environmental violations, including:
4> Failure to obtain a permit;
Failure to determine the type of hazardous waste and fai ure to manage it properly;
and
+ Illegal storage of hazardous waste and discharge of oil in harmful quantities.
-------
Fiscal Year 2001
Assurance
Based on high noncompliance rates and their potential impact on the environment,
the petroleum refining sector was identified as one of EPA's national priorities. Five
significant compliance problems were identified that needed to be addressed at the
federal level. Given the size, complexity, and sophistication of this sector, the majority
of the Agency's resources focused on compliance monitoring and enforcement actions,
but a multi-year integrated strategy also included compliance assistance and compli-
ance incentive opportunities. The goal of the strategy was to significantly improve the
industry compliance rate and reduce emissions that resulted from noncompliance.
The various tools of the integrated strategy were used in combination and in sequence
to achieve the highest possible result. While compliance monitoring investigations
at refineries proceeded, EPA offered compliance assistance on these five major issues
in meetings with trade associations, industry, and other stakeholders. The compliance
assistance was designed to give refineries the understanding of how to identify and
correct their compliance problems, encourage the refiners to perform self audits and
finally to encourage companies where investigations were already underway to enter into
innovative global settlement agreements with the Agency. Additionally, a Compliance
Assistance Program (CAP) was offered for sources that had significant emissions from
improperly controlled storage tanks.
To date, the strategy has resulted in significant measurable environmental benefits.
EPA entered into settlements with six companies that have a total of 32 facilities and
represent over 30 percent of the country's crude oil refining capacity. The companies
agreed to install pollution controls and implement new environmental management
programs that cost almost $1.5 billion. In FY01, EPA's petroleum refinery initiative
resulted in four settlements that will reduce more than 140,000 tons of harmful air
pollutants annually.
-------
EPA selects its national enforcement and compliance program priorities by considering
patterns of noncomplianceand environmental or public health risk associated with regulated
sectors, particular pollutants, and specific regulatory requirements.
National priorities must be appropriate for federal attention and response. EPA regions
support national priorities but also recognize the need for and the importance of the
establishment of regional and state priorities, with the commitment to provide the resource
flexibility necessary to implement those priorities. In FY01, EPA's national enforcement and
compliance priorities were:
Run-off from wet weather events such as
overflows from combined sewers, sanitary sewers, or concentrated animal feeding
operation (CAFO) discharges. Overflows contain bacteria and other pathogens which
cause illnesses and lead to impaired waters, including beach and shellfish bed closures.
"With our state and local partners, we set a high priority on areas that posed serious threats to
health and the environment. The Administration is determined to actively pursue those who fail
to comply with the law while working closely with the regulated community to find workable and
flexible solutions,"
—fPA Administrator Christie Whitman
January 22, 2002
-------
Fiscal Year 2001
Assurance
'! '- - -Vmt^mt,ttftyL--^.-w""....--amf
Ws-l -i;^- i
Ensuring compliance with microbial regulations and continued federal support of the Clean
Water Action Plan. Adverse health effects of microbiological contamination include gas-
trointestinal distress, fever, pneumonia, dehydration (which can be ife threatening), or death.
of
Ensuring that New Source Review (NSR) requirements of the Clean Air Act
(CAA) are implemented. Failure to comply with NSR and/or PSD requirements results in
inadequate control of emissions, thereby contributing thousands of tons of uncontrolled
pollution each year, particularly of nitrogen oxides, volatile organic compounds, and
particulate matter.
Ensuring reduction of public exposure to toxic air
emissions through the adoption and implementation of Maximum Achievable Control
Technology (MACT) standards.
Reducing air emissions and eliminating unpermitted
releases from an estimated 162 operable domestic refineries spread across the country.
Clod Preventing
unpermitted waste handling and management operations.
The following cases and activities represent actions taken in FY01 in support of meeting
our national enforcement and compliance priorities:
-------
CSOs occur in older sewer systems that collect both sanitary sewage and storm water
runoff in the same pipe. In periods of rainfall orsnowmelt, the treatment plant and/or
associated collection system may lack the capacity to ensure that the wastewater is
appropriately collected and treated, resulting in raw sewage and industrial wastewater
being released into the environment. In FY2001, EPA regions reached more than 4,400
regulated facilities with compliance assistance information on CSO requirements.
Upper Blackstone River (MA)
One example of EPA's efforts on CSOs is EPA New England's work on the Upper
Blackstone River, one of severe areas on which EPA is concentrating its efforts to
improve water quality. Blackstone River was chosen as an American Heritage River
and its waters have direct impacts on Narragansett Bay. Because both CSOs and
storm water are pollution sources, an innovative, collaborative effort with the city of
Worcester and the Upper Blackstone Water Pollution Abatement District was created
to address the most significant pollutant sources. Under an agreement with EPA, the
city of Worcester will develop a two-phased waterquality improvement program in
which the city will first identify ways to reduce the effect of pollution from CSOs and
later devise storm water-related projects. The agreement to study both CSO and
storm water projects enables everyone involved to make more informed decisions
about how much CSO control is appropriate in light of other water quality issues
and most effectively uses public funds to improve the quality of the Blackstone River
and Narragansett Bay.
-------
Fiscal Year 2001
Assurance
Significant human health and environmental risks are generally associated with large-
scale Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations. Improper handling of manure from
feed lots, lagoons, and improper land application can result in excessive nutrients
(nitrogen and phosphorus), pathogens (i.e., fecal coliform), and other pollutants in
the water. This pollution can kill fish, cause excessive algae growth, and contaminate
drinking water. In addition, emissions of air pollutants from very large CAFOs may result
in significant health effects for nearby residents.
Livestock and Poultry Environmental Stewardship
Curriculum Project
Through a cooperative interagency agreement with the United States Dairy Associa-
tion, EPA, through its Nationa Agriculture Compliance Assistance Center (Ag
Center), sponsored a three-year project to help livestock producers implement
sound environmental management practices and comply with environmental
requirements. A nationwide team, which includes partners from 16 major agricul-
ture research, and teaching universities and other groups, has worked closely with
the Ag Center and United States Dairy Association's Cooperative State Research,
Education, and Extension Service (CSREES) and Natural Resources Conservation
Service to develop a nationally recognized, producer-oriented training curriculum,
the Livestock and Poultry Environmental Stewardship curriculum, to address high
profi e livestock environmental issues.
The program is designed for use in various climates, for poultry, swine, dairy and
cattle operations, and for a variety of livestock operations from totally confined to
open lot systems. The program promotes the natural stewardship role that livestock
and poultry farmers should play in their handling of water, air, waste, and pesticide
issues. The materials will assist operators to apply pollution prevention concepts to
actual, on-site, day-to-day farming realities to meet environmental requirements.
The project builds on the shared, common objectives of USDA and EPA by promot-
ing economically feasible resource management approaches that are scientifically
sound and environmentally protective. Upon completion, the curriculum will have
received extensive educator and industry review, and in-field pilot testing in loca-
tions across the country.
Murphy Farms, Magnolia (NC)
As a result of a civil settlement with EPA and the Department of Justice, Murphy
Farms and D.M. Farms of Rose Hill were ordered in July 2001 to take specific
measures to prevent future discharges of swine waste at five hog farms in Magnolia,
NC, and pay a fine of $72,000 to the United States Treasury. The agreement repre-
-------
sented a settlement of a civil judicia action for violations of the Clean Water Act filed by
the Department of Justice on behalf of EPA's Region 4 and by three citizens organiza-
tions: the American Canoe Association, the Professional Paddlesports Association and
the Conservation Council of North Carolina. EPA and citizen lawsuits alleged a number
of illegal discharges to the Cape Fear River Basin from swine operations in violation of
the Clean Water Act. An earlier decision by the district court resulted in the state of
North Carolina issuing to D.M. Farms the first National Pollutant Discharge Elimination
System (NPDES) permit to a concentrated animal feeding operation in the state.
Measures called for in the Consent Decree include stream buffers; marking of spraying
areas; inspections; training of personnel; taking certain sprayfield areas out of service;
and record keeping. The NPDES permit contains substantia additional measures to
prevent discharges.
Tommy Naylor Farm (NC)
On September 28, 2001, Region 4 issued an emergency order to Tommy Naylor
Farm, a concentrated anima feeding operation in North Carolina. Tommy Naylor
Farm was targeted for enforcement action after severe I private drinking water wells
near the farm were found to be contaminated with nitrate. During the course of the
investigation, EPA used nitrogen isotope analysis to determine the source of the
nitrate contamination in the private wells near Tommy Naylor Farm. As a result
of testing, EPA determined that Tommy Naylor Farm was causing or contributing
to nitrate contamination in the underground source of drinking water, which resulted
in the contamination of three down-gradient private water supply wells. Drinking
water with high levels of nitrate can cause serious illness and even death in infants
and small children. The order required Tommy Naylor Farm to provide an emer-
gency supply of bottled water to the three homes with wells that were contaminated
by the farm's operations. The Farm is also required to perform quarterly sampling of
the three private wells and to submit a plan for providing a permanent alternative
source of safe drinking water to the affected homes.
il
Contaminated drinking water threatens human health, especially that of children, the
elderly, and those with compromised immune systems. Adverse health effects of micro-
biologica contamination include gastrointestinal distress, fever, pneumonia, dehydra-
tion, and even death. The focus on microbial rules is intended to provide compliance
assistance and enforcement to ensure that these rules are followed. EPA provided
27,152 entities with compliance assistance information on Safe Drinking Water Act
reiT'irerppntc in rYOl. Tnjs inrlurled 127 onsite visits, 11 8 presentations, meetings,
\ K ) ur r< ir
-------
Fiscal Year 2001
Assurance
Fort Bragg (NC)
In June 2001, EPA Region 4 announced the settlement of an administrative enforcement
action against U.S. Army XVIII Airborne Corps at Fort Bragg in North Carolina for _
alleged violations of the Safe Drinking Water Act Public Water Supply requirements.
The complaint alleged a range of violations including: exceeding the maximum
contaminant level for Total Trihalomethanes (TTHM) in the drinking water
(16 times from March 1994 -December 1999), lack of public notification of the TTHM
exceedances; and lack of public education in regards to exceeding lead levels from
January 1993-June 1998. Under the terms of the consent agreement and consent
order, Fort Bragg agreed to pay a civil penalty of $312,500. In addition, Fort Bragg iC-Jjix:.--
agreed to perform supplemental environmental projects (SEPs) as part of the settlement. ;; ::i;T"C
Kansas Public Water Systems ;; ~";
In May 2001, EPA Region 7 ordered 21 community public drinking water systems
in Kansas to provide annual water quality reports for their customers or confirm that : - %,
they have provided the reports. The systems are those that have not met the new .::£; •• --.
consumer confidence reporting requirements of the federal Safe Drinking Water Act. ^S:=?l:; —^-SfSv.
The Consumer Confidence Report (CCR) is a brief annua report to a system's customers BlltiljUv"
thatsummarizeswaterquality information the drinking water system has been required
by law to collect.
Activities that take place at industrial facilities, such as material handling and storage,
are often exposed to storm water. The runoff from these activities discharges industrial
pollutants into nearby storm sewer systems and water bodies. This may adversely impact
water quality. The CWA required EPA to implement a two-phase comprehensive national
program for addressing storm water discharges. Phase I requires NPDES permits for
storm water discharge from a large number of priority sources including medium and
large municipal separate storm sewersystems generally serving populations of 100,000
or more and severe categories of industrial activity, including construction activity that
disturbs five or more acres of land. Phase II requires permits for storm water discharges
from certain small municipal separate storm sewersystems and construction activity
generally disturbing between one and five acres. In FY01, EPA Regions reached more
than 2,300 regulated facilities with compliance assistance information.
Wal-Mart (TX, NM, OK, and MA)
On June 7, 2001, the Department of Justice and EPA reached an environmental
agreement with Wal-Mart Stores Inc. to resolve claims the retailer violated the Clean
Water Act at 1 7 locations in Texas, New Mexico, Oklahoma, and Massachusetts.
This was the first federal enforcement action against a company for multi-state
-------
V
':-E=^==? "" fe: •••'£&. p;^;
*, _k V ^ =
violations of the Act's storm water provisions. The settlement committed Wal-Mart to
establish a $4.5 million environmental management plan, to improve the retailer's
compliance with environmental laws at each of its construction sites, and to
minimize the impact of its building on streams and watersheds. The settlement also
compelled the company to pay a $1 million civil penalty.
Texas Construction Activities
Throughout FY2001, EPA Region 6 worked closely with the National Association of
Home Builders, Associated Builders and Contractors, and Associated General Contrac-
tors, to educate their members on how to comply with the storm water construction
regulations. This has included developing a Web page with all necessary documents
and information for compliance with the storm water construction program. An enforce-
ment training conference was provided for state inspectors and enforcement officers in
November 2000 and February 2001, with a combined attendance of 1 70 government
employees. Investigations were initiated resulting in 12 administrative orders issued for
construction violations in FY01. EPA Region 6 issued a total of 38 administrative orders
and 25 administrative penalty orders in FY01.
-------
Fiscal Year 2001
Assurance
New Source of
Failure to comply with the Clean Air Act's NSR and/or PSD requirements results in
inadequate control of emissions, thereby contributing thousands of uncontrolled tons
of pollution each year, particularly of nitrogen oxides, sulfur dioxides, volati e organic
compounds, and particulate matter. NSR/PSD requirements ensure that the construction
of new sources or the modification of existing sources does not jeopardize the attainment
of clean air standards in critical areas. The PSD requirements ensure that areas with
relatively clean air are not significantly degraded by new sources of air pollution.
Willamette, Industries (OR, LA, AR, SC)
EPA entered into a consent decree in November 2000 with Willamette Industries,
Inc. of Portland, OR, for the company's failure to comply with PSD permitting
requirements. The settlement requires Willamette to install state-of-the-art pollution
control equipment at 13 of its facilities. The pollution control equipment, valued at
approximately $74 million, will mean emission reductions of 1 7,500 tons of volatile
organic compounds (VOCs); 8,1 00 tons of particulate matter (PM); and 1,020 tons
of carbon monoxide over the four-year life of the consent decree. Willamette also
will spend $8 million on supplemental environmental projects, which include
pollution reduction projects, alternative fuels projects, community sewer and water
system improvements, and state parkland donations, concentrated in the immediate
areas where Willamette facilities are located, many of which are economically
disadvantaged areas. Willamette also agreed to pay a civil penalty of $11.2 million,
which, at the time of the settlement, was the largest ever assessed for factory
emissions of air pollution. This action is a culmination of the government's invest!-
-------
gation of the wood products industry and its continuing effort against recalcitrant
violators since the first consent decree was lodged against Louisiana-Pacific Corpo-
ration in FY1993.
Koch Industries, Inc. and Koch Petroleum Group, L.P. (TX)
Koch Industries, Inc. and Koch Petroleum Group, L.P (Koch) pleaded guilty on Apr!
9, 2001, to violations of the Clean Air Act by concealing the fact that it had failed
to properly control benzene, a known carcinogen. As penalty, Koch agreed to pay
$1 0 million in crimina fines and also agreed to spend $1 0 million for environmen-
tal projects in the Corpus Christ! area. Koch must also complete a five year term of
probation and adhere to a strict new environmental compliance program. Koch
admitted that in January 1995 the company certified that it had installed equipment
necessary to control benzene, but then disconnected a critica oil-water separator
used to control benzene emissions. The case was investigated by EPA's Crimina
Investigation Division with the assistance of EPA's National Enforcement Investiga-
tions Center, the FBI and the Texas Natural Resources Conservation Commission.
The case is being prosecuted by the Environmental Crimes Section of the Depart-
ment of Justice and the U.S. Attorney's Office in Houston.
EPA's priority sectors analysis showed that the petroleum refining sector ranked highest
among 1 7 sectors in VOC and SO2 emissions, and second highest in NOX emissions.
These "criteria air pollutants" cause significant air pollution problems and are strictly
regulated under the Clean Air Act. In FY2001, EPA's national petroleum refinery initiative
resulted in four settlements that will reduce more than 140,000 tons of harmful air
pollutants annually.
-------
Fiscal Year 2001
Assurance
BP Amoco (IN)
On August 29, 2001, the District Court for the Northern District of Indiana entered
a consent decree between EPA and BP, to resolve Clean Air Act violations at eight
refineries owned by BP, Amoco, and ARCO (recently acquired by BP). Under the
settlement, BPwill install and operate innovative pollution control technologies that will
reduce emissions of nitrogen oxides and sulfur dioxide from refinery process units by
more than 50,000 tons annually. The agreement requires BP to pay a $9.5 million civi
penalty to the United States Treasury and $500,000 to the state of Indiana. The injunc-
tive relief is estimated by BP to be approximately $600 million.
Motiva, Equilon, Deer Park Refining (DE, LA, TX, CA, WA) ^ ^ •=-
On March 11,2001, the Department of Justice, the EPA, the states of Louisiana and cr"5T~
Delaware,and the Northwest Air Pollution Authority announced agreements with three ~:^; ":;:jr;?T'- __/-%_ '"'"''
petroleum refiners that will reduce air emissions from nine refineries by over 60,000 tons js p=r-:=|ii' 7 ij! Ji '^^ "—
per year The agreements with Motiva Enterprises, Equilon Enterprises, and Deer Park ^=^^^.s:^2^::^^_^^f'^-.
Refining, LP, will affect petroleum refineries located in Delaware, Louisiana, Texas, ~:=!:::^|li|r'' ~~ --."- -~ ~
California, and Washington. Consent decrees filed in federal court in Houston call for >=3=il.Ji
the companies to spend an estimated $400 million to install up-to-date pollution-control ^.-.S. , =fe T r
equipment and significantly reduce emissions from process units, wastewater vents, r --—r-i-, 1^,^.-" .."SL..-.:,
leaking valves, and flares throughout the refineries. The agreements also resolve alleged '•, "• ri^YS^ss
violations of federal and state hazardous waste and toxics laws at Motive's Convent, LA, '. ~''\_ --_ . -' _
and Port Arthur and the Deer Park, TX, refineries. ".. -. t. .- ."~. '•-
Air
The adoption and implementation of Maximum Achievable Control Technology
standards are intended to regulate the most hazardous air pollutants as well as those posing
the greatest risks to human health and the environment because they are released frequently
or in large amounts. To reduce the public's exposure and risk of exposure to toxic air
emissions, EPA targeted inspections and compliance assistance at sources with existing
MACT standards and targeted enforcement at sources with high risk for emissions of air
toxics. One example of activities relates to the chromium e ectroplating MACT.
New Chrome Compliance Tool
EPA's Region 9 developed a manual to aid compliance and enforcement of the
Chromium Electroplating MACT to help state and local agencies develop their own
MACT standards for chrome platers. This manual represents a comprehensive
approach, by not only dealing with the technica and practice aspects of compli-
ance, but also by encouraging the use of pollution prevention and other innovative
techniques. The manual is also used by EPA for compliance training and outreach
and to support EPA's Air Toxics and Environmental Justice initiatives.
-------
'
Handling and disposing of wastes without permits under RCRA present significant
environmental threats. Unpermitted operations also economically undercut facilities that
comply with environmental laws. In FY01, EPA focused on eliminating dangerous
treatment and recycling practices by addressing several areas of noncompliance,
including the handling of foundry wastes, waste-derived fertilizers, mineral processing,
illegal hazardous waste recycling, illegal dilution of hazardous waste, and practices
regarding wastes that were previously exempt but are now included in RCRA regulations.
Joint Border Warehouse Initiative (TNRCC)
EPA Region 6 and the Texas Natural Resources Conservation Commission devel-
oped the Joint Border Warehouse Initiative in FY01 to conduct warehouse inspec-
tions along the U.S./Mexico border. Area citizens had been concerned that improper
storage of hazardous materials could result in the contamination of the Rio Grande
River, a principal source of drinking water, or the exposure of the public to danger.
Inspectors conducted inspections of 216 warehouses that were not registered to
handle hazardous waste to determine the extent of the mismanagement of hazard-
ous waste. The inspections determined that 36 facilities were found to be non-
compliant and that the majority of the violations were due to the warehouse
industry's lack of knowledge regarding hazardous waste and RCRA. The investiga-
tions also identified that the two main activities that were causing the majority
of the violations were abandoned hazardous products/hazardous waste and sham
recycling (Some facilities may claim that they are "recycling" a material to avoid
being subject to RCRA regulation, when in fact the activity is not legitimate
recycling. EPA has established guidelines for what constitutes legitimate recycling
-------
Fiscal Year 2001
Assurance
and has described activities it considers to be "sham recycling.") To assist the
warehouse industry, EPA and TNRCC held a compliance assistance seminar
in Laredo, Texas, at which 40 companies attended. Approximately 10 companies
later contacted the TNRCC to report potential RCRA violations. Soon after, EPA
and TRNCC conducted an additional 256 warehouse inspections. The inspections
determined that approximately 34 facilities were non-compliant, several of which
have the potential to be involved in sham recycling activities and thus lead to EPA
led enforcement actions.
Magnesium Corporation (UT)
On January 1 7, 2001, the Department of Justice filed suit against Magnesium
Corporation of America, its parent corporation Renco Metals Inc., and other related
entities charging that the mineral mining company is illegally handling hazardous
waste at its magnesium production plant on the edge of the Great Salt Lake.
In the complaint, the government alleges that Magnesium Corporation (MagCorp)
is illegally generating, storing and disposing of waste, including at least five wastes
regarded as hazardous because of their toxicity or corrosivity. The suit also asks
the court to impose penalties on MagCorp under RCRA. MagCorp processes
magnesium chloride salts taken from water of the Great Salt Lake at its Tooele
County, Utah, plant, and this production of magnesium generates several kinds
of hazardous waste. The plant discharges thousands of gallons per day of liquids
and solid waste into several unlined ditches and into a 400-acre pond, immediately
adjacent to the Great Salt Lake. For many years, MagCorp maintained that its waste
was exempt from RCRA requirements because of an exclusion in the law for certain
kinds of processes involving minerals.
-------
...Other Region 9 Sites
• Guam
• American Samoa
• Trust Territories
• Commonwealth of the Northern Mariana Islands
...Other Region 2 Sites
• Puerto Rico
• Virgin Islands
-------
Fiscal Year 2001
Assurance
-If.
In addition to their work in support of EPA's national enforcement and compliance priority
areas, regions can identify priority sectors and/or media that are of importance to their
specific geographic location. Regions all dedicate resources for national priorities identified
as environmental or public health concerns requiring attention nationally.
In FY01, EPA New England launched an Audit Policy Initiative for colleges and universities.
To date, 1 70 colleges and universities have declared their intent to participate, and 131 have
submitted disclosures for review. Region 1 also completed an Environmental Management
System (EMS) Guide specifically targeted to the college and university sector and imple-
mented an EMS Pilot Program to test its efficacy. Colleges and universities participating in the
pilot's first round included University of New England, Wentworth Institute of Technology, and
The University of Massachusetts-Amherst. The region is currently recruiting an additional six
to eight institutions to participate in the second round for the EMS Pilot Program which starts
in December 2002. Accurate measurement of the effects of this strategy are important as the
region is considering the value of its transferability to other sectors and other regions are
considering its utility. Therefore, the region is measuring the effect of discrete phases of the
initiative on the college and university sector. The region has already developed and
conducted a statistically valid telephone survey to determine how its initial efforts affected
college and university regulatory practices and to identify areas for improvement. EPA New
England is now expanding the ambit of its original assessment by evaluating the overall
-------
effectiveness of the first two phases of its program, and the value of the specific tools it offers,
especially the effect of the Audit Initiative.
In FY01, EPA issued administrative penalty orders against the University of Massachusetts
and against Brown University for 11 separate locations. The Region filed judicia consent
decrees for the Massachusetts Institute of Technology and the University of Rhode Island. The
settlements included substantia supplemental environmental projects as well as significant
civil penalties. The Region also conducted air and water inspections at two universities and
multimedia inspections at three other col leges. A multi-media inspection at Centra I Connecti-
cut State University resulted in an emergency removal action to address imminent and
substantial hazards observed at the time of inspection.
WTC fcesportse
From the first hours of the morning of September 11, EPA played an ongoing role in the
nation's response to the terrorist attacks on the World Trade Center, located only six blocks
away from Region 2's Manhattan offices. With assistance from headquarters and other
regions, Region 2 employees undertook severe I support activities at and around Ground
Zero as well as at the Fresh Kills Landfill in Staten Island, where debris from the collapsed
buildings was brought for evidence-gathering.
In the first weeks after September 11 these activities included monitoring air, water, and dust
for potential environmental hazards; helping Financial District firms to retrieve backup
computer system files from buildings within the exclusionary zone around Ground Zero;
vacuuming dust and debris from streets and other outdoor spaces in lower Manhattan;
removing and disposing of hazardous wastes from the sites; and setting up wash stations
and providing protective equipment for rescue and recovery workers.
-------
Fiscal Year 2001
Assurance
EPA is committed to increasing public awareness about the dangers associated with exposure
to mercury and continues to take actions that will provide increased protection of public
health. All forms of mercury are toxic to humans, but the various forms of organic and
inorganic mercury have different toxicity. In FY2001, EPA Region 2 held a mercury reduction
and pollution prevention workshop for federally owned healthcare facilities to better educate
healthcare staff on minimizing and properly handling hazardous wastes. Approximately 35
federal facilities staff attended. EPA Region 2 has held two inter-regional compliance and
pollution prevention seminars for hospitals and healthcare facilities in FY2001,with Region 1
in Connecticut and with Region 3 in Philadelphia. Seventy-four people attended the first, and
over 90 attended the second. Fact sheets and contact information were provided in addition
to the speaker's presentations. In addition to compliance information on federal regulations,
state regulations have often been included. Environmental management systems, the
voluntary audit program, Energy Star, voluntary pollution prevention programs and waste
minimization programs have been included. The Region 2 New York Health Care Focus
group was created and has had input on various efforts such as planning the seminars and
dissemination of information. Similar focus groups are under development for New Jersey
and the Caribbean. Speakers also addressed environmental issues, compliance, and EMS at
various healthcare meetings, conferences, and seminars held throughout the region.
Safe Drinking of
A consent agreement between EPA and AK Steel was signed in March 2001 that comes
in the wake of years of AK Steel's discharging nitrate, a scouring agent, into
Connoquenessing Creek, which the borough uses as a drinking water supply. EPA's
health-based standard under the Safe Drinking Water Act sets a maximum contaminant
-------
~-'
level of 1 0 (mg/l) or 1 0 parts per million of nitrate. Water samples from Connoque-
nessing Creek in the 30 miles downstream from AK Steel routinely showed nitrate evels
above 10 mg/l. Levels of nitrate as high as 100 mg/l, have been measured on numer-
ous occasions. The highest leve measured was 1 75 mg/l on October 26, 1999.
The agreement under the Safe Drinking Water Act required AK Steel to provide a
filtration system to remove harmful nitrates from the water at the Borough's backup water
intake on the Connoquenessing Creek, 21 miles downstream from the company's
stainless steel plant in Butler, PA. Until the filtration system was put in place, AK Steel
delivered bottled drinking water at no cost to the homes of all Zelienople customers when
nitrate levels exceeded 10 mg/l. The agreement requires AK Steel to reduce the amount of
nitrate it discharges to the Connoquenessing from its Butler plant to 999 pounds per day by
October 31,2002, so that it no longer poses a threat to Zelienople customers. Drinking
water with high concentrations of nitrates can cause serious illness and death in infants
under six months from a condition known as "blue baby syndrome."
On October 11, 2000, a coal slurry impoundment owned and operated by the Martin
County Coal Corporation (MCCC), in Inez, Martin County, KY, had a sudden breach
and released an estimated 250 million gallons of waste materials, including coal mine
fine refuse slurry, sediments, and other materials. The release occurred due to the
collapse of an abandoned mine shaft under and adjacent to the refuse impoundment.
The spilled waste material entered both the Wolf Creek and Rockcastle Creek water-
sheds. The slurry left fish, turtles, snakes, and other aquatic species smothered as the
slurry covered the bottoms of the streams and rivers. EPA Region 4 was contacted by the
National Response Center and responded immediately to the release along with the
Commonwealth of Kentucky. The EPA On Scene Coordinator (OSC) was dispatched and
-------
Fiscal Year 2001
Assurance
set up the Unified Command/Incident Command to coordinate the response as required
by the National Contingency Plan. Several potable and industrial water supply intakes were
affected as a result of the spill. MCCC, underthe direction of the OSC and with the help of the
Corps of Engineers, began immediately providing alternative water supplies to the impacted
communities. The released waste material impacted more than 100 miles of surface water
downstream from the site, including the Tug Fork and Levisa Fork of the Big Sandy River, a
tributary of the Ohio River. The spill buried yards and farms, covered roads, disrupted water
service, and closed schools, businesses and other public facilities. The Tug Fork and Big
Sandy border both West Virginia and Kentucky. Region 4 worked closely with the coal
company, the state of West Virginia, the Commonwealth of Kentucky, EPA Headquarters, and
EPA Region 3 to develop a unique orderthat requires the company to remove all the slurry
material from the water bodies and to restore those water bodies. The order further requires
the coal company to pay all of EPA's past and future costs for this site under CERCLA.
During FY2001, EPA initiated and concluded 54 separate enforcement actions under
Section 312 of Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act as part of its "metal
platers" initiative. The initiative involved identifying those metal platers out of compliance with
the EPCRA Section 312 requirement that facilities submit information regarding theirstored
chemicals to the State Emergency Response Commission, the Local Emergency Planning
Committee, and the local fire department with jurisdiction over the facility, by March 1 of
each year so that these entities can more efficiently respond to emergencies at these facilities.
In addition to coming into compliance, the 49 facilities with fewer than 100 employees that
agreed to participate in the initiative paid a civil penalty of $5,000. The five facilities with 100
or more employees paid a civi penalty of $10,000. In total, EPA collected penalties of
$282,225 from this initiative.
-------
In FY2001, Region 6 addressed oil field waste disposal pits in Arkansas that posed a threat
to human health or the environment. Previously, the U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service (FWS)
determined that pits or ponds containing oi pose a threat to migratory birds and other
wildlife. They identified, through aerial surveys, numerous sites in southern Arkansas that
appeared to exhibit this type of threat. As a result, during the past fiscal year, a partnership
formed between members of the FWS, EPA, Arkansas Oi and Gas Commission (AOGC),
and Arkansas Department of Environmental Quality. Through this partnership, additional
concerns are being addressed regarding oi field sites in southern Arkansas, such as
inadequate containment for tanks and actual or potential discharges of oily waste to waters
of the United States. For this reason, the initiative is now being referred to as the "Southern
Arkansas Environmental Improvement Project." Three workshops were held in southern
Arkansas for the oi exploration and production industry, as well as oil field waste handlers,
to explain the concerns, and the state and federal regulations relevant to their businesses.
Over 100 people attended the workshops. Site visits of potential problem areas, along with
steps to correct those problems, are planned.
Groin Processors
In FY01 EPA offered a voluntary air compliance audit program for grain processing facilities.
Region 7 has identified the grain-processing sector as an enforcement priority for FY2001
and plans to increase overall inspections of grain processing facilities. Voluntary audit
programs play an important role in helping companies meet their obligation to comply with
environmental laws. Participants were given six months to complete an air compliance audit
and disclose any potential areas of noncompliance to EPA. Demand for products from this
sector has steadily increased in the past decade. Existing facilities may have increased cap-
acity by modifying process units or building new ones to meet this new demand. Increased
capacity may trigger the need to obtain pre-construction permits under the Clean Air Act.
-------
Fiscal Year 2001
Assurance
Fort Feclc
On September 20,2001, EPA Reg ion 8 issued an emergency administrative order requiring
severe oil companies to deliver full replacement waterforall household uses including safe
drinking, bathing and cooking, to 20 families whose private water supply wells have, or are
at risk of having, unsafe levels of the contaminants benzene and total dissolved solids.
The order extended to Marathon Oil Co., Murphy Exploration and Production Co., Pioneer
Natural Resources USA Inc., Samson Investment Co., and Samson Hydrocarbons Co.
The companies were also ordered to collect new data and submit relevant documents
to indicate whether the groundwater contamination from their oil production operations
might pose a future threat to the city of Poplar's drinking water supplies. The groundwater
contamination was affecting 20 private water wells in the East Poplar oi field.
Spurred by a series of EPA enforcement actions against more than a dozen parties respon-
sible for leaking gasoline underground storage tanks, the nation's largest cleanup of soi and
water tainted by the gas additive MTBE is now well underway. The contamination forced
Santa Monica, CA, to shut down wells that formerly provided 40 percent of the city's drink-
ing water. EPA, working in partnership with the Los Angeles Regional Water Quality Control
Board, successfully compelled the parties to pay over $5 million for replacement drinking
water, treat over 100 million gal Ions of contaminated groundwater, remove over 4,100
cubic yards of contaminated soil, remove over 1 7,000 Ibs of hydrocarbons using soi vapor
extraction, drill over 400 groundwater monitoring wells, collect over 4,000 ground water
samples, collect over 10,000 soil samples, and conduct pilot treatment tests of eight different
technologies. By late FY2001, they had collectively spent about $90 million on this effort.
-------
EPA began its Cruise Ship Initiative in the summer of 1999 to address the public's
concerns about the excessive smoke emissions from cruise ships in southeast Alaska.
Citizens of Juneau had registered numerous complaints about excessive smoke from the
ships in recent years, and the Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation
(ADEC) had been unable to investigate air quality violations by cruise ships because of
targeted budget cuts by the state legislature in recent years. For this initiative, EPA
observed visible emissions from cruise ships in Juneau, Seward, and Glacier Bay
Nationa Park in southeast Alaska in FY1999 and FY2000 and documented a number
of violations by cruise ships. EPA issued administrative complaints to Carnival Cruise
Lines and Princess Cruise Lines alleging violations of the state of Alaska's marine vessel
visible emission standards and the requirement to report excess emissions to the state.
Following the EPA's initial investigation and notification to the company of the opacity
violations, each of these companies took steps to correct the cause of the opacity
problems. Specifically, the companies switched the fuel used in the engines, installed
opacity monitors on the engine stacks, and trained the ship engineers on the importance
of proper operation to lower opacity. Additionally, Princess Cruise Lines announced that,
in FY2001, four of its five cruise ships in Juneau, AK, would use shore power rather than
power generated on board to reduce opacity violations. In FY2001, EPA resolved the
complaints with the issuance of a consent agreement and final order assessing a penalty
of $42,000 against Carnival and $77,000 against Princess.
-------
Fiscal Year 2001
Assurance
Although cleaning up hazardous waste sites generally takes several years, when there
is an immediate danger to human health or the environment, EPA can order responsible
parties to promptly investigate contamination and to take whatever actions are necessary
to reduce the threat of exposure to hazardous substances. Underthe federal Superfund
law, any and all responsible parties must pay for cleanup—tax funds are used only as
a last resort. This is known as the "polluter pays" principle.
To make sure that those responsible clean up or pay for the cleanup as much as
possible, EPA's Superfund Enforcement program identifies the companies or people
responsible for contamination at a site and negotiates with them to do the cleanup.
In the event EPA pays for some or all of the cleanup at a site and then finds the people
responsible, EPA can recover the money it spent from them. The Superfund law also
requires federal facilities to clean up contamination at facilities they own or operate.
ForFY2001, EPA's Office of Site Remediation Enforcement, which facilitates, coordi-
nates, and evaluates the enforcement of EPA's national hazardous waste cleanup
programs including Superfund, Resource Conservation and Recovery Act, Oi Pollution
Act, and Underground Storage Tanks, reports the following:
-------
::::a^pBp^j| |
A Potentially Responsible Party (PRP) is any party that has been notified either through
a general notice or special notice etter of potential liability under CERCLA or has been
party to a CERCLA enforcement settlement or order. In FY01, EPA secured PRP commit-
ments exceeding $1.7 billion. Of this amount, PRPs signed settlements for more than
$1.3 billion for future response work, and settlements for more than $41 3.5 million in
past costs.
To promote enforcement fairness and resolve small party contributors' potential lability
under Section 122 (g) of CERCLA, EPA concluded 15 de minimi's settlements with over
1,900 parties. Through FY01, EPA has achieved more than 475 settlements with over
24,700 small volume waste contributors.
To promote redevelopment of contaminated properties, EPA has sought to protect
prospective purchasers, lenders, and property owners from Superfund liability. With
Prospective Purchaser Agreements, bona fide prospective purchasers were not held
responsible for cleaning up sites where they did not contribute to or worsen contamina-
tion. In FY2001, the Agency assessed 22 PPA requests, and signed 16 PPAs.
Frequently, waste has been contributed to a site by parties that are now insolvent or
defunct and are not affiliated with other liable, viable PRPs at the site. The share of
cleanup liability attributable to such insolvent or defunct parties is called the "orphan
share." In FY2001 EPA made orphan share compensation offers at 100 percent of
eligible sites in work negotiations. The Agency made eight offers for more than $ 1 7.6
-------
Fiscal Year 2001
Assurance
million in orphan share compensation during response negotiations, and eight offers
for more than $5.2 million in orphan share compensation during cost recovery
negotiations.
PIP
In FY01, PRPs initiated 67 percent of the remedial work at Superfund sites. PRP commit-
ments for remedial design and remedial action response work exceeded $395 million.
The type of remedial response settlements were 22 consent decrees referred to the
Department of Justice, seven unilateral administrative orders with PRP compliance, and
six other administrative orders on consent or consent agreements for response work.
A Special Account is a specific account established under a CERCLA (Sectionl 22(b)(3))
settlement, in to which PRPs deposit funds for cleanup costs at the site. The regions
achieved 50 settlements providing for deposit of more than $297 million into special
accounts and four settlements providing for disbursement of over $21 million from
special accounts to PRPs. The regions collected $311 million in cash payments for
response work, created 36 special accounts, and accrued $28 million in interest for
a total of $339 million, and the program disbursed about $60 million. Through FY01,
the program collected $878 million in cash payments for cleanup work, created
197 special accounts, and accrued over $135 million in interest fora total of over
$1 billion, and the program also disbursed $326 million.
-------
(;:
§ ? 5
Iron Mountain Mine (CA)
On October 19, 2000, the United States and the state of California reached a
settlement with Aventis Crop Sciences USA, Inc. (formerly Rhone Poulenc, Inc.) to
fund future cleanup costs at the Iron Mountain Mine Superfund Site near Redding,
CA. The settlement, one of the largest with a single private party in the history of the
federal Superfund program, will ensure long-term control of more than 95 percent
of the releases from Iron Mountain, the source of the most acidic mine drainage in
the world. Aventis has arranged for the IT Group to operate and maintain the site
cleanup over the next 30 years, and for a payment to the federal and state govern-
ments of $514 million in FY2030 to pay for future site costs. This unique funding
mechanism enables Aventis (which is securing the funding through a financia
assurance and insurance vehicle) to pay roughly $160 million to fund the long-term
operation and maintenance at the site (an estimated cost of $200 to $300 million),
a payment to the EPA of approximately $8 million, and a $10 million payment to the
natural resource trustees to fund natural resource restoration projects. The innova-
tive settlement will benefit the people, fish, and animals of northern California and
will allow salmon to once again migrate and spawn in the Sacramento River.
Operating Industries Inc. (CA)
EPA negotiated a $340 million settlement last year with more than 160 companies
to pay for further cleanup work at the Operating Industries Inc. site, a 190-acre
landfill about 10 miles east of downtown Los Angeles. From 1948 to 1984, the
landfill accepted municipal, commercia , and industrial so id and hazardous wastes,
including at least 300 million gallons of liquid waste. EPA found that nearly 4,000
different parties sent wastes to the landfill. Over the past two decades, EPA has
-------
Fiscal Year 2001
Assurance
reached settlements with more than 1,250 of them to pay for cleanup work, includ-
ing small businesses that have demonstrated an inability to pay their share of
the cleanup costs and for whom EPA has been willing to accept payment in install-
ments. The $340 million settlement brings the responsible parties' commitments
for cleanup costs to more than $600 million, one of the largest sums ever raised
fora toxic cleanup. The landfill towers hundreds of feet over the community
of Montebello. There are approximately 53,000 homes near the landfill, including
many adjacent to it. Earlier problems at the site have included contaminated water
runoff into neighborhoods, unstable slopes threatening to slump onto houses,
and methane and odors migrating to nearby homes. The work to be performed
under the agreement will protect human health and the environment from the risks
posed by the site. The remedy includes long-term maintenance of the landfill cover
to contain landfill gases and to limit odors and health impacts to nearby residents.
Contaminated landfill liquids will be captured by a control system at the landfill
perimeter to avoid degradation of area groundwater. EPA actively sought community
input during the remedy selection process for the site, and the community has been
very supportive of EPA's progress.
Schaffer Landfill Portion of Iron Horse Park Superfund Site (MA)
On April 19, 2001, The U.S. District Court in Boston entered a consent decree for
the Schaffer Landfill portion of the Iron Horse Park Superfund Site in Billerica, MA.
In addition to requiring the responsible parties to reimburse the costs incurred by
EPA and Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection, the consent decree
mandates the capping of the landfill and installation of landfill gas and leachate
collection systems; groundwater monitoring; and fulfillment of operating and
maintenance responsibilities. More than 30 responsible parties, representing landfill
owners and operators, generators and transporters, will reimburse more than $1.5
million to the United States and nearly $150,000 to the commonwealth of Massa-
chusetts. The capping of the landfill will be completed by the end of 2002 at an
estimated cost of $15 million to the responsible parties and the leachate collection
system will collect and treat/dispose of up to 10,000 gallons per day of leachate.
To ensure that cleanup goals are being met, the responsible parties will conduct
ground water monitoring for up to 15 years, after which Massachusetts will assume
monitoring responsibility. Forty years of operating and maintenance costs will be
borne by the responsible parties; thereafter, the costs will be assumed by the state.
-------
Marisol, Inc. (NJ)
In April 2001, a consent decree was entered in this case, involving the Lang
Property Superfund Site. Under the settlement, Marisol, Inc., agreed to pay approxi-
mately $ 11 million toward the cost of an EPA cleanup at the site located in
Pemberton Township, NJ. EPA removed and properly disposed of 13,200 tons
of contaminated soi and constructed a system that has treated 232 million gallons
of contaminated groundwater since August 1995. In the 1970s, hazardous waste
from the company was disposed of at the Lang Property, a 40-acre parcel of rural
land in New Jersey's Pinelands National Reserve, one of the country's valuable
environmental resources. In June 1975, between 1,200 and 1,500 drums of
unidentified chemical waste were discovered in a clearing at the end of the unpaved
road leading to the Lang Property site. Under a New Jersey state order, the site
owners paid for the remove of the drums and contaminated soils from the site in
1976. However, before the remove , the contents of the drums were emptied into
unlined pits on the site, or the contents were spilled on the ground, which caused
the contamination of soils and ground water at the site. In FY1979, Burlington
County and the state confirmed the site had contaminated ground water. The Lang
Property site was placed on EPA's Nationa Priorities List of hazardous waste sites
in FY1983. Under the settlement, EPA will recover about $10 million in federal
expenditures and the state of New Jersey will recover about $1.1 million in state
expenditures. To date, the total cost of the federal cleanup at the Lang Property site
is approximately $21 million. The proposed settlement amount is based on the
company's limited ability to pay.
-------
Fiscal Year 2001
Assurance
In addition to nationa enforcement and compliance priorities, EPA has a number of
ongoing "core" programs or statute specific programs in which all regions participate. EPA is
committed to maintaining a robust core compliance and enforcement program necessary to
achieve a strong and credible enforcement presence to deter non-compliance. The work
done to meet the requirements of Goal 9 are the core program elements, which address air,
land, and water statutory requirements in addition to the federal facilities, undergrou
storage tanks, criminal enforcement, multimedia, tribal, and environmental justice pr
Seven sectors are included under the core program: petroleum refining, coal-fired pc
plants, CAFOs, industrial organics, chemica preparation, iron and steel, and prime
nonferrous facilities were the subject of focus in FY01. Three of the sectors, CAFOs, i
fired power plants, and petro eum refining are national enforcement and compliance
priorities.
The following is a snapshot of activities and enforcement actions that occurred u
EPA's core enforcement and compliance program for FY2001:
The depletion of stratospheric ozone is a serious global environmental problem.
depletion can result in an increase in skin cancer, cataracts, and possible immui
system impairments among humans as well as a reduction in crop yields and dir
productivity of oceans. The Clean Air Act phases out the production and consun
certain types of ozone depleting substances, requires recycling of CFCs, prevent:
-------
and other excessive leaks from certain equipment, and restricts motor vehicle air
conditioning repair activities.
During FY2001, EPA continued its long-term initiative against the illegal smuggling
of CFCs into the U.S.
Air Liquide
On June 19, 2001, the Justice Department and EPA announced a groundbreaking
Clean Air Act settlement with Air Liquide America Corporation to replace refrigerant
chemicals that destroy the earth's stratospheric ozone layer with environmentally
friendly alternatives. The United States charged Air Liquide with illegally releasing
ozone-depleting gases from industrial process refrigeration systems at 22 facilities
located in 1 8 states. The agreement, filed in U.S. District Court in Texas, requires Air
Liquide to convert all its industrial refrigeration systems now using regulated ozone-
depleting chlorofluorocarbons to systems using alternative, environmentally friendly
refrigerants. The company also will fund an "environmental justice" supplemental
project that will benefit a lower income, predominately minority community in
Louisiana and pay a $4.5 million civil penalty.
Oil Act
The Oi Pollution Act (OPA) was signed into law in August 1990, largely in response
to rising public concern following the Exxon Valdez oil spill in Alaska's Prince William
Sound. The OPA is the most recent and the most comprehensive effort by Congress
to deal with the harmful environmenta impacts of oi spills. Oil spills pose a potentially
serious threat to human health and the environment. EPA studies show that one pint
of oil released into the water can spread over a surface area of one acre, severely
damaging aquatic habitats.
BP Amoco
In Apr! 2001, BP Amoco, formerly ARCO Pipeline Company (ARCO), agreed to a civi
settlement for violating the federal Clean Water Act by dumping almost 162,500 gallons
of oi into the Mara is des Cygnes River in Osawatomie, KS, disrupting the city's water
supply for 38 days. Osawatomie is 50 miles southwest of Kansas City. The consent
decree resolves a 1999 lawsuit filed by EPAagainstARCOfordischarging 162,498
gallons of oi into the Marais des Cygnes River in January 1994. The oi spill was
caused by a break in a pipeline owned at the time by ARCO. Residents used bottled
water and water trucked in by local and state agencies until a temporary pipeline was
built. In addition to the civil penalty, BP Amoco agreed to pay an $804,700 civi penalty
and spend at least $145,300 on a supplemental environmental project involving
reconstruction improvements to Osawatomie's water intake.
-------
Fiscal Year 2001
Assurance
To address "indirect discharges" from industries to publicly owned treatment works (POTWs),
EPA, through CWA authorities, established the National Pretreatment Program as a compo-
nent of the NPDES Permitting Program. The program requires industrial and commercial
dischargers to treat or control pollutants in their wastewater prior to discharge to POTWs.
Without pretreatment, toxic pollutants may pass through the treatment plant into the receiving
stream, posing serious threats to aquatic life, to human recreation, and to consumption of
fish and shellfish from these waters. These discharges can also interfere with the biological
activity of the treatment plant causing sewage to pass through the treatment plant untreated
or inadequately treated.
Guide Corporation (IN)
On June 1 8, 2001, the Guide Corp., an auto parts manufacturer, pled guilty to
seven crimina violations of the Clean Water Act resulting from the discharge of
toxic wastewater which, after disrupting operations at the local wastewater treatment
plant, killed more than 100 tons of fish and other aquatic ife along a 40 mile
stretch of the White River, from Anderson, IN, to Indianapolis. The company
admitted that it negligently discharged sodium dimethyldithiocarbonate, used in
metal treatment operations, to the Anderson sewage treatment plant. For these
environmental crimes, the company will pay $1.9 million in criminal penalties, $1.9
million in asset forfeitures, and $275,000 restitution for damaging the Anderson
treatment plant. Forensic support from EPA's National Enforcement Investigations
Center established the link between the discharge of the chemical by the plant and
the subsequent fish kill.
Wetlands and riparian areas play a significant role in managing the adverse water
quality impacts associated with nonpoint source pollution, and they help decrease
the need for costly storm water and flood protection facilities. In addition, in their natural
condition they provide habitat for feeding, nesting, cover, and breeding to many species
of birds, fish, amphibians, reptiles, and mammals. Section 404 of the Clean Water Act
establishes a program to regulate the discharge of dredged and fill material into waters
of the United States, including wetlands. The program's premise is that no discharge
of dredged or fill material can be permitted if a practicable alternative exists that is less
damaging to the aquatic environment or if the nation's waters would be significantly
degraded. EPA and the Army Corps of Engineers jointly administer the program.
-------
Montana Land Developer
In an unprecedented prosecution, David Allan Phillips, a Montana land developer,
was convicted on July 12, 2001, of felony conspiracy to violate the CWA, of seven
CWA felonies, and of seven CWA misdemeanors. This is the first case where
a federal jury in Montana has convicted an individual of conspiracy to violate
the CWA. The offenses occurred when an attempt was made to develop land near
Phillipsburg, MT. The area was being developed for recreational home sites valued
at several hundred thousand dollars each. They were marketed nationally with false
assurances that all required permits had been obtained, including those required
under the CWA for wetlands. Two of Mr. Phillips' associates, Mitch Buday and Larry
Zinger, previously pled guilty to conspiracy charges relating to these violations.
When sentenced, Phillips faces a maximum penalty of five years imprisonment and
a $250,000 fine on each felony count and one year imprisonment and a $ 100,00
fine on each misdemeanor count. The case was investigated by EPA's Criminal
Investigation Division with assistance from the Montana Department of Environmen-
tal Quality and the Internal Revenue Service. The case was prosecuted by the U.S.
Attorney's Office in Missoula, MT.
Although preventable, lead poisoning remains a major childhood environmental
disease. Nearly 1 million children in the U.S. have blood-lead levels high enough
to result in irreversible neurological and other health damage. Roughly 24 million
children under the age of six are potentially at risk for lead poisoning, generally through
exposure to lead-based paint and lead-contaminated dust and soi. The Real Estate
Notification and Disclosure Rule (Disclosure Rule) requires that landlords and owners of
regulated property provide information about lead poisoning to prospective renters and
purchasers and disclose known information regarding lead-based paint to potential
lessees or purchasers prior to finalizing lease or purchase agreements.
Washington D.C. Landlord
In the first-ever criminal prosecution under the Disclosure Rule, David D. Nuyen a
Washington D.C. landlord pled guilty to, among other things, violating the rule and
to obstructing justice and making false statements to federal officials to concea his
violation. The landlord owned approximately 15 low-income rental properties. Three
children living in his property required medico attention for exposure to lead. In
March, he was sentenced to two years in prison and ordered to pay a $50,000 fine.
He also must provide all tenants with new notices of actual and potential lead
hazards, hire an independent contractor to assess lead paint hazards on his
properties, and develop a lead abatement plan for his current properties.
-------
Fiscal Year 2001
Assurance
The Federal Insecticide, Fungicide and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) regulates pesticides,
including germ-killing substances, or "antimicrobials." Because of the risks posed
by human pathogens, antimicrobials are an especially important group of pesticides.
EPA, therefore, reviews this type of pesticide for both efficacy and safety.
S.C.Johnson
EPA determined that S.C. Johnson and Son, Inc., makers of Raid® and Off!®, violated
FIFRA by marketing unregistered antimicrobial pesticides in a product for asthma
sufferers. Under an administrative settlement agreement, the company agreed to pay
a penalty and, as a supplemental environmental project, fund purchase and operation
of a mobile asthma clinic, known as the "Breathmobi e"®, to provide asthma diagnostic
and treatment services to underprivileged, at-risk children. (See page 50.)
Micro Flo, LLC
EPA issued a complaint in Sept. 2001 against Micro Flo, LLC, (Micro Flo)
for violations of the FIFRA. The company is a subsidiary of BASF Corporation, and
is in the business of formulating and selling pesticide products. The complaint
alleges that the Micro Flo offered for distribution or sale several pesticide end-use
products and active ingredient pesticides which differed in composition at the time
of sale or distribution from the composition described in the statement required in
connection with the registration; and that Micro Flo falsified the Notices of Arrivals
(NOAs) accompanying multiple shipments of active ingredient pesticides, by using
the EPA Establishment Number of an approved producer while importing the
pesticide ingredients from unapproved producers. The complaint assessed a civi
penalty of $3,701,500. The penalty, at the time, was the largest penalty sought
under FIFRA by EPA, Region 4.
Underground storage tanks range in capacity from a few hundred to 50,000 or more
gallons, and are used to store gasoline, heating oi, and other fuels, waste oil and
hazardous substances at gas stations, marinas, government facilities and large industrial
sites. Leaks from tanks often contaminate the soil around them and can cause
unhealthy gasoline vapors to settle into the basements of private homes and apartment
buildings. EPA and states' underground storage tank regulations were put in place
to prevent releases of petroleum and, if a release does occur, to ensure that it is ad-
dressed immediately.
-------
A supplemental environmental project (SEP) involves actions a violator agrees
to undertake as part of an enforcement settlement to protect human health
and the environment beyond any required injunctive relief, in exchange fora
penalty reduction. In FY2001, EPA obtained SEPs valued at $89.1 million, up
60 percent from last year's value of $55.8 million.
One significant SEP in FY2001 included a project funded by S.C. Johnson
and Son, Inc. The company violated Federal Insecticide, Fungicide and
Rodenticide Act by marketing an asthma product that contained unregistered
pesticides. To resolve its liability, the company entered into an administrative
settlement with EPA under which, among other things, the company provided
funds to the Asthma and Allergy Foundation of America to purchase and
operate the "Breathmobile,*" a mobile asthma c inic. This SEP—valued at
approximately $700,000—included funds to hire and train a full-time physi-
cian, nurse and respiratory therapist to provide preventive care and special-
ized treatment to under-privileged children at high-risk for asthma in Balti-
more, MD. Asthma is the number one reason for pediatric emergency room
visits, and the leading cause of school absenteeism. This SEP addresses both
environmental justice and children's health concerns involving allergies—and
brings state-of-the-art care to children who, otherwise, may not have routine
access to such care. The SEP funds the Breathmobile® for one year. Thereafter,
the University of Maryland will operate the mobi e clinic.
-------
Fiscal Year 2001
Assurance
Raceway Petroleum (NJ) [• '_/-:::=;:MM::'^:; v:~:^M=:lL.;
On August 22, 2001, Raceway Petroleum Inc. and 15 related companies settled
with EPA on charges of underground storage tank mismanagement at several
Raceway gas stations in New Jersey. EPA had issued two complaints against
Raceway and affiliated companies, charging that they did not follow federal
regulations when it came to regularly testing tanks at their gas stations for leaks
and closing out-of-service tanks. The companies and the agency have reached
a settlement in which the companies committed to comply with all applicable
regulations and to make additional environmental improvements not required by
regulation to 12 gas stations. The companies will also make a $30,000 payment.
Lee Brass (AL)
Lee Brass Company, Inc. of Anniston, AL, agreed to a settlement with EPA, the
Department of Justice and the State of Alabama, for alleged violations of RCRA.
These alleged violations included illegal treatment of hazardous waste foundry
sand in the sand reclamation unit without a permit; illegal storage of the sand;
disposal in violation of Land Disposal Restriction lead standards; preparedness
and prevention violations; training violations; and container management
violations, including management of hazardous waste in open, improperly
marked, and unlabeled containers. The settlement required the company to
close its sand reclamation unit consistent with RCRA requirements and conduct
an extensive compliance audit of its facility. The consent decree also calls for Lee
Brass to pay a monetary penalty of $350,000; to handle all non-reused sand as
a so id waste and, if applicable, hazardous waste; and to investigate its entire
facility to determine whether there is a need for a corrective action cleanup.
The company produces brass and bronze parts, mainly for the plumbing
industry, through a variety of casting processes using sand molds, and produces
a lead contaminated foundry sand. Lead exposure is known to have significant
human health effects, including developmental effects on children.
During FY2001, EPA maintained a strong criminal enforcement program to bring to
justice offenders representing the most serious threat to public health and the environ-
ment. Over the year, among other enforcement accomplishments, the criminal program
initiated 482 cases, referred 256 cases to the Department of Justice, and filed charges
against 372 defendants. The guilty paid nearly $95 million in fines and restitution and
were sentenced to 256 years in prison—an increase of more than 100 years from
FY2000. In addition to committing resources and manpower to the Agency's criminal
enforcement efforts, EPA's criminal staff also worked closelywith otherfederal law
-------
enforcement agencies as part of the federal government's response to the September 11
terrorist attacks. Immediately after the September 11 attacks, EPA'scrimina enforcement staff
provided investigative and technical support at the World Trade Center, Pentagon, and
Pennsylvania crash site. Subsequently, EPA Special Agents and technical staff were also
called upon to respond to the Anthrax threat at the U.S. Capitol. Since the attacks, investiga-
tive and technical staff have continued to provide homeland security-related support to the
Secret Service, Federal Bureau of Investigation, State Department and the Office of Home-
land Security. Special agents have been designated to each of the FBI's 36 Joint Terrorism
Task Forces and also participate on each of the Department of Justice's 95 Anti-Terrorism
task forces. National Enforcement Investigations Center (NEIC) serves on the EPA counter-
terrorism response team, which collects, samples, analyzes, and identifies environmental
and chemical evidence.
On February 1,2001, the NEIC, located in Lakewood, CO, was part of EPA's Office of
Criminal Enforcement, Forensics, and Training (OCEFT), was granted accreditation by the
National Forensic Science Technology Center. It thus became the first and only environmen-
tal forensic center in the country to be granted this prestigious accreditation. It was recog-
nized for its overall field and laboratory environmental measurement activities such as field
measurements/monitoring, field sampling, and laboratory measurements, on-site investiga-
tions, and providing fact and expert trial testimony.
A crucia part of EPA's criminal enforcement program is training that the Agency delivers to
other federal, state, tribal and local civil and crimina law enforcement personnel. Working
thrrumh the National Enforcement Training Institute (NETI), OCEFT's training division, EPA
3,269 federal, state, local, tribal and international personnel through 128 different
leliveries in FY2001. Training state, local and tribal personnel remained a strong
sa combined total of 5,155 students, or 62 percent, were trained from these
ations. A total of 2,470 federal employees received training, and international and
idents numbered 644. NETI released two new training products in FY2001: the
spector Training Computer-Based Training (CBT) and the RCRA Inspector Training—
3T. Besides these two products, NETI enhanced its virtual university, "NETI Online,"
•ovides training course information and registration support for students.
nultimedia" approach means the Agency develops ways to work simultaneously
ate different environmental media, such as air, water, and land. Although many
environmental regulations focus on one medium (e.g., the Clean Air Act),
•imedia approach focuses on whole facilities and sectors, so it may involve
at regulatory compliance for air, water, and hazardous waste simultaneously
ite.
-------
Morton (MS)
The United States and Mississippi Department of Environmental Quality (MDEQ)
announced a civil settlement and criminal plea agreement by Morton International
Inc. to resolve charges the chemical company violated several environmental laws
at its Moss Point, MS, facility. These violations include the Resource Recovery and
Conservation Act (among other violations, illegal treatment, storage, and disposal
of hazardous waste, and illegal disposing of hazardous wastes into a landfill,
including spent solvents, liquid wastes, and acutely toxic wastes); the Safe Drinking
Water Act (illegal disposal of hazardous wastes into underground injection wells
and improper operation and maintenance of those wells); the Clean Water Act
(falsification of nearly a hundred discharge monitoring reports, concealing hundreds
of illegal discharges of pollutants to a local river, and more than 600 effluent
limitation exceedances) the Clean Air Act (no pre-construction and operating
permit, and no operation and maintenance log for a regulated source of air
pollution); and the Emergency Planning, Community Right-to-Know Act; and the
Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (numer-
ous unreported releases of hazardous waste to the environment). Morton, a wholly
owned subsidiary of Rohm and Haas Company based in Philadelphia, PA, agreed
to pay a $20 million penalty that will be divided equally between the United States
and Mississippi under the civil settlement filed in U.S. District Court in Biloxi.
This penalty marks the largest-ever civi fine for environmental violations at a single
facility. The civil settlement obligates Morton to perform $1 6 million worth of projects
to enhance the environment.
Nucor (AL, AR, IN, NE, SC, TX, and UT)
Nucor Corporation Inc. agreed to spend nearly $ 100 million to settle an environmental
suit alleging that it failed to control the amount of pollution released from its steel
factories in seven states. This was the largest and most comprehensive environmental
settlement ever with a steel manufacturer. The settlement, filed in U.S. District Court in
Florence, SC, will require Nucor to undertake broad environmental improvements at
its 14 facilities in Alabama, Arkansas, Indiana, Nebraska, South Carolina, Texas, and
Utah. The Charlotte, NC-based company also will pay a $9 million civi penalty and
spend another $4 million on continued emissions monitoring of hazardous pollutants
and environmental projects to benefit the communities where the factories are located.
The agreement covers eight Nucor "mini-mills," which produce steel by melting scrap
metal in large electric arc furnaces and six steel fabrication plants, where the final
molding and painting of steel products occurs. The settlement resolved allegations,
contained in a federal complaint filed along with the agreement, that Nucor violated
environmental standards regulating the release of pollutants into the air, water, and soi.
Fiscal Year 2001
Assurance
-------
"Under this Administration, federal facilities will be held
accountable to the same standards for environmental
compliance as other members of the regulated community.
Federal facility compliance is a top priority for EPA,"
—EPA Administrator Christie Whitman
October 4, 2001
One of EPA's most important roles is ensuring that federal agencies comply with environ-
mental requirements in the same manner and extent as privately-owned facilities. The
Federal Facilities Enforcement Office (FFEO) and the EPA regions regularly analyze
compliance and enforcement data, monitor federal agency compliance, negotiate and
issue compliance orders and agreements, assess fines, and develop federal agency
enforcement and compliance policy and guidance. In FY2001, EPA issued orfinalized
53 enforcement actions against federal agencies and government contractors.
The Department of Defense was named in 26 of these actions, the Department of Energy
in three of the actions, and other federal agencies in 19 of the actions. In five actions,
a federal government contractor was cited as the sole defendant.
The majority of the enforcement actions were for violations under RCRA with 28 actions.
There were also eight CAA actions, eight CWA actions, four SDWA actions, two
CERCLA actions and three EPCRA enforcement actions.
Of the 53 actions, 37 were proposed orfina penalty
orders. The total dollar amount of penalties in all final
penalty orders for all statutes was $1,356,840 in penalties
and $3.5 million in SEPs. Additionally, over $2.1 million
of work to correct violations and come back into compli-
ance is to be done as a result of EPA's enforcement
actions for FY01. To assist federal facilities, EPA provided
71 onsite compliance assistance visits, including 12 Environmental Management
Reviews and 128 workshops and presentations. Together, compliance assistance
activities for federal facilities reached overl 6,000 federal facility employees nationwide.
-------
Fiscal Year 2001
Assurance
EPA's international enforcement program implements international commitments for
enforcement and compliance cooperation with other countries, especially those along
the U.S. border. This program's mission is to reduce risks to U.S. citizens from external
sources of pollution and prevent or reduce U.S. impacts abroad.
•/" ••< s- ,.fv. \ || '-:. : ... & ..
rivl AccontptiSfHTtenrs
•f For all ports of entry to the United States, EPA's Office of Federal Activities (OFA)
intensified post-September 11, 2001 planning work to improve the EPA-customs
cooperative efforts to better control imports of hazardous chemicals.
4» For the Canadian and Mexican borders, OFA continued to coordinate and manage
OECA's lead in the U.S. representation on the North American Working Group
on Environmental Enforcement and Compliance Cooperation of the tri-national
Commission for Environmental Cooperation.
For the Mexican border, OFA continued to coordinate and manage OECA's lead
in the U.S. representation on the Working Group on Environmental Enforcement
and Compliance Cooperation under the bi-national La Paz Agreement with Mexico.
4* EPA's Import-Export Program (IEP) controls international trade in hazardous waste for
the United States. The United States has agreements with several countries, including
Canada and Mexico, which provide for prior notification of shipment of wastes (both
importing and exporting of wastes). EPA has issued regulations under the Resource
Conservation and Recovery Act that are binding on the regulated community. On
average, IEP annually processes over 1,500 notifications, involving more than 7,600
waste streams; collected from the United States Customs Service more than 20,000
export manifests documenting individual shipments of waste; and received about 450
export annual reports from the regulated community.
-------
In FY2001, Administrator Whitman directed EPA staff to ensure equal environmental and
health protection and access to information for all individuals and communities across
the United States. She underscored the Agency's commitment to "... environmental justice
and its integration into all programs, policies, and activities, consistent with existing laws and
their implementing regulations." The Administrator's memo paved the way for the integration
of environmental justice into the Agency's core operations. The Office of Environmental
Justice, in partnership with The Environmental Law Institute and the National Academy of
Public Administration, published two documents which highlight the efficacy and soundness
of incorporating environmental justice as a core regulatory practice. The first, Opportunities
for Advancing Environmental Justice: An Analysis of US EPAs Statutory Authorities, describes
how environmental justice can be addressed in EPA's major environmental laws governing
air and water quality, waste management, pesticide and chemica regulation, and public
right-to-know. The report also identifies statutory authorities for promoting environmental
justice in such program functions as standard setting and permitting, enforcement, and
delegation of program authority to states. The second, Environmental Justice in EPA
Permitting: Reducing Pollution in High-Risk Communifies is Integral to EPAs Mission, serves
as a handbook to public administrators by describing the practical areas where environmen-
tal justice can be integrated into EPA's federal programs for issuing permits.
The message in both reports is key to EPA's role to address environmental and human health
concerns in segments of the population, such as low-income and/or minority communities,
which have been disproportionately exposed to environmental harms and risks. The Office
of Environmental Justice works to ensure that environmental justice considerations are
integrated into the Agency's policies, programs and activities.
Here are some highlighted activities in FY2001:
-------
Fiscal Year 2001
Assurance
III
Training
In FY2001, the work of the Environmental Justice Training Collaborative, a group
comprised of representatives from each region and the Office of Environmental Justice,
completed the Environmental Justice Fundamentals Workshop. This collaboration
includes stakeholders and partners from other federal agencies, state and tribal agen-
cies, local government, industry, community and faith-based organizations, and
academia. The training provided a basic overview of environmental justice to help
participants put this concept into practice in their own duties and responsibilities.
The National Environmental Justice Advisory Council (NEJAC) provides advice
to EPA on broad public policy issues. It recently released the final report from its 16th
meeting, which addressed the integration of environmental justice throughout the federal
agencies. This report proposed the following recommendations: support advancement of
the Interagency Working Group (IWG) on Environmental Justice Action Agenda and its
collaborative interagency problem-solving model as exemplified in 15 demonstration
projects, explore and identify ways for greater use of legal authorities and removal of
regulatory impediments to achieve environmental justice, as discussed in the Environ-
mental Law Institute report "Opportunities for Advancing Environmental Justice," and
collaborate in identifying focus areas ortarget programs where environmental justice
principles could significantly benefit communities.
The Interagency Working Group on Environmental Justice is chaired by EPA and is
comprised of 12 federal agencies. The IWG was established as a result of Executive
Order 12898, to mobilize federal agencies to address the needs of communities, which
may be adversely and disproportionately affected by environmental harms and risks.
The IWG developed an integrated federal action agenda to focus attention on 15
-------
community revitalization projects. This action agenda emphasizes coordinated federal
initiatives and resources to help environmentally and economically distressed communi-
ties. Some examples of their accomplishments include:
9 Establishing strong working partnerships of more than 1 50 organizations
and 11 federal agencies;
f1 Securing commitments of more than $1 5 million in public and private funding;
9 Augmenting existing brownfields redevelopment initiatives to fully meet quality-of-life
and economic development needs in diverse communities; and
* Addressing children's health concerns in minority, low-income and tribal communities.
The Environmental Justice Small Grants Program continues to significantly empower
communities to address problems at the local level. In FY2001, 85 grants were awarded
across the country, bringing the total since FY1994 to more than 900. The 2ndEdition
of the Environmental Justice Small Grants Emerging Tools for Local Problem-Solving
was published and describes 71 of the "best" grants completed underthe Small Grants
program to demonstrate how communities can solve local problems. Another program
to assist communities is the Community Intern Program, which was created to provide
students with "hands-on" experience in community organizations. In FY2001, 30
students spent their summer training in community organizations.
-------
Fiscal Year 2001
Assurance
The National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) requires federal agencies to consider
the environmental consequences of their actions. For approximately 500 major actions
a year, agencies prepare an environmental impact statement, which EPA reviews
to assess those impacts and determine the adequacy of public disclosure. The NEPA
program's mission is to carry out NEPA responsibilities so as to maximize protection
of human health and the environment and public understanding of the environmental
impacts of federal actions.
FY01
# Federal agencies reduced 76 percent of the significant impacts identified by EPAs
review of major federal actions.
4> Forthe first time, EPA collected data on measurable environmental improvements:
• More than 5,000 acres of aquatic habitat were protected; and
• More than 25 million acres of terrestrial habitat were protected.
4> The National Energy Policy cited a "win-win" for the environment and energy
production: through the NEPA process, a California power plant design was
changed to reduce ground water consumption by 95 percent and eliminate particu-
late emissions while still producing a much needed energy supply.
-------
mum
••|sa5pyj
L.^^','".
jm..
f
-------
Fiscal Year 2001
Assurance
"I believe that a vigorous enforcement program, both civil and criminal,
will help us achieve strong measurable environment outcomes, and
improve the quality of our nation's air, water, and land. I'm confident
that our compliance programs will continue to bring more and more
companies into compliance through the use of innovative efforts such
as our compliance assistance centers and the self-disclosure policy.
Together, the resources of OECA provide formidable tools to safeguard
our environment and public health."
—EPA Administrator Christie Whitman
August 2, 2002
i*'
-------
BACT Best Available Control Technology
BLM Bureau of Land Management
BOD Biological Oxygen Demand
CAA Clean Air Act
CAFO Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations
CCR Consumer Confidence Report
CERCLA Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act
CFC Chlorofluorocarbon
CSO Combined Sewer Overflows
CWA Clean Water Act
DOD Department of Defense
DOE Department of Energy
DOJ Department of Justice
EA Enforcement Action
EAO Emergency Administrative Order
EJ Environmental Justice
EMS Environmental Management System
EMR Environmental Management Review
EO Executive Order
EPA U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
EPCRA Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act
ERNS Emergency Response Notification System
FFEO Federal Facilities Enforcement Office
FIFRA Federal Insecticide, Fungicide and Rodenticide Act
FY Fiscal Year
GPO Government Printing Office
GPRA Government Performance and Results Act
HUD Department of Housing and Urban Development
IDEA Integrated Data for Enforcement Analysis
LDAR Leak Detection and Repair
-------
Fiscal Year 2001
Assurance
MACT Maximum Achievable Control Technology
MCL Maximum Concentration Limits
MRBMA Mercury-Containing and Rechargeable Battery Management Act
MTBE Methyl Tertiary Butyl Ether
NASA National Aeronautics and Space Administration
NEPA National Environmental Policy Act
NESHAPs National Emissions Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants
NEIC National Enforcement Investigations Center
NO2 Nitrogen Dioxide
NOx Nitrogen Oxides
NOV Notice of Violation
NPDES National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
NPMS National Performance Measures Strategy
NSR/PSD New Source Review/Prevention of Significant Deterioration
OAQPS Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards
OECA Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance
Ol Order for Information
OLC Office of Legal Counsel
ORE Office of Regulatory Enforcement
OTIS On-line Tracking Information System
PCB Polychlorinated Biphenyl
PM Particulate Matter
POTW Publicly Owned Treatment Works
RCRA Resource Conservation and Recovery Act
RMP Risk Management Plan
SEP Supplemental Environmental Project
SDWA Safe Drinking Water Act
SWTR Surface Water Treatment Rule
SFIP Sector Facility Indexing Project
SIC Standard Industrial Classification
SIP State Implementation Plan
SNC Significant Noncompliance
SO2 Sulfur Dioxide
SPCC Spill Prevention Control and Countermeasure
SSO Sanitary Sewer Overflows
TRI Toxic Release Inventory
TSCA Toxic Substances Control Act
TSS Total Suspended Solids
USCG U.S. Coast Guard
USFS U.S. Forest Service
UST Underground Storage Tank
VOC Volatile Organic Compound
-------
Criminal Program Statistics
Last year criminal violators received 256 years of prison time
for their environmental crimes.
700
600
500
400
300
200
100
0
FY1995
FY1996
FY1997
FY1998
FY1999
FY2000
FY2001
Cases Referrals Defendants,,, Sentences,,, Fines,,,
Inititated
562 256 245 74 23.2
548 262 221 93 76.7
551 278 322 195.9 169.3
636 266 350 172.9 92.8
471 241 324 208.3 61.6
477 236 360 146.2 122
482 256 372 255.9 94.7
Agents
156
151
200
200
192
179
181
(1) Defendants equal entities and individuals charged in the fiscal year
(2) Years of Incarceration
(3) Millions of Dollars
-------
Fiscal Year 2001
Assurance
EPA Criminal Program : Referrals vs. Penalties (FY1983 - FY2001)
In FY01, the guilty paid nearly $95 million in fines and restitution.
u
a
U
-------
EPA Civil Judicial Settlements by Act
140
120
100 I B
80 H
60 ! •
40
20 i U ! U Uf
0 ! « : » ! = :=
CM CERCIA CWA-NPDES CWA-311 CWA-404 EPCRA
43 132 24 3 1 1
FYOO 53 130 12 6 4 2
FY99 48 124 16 1 7 1
EPA Administrative Penalty Settlements (Conclusions)
400
350 ==
300 M
250 H
200 m H •
150 • • • •
100 H • • •
50 • • • •
0 is im mm is sis mm
CAA CERCIA CWA-NPDES CWA-311 CWA-404 EPCRA
179 25 210 235 26 346
FYOO 182 0 291 180 44 379
FY99 154 1 186 148 31 244
FIFRA RCRA SDWA-PWSS SDWA-UIC TSCA Total
0 12 0 1 2 222
0 10 5 2 0 219
1 11 10 215
FIFRA RCRA SDWA-PWSS SDWA-UIC TSCA Total
174 168 51 16 154 1,584
200 201 21 27 205 1,730
223 134 16 24 197 1,358
-------
Fiscal Year 2001
Assurance
EPA Regional Inspections
In FY2001, EPA conducted 1 7,560 compliance inspections, 366 complex
investigations, and 895 inspections specifically targeted to assist states.
EPA also responded to 9,700 citizen complaints. These activities represent
a significant field and monitoring presence to deter both ongoing and
future violations.
7000
6000
5000
4000
3000
2000
1000
CAA Stationary
CAACFCs
CAA Mob. Sources
Asbestos D & R
NPDES Minors
NPDES Majors
Pretreatment IUS
Pretreat. POTWs
CWA311
CWA 404
EPCRA313
EPCRA non-31 3
FIFRA
RCRA*
UST
SDWA-PWSS
SDWA-UIC
TSCA
Total
1406
1227
39
437
965
949
0
0
1424
1079
513
521
259
2214
1482
449
6880
2003
21,847
1284
579
34
151
1141
640
277
115
1549
964
472
1366
799
1746
1185
488
6227
1400
20/417
1046
12
8
325
876
758
273
134
1269
699
321
613
858
1521
1259
362
5663
1453
17,560
There were also 1 1 1 GLP inspections and 31 6 data audits by HQ.
-------
Enforcement causes a deterrent effect that motivates regulated
entities to comply and ensures a leve -playing field for those who
comply with our nation's environmental laws.
EPA Compliance Orders Issued
2200
2000
1800
1600
1400
1200
1000
800
600
400 =
200 ; m I ^ Uf
CAA CERCIA CWA-NPDES CWA-311 CWA-404 EPCRA
^•FYOI 192 220 374 12 66 1
FYOO 219 251 596 29 102 1
FY99 298 247 549 8 64 0
FIFRA RCRA SDWA-PWSS SDWA-UIC TSCA Total
12 35 542 39 0 1,494*
64 42 2,067** 17 0 3,388
28 50 251 18 3 1,516
This includes 1 Mercury-Containing and Rechargeable Battery Management Act Order.
In addition, there were 35 HQ CM Mobile
The significant number of compliance orders issued in FY2000 was due to Safe Drinking Water Act administrative enforcement actions related
to non-submissions of the required Consumer Confidence Report (CCR), an annual drinking water quality report for consumers. On October
1 9, 1 999, community water systems across the nation were, for the first time, required by federal and state regulations to provide consumers
with a CCR.
-------
Fiscal Year 2001
Assurance
EPA Administrative Penalty Order Complaints
400
350 _
300 H
250 m H
200 U H
150 H ; jji • • • B
100 H H 11 Hlllies 1
50 M •• = •••• 1
0 CM CEKLA CWA-NPDES CWA-311 CWA-404 EPCRA FIFRA RCRA SDWA-PWSS SDWA-UIC TSCA
Total
JFY01 170 25 136 261 45 338 184 154 97 25 147 I,SM
FYOO 160 0 295 208 41 390 199 212 20 41 197 1,753
FY99 193 0 192 204 40 285 274 197 20 44 205 1,654
-------
EPA Field Citations
Audit Policy Notices of Determination
Notices of Determination are used to
resolve audit disc osures under which
the disclosing company has returned to
compliance and does not pay a penalty.
EPA's compliance incentive programs
are intended to encourage the regulated
community to self-audit their facilities
and correct violations.
250
200
150
100
50
0
Nit
All Statutes
HI FY 01 234
i FY 00 144
FY 99 NA
EPA may issue field citations for minor
violations of certain regulations.
In FY2001, EPA issued 3,228 field
citations and administrative orders
involving violations of a single statute
or multiple statutes.
350
300
250
200
150
100
50
0
UST
JFYOl 150
i FY 00 1 92
FY99 311
-------
Fiscal Year 2001
Assurance
Pollutants with the Largest Reductions Reported for EPA Enforcement Settlements
800
700
c
g
t3
~a
-------
Dollar Value of FY2001 EPA Enforcement Actions (by Statute)
CAA
CERC1A*
CWA
EPCRA
FIFRA
RCRA
SDWA
TSCA
** TITLE 18/OTHER
TOTALS
CRIMINAL
PENALTIES
ASSESSED
$25,315,683
$16,742,004
$38,216,603
$15,000
$128,505
$1,611,479
$8,000
$357,336
$12,331,673
$94,726,283
CIVIL JUDICIAL
PENALTIES
ASSESSED
$55,015,441
$2,220,000
$17,984,220
$12,957
$0
$25,981,539
$469,000
$0
$0
$101,683,157
ADMINISTRATIVE
PENALTIES
ASSESSED
$4,006,848
$143,170
$5,353,442
$3,515,780
$1,600,081
$5,554,194
$582,766
$3,025,983
$0
$23,782,264
$ VALUE OF
JUD. INJUNCTIVE
RELIEF
$2,702,366,701
$1,067,948,700
$97,662,082
$0
$0
$89,567,501
$100,000
$0
$0
$3,957,644,984
$ VALUE OF
ADM. INJUNCTIVE
RELIEF
$4,467,971
$154,235,133
$60,925,238
$834,689
$1,109,965
$210,800,317
$5,558,975
$441,095
$0
$438,373,383
$ VALUE OF
SEPs
$33,825,273
$830,957
$3,390,528
$3,711,428
$107,000
$44,393,575
$2,290,419
$585,776
$0
$89,134,956
* This includes PRP cash out settlement
** Criminal cases with U.S. Code - Title
for future work. Cost recovery dollars were $414 million.
1 8 or other violations.
-------
Fiscal Year 2001
Assurance
FY2001 National Compliance Assistance
Number of Entities Reached = 550,000
The Compliance Assistance Centers were visited more than 485,000 times.
Assistance
about
Statutory
Requirements
Assistance for
Specific Sectors
Entities Reached
600
500
400 ;
O
g 300
_c 200
100
0
FY99
FYOO
FY01
-------
Compliance^
Centers
.iLink"
The Agency has sponsored partnerships with industry, academic institutions, environmental
groups, and other federal and state agencies to establish Compliance Assistance Centers for 1 0
industry and government sectors. Through these centers, businesses in these sectors learn their
environmental obligations, improve compliance, and find cost-effective ways to comply. The
Compliance Assistance Centers can be accessed at www.assistancecenters.net.
CCAR-GreenLinks: Helps the automotive service and repair community identify flexible,
common sense ways to comply with environmental requirements, www.ccargreenlink.org
Provides innovative Web site features to direct chemical manufacturers to
information resources and plain-language compliance assistance material.
www.chemalliance.org
Government Environmental (LGEAN): Serves as a "first-stop-
shop" by providing environmental management, planning, and regulatory information for local
government officials, managers, and staff, www.lgean.org
Center}: Serves as the "first
stop" for information about environmental requirements that affect the agriculture community.
www.epa.gov/agriculture (This is a government-run center).
Resource (NMFRC): Provides comprehensive environ-
mental compliance, technical assistance, and pollution prevention information to the metal
finishing industry, www.nmfrc.org
Center: Provides regulatory compliance and pollution
prevention information to organic coating facilities, industry vendors and suppliers, and others.
www.paintcenter.org
Ag Center Printed Provides regulatory compliance and pollution
2SLSSSS"1 prevention information to printed wiring board manufacturers, industry vendors and suppliers,
and others, www.pwbrc.org
Printers* National Environmental Center (PNEAC): Provides compliance and
pollution prevention fact sheets, case studies, and training, as well as two e-mail discussion
NEAC groups on technical and regulatory issues, www.pneac.org
Resource (TERC): Provides compliance assistance
information for each mode of transportation—air, shipping and barging, rail, and trucking.
www.transource.org
Provides information on
environmental regulations, pollution prevention, and policies affecting federal agencies.
www.epa.gov/fedsite
-------
Fiscal Year 2001
Assurance
www.epa.gov/compliance
esdev.sdc-moses.com/oeca/newsroom/
www.epa.gov/compliance/resources/index.html
www.epa.gov/compliance/complaints.html
cfpub.epa.gov/clearinghouse/
www.assistancecenters.net/
http://www.epa.gov/compliance/incentives/auditing/index.html
Policy: http://www.epa.gov/compliance/incentives/smallbusiness/
index.html
http://www.epa.gov/compliance/incentives/
smallcommunity/index.html
www.epa.gov/oeca/sector
www.epa.gov/epahome/whereyoulive.htm#regiontext
http://www.epa.gov/epahome/lawregs.htm
http://www.epa.gov/epapages/statelocal/envrolst.htm
-------
(To report oi spills and chemical accidents): 1 -800-424-8802.
of (202) 564-2440
(202) 564-2280
of (202) 564-2220
of (202) 564-5110
(202) 564-2480
of (202) 564-2515
of & (202) 564-2530
(202) 564-2510
of (202) 564-5400
(202) 564-2455
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
1200 Pennsylvania Ave., NW
Washington, D.C. 20460-0001
-------
-------
------- |