-------
             H1993 Enforcement Accomplishments Report
The FY1993 Enforcement Accomplishments Report was prepared by the Compliance
Evaluation Branch within the Office of Enforcement.  Information contained in the
report was supplied by the EPA Regional Offices, Headquarters program offices
and the Office of Enforcement.
                       Printed on recycled paper

-------
                                                                           X
                     FY1993 Enforcement Accomplishments Report                        CSffi^
                       Dedication to Paul G. Keough


    The Fiscal Year 1993 EPA Enforcement Accomplishments Report is dedicated to
Paul G. Keough.  Paul was the Acting Regional Administrator of EPA Region I in
New England at the time of his sudden death on January 17,1994.  Paul served EPA
since its inception in 1971, and had held the position of Acting Regional
Administrator since January 1993. It was the third time he had served as Acting
Regional Administrator.  Since 1983, Paul's official position was as the Deputy
Regional Administrator, and in that role he had lead responsibility for Region  I's
enforcement programs.

    With his background in journalism, Paul also was a national leader in EPA's
efforts to better communicate the successes of our enforcement program. He chaired
a national Agency workgroup on communications with the media during the  late
1980's. Among other things, this workgroup recommended a major expansion of
the scope and distribution of the annual Enforcement Accomplishments Report.

    EPA Administrator Carol Browner recognized Paul Keough's contributions to
EPA in her announcement of a national award in his name as follows: "Paul was
the toughest of defenders of the environment and EPA, fighting passionately for
what he believed to be the correct course of action."

    Dedication of this Enforcement Accomplishments Report to Paul Keough
recognizes his national leadership in both enforcement and communications.

    We are grateful for  his efforts and we miss him very much.

-------
                      FY 1993 Enforcement Accomplishments Report
                             Table of Contents


I.    FY 1993: Maintaining Enforcement Priorities

II.    Environmental Enforcement Activity


III.   Major Enforcement Litigation and Key Legal Precedents

      An alphabetized summary of important civil and criminal judicial case settlements,
      administrative actions, and key court decisions that occurred during the year.

      CAA Enforcement Cases                                page 3-1
      CWA Enforcement Cases                                page 3-9
      MPRSA Enforcement Cases                              page 3-16
      SDWA Enforcement Cases                              page 3-19
      RCRA Enforcement Cases                               page 3-21
      CERCLA Enforcement Cases                             page 3-31
      TSCA Enforcement Cases                               page 3-53
      EPCRA Enforcement Cases                              page 3-58
      FIFRA Enforcement Cases                               page 3-63
      Multi-media Enforcement Cases                          page 3-66
      Federal Facility Cases                                 page 3-71
      Criminal Enforcement Cases                             page 3-73

IV.    Federal Facilities Enforcement and Federal Activities


V.    Building and Maintaining a Strong National Enforcement Program

      Summaries of major enforcement program strategies, initiatives, guidance, and management studies.
      Subsections on local enforcement, cooperative work with environmental groups, relationships with
      other Federal agencies and international issues.


VI.    Media Specific Enforcement Highlights and Regional Accomplishments

      Brief summaries of each National program and each Region's FY 1993 highlights.


      Appendix:
           Historical Enforcement Data
           List of Penalties by Media
           List of EPA Headquarters and Regional Enforcement Information
             Contacts

-------
                     FY1993 Enforcement Accomplishments Report
I. FY 1993:  Maintaining Enforcement Priorities

      During FY 1993, EPA's enforcement program, in partnership with the
enforcement programs in each state and the Department of Justice, worked hard to
maintain its  strong traditional, media-focused enforcement programs and assure
that violations of environmental rules and regulations were addressed  swiftly and
in an appropriate manner. At the same time, EPA accelerated its implementation of
innovative multi-media, risk-based enforcement approaches to solving compliance
problems and environmental risks, approaches which are described in  the
Enforcement Four-Year Strategic Plan and the Enforcement in the 1990's Project.
Two additional high priority areas for FY 1993 Agency enforcement were
environmental justice impacts and  our international enforcement program.

      The FY 1993 enforcement priorities for each of the Agency's traditional
enforcement programs are detailed in Section Three of this Report.  In  addition, that
section highlights significant enforcement cases supporting those priorities.  Section
Two of this Report and the Appendix provide quantitative statistics on the
accomplishments of EPA's media-specific enforcement efforts; these data provide
strong evidence that the Agency  continues to enforce environmental laws
forcefully.

      During FY 1993, the Agency continued the expansion of the criminal program
under the Pollution Prosecution Act of 1990, increasing the number of field offices
and agents.  Criminal sanctions resulting from the expansion in the capacity of our
criminal program provide a clear message to those engaged in criminal behavior
that those actions will not be tolerated.  (For examples, see Section Three criminal
cases write-ups.) With increased authority also to assess penalties administratively,
the Agency continued to screen cases to ensure use of the appropriate mix of
administrative, civil judicial and  criminal enforcement authorities to prosecute and
resolve violations. Civil enforcement continues to be the primary mechanism for
establishing  program precedents and resolving complex technical issues.  Civil
injunctive relief and administrative settlements compel industry to invest  in
environmental cleanup, pollution controls, and new technology to mitigate
environmental damage resulting from noncompliance.

Innovative Enforcement Approaches

      Major elements of the innovative enforcement approach which  the Agency
continued to implement in FY 1993 are: targeting enforcement at sources and
pollutants of particular risk or compliance concern, or at geographic areas of
concern; multi-media compliance assessments and multi-media enforcement
responses; and developing settlements which include pollution prevention, waste
minimization and other innovative solutions to environmental problems.

                                    l-l

-------
                      FF1993 Enforcement Accomplishments Report
Multi-media. Risk-based Enforcement Targeting

      As part of its multi-media, risk-based strategy, beginning in FY 1991 the
Agency has emphasized annual national 'targeted' enforcement initiatives.
National enforcement initiatives can focus on specific pollutants, industries, and
sensitive geographic zones which present a national risk from the standpoints of
human health, the environment, and the maintenance of the integrity of agency
regulatory programs. This effort continued during FY  1992 when the Agency filed
nine benzene cases, prosecuted twenty-four previously filed lead cases, and filed a
total of sixty-four cases against the primary metals, pulp and paper, and industrial
organic chemical industries.  These three industries were targeted on the bases of
toxic releases and historical noncompliance.  These cases have resulted in significant
settlements in FY 1993, many of which are discussed in detail in Section Three.

      During FY 1993, the agency commenced two additional two-year long
national initiatives.   One, a Data Integrity/Data Quality initiative, focussed
principally on non-reporters and false reports of data that are required under
national and delegated programs. The goal is to send a positive, consistent message
to the regulated community on the importance to EPA and the states of obtaining
complete and accurate data to determine compliance and to assess environmental
progress. Each Agency enforcement office is participating in this effort

      The second FY 1993 initiative is a comprehensive program to address multi-
media  enforcement and compliance issues at federal facilities.. At least forty high
priority federal facilities across the all EPA regions are being inspected for multi-
media  compliance.  Selection of the facilities was based upon pre-established criteria
that include compliance history, EPA regional risk rankings, pollution prevention
opportunities, and compatibility with EPA national or regional/state program
priorities.  States have been encouraged to participate  in the inspections.

      As part of the initiative process, EPA and states, to the extent possible,
"cluster" or group individual cases for filing. The purpose of case "clusters" is to
gain maximum deterrence through capturing the attention of the  media and the
regulated  community. EPA is  analyzing the impact of completed initiatives to assess
"what  works best and what doesn't work" so that future enforcement activity can be
carried out in the most efficient manner. As EPA expanded its use of initiatives and
case clusters, state participation in both the formulation and execution of these
activities is taking on added significance. The process for multi-media strategic
planning ensures that states are directly involved in the formulation of national
priorities and will have sufficient time to plan for this involvement. National
initiatives for FY 1994 and beyond will be identified in conjunction with a broad-
based multi-media team, including state representatives.
                                     1-2

-------
                     FY1993 Enforcement Accomplishments Report
      One of the major  tools for identifying enforcement initiatives is the
agency's IDEA (Integrated Data for Enforcement Analysis) computer capability.
IDEA, which links the agency's compliance, toxic release inventory (TRI), and
geographic (GIS) data systems/ is used to screen and target single and multi-media
enforcement efforts. EPA has already demonstrated the IDEA capability to several
states and has worked to more widely deliver IDEA training to states.

Environmental Justice

      A central tenet of our enforcement philosophy is that citizens receive full and
equal protection under our environmental laws and regulations, regardless of
race, nationality, or social standing. Environmental equity concerns are being
institutionalized as a core component of our enforcement program and throughout
the Agency as a whole in rulemaking. research, and policy.

      The Agency has taken specific steps to ensure that the enforcement program
supports the health and welfare of minority populations. For  example, the national
enforcement initiative to reduce lead exposure was implemented in large part
because of the understanding that lead is one of the most pervasive chemicals
impacting minority populations, especially children. Our Federal Facilities
Enforcement Program is beginning a comprehensive study of environmental equity
issues as they relate to pollution generated and emitted at federal facilities.

      The EPA regional offices are taking specific enforcement actions to protect
minority populations.  For example, Region II is performing  a study of Superfund
enforcement at minority/low income communities using geographic information
system (GIS) mapping, and Region V implemented a geographic enforcement
initiative to reduce pollution exposure to Southeast Chicago residents and the
Wisconsin Native American Indian Tribes.  Similarly, Region VI and  Headquarters
are coordinating compliance and enforcement actions in a geographic initiative
targeted at the Mexican border area (in conjunction with Mexico), and Region IX has
implemented an enforcement initiative targeted for drinking water sources at
migrant farmworker camps.

Innovative Settlements

      Over the last several years, the Agency has looked for ways to expand the
impact of enforcement settlements by  securing additional environmental benefits
beyond that which can be  required through injunctive relief.  One of  the major tools
used by the agency has  been the use of Supplemental Environmental  Projects (SEPs),
especially ones which emphasize pollution prevention and waste minimization.
Over the last two years, the inclusion of SEPs in settlements have increased
substantially and the environmental benefit resulting from them has indeed far
exceeded the benefits available through injunctive relief.  A review of case
summaries in Section Three of this report will demonstrate the frequent use of
                                    1-3

-------
r~
                               FF 7995 Enforcement Accomplishments Report
         these projects and illustrate their innovative solutions to solving pollution
         problems.

               As EPA looks for opportunities to promote pollution prevention and waste
         minimization opportunities through enforcement, the Agency's Pollution
         Prevention Senior Policy Council endorsed the delivery of more enforcement-
         oriented pollution prevention training to legal and technical enforcement
         personnel.  This training emphasizes the types of pollution prevention  technology
         which are  most appropriate to the types of facilities regulated by the media
         programs and the types of violations encountered.

         Transboundary International Enforcement

               The point that pollution respects no national boundaries could not have been
         more clearly made than in the debates over NAFTA, involving the United States,
         Mexico, and Canada. Most of the discussions involved the Mexican Border area,
         where the expected trans-border  movement of hazardous substances, wastes, and
         other materials regulated by both countries creates the need for expanded
         cooperation in environmental enforcement.  NAFTA contains a provision
         recognizing the inappropriateness of encouraging investment by relaxing
         environmental laws.   A strong commitment by each country and its political
         subdivisions to adequate enforcement of their respective environmental laws  is the
         key to ensuring that NAFTA does not result in such behavior. The United States
         and Mexico have made mutual  commitments  to  respond aggressively to
         environmental problems along the U.S.-Mexican Border.

               EPA and Mexico continued to expand their cooperative enforcement efforts in
         FY 1993 by:  working to improve tracking of environmental enforcement  activity in
         the Mexican border area by both  countries; conducting joint training and
         investigations aimed at criminal  prosecution; and conducting expanded border
         checks to detect transboundary shipment violations.
                                             1-4

-------
                         FY1993 Enforcement Accomplishments Report
II.    Environmental Enforcement Activity

A.  Federal Judicial and Administrative Enforcement Activity

       During FY 1993, EPA continued to implement the strategic approaches called for in the Agency's
Enforcement Four-Year Strategic Plan through through cross-program/multi-media and multi-facility
enforcement actions which seek to  bring about comprehensive  solutions  to complex interrelated
environmental problems. With this perspective, EPA intends to achieve additional public health and
environmental protection results, deterrence, and efficiency which might not be achieved through use
of traditional single-media approaches alone.  In FY 1993, EPA fully implemented modifications to its
activity counting methodologies that track and account for civil referral activity. These adjustments
were recommended by an Agency-wide workgroup rnd are intended to account for the greater magnitude
of cross-program/multi-media actions, and to remove any accounting-related disincentives to bringing
more complex cases.

       EPA is also implementing other enforcement indicators that are intended to provide a more
complete and balanced picture of the quality and magnitude of its enforcement efforts. In this and other
sections of this report, more information is provided on EPA's use of Administrative Penalty Orders,
which are an effective complement to civil judicial enforcement tools, along with information on the
value of injunctive relief and Supplemental Environmental Projects, which complement information
reported on civil penalty assessments.

B.  Federal Civil Judicial Enforcement

       In FY 1993, EPA referred 338 civil judicial cases to the Department of Justice, down six percent
from FY 1992. Program-specific increases were recorded for the Clean Water Act and the Safe Drinking
Water Act, which when combined, increased 9% from FY 1992. Clean Air Act civil referrals declined by
12 cases, however, use of Clean Air Act Administrative Penalty Order (APO) authorities increased by
154 cases, an increase of 67% over the FY 1992 level.  Agencywide, issuance of APOs increased by 180
cases from FY 1992, an increase of 12%. The Office of Enforcement expects that the trend toward greater
use of APO authorities will continue, and in the future the civil judicial referral and APO indicators
will need to be viewed together in assessments of civil enforcement activity levels.
        400-/


        300-


        200-


        100
Civil Judicial Referrals to DOJ Since FY1977
I WATER
              TOXICS/
              PESTICIDES
                                        QlRCRA
ISUPERFUND HAIR

-------
                         FF1993 Enforcement Accomplishments Report
C. Monitoring Judicial Consent Decrees

       The high levels of civil judicial enforcement activity over the last several years have resulted
in accompanying large increases in the number of consent decrees which the Agency has entered into
with violating facilities.  EPA places high priority on ensuring that defendants live up to the
obligations assure that are spelled out in consent decrees. At the end of FY 1993, the Agency reported
that  968 active judicial consent decrees were in place and being actively monitored to  ensure
compliance, an increase of 153 (up 18%) from FY 1992.  Where noncompliance with a decree is found,
EPA may initiate proceedings with the court to compel the facility to live up to its agreement and seek
penalties for such noncompliance. EPA referred 18 cases to DOJ for enforcement of the consent decree
compared to 19 cases in FY 1992.

D. Federal Criminal Judicial Enforcement

       EPA's criminal program established records in FY 1993 for several categories of activity.  New
records included referring 140 cases to DOJ (the previous record was 107 in FY 1992), bringing charges
against 161 defendants (the previous record was 150 in FY 1992), and the number of months of jail time
defendants served with 876 months (the previous record was 744 months in FY 1992).  Seventy-seven
criminal cases concluded during the year, in which 135 defendants were convicted. In addition, 57 of the
defendants convicted were sentenced to incarceration.

       Incarceration and probation are key parts of the criminal program, including serving a strong
deterrent role.  Probation is very effective because in the event that an individual commits another
crime (not limited  to environmental crimes), the  provisions of the probation normally call  for the
automatic imposition of the  prison sentence that was suspended in lieu of probation.  Since 1982,
individuals have received prison sentences for committing environmental crimes totaling 429 years, and
1,261 years of probation have been imposed,

       EPA's increased  emphasis  on the criminal enforcement program over the past five years,
coupled with passage and implementation of the Pollution Prosecution Act of 1990, has significantly
raised the profile of criminal enforcement both within EPA and in the regulated community. By the end
of FY 1993, EPA had increased the number of criminal agents to 110 compared to 47 in FY 1989. This
additional investment in agents has  yielded significant increases in most of the key outputs of the
criminal program.
                 Criminal Enforcement Increases: FY 89 to FY 93JJ
                         FY 1989   FY 1990   FY 1991   FY 1992  FY 1993
                Agents
Cases Initiated B Referrals      D Defendants
                                            2-2

-------
                          FY1993 Enforcement Accomplishments Report
E.  Administrative Enforcement

       EPA posted its third highest annual total for administrative enforcement activities in FY 1993
with 3,808 actions.  The Agency record of 4,136 was set in FY 1989. The totals for FY 1993 demonstrate
that although judicial actions (both civil and criminal) have been the most visible indicators of EPA's
performance, other indicators need to be considered to fully ascertain EPA's effectiveness in enforcing
environmental laws  and regulations.  In recently enacted or reauthorized statutes, Congress has
expanded EPA's authority to use administrative enforcement mechanisms to address violations, compel
regulated  facilities to  achieve compliance, and assess penalties.  Many  of these administrative
authorities provide for  injunctive relief and penalties  that are comparable to those which can be
obtained through civil judicial enforcement.  EPA programs issued 1,614 administrative penalty orders
(APOs) in FY 1993, an increase of 180 (12%) from FY 1992.
      45(Xh
      3600-
EPA Administrative Orders Since FY 1977
         o
           '77  78  '79  '80   '81   '82   '83  '84  '85   '86   '87   '88  '89  '90  '91   '92   '93
          CAA
        CWA/SDWA  • RCRA
D  CERCLA
                                                                    HFRA
TSCA/EPCRA
F. EPA Contractor Listing

        In FY 1993, fifty-seven facilities were added to EPA's List of Violating Facilities (List) under
the authorities provided to EPA by Clean Air Act § 306 and Clean Water Act § 508, to bar facilities
that violate clean air or clean water standards from receiving Federally funded contracts, grants or
loans.  Federal agencies are prohibited by statutory mandate  from entering into contracts, grants or
loans (including subcontracts, sub-grants or subloans) to be performed at facilities owned or operated by
persons who are convicted of violating air standards under CAA §113(c) or water standards under CWA
§309(c) (and involved  in the violations),  effective automatically on  the date  of the conviction.
Facilities which are mandatorily listed remain  on the  List until EPA  determines that  they have
corrected the conditions giving  rise to the violations.  Fifty-seven facilities were listed in FY 1992
based on criminal convictions. Nine facilities were removed from the List in FY 1993. Since FY 1986,
175 facilities have  been placed on the mandatory list.  One hundred eighteen facilities remained on
the List as of the end of FY 1993.

        Facilities with records of civil violations may also be listed, at the discretion of the Assistant
Administrator for Enforcement, upon the recommendation of certain EPA officials, a State Governor, or a
member of the public (referred to as discretionary listing).  A facility may be recommended for
                                            .2-3

-------
                         FY1993 Enforcement Accomplishments Report
discretionary listing if there are continuing or recurring violations of the CAA or CWA after one or more
enforcement actions have been brought against the facility by 1PA or a state enforcement agency.
Facilities  recommended  for. discretionary listing  have a  right  to  an informal  administrative
proceeding.  In FY 1993, one proposed discretionary listing was settled.  Also, the possibility of
discretionary listing helped to achieve settlements in numerous other civil enforcement cases.

G, Federal Penalty Assessments

       Delaying or foregoing capital investment in pollution controls, as well as failure to provide
resources for annual pollution control operating expenditures, can allow undeserved economic benefits to
accrue to a regulated entity. As part of the effort to deter noncompliance, EPA's enforcement programs
have developed penalty policies designed to assess penalties which recover any economic benefit that
a noncomplying facility has realized, and assess additional penalties commensurate with the gravity
of the violation(s).

       In FY 1993, $115.1 million in civil penalties were assessed, an all-time record ($85.9 million in
civil judicial penalties, a record, and $29.2 million in administrative penalties).  The overall increase
was in part a result of a substantial increase in CERCLA § 104,106,107 penalties (from $6.7 million in
FY 1992 to $24.3 million in FY 1993).  Since 1974, EPA has assessed $435.9 million in civil and judicial
penalties, with over sixty percent of this total being assessed in the last three years.  Criminal fines
totaled $29.7 million in FY 1993.  Since 1984, $139 million in fines have been levied in EPA criminal
cases.

       In FY  1993, $22.9 million in dean Air Act civil penalties were assessed ($20.4 million for
stationary source violations and $2.5 million for mobile source violations);  $27,8 million in Clean
Water Act penalties were  assessed ($23.1  million in civil judicial penalties  and $4.7 million in
administrative penalties); over $6.9 million in Toxic Substances Control Act penalties were assessed;
$22.8 million in Resource Conservation and Recovery Act penalties were assessed  ($14.2 million in civil
judicial penalties and $8.6 million in administrative penalties); and $24.3 million in CERCLA civil
judicial penalties were assessed. The Federal Insecticide,  Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act and Safe
Drinking  Water Act programs  are  largely delegated to the States; however, EPA assessed $632
thousand, and $5.6 million, respectively, under these statutes. The Toxic Release Inventory program
assessed nearly $2.6 million. The Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act (EPCRA)
had $1.6 million in assessed penalties (including CERCLA §103).
c
M
"3
TJ
"8
a
o
160-

140

120

100

 SO

 60

 40

 20

  0
                          Civil Judicial and Administrative Penalties
                              and Criminal Fines Assessed
                     a CRIMINAL
                              t
                     • ADMINISTRATIVE

                     • JUDICIAL
                                              24

-------
                        FY1993 Enforcement Accomplishments Report
H. State Judicial and Administrative Enforcement Activity

       Several hundred thousand facilities are subject to environmental regulation, and the job of
ensuring compliance and taking action to correct instances of noncompliance with federal laws is
entrusted both to EPA and to the States through delegated or approved State programs. EPA and the
States must rely on a partnership to get the job done, with State environmental agencies shouldering a
significant share of the nation's environmental enforcement workload. In FY 1993, the States referred
690 civil cases to State Attorneys General and issued 11,881 administrative actions to  violating
facilities.  The major portion of State administrative actions occur in the FTFRA and water programs,
35% and 33% respectively.  (Additional data on State administrative orders and referrals is contained
in the Appendix.)
                  State Administrative Orders: FY 86 to FY 93

       FY93
        FY92
        FY91
        FY90
        FY89

        FY88
        FY87
        FY86

                    2000
   4000     6000     8000     10000    12000     14000
                          I FIFRA    D WATER  • AIR
                              IRCRA
                         State Judicial Referals: FY 86 - FY 93
         FY93
         FY92
         FY91
         FY'
         FYI
         FYi
         FY87
         FY86








              0
200
400
600
800
1000
                                  WATER  DAIR
                           IRCRA
                                           2-5

-------
e->
^k
                             FY 1993 Enforcement Accomplishments Report
    I. Supplemental Environmental Projects

           The analysis of FY 1993 settlement data indicated that the EPA regional offices negotiated 229
    Supplemental Environmental Projects (SEPs).  These SEPS,  which had an estimated total value of
    $73.8M, were negotiated in EPCRA, RCRA, CERCLA, TSCA, FIFRA, AHERA, OPA, CWA, SDWA,
    stationary source CAA and multi-media cases. Forty-eight percent of the SEPs were in the category of
    pollution reduction, and another 18% were in the category of pollution prevention.  In addition to these
    figures, the Nationally Managed Mobile Sources Air program negotiated an additional 62 SEPs, the
    majority of which were in the Public Awareness category.  More detailed information on SEPs can be
    found in the FY 1993 National Penalty Report, which will be published separately,

    J.  Cross-Program/Multi-Media Enforcement and Targeted Enforcement Initiatives

           While maintaining strong traditional  enforcement programs, EPA stressed implementation of
    the cross-program/multi-media perspective  and use of  targeted and  innovative  enforcement
    approaches. The Agency's primary goal in  implementing these approaches it to obtain additional
    public health and environmental protection results, greater deterrence, and efficiency which might not
    be achieved through use oif traditional approaches alone.  Highlights of Regional performance in these
    areas include:

            » Cross-program/multi-media inspections and enforcement actions - The Regions implemented
    the cross-prpgram/multi-media perspective through  use  of workgroups which  targeted  cross-
    program/multi-media inspections, conducted case screening  on single media enforcement cases, and
    coordinated case management against facilities with cross-program violations. FY 1993 was the second
    year for which the Agency has collected data on cross-program/multi-media activities, and the data
    are very encouraging.  In  FY 1993, the Regions  conducted  209 consolidated  (simultaneous) cross-
    program/multi-media inspections and 71 additional coordinated inspections (inspections conducted in
    follow-up to concerns raised during an inspection by another program).  In all, 858 individual program
    compliance assessments occurred in these 280 inspections.  During FY 1993, the Agency initiated 24 cross-
    program/multi-media administrative enforcement actions, referred 12 multi-media  judicial cases to
    DOJ and completed 18 cross-program/multi-media settlements which grew out of a single media case.
    In addition to these inspections the Regions reported conducting 2700 single-median inspections using a
    multi-media inspection checklist.
                                                2-6

-------
                        FY1993 Enforcement Accomplishments Report
III.   Major Enforcement Litigation
       and Key Legal Precedents -
       Protecting Public Health and
    •   the Environment through  .
       Enforcement

       This  chapter  provides highlights  of
major environmental litigation in FY  1993.  These
cases   support   EPA  and  state   enforcement
priorities    and   demonstrate   innovative
approaches  in the enforcement process.   FY 1993
was an exciting and challenging year for EPA's
and  the  states'  enforcement efforts.   EPA
continued   implementation   of   the   new
enforcement  approaches,   described   in   the
Agency's Enforcement Four-Year Strategic Plan
and Enforcement in the 1990's  Project,  by which
federal  and  state  governments  could better
promote   compliance  with,  and   effective
deterrence  against violations  of,  environmental
laws.
Clean Air Act Enforcement

Stationary Sources

        The  1990   Clean  Air  Act  (CAA)
amendments  generally     expanded    EPA's
enforcement authorities and tools,  providing for
a  more flexible  enforcement  program.   For
example, in May 1992, the program undertook a
coordinated nationwide filing  of fifty-two CAA
administrative  penalty  cases  under  the  new
authorities  granted  by  the  act.   These  cases
covered a  variety of regulations, including new
requirements for continuous emissions monitoring
equipment  at petroleum  refineries,  benzene and
uranium mining waste piles, and state  standards
for smoke density and airborne particle emission.
The  1990  amendments also expanded  contractor
listing  sanctions,   authorized  a.  new  field
citations   program   and  tougher   criminal
enforcement provisions, and provided for citizen
suits.   In   addition,  the  CAA   necessitated
implementation  of   the  revised  Significant
Violator/Timely  and  Appropriate Guidance,
which applies to all major  sources  as defined by
the amendments. The air program  continues to
place    high   priority   on   supporting
implementation  of the guidance.
       In  FY  1993,  the  program's  general
compliance monitoring and  enforcement efforts
continued  to   place  high   priority  upon
implementation  of the 1990 amendments. The
program,   working   with  the  states,   also
emphasized  the  compliance of  sources   with
State Implementation Plans  (SIPs), New Source
Performance  Standards   (NSPS),   and   the
National  Emissions  Standards for  Hazardous
Air Pollutants (NESHAP) and  compliance  with
the  dry  cleaning rule,  permits  enforceability
review  under   Title  V,   and  the  benzene
wastewater  rule.  The program  maintains an
active  effort  to  implement  the  requirements  of
the Montreal Protocol to protect stratospheric
ozone.  Enforcement actions  were  taken against
persons who import CFCs without  first  obtaining
the allowances necessary  to  ensure  that overall
U.S. consumption of these  chemicals  does  not
exceed  the limits imposed  by  the protocols.

       The  air  program  continues  to  focus
enforcement  activity  on criteria pollutants.   It
also  emphasized  compliance  for  pollutants
specific to  certain industries  and  geographic
areas  that,  pose  the  greatest  health  and
ecological  risk. For example,  the  program  has
previously  implemented  lead  and   benzene
NESHAP  initiatives and  will continue  to  target
for  violations  involving asbestos  and  vinyl
chloride.  As part of the  geographic  initiatives
for  the  Mexican Border  area,  the  program
emphasizes   compliance   with   air   quality
standards for ozone, PM-10, and  carbon monoxide.
The program also emphasizes  compliance  with
volatile organic  compound limitations  in  ozone
nonattainment areas.

       With passage of the  1990  Clean Air Act
amendment,  the  air program will be developing
a  host of new  rules that  are heavily dependent
on  data  accuracy and integrity (e.g.,  enhanced
monitoring,   continuous   emission  monitoring,
hazardous air pollutants). As  part of the FY 1993
National  Data   Quality  Initiative,   the  air
program  ensured  the  quality  of air  emission
reports submitted by  stationary  sources  to
regional,  state,   and local  air  agencies, and
compliance with  emission monitor  certification
requirements.

In the Matter of; Applied Magnetics Corporation:
On July 22,1993, Applied Magnetics agreed to pay
                                             3-1

-------
  %. ii

SB)
V«^
FF /99J Enforcement Accomplishments Report
   a civil penalty of $67,525 resolving EPA's first
   administrative enforcement action initiated to
   address violations of CAA requirements governing
   the importation of chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs).
   The  CFC  regulations  help   protect  the
   stratospheric ozone layer and are an important
   element of the U.S. government's implementation
   of the Montreal Protocol  on Substances that
   Deplete the Ozone Layer.

   Archer Rubber Company (D.Mass.):  On October
   12, 1993,  the U.S. District Court approved  a
   settlement  between  EPA  and Archer Rubber
   Company  of Milford, Massachusetts settling an
   action initiated by EPA in July  1990 alleging
   violations  of §113  of  the  CAA  and  the
   Massachusetts State Implementation Plan (SIP).
   EPA's complaint alleged  violations  at Archer's
   Milford facility since 1985 involving uncontrolled
   emissions of volatile organic compounds (VOCs)
   from  the   company's  fabric  surface coating
   operations.  Under  the  settlement, Archer is
   obligated  to, among other things: (1) pay  a
   $200,000 penalty; (2) install, test and operate
   VOC capture and control equipment in compliance
   with the SIP;  (3) keep extensive written records
   concerning VOC emissions and the use of emission
   controls; (4) report to EPA on a quarterly basis;
   and (5) pay significant stipulated penalties for
   each day of each violation of the consent decree
   terms. The settlement allows Archer to admit no
   liability for the alleged violations.

   Under the settlement, EPA agreed to withdraw a
   contractor  listing action  against  Archer,  under
   §306 of the CAA, based  on Archer's  record of
   continuing or recurring noncompliance with clean
   air standards and  on prior EPA enforcement
   actions taken against  the company.   While
   agreeing  to withdraw the listing action, EPA
   expressly reserves the right to initiate a second
   listing action in the event of any future violation
  . by Archer  of the CAA, the SIP, or  the consent
   decree.

   U.S. v. Bethlehem Steel e^jd, JLjckwanna^ New
   XfirJi:   On September 7, 1993, the United  States
   entered into a settlement with Bethlehem Steel
   and several asbestos contractors in which these
   companies agreed  to  pay a  civil  penalty of
   $560,000, the  largest penalty ever collected for
   violations  of the asbestos NESHAP.  The consent
   decree requires Bethlehem and the contractors to
   implement asbestos abatement programs to ensure
                     all future asbestos removal operations follow the
                     requirements of the asbestos NESHAP.  One  of
                     the    abatement   contractors,   Safe   Air
                     Environmental Group  (now  defunct)  and  its
                     president, James Long, were convicted in 1992 of
                     criminal violations  in  connection with  their
                     work  at mis Bethlehem Steel facility.

                     U.S. v. B.F. Goodrich {W.D. Kent,); On September
                     13, 1993, the court entered  a consent decree
                     resolving a CAA civil enforcement action against
                     B.F. Goodrich for violations of the benzene and
                     mercury NESHAPs at Goodrich's plant in Calvert
                     City, Kentucky.  Goodrich agreed to pay a civil
                     penalty  of  $160,000,     implement   an
                     environmentally beneficial project to reduce
                     mercury emissions  beyond  the  NESHAP
                     requirement, and conduct environmental audits at
                     several of its  facilities.

                     U.S. v. City of Chicago, ct al.. (N.D. III.); On
                     February 16,1993, the court, after a trial, found
                     Coif ax liable on all of the 11 CAA violations
                     alleged in the complaint. The court also found
                     Metropolitan Structures liable  for all  nine
                     violations  alleged  at  the two  sites which it
                     owned. The penalty, assessed against Colfax was
                     $95,000 and against Metropolitan Structures was
                     $20,000, for a total of $115,000,

                     U.S. v. Consolidated Edison Company (E.D.N.Y.):
                     The complaint • in  this  action, filed  in  1988,
                     charged that asbestos had been removed from Con
                     Ed facilities in New York City in violation of the
                     CAA, including both failure to notify and work
                     practice infractions.  After extensive litigation
                     involving, inter a 1 i a. numerous depositions and
                     summary judgment motions from both parties, the
                     case was resolved with Con Ed's agreement to pay
                     $219,500. The consent decree was entered by the
                     court on October 7,1993.

                     U.S.  v. Consolidated Rail Corporation   (N.D.
                     Ohio): On  October  14,  1992, the U.S.  District
                     Court entered a Second Amendment to Consent
                     Order resolving EPA's CAA contempt action
                     against Consolidated Rail Corporation (Conrail).
                     The amendment requires Conrail to pay $165,000
                     in penalties for its past violations. In addition, it
                     allows the company to apply encrusting agents in
                     lieu of water to control fugitive dust.

                     EPA and Conrail had negotiated a consent order in
                     1986 which resolved violations of  Ohio's CAA
                                                3-2

-------
                        FY1993 Enforcement Accomplishments Report
SIP  at  the  company's Ashtabula,  Ohio coal
facility. Among the consent order provisions was
a  requirement  that  Conrail  utilize a  water
spraying system  to suppress fugitive dust
emissions from its coal piles.  In 1988, the Agency
filed a Motion to Enforce the Consent Order, citing
Conrail's failure to comply with the order's
watering requirements on more than 200 days.

Coors Brewing Company. Inc. (Elkton. VA): On
August  10, 1993, Coors Brewing Company, Inc.
executed a  consent. decree with  EPA,  which
requires Coors to pay a civil penalty of $245,000.
The decree resolved violations of the  Prevention
of Significant Deterioration (PSD) regulations
under the CAA that require a valid PSD permit
before construction  commences  on a  new major
stationary source. In March 1981, EPA Region III
issued Coors a PSD permit for the construction of a
10 million barrel-per-year brewery. The  permit
was reissued and extended on numerous occasions
by the State, who required, as a condition of the
extension, that Coors complete a new PSD review
prior to initiating construction of the brewery.
However, Coors  initiated construction of certain
brewery elements without meeting the terms and
conditions  of  its PSD permit  extensions. The
consent decree  requires Coors to send a  letter to the
Virginia Department of Environmental Quality
and EPA certifying that it has abandoned plans to
construct the brewery as a major stationary source,
as defined under PSD regulations, for a five-year
period.  As a result, Coors now proposes  to use
natural  gas instead of coal as its boiler fuel, and
will  relinquish all rights it now has to available
Shenandoah  Park  class I  sulfur  dioxide
increments, held solely by Coors for over 12 years.

U.S.  v.  Crown.  Cork  &  Seal  Company
(N.D.Miss.): On September 30, 1993,  the U.S.
Attorney filed a  consent decree in settlement of
EPA's pending enforcement action against Crown
Cork and Seal Company, Inc. (Crown) for CAA
violations.  On  or about June 1987,  Crown
commenced  operations of a new two-piece can
coating  facility in  Batesville,  Mississippi,
without first obtaining a PSD permit or  testing
and  reporting pursuant to requirements  of the
CAA.   Under  this decree,  Crown will  pay
$343,000 for  PSD and NSPS violations.

In addition to  the penalty, Crown agreed to
perform  three  supplemental  environmental
projects (SEPs) valued at more than  $2,000,000,
after tax. These SEPs consist of the following:  a
new regenerative incinerator  at the Batesville
plant to further reduce VOC  emissions  below
legal  requirements; a pilot  project at Crown's
Cheraw, South Carolina facility to test the use of
a bio-filter to control VOC emissions;  and  a
management  environmental  awareness training
program for Crown's corporate  managers and for
managers at all Crown can  coating facilities in
the United  States.

U.S. v. Enterprise Products Company. (S.D. Tex.:)
On August 25, 1993, the court entered a consent
decree  settling the CAA civil penalty  action
against Enterprise Products Company. On August
30, 1993, Enterprise paid a civil penalty  in the
amount of $86,000 to resolve NSPS violations at
its  Mont Belvieu, Texas  storage facility.  The
violations occurred  due to the release into the
atmosphere of unauthorized amounts of natural
gasoline vapor from a storage vessel.  The vapor
recovery system that had been installed  was
insufficient to collect and/or process all volatile
organic compound vapors and gases discharged
from the storage vessel.

Idaho  Panhandle  Wood Products Initiative:
During  fiscal year 1993, Region X completed a
two-year  enforcement initiative  in Northern
Idaho ("Idaho panhandle").  The shift of wood
product operations from the coast of Washington
and Oregon to Northern Idaho has resulted in
increased production at existing facilities and the
startup of many new facilities.  Since the State
of Idaho had limited resources to inspect this
large universe of major stationary  sources,  EPA
agreed to conduct field inspections of 25 wood
products facilities in the Idaho panhandle. As a
result of violations documented during these
inspections, Region  X issued nine administrative
penalty actions and made two referrals  to the
DOJ (one involves  a  Louisiana-Pacific facility,
included in the national  settlement discussed
below). In addition  to substantial penalties, the
settlements included  both extensive injunctive
relief provisions and supplemental environmental
projects requiring reduced  emissions  through
improved  operations,  better maintenance,
installation of continuous emission monitors, and
source testing. These provisions are expected to
reduce emissions of particulate matter by 1,398
tons per year and volatile organic compounds by
239 tons per year.
                                             3-3

-------
**)
                           FY1993 Enforcement Accomplishments Report
U.S. v. Kimmins Environmental Services. Ir^c,
(M.D. Fl.)t On December 7,1992, the court entered
a consent decree  to  settle  an action against
Kimmins Contracting Corporation for violations
of  the  asbestos  NESHAP  demolition  and
renovation regulations.   Under  the decree,
Kimmins agreed to pay a $25,000 penalty and  to
develop  both Asbestos  Control  and  Asbestos
Training Programs. On December 5,1988, Kimmins
had  removed asbestos pipe insulation from  a
phosphorus and sulfuric acid plant, later owned
by  U.S.  Agri-Chemicals Corporation  in Polk
County,  Florida,  prior  to  demolition of  the
facility.  Kimmins failed to give at least ten days
notice  to  the  proper  agency  prior   to
commencement, and  had failed to keep  the
asbestos  insulation wet during  stripping,  as
required under 40 C.F.R. § 61.147(d).

In re La Roche Chemicals. Inc.; Under the terms of
a consent agreement and consent order filed. July
30,  1993, LaRoche Chemicals  of Gramercy,
Louisiana, agreed to pay a $25,000 civil penalty
and expend an additional $158,400 to purchase,
install and operate equipment for recovery of
residual  chlorofluorocarbons  (CFCs) in used
cylinders returned by customers.  Recovery of
tftese CFC residues will reduce the amount of
CFCs released  into  the atmosphere by  an
estimated 50,000 pounds per  year more than
current regulatory requirements. This agreement
resolved  CAA  violations  by  LaRoche  for
facilities utilizing asbestos during manufacturing
processes. EPA accepted the company's proposal
to reduce  CFC  releases in  lieu  of paying
additional sums  to resolve violations of  the
unrelated asbestos rules.

U.S. v. Louisiana-Pacific Corporation and Kirby
Forest Industries. Inc. (W.D. La.):  The penalty in
this  case represents the  largest  CAA civil
penalty ever  collected by EPA, and the second
largest   penalty  recovered   under   any
environmental  statute. Under the  terms of  a
consent  decree  entered on September 30, 1993,
Louisiana-Pacific  (LP) was  required to pay an
$11.1 million civil penalty and to  install state-of-
the-art pollution control  equipment, valued at
approximately  $70 million,  in  eleven of its
facilities,   Louisiana-Pacific also agreed  to
implement an extensive CAA compliance program
including: compliance and management audits;
obtaining PSD or NSR permits; complying with
existing  state  permits; installing enhanced
                                                  monitoring equipment at 11  facilities; and
                                                  maintaining records  and  reporting  to  the
                                                  government as required under the CAA.

                                                  On May  24, 1993,  EPA  Administrator Carol
                                                  Browner and Attorney General Janet Reno held a
                                                  joint press conference announcing settlement of this
                                                  action which involved numerous violations of
                                                  SIPs, PSD, NSR, and state permit requirements at
                                                  fourteen of LP's  wood panel facilities located.in
                                                  eleven  states.    The Administrator  and  the
                                                  Attorney General stressed the Agency enforcement
                                                  themes which were  addressed  in this national
                                                  case,  including:  the environmental benefits  and
                                                  deterrent  effect of the settlement; data and PSD
                                                  program  integrity;  advancing the pollution
                                                  control technology used  in  an industry;  and
                                                  federal-state cooperation in  coordinating a
                                                  nationally managed enforcement action.

                                                  U.S. v. Midwest Suspension and  Brake (E.D. Mi.)
                                                  On June 16,1993, the court ordered the defendant
                                                  in this civil judicial enforcement action to pay a
                                                  civil  penalty of  $50,000 for violations of the
                                                  asbestos NESHAP at its brake refurbishing plant.
                                                  The court's opinion clarified key terms under the
                                                  asbestos NESHAP.   The  court opined  that a
                                                  "visible emissions" violation must be proven
                                                  without  the  aid of  instruments  and that
                                                  circumstantial evidence is sufficient to establish
                                                  the violation.  In determining  the appropriate
                                                  civil  penalty, the court followed  a 1992 CAA
                                                  holding that, when calculating civil  penalties
                                                  under §113 of the CAA, a court must start by
                                                  imposing the statutory maximum penalty  and
                                                  then  must apply  the  appropriate  penalty
                                                  assessment criteria to determine if penalty
                                                  mitigation is justified.

                                                  U.S.  v. Mobil Oil Corporation (E.D.  Ca.):  On
                                                  February  4, 1993, the court entered a consent
                                                  decree ordering  Mobil Oil Corporation to pay a
                                                  civil  penalty of $950,000, the second largest
                                                  penalty levied  by EPA for CAA  violations in
                                                  California. In its complaint, the government
                                                  alleged  that  between  November  1983  and
                                                  December 1985, Mobil violated the CAA at its
                                                  polystyrene foam manufacturing facility.   The
                                                  complaint charged that Mobil had emitted more
                                                  isopentane, a volatile organic compound that is a
                                                  precursor to ground level ozone pollution, than
                                                  was permitted by Kern  County Air  Pollution
                                                  Control District  Rule 414.4, which is part of the
                                                  federally enforceable SIP for California.
                                            3-4

-------
                        FF1993 Enforcement Accomplishments Report
    v.
January 20, 1993, a consent decree was entered
resolving this case.  Under the decree, Nabisco is
enjoined from further violations of the CAA and
will pay $358,000 in civil penalties.  The decree
also  requires Nabisco  to retrofit new catalytic
incinerators onto the manifolded stacks of its
primary baking ovens  and then perform  stack
testing  after  receiving a  permit and protocol
approval  from  the State.  Nabisco's  facility
produces  baked leavened  products for the
wholesale  market.  While  making  its  bread
products, the facility was emitting ethyl alcohol,
a volatile organic substance which is a precursor
to the formation of ozone, in excess of applicable
emission requirements.

U.S. v. New York City (S,D. N.Y.):  On April 22,
1993, a  consent decree  was entered  in this case
which  involves  gasoline dispensing stations
leased and /or operated by the City of New York.
There  are over 300  such  stations at  sites
throughout   the   City's   five   boroughs.
Approximately 55  of these  facilities  were not
equipped  with Stage I and/or  Stage II vapor
collection systems as required by the New York
SIP.  The consent decree requires  the City  to
award  contracts to construction managers who
will in turn provide enforceable work schedules to
bring   all  of   the affected  facilities   into
compliance. The settlement also requires the City
to complete an extensive capital improvement
work program, with  stipulated penalties for
failure to  complete work  on  schedule; and the
decree  requires the City to pay $200,000 in civil
penalties.

IJ,g, yt .Mew York City Board of Education, ctjLj
(E.D.N.Y.): On various dates during 1993, judicial
consent decrees were lodged with respect to the
Board of Education and two of the seven asbestos
abatement  contractors  which are defendants  in
this  multi-party  action.   Defendants  were
charged   with  violating   EPA's  asbestos
"notification" rule, which forms an integral part
of the NESHAPs regulations.  The action serves
notice  on  the  regulated  community that the
notification rule is  essential to the  integrity  of
these regulations and will be strictly enforced. As
part  of a nationwide EPA asbestos enforcement
initiative, a  complaint was  filed  against the
Board  of Education and seven  contractors for
failure  to notify EPA  of renovations involving
asbestos  removal  in many  City schools.
£» (D.NY): On     Approximately 126 such failures were at issue in
                 this  case.   These  consent  decrees  finalize
                 settlements with the Board, as owner, for all
                 violations, and with two  of  the  asbestos
                 abatement contractors involved in the violations,
                 Jack's Insulation and Philson Painting Co. The
                 combined penalties provided for in these decrees,
                 and in several  others for which consent decrees
                 have been negotiated but not yet lodged/total
                 $175,000.

                 In re Placid Refining Company. Port Allen, La.; to
                 re Conoco.  Westtake, La: As part of a hydrogen
                 sulfide monitoring initiative, Region VI signed
                 two consent agreement/consent orders (CACO)
                 during June 1993,  concluding administrative
                 enforcement complaints against Placid Refining
                 Company  (Placid) of Port Allen, Louisiana and
                 Conoco  of Westlake,  Louisiana.   These two
                 agreements required penalties of  $68,000 and
                 $60,000  respectively.  EPA  had alleged  that
                 Placid violated  NSPS rules by failing to conduct a
                 performance evaluation of  a  hydrogen sulfide
                 continuous emission monitor (CEM) in a timely
                 manner as required.  Conoco was alleged to have
                 failed to install a hydrogen sulfide CEM and also
                 failed to conduct the performance evaluation.
                 The rules requiring petroleum refineries to  install
                 and certify hydrogen sulfide CEMS on their fuel
                 gas systems were promulgated on October 2,1990,
                 and became effective 12  months later.   Both
                 complaints were  filed as  part  of a national
                 initiative to enforce the new hydrogen sulfide
                 monitoring requirements of NSPS Subpart J.

                 Republic Industries. Inc.?  On September 27,1993,
                 EPA Region IV filed a consent agreement settling
                 an administrative asbestos NESHAP case against
                 Republic Industries, Inc. for $32,824.

                 Republic is an  asbestos abatement company that
                 conducted  asbestos renovation projects at the
                 Marine Corps Recruit Depot on Parris Island, S.C.
                 and  at  the Inbordan Elementary School  in
                 Enfield, N.C., in August 1991. EPA inspections
                 revealed that Republic had failed to adequately
                 wet asbestos-containing material  (ACM) at both
                 sites and failed to properly label containers of
                 asbestos-containing waste material  at the  Parris
                 Island site, in  violation of the  CAA asbestos
                 NESHAP regulations.
                 Shenanago, Inc; The consent decree in this CAA
                 case is the  first  to have the  new  dispute
                                             3-5

-------
                            FF1993 Enforcement Accomplishments Report
resolution  section patterned after the dispute
resolutions used in RCRA decrees. Shenanago, Inc.
will  pay  $540,000  and  install innovative
desulfurization control  technology at it Neville
Island Coke Plant. The consent decree, which was
entered on August 24, 1993, had been lodged
against Shenango in response to violations of its
1980 and 1987 consent decrees.   As part of the
decree, Shenango  must undertake  specified
remedial actions,  one of which is the installation
of an innovative  desulfurization process, which
has been successfully employed in the petroleum
industry to desulfurize gas to  very low levels.
Shenango was also placed on an schedule to study
the transferability of  this process technology.
EPA believes  that this process holds promise for
the steel industry and, if successfully transferred,
is likely  to establish a new LAER standard for
desulfurization plants.

Texas Instruments, Inc.;  On July 23, 1993, EPA
entered into  a consent agreement with  Texas
Instruments, Inc. of Attleboro, Massachusetts for
violations of several NSPS provisions applicable
to small  boilers.  The  company engages in the
manufacture  of various pressure bonded  metal
products.  Texas Instruments  also operates a
utility plant which houses six boilers. In January
of 1992, Texas Instruments began operating a new
boiler.  On January 26,  1993,  EPA issued an
administrative penalty order to Texas Instruments
for  notification, performance  testing,  and
reporting violations.

The case was settled for $49,900 and an agreement
by Texas Instruments to perform a supplemental
environmental project in which Texas Instruments
will replace a vapor degreaser unit, which emits
approximately 6,800 pounds per year of Freon-113,
an ozone depleting chemical, with a closed-loop,
zero-emissions degreaser  unit.  The project will
cost Texas Instruments  over $170,000, and is the
first application of this technology to  the metal
finishing industry.

Watson Electrical  Construction Co.: On August 16,
1993, EPA settled a case against Watson  Electrical
Construction Company with a penalty of $30,107,
the largest penalty to date received by EPA for
violations of §608 of the CAA. EPA  initiated the
action against Watson  as part of the  Agency's
initial effort  to enforce the new stratospheric
ozone protection requirements established by the
CAA of 1990.  Watson is a large electrical and air-
conditioning  service  contractor  with  offices
located throughout North Carolina and Virginia.
EPA discovered that Watson had done  service
work on  air-conditioners  in a manner which
violated  the  stratospheric  ozone protection
requirements.  The violations consisted of failure
to use refrigerant capture equipment to prevent
chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs) from being released to
the atmosphere.

U.S. v. World Color Press. Inc. (S.D. 111.); On
December 5, 1992, the court entered a consent
decree against World Color Press, Inc. for CAA
violations at three facilities in southern Illinois.
The decree requires World  Color to pay a civil
penalty of  $500,000, perform stack tests and
install afterburner systems to control emissions of
volatile organic compounds at its two remaining
facilities.  (The company closed its Mt  Vemon
facility  in March 1991.) In addition, World Color
agreed to maintain compliance with its permits,
demonstrate  continued compliance through
various monitoring  and reporting,  and pay
stipulated penalties for violations of the consent
decree.

EPA action in  this matter had begun in February
1991 with a complaint alleging that World Color
had violated the CAA and regulations governing
the prevention of significant deterioration of air
quality. The company had allegedly failed  to
obtain permits  for the construction of  eleven
printing presses at two  facilities and failed  to
install pollution  control equipment pursuant to a
PSD permit at a third  facility.
Clean Air Act Enforcement
Mobile Source Program

       For mobile  sources, EPA increased  efforts
to control emissions from  motor  vehicles  and
vehicle fuels  under  the new Clean  Air  Act
amendments,   EPA   wilt   promulgate   new
compliance regulations for   reformulated  fuels,
will   promulgate regulations requiring detergents
in  gasoline,   and  began  implementing  and
enforcing  regulations  (effective  October I, 1993)
which  will control  the amount of sulfur in diesel
fuel.  In  addition,  EPA  enforces   the  volatility
standards for  gasoline  as well  as the  anti-
tampering and defeat device  prohibitions.  The
amended  act  also  provided  administrative
enforcement authority which EPA  has begun  to
                                              3-6

-------
                         FY1993 Enforcement Accomplishments Report
 implement.    EPA  also  continued  existing
 enforcement programs such as the recall program
 (which  results  in  the  recall  and  repair  of
 emissions systems of about  one third of all new
 vehicles)  and  will   initiate  a  compliance
 program for heavy duty engines.

 Lead Phasedown Cases

 U.S.  v.  CENEX  (D.Minn.): In November 1992,
 the U.S.  District Court entered  a civil consent
 decree  in  which  Farmers  Union  Central
 Exchange,' Inc. ("CENEX"), a  refinery located
 in Montana, agreed to  pay  $571,000 for multiple
 violations of the lead phasedown regulations.
 The purpose of these regulations is  to  reduce
 ambient  lead  levels.   Airborne  lead  has been
 found  to  interfere   with   normal  mental
 functioning arid  synthesis of blood  hemoglobin.
 The penalty approximates  the actual economic
 benefit  realized by CENEX1 s from the  illegal
 lead transactions, as adjusted for interest and
 taxes from December 1987 to  the present.

 Volatility and other Fuel Cases

 Keystone Terminal Operating Corporation (E,D,
 Pa): On February 12,  1993J the court  entered a
 consent  decree requiring  Keystone   Terminal
.Operating  Corporation  to pay  $12,500  for
 multiple   violations   of    the   volatility
 regulations and $1,000  for refusal to allow EPA
 inspectors entry to inspect its premises.

 Gas City. Ltd.: In  May, 1993,  EPA  settled  a
 major enforcement  action  against Gas  City for
 extensive violations of §211 of  the CAA.  The
 settlement   requires  Gas   City,  a  Frankfort,
 Illinois  gasoline blender and retailer, to pay a
 $450,000 penalty, the  largest penalty collected
 by EPA  for violations  of this nature.

 An EPA investigation  during  1991  and 1992
 revealed  that  Gas City  blended nearly  1.6
 million   gallons  of  methanol  with unleaded
 gasoline, at  concentrations  in excess  of  federal
 limits,   for  sale at  various  Gas  City  retail
 outlets  located  in  Chicago, Illinois and  Gary,
 Indiana.  Excess  methanol can damage emission
 control components in vehicles not designed for
 methanol.  By using inexpensive methanol  to
 dilute gasoline,  Gas City realized  an economic
 benefit  of  over $300,000.   EPA increased the
amount it was willing to settle for when  it was
discovered that  Gas  City continued  to  blend
methanol  gasoline  in violation after  EPA  had
notified it of the violation.  The  investigation
further  revealed that Gas  City  had  sold, or
offered  for sale, gasoline  in  violation of  the
volatility  regulations  which  limit summertime
fuel   volatility   (a   measure  of  a  liquid's
evaporative characteristics)  to  reduce  urban
smog levels.   Finally, Gas  City was  found to
have  violated  several  requirements of   the
unleaded  gasoline  regulations,  which  are
designed  to  ensure that  unleaded vehicles  are
not misfueled with  gasoline  containing lead,
thereby deactivating  catalytic  converters.

U.S. v. All Virani d/b/a Pit Stop (S.D. Texash On
October  7,  1993,  the  court   entered a  civil
consent decree  in which  AH Virani d/b/a Pit
Stop,  an  unbranded  retail  gasoline station in
Galveston, Texas,  agreed to  pay  $6,000 for a
violation of the  volatility regulations.   Random
inspections  of retail outlets in the Galveston,
Texas area in  August  1989  revealed that Pit
Stop  was selling gasoline  that  exceeded  the
95 pounds per square inch standard applicable
in Galveston  at the  time. AH Virani's attempt
to deny ownership of the  retail  outlet during
the time  of  the  inspection  was thwarted  after
EPA discovered  he had paid for a food service
permit application with a personal check  before
the inspection.

Fuel Misdelivery Initiative

       As  a  result  of  inspections  in  and
around various ozone nqnattainment areas  during
the   1992  volatility  control  season,   EPA
discovered   extensive   misdeliveries   of   high
RVP  gasoline into nonattainment areas requiring
low   RVP  gasoline.     Further  investigations
revealed   that    certain    regulated   parties
upstream  of  those   that   actually  made the
deliveries, either  had   knowledge   of    the
deliveries  or  had   information available   that
provided  them with  a  reason  to  know  that
such    deliveries  had occurred.  Consequently,
during  FY  1993, EPA issued  24   NOVs,  with
proposed penalties  totaling, nearly  one million
dollars,  to  these  parties as   well  as   to  those
more     directly     involved  in   the  actual
misdeliveries.   These    enforcement  actions
generated  significant  attention   by  those cited for
the violations and    other  regulated parties,
                                               3-7

-------
                            FY1993 Enforcement Accomplishments Report
many  of  which  have  subsequently  instituted
more aggressive monitoring  and quality  control
programs    to   prevent    and remedy   such
violations.      Similar  violations  were  not
discovered  during  the   1993 volatility  control
season  due,  in   part,  to  EPA's  aggressive
enforcement.

Aftermarket Catalytic Converter Policy
Cases

U.S. v. Cole Muffler. Inc. (N.D. New York):  In
January  1993, Cole Muffler  entered  into  a
settlement  with the  EPA  agreeing  to pay
$238,000  for  its  violation  of  the tampering
prohibition of  the Clean Air Act.  This  is the
largest penalty  ever  awarded for a violation of
this  nature.   Cole Muffler, Inc., a  New York
corporation with 51 muffler shops in New York,
Pennsylvania and  Florida,  incorrectly installed
aftermarket catalytic  converters  on  at  least
3,160  vehicles.  The converter is  the  most
effective emission control component on  motor
vehicles.   Misapplications  can  dramatically
increase a vehicle's  emissions of hydrocarbons,
nitrogen  oxides and carbon  monoxide.  The
violations  were   discovered  upon  a routine
review of  warranty  cards submitted by  repair
shops  to catalytic converter  manufacturers.

In addition, the settlement requires Cole Muffler
to pay stipulated penalties  for certain  future
violations if they occur and file quarterly  reports
with   the   EPA   for each  and every catalytic
converter  installation over the  next two years.

Benny's Pipe and Muffler Shop (E.D. Term.): On
September  7, 1993, EPA won a partial summary
judgment against  Benny's  Pipe  and  Muffler
Shop,  Inc. ("Benny's") on the issue of Benny's
liability  for  at  least   43   violations  of  the
tampering  prohibition of the CAA. Benny's, a
corporation with  four  repair shops  in  the
Bristol, Tennessee area,  violated  the  Act  by
installing   aftermarket  catalytic converters  on
vehicles  with  converters   still  under  the
manufacturer's 5  year/50,000  mile  warranty
and/or   by   installing  two-way   catalytic
converters on  vehicles  which  required  three-
way catalytic  converters.

The  decision was  significant because  it was the
first judicial  opinion  stating  that  installation
of  an  aftermarket  catalytic  converter  on  a
warranty   eligible   vehicle    violates   the
tampering  prohibition.

y_.j»t v, lamqs A. Lgocfogt a]. (E.D. California):
On September 16,  1993,  the court  entered  a
default judgment ordering James A. Loock, doing
business  as Muffler Man, to pay a $12,500 civil
penalty  for  five violations  of the  tampering
prohibition of  the  CAA.   Muffler Man, an
automobile repair  business,  installed  two-way
catalytic  converters  on  five vehicles requiring
three-way   catalytic   converters.   Such
installations  are  prohibited  because  they
increase emissions of  nitrogen oxides which are
major contributors to urban smog and acid rain.
The  violations were discovered upon a  routine
review of  warranty  cards submitted by  repair
shops to catalytic converter manufacturers.
Muffler Man  filed  a  motion to set aside the
default.   In response,  the  U.S.  alleged that
Muffler  Man's   motion  contained   fabricated
evidence and constituted a fraud upon the court.
An EPA  attorney  discovered,  in  researching
Muffler  Man's claim  that  it  had  submitted
numerous documents to EPA during the settlement
process  by  certified  mail,  that the  green
certified mail slips attached  to these documents
had  not  been   printed  by the  U.S.   Postal
Service  at  the  time  that  Muffler  Man had
sworn they had  mailed these documents. The
court denied Muffler  Man's motion holding that
it  had  not  rebutted  the government's  initial
allegations or subsequent  allegations of  fraud.

Tampering Cases

Leith Jeep-Eagle. Inc. (E.D.  N.C.): On June 21,
1993, the court entered a  civil consent decree in
which  Leith Jeep-Eagle,  Inc. (Leith) agreed to
pay $15,000 for three, violations of the tampering
prohibition of the CAA. Leith, a new car  dealer
in Raleigh, North Carolina, violated the Act by
plugging the vacuum  hoses  to the exhaust gas
recirculation  ("EGR") valve on three  motor
vehicles.   An EGR valve recirculates  exhaust
gases thereby reducing a vehicles emissions of
nitrogen oxides.  The violations were discovered
during an  EPA inspection on January 31, 1990,
made as a follow-up to a  customer complaint.

In  addition  to  the  penalty, the settlement
requires Leith to implement a comprehensive
recall program  which includes the  distribution
of  a  "recall letter"   to  certain customers  of
                                              3-8

-------
                        FF1993 Enforcement Accomplishments Report
                                         mj
Leith and  an agreement  to repair all plugged
EGR systems  which are  brought in by those
customers  at  no charge. The recall program is
expected to cost more 'than $15,000.

Defeat Device Cases

MSA Manufacturing Company. Inc.? On August
27, 1993,  the  U.S. District  Court  entered a
consent decree  requiring MSA Manufacturing
Company, Inc. to pay $28,500 for  manufacturing
and  installing  catalytic  converter replacement
pipes.   This was the first enforcement  action
undertaken  pursuant  to  the  defeat  device
provisions of the CAA Amendments of 1990.

In  addition   to   the   penalty,  the   decree
prohibits   MSA  from manufacturing,  selling,
trading, or otherwise supplying test pipes.  The
decree further requires  MSA  to  issue a recall
letter to all  customers   who  purchased  test
pipes  on  or after the  effective  date   of  the
defeat device  provision  (November  15, 1990),
through the  date  of  entry  of the  decree.
Finally,  the decree  prohibits   MSA   from
referring  to test  pipes  in  its advertising  or
sales-related  documents.

Eckler industries. Inc.;  On December 16, 1992,
Eckler Industries, Inc. entered  into a  settlement
agreement  with EPA requiring  it  to pay  $30,000
for selling  or  offering  to  sell  49 catalytic
converter  replacement  pipes  and mufflers  in
violation of  the defeat  device  provision  of the
Clean  Air  Act.  The violations, which occurred
throughout the  U.S., were discovered during a
directed inspection.  This  was  one of the first
administrative  actions taken  for  violations  of
the defeat  device provision added by the CAA
Amendments of  1990.

Other cases

Caterpillar. Inc.:  On February  2,  1993,  EPA
entered into  a settlement agreement with
Caterpillar, Inc., (Cat) in which  Cat agreed to
pay a  penalty of $220,500 for violations of the
Clean  Air  Act.  Cat also agreed  to perform a
recall program yielding  a 76  percent response
rate,  with costs to Cat estimated at $370,400.
The penalty arose out of Cat's introduction into
commerce  of three hundred  ninety-seven  1991
model year heavy-duty engines which were not
covered by a certificate of conformity and Cat's
failure to report changes made to the engines
during production.

An investigation of the violations began during a
heavy-duty Selective Enforcement Audit (SEA).
SEAs are  routinely  conducted  by  EPA  on
production line engines and vehicles to determine
whether these engines and vehicles comply with
federal emission requirements.  While conducting
an SEA at Cat's engine assembly plant, EPA
discovered that the engines subject to testing were
not  manufactured  according to  the design
specifications in the application for certification
submitted to EPA.

Chrysler Corporation: On July 14,1993, EPA and
Chrysler  Corporation  signed  a  settlement
agreement In which Chrysler agreed to pay
$51,200 in  civil penalties.   The  settlement
agreement resolved 16 separate violations which
were the result of Chrysler's  introduction into
commerce of sixteen Dodge Daytonas that did not
meet EPA's motor vehicle emission requirements.
Clean Water Act Enforcement

       In FY  1993, the Clean  Water Act (CWA)
NPDES permit program,  regulating direct and
indirect point  source  discharges  to  the nation's
navigable   waters,  continued    to    focus
enforcement  efforts  on  human   health  and
ecological risk from  significant  noncompliers.
The  program  continued  civil  judicial  and
administrative  penalty  actions  against  both
municipalities and  industry to  reduce significant
noncompliance  with pretreatmeni requirements,
This effort builds  on pretreatment  enforcement
initiatives  against municipalities  initiated  in
October 1989, and against both industries and
municipalities begun in May 1991 and in October
1992. EPA  and  the states continued  to  build
municipal facilities' capacity  to  enforce against
Industrial Users (Ills).  However, where there is
an approved program and the Publicly Owned
Treatment  Works  (POTW)  has not  taken all
actions available under its authority to  secure
compliance by  an  III, action  against  both the
POTW and the III usually is appropriate. The
program  enforces  requirements for  Combined
Sewer   Overflows   (CSOs)  for  municipalities.
EPA  released a draft permitting and enforcement
CSO strategy for comment in the first half of FY
                                              3-9

-------
m
/993 Enforcement Accomplishments Report
   1993.  The  program  is  developing enforcement
   strategies  for  new  storm water and  sludge
   regulations  and will  begin enforcement  in  these
   areas in FY 1994,

          Through  the national and  state-based
   Municipal  Water Pollution Prevention  Programs
   (MWPPP),  EPA  and  states  foster  pollution
   prevention  and  compliance   maintenance  at
   POTWs. These programs are designed  to prevent
   future pollution that could result from capacity
   limitations and  operation   and maintenance
   problems at POTWs that are now in compliance.

          The  program   continued   to   focus
   compliance monitoring and enforcement  efforts on
   industries  that  are  required  to  meet   best
   available  treatment  and water  quality-based
   effluent limits to control  toxic  pollutants, such as
   the  pulp  and paper   industry  and  organic
   chemicals.  As part  of the  effort to control toxic
   pollutants, the  regions and states  enforce permit
   requirements for reductions  in Whole  Effluent
   Toxicity (WET).

          The program was  supportive  of several
   agency-wide, multi-media  priorities in  FY  1993,
   including initiatives on  the Mexican  Border, at
   federal facilities,  and  regarding  data  quality.
   The program  also  participated  in geographic-
   based  initiatives, as defined by the regions and
   the  Office of Water, such as the Puget Sound and
   the Gulf of Mexico.

   U.S. v. Aluminum Company of  America (E.D. TX):
   The Aluminum Company of America (ALCOA)
   agreed to  settle a Clean Water Act case for
   $750,000 in civil penalties shortly after the trial
   of the case had commenced in  U.S. District Court,
   An enforcement case involving effluent violations
   of the National Pollutant Discharge Elimination
   System (NPDES) permit had  been filed against
   ALCOA for violations that occurred during 1987
   at its aluminum  smelting plant located near
   Palestine, Texas. The violations, demonstrated in
   the facility's self-reported  data,   included
   exceedances of the permit limits  at an internal
   outfall   of certain  chlorinated   organics,
   specifically    hexachlorobenzene    and
   decachlorobiphenyl, a PCB, No injunctive relief
   was included since  the facility  has  been
   dismantled.
                  p.S. v. City of Bossier City and  the  State of
                  Louisiana (W.D. LA):  On February 11, 1993, a
                  consent decree was entered in settlement of
                  violations  by Bossier City.   The complaint
                  alleged  that  Bossier  City failed  to  properly
                  operate  and  maintain  its  publicly  owned
                  treatment works, failed to comply with effluent
                  limitations  in its NPDES permit, and failed to
                  implement fully its  industrial  pretreatment
                  program.   Bossier City agreed  to pay a civil
                  penalty of $200,000 and to conduct a supplemental
                  environmental  project (SEP) which promotes
                  EPA's policy of providing for the beneficial use of
                  municipal wastewater sludge. The projected cost
                  of the  SEP is approximately $375,000.   In the
                  past, Bossier  City  transported its  municipal
                  wastewater sludge to a landfill.  Under the SEP,
                  Bossier  City  will  install  sludge  treatment
                  facilities  which will produce a reusable final
                  product.

                  U.S. v. City of Cocoa. Florida:  On February 10,
                  1993, the EPA Region IV Regional Administrator
                  ratified a consent agreement and final order
                  (CAFO) between EPA  and  the  City  of Cocoa
                  which  included a mitigated penalty of $32,593
                  and  several supplemental environmental projects
                  valued at approximately $1,963,600.

                  EPA's complaint alleged that Cocoa had violated
                  §301 (a) of the CWA by failing to monitor pH on a
                  continuous  basis and by exceeding several other
                  NPDES permit limitations at various times from
                  October  1988 through  August  1990. The SEPs
                  include: installation of 5,000 feet of storm water
                  swales; expansion of the City's wastewater reuse
                  system; restoration of a 300,000 gallon elevated
                  storage tank; and accelerated  compliance with
                  the Florida Indian River Lagoon Act.

                  U.S. v. Crown Cork de Puerto Rico (D. P.R4: On
                  October 15, 1992 a consent decree was lodged in
                  U.S. District Court which required Crown Cork to
                  pay  a   civil  penalty  of  $750,000,  attain
                  categorical pretreatment standards for discharges
                  to PRASA's Carolina wastewater treatment plant
                  (immediately), and comply with PRASA's local
                  pretreatment limit for aluminum by June 1,1993.
                  The complaint in this action was filed in 1988,
                  alleging that Crown Cork, a can manufacturer
                  located in Carolina,  Puerto Rico,  had violated
                  the  CWA  by  discharging  pollutants into
                  navigable waters without a permit, discharging
                  pollutants to navigable waters in excess of permit
                                                3-10

-------
                       FY1993 Enforcement Accomplishments Report
limits once a permit was obtained, and violating
applicable  pretreatment  standards  for  its
discharges into a  publicly owned  treatment
works.

U.S. v.  CSX Transportation. Inc. (M.D.FLk On
May 6, 1993,  CSX Transportation, Inc.  (CSX)
signed a consent decree for alleged violations of
the Clean  Water Act at six railroad  yards owned
by  CSX in  Florida and North Carolina. The
consent decree requires CSX to pay a $3,000,000
civil penalty and perform four SEPs valued at
over $4,000,000. The four projects are: an NPDES
compliance  audit  at  21  active  CSX  yards in
Region IV; a multi-media risk assessment audit at
61  inactive  CSX  facilities  nationwide;  an
environmental awareness training  program for
CSX managers throughout the corporation; and
the development of a best management  practices
manual  and a seminar on storm water runoff at
railroad yards.

The civil  complaint  was  filed on  April  10,
1992, alleging that discharges  from  six CSX
railyards  exceeded   limits  in  the  respective
NPDES permits for these facilities.  The consent
decree  was filed  with the U.S.  District  Court
on September 27,  1993.

Easton. PA; A consent decree was entered in U.S.
District  Court, Eastern District of Pennsylvania,
on July 20,1993.  The decree required Easton Area
Joint Sewer Authority to pay a civil  penalty of
$389,000 to the  U.S.  for past violations of its
NPDES  permit.  The decree also required them to
maintain compliance with their permit effluent
limitation  and  to  implement  a pretreatment
program subject to stipulated penalties.

Defendant Harcros Pigments, Inc., which had
purchased the manufacturing  unit from  Pfizer
Pigments, a contributing industry, was required to
maintain  compliance with its  industrial user
permit subject to stipulated penalties. The  decree
required the Authority  to  pay $120,000  to the
Coalition  of Religious and Civic Organizations,
Inc. (CORCO), and required Harcros to pay $7,500
to CORCO for attorneys' fees and costs.  CORCO
initiated the suit in 1988 and was joined by the
U.S. in 1989.

The City  of Easton, a previous holder  of the
permit, was required to pay a $45,000 penalty for
permit effluent and pretreatment violations.
Farmers Union Central Exchange C^OOP/ CENEX
(Billings, Montana): EPA issued an NOV to the
State  of Montana on November 11,  1990, for
violation by CENEX of its NPDES permit limits
for oil and grease dating back to December 1986.
The State replied on January 29,1991, that due to
a lack of resources, the State would not pursue
enforcement against CENEX. On June 26,1991, EPA
Region VIII referred the CENEX case to DOJ.
Over  the last year, EPA has negotiated with the
company and has agreed in principle to settle the
case for $316,000. Final settlement of this case
sets a standard for the State of Montana which
should help the State in future negotiations.
Further, once concluded, it  will send a strong
message  to all  of  the  regulated  NPDES
community that EPA will overfile in a delegated
State  when  necessary.  CENEX was a FY 1993
targeted inspection,

U.S. v. Florida Tile Industries. Inc. {M.D. FL): On
April 26,1993, Florida Tile Industries, Inc. signed
a consent decree for alleged violations of the
CWA at the  Lakeland, Florida  facility. The
consent decree requires Florida Tile  to pay  a
$493,070 civil penalty, requires construction of a
system  to  eliminate  the  discharge  of
contaminated storm water  as  described in  a
NPDES permit, and to perform two supplemental
environmental projects (SEPs) valued at $333,930.
The SEPS are a plan to reduce the levels of zinc
oxide used  in  a portion  of the Florida Tile's
glazes, and the construction  of a zero  discharge
stormwater  management system on 13 acres of
Florida  Tile's property not currently subject to
NPDES permit requirements.

A civil complaint was filed  on  March 17, 1992,
alleging   that  storm  water  discharges
contaminated by fugitive air  emissions exceeded
limits in the NPDES permit. Florida Tile is the
third  largest manufacturer of ceramic tile in the
U.S.

Town of Fort Gay. WV;  A consent agreement and
consent order (CACO) was issued to the Town of
Fort Gay, WV, on June 25,1993, requiring payment
of $10,000  for NPDES  permit violations.  This
case was referred to EPA by the West Virginia
Department of Environmental Protection after the
Town refused  to enter  into  an enforceable
compliance schedule to correct violations at the
Town's POTW.    Violations  included numerous
effluent limitations violations, failure  to submit
                                            3-11

-------
                            FY1993 Enforcement Accomplishments Report
 timely  discharge  monitoring reports (DMRs),
 failure to report bypasses and Combined Sewer
 Overflow (CSO) discharges, and operation and
 maintenance problems. Fort Gay has now met all
 compliance schedule  requirements  of  the
 administrative order to address the violations at
 this facility.

 U.S.. yt Gil- Caribe. Inc.: On November 24,1992, a
 consent decree was entered in the U.S. District
 Court (D. PR) pursuant to which G.E. will pay a
 civil  penalty of  $500,000, and will cease  the
 discharge from its facility in Puerto  Rico. EPA
 initiated this action based on G.E.'s violations of
 its NPDES permit. The settlement was reached
 during  pre-referral  negotiations;   a  civil
 complaint was filed simultaneously with  the
 consent decree.

 U.S.  v. McDonnell Douglas Corporation  (C.D.
 Cal.): On September 17, 1993, the court entered a
 civil consent decree in which McDonnell Douglas
 agreed to pay $505,000 in  civil penalties  in
 settlement of an action brought under the  Clean
 Water  Act for  violations  at  its  aerospace
 manufacturing facility in Huntington Beach,
 California.   Specifically, McDonnell Douglas
 discharged approximately 7,000 gallons of metal
 finishing waste from  its printed circuit board
 manufacturing operations in violation of  the
 pretreatment standards.  The  wastewater was
 discharged to the  County Sanitation  Districts of
 Orange County sewers and then conveyed  to the
 Orange County Treatment Plant for treatment and
 disposal into the Pacific Ocean.

 U.S.  v. Modine Manufacturing   (N.D. 111.):  On
 May  28,  1993, a  consent decree was lodged
 resolving EPA's civil complaint  against Modine
 Manufacturing. The consent  decree requires
 Modine to  pay a $750,000  cash penalty and
 requires it  to implement substantial pollution
 control measures  at a cost to  the company of
 approximately $5,300,000.

 On June 11, 1993 the U.S, filed a CWA civil action
• against-Modine, seeking injunctive relief and civil
 penalties  for -violations of §§ 301 and 311 of the
 CWA  for  discharging  pollutants from  its
 Ringwood,  Illinois facility, in excess of the limits
 in its applicable 1975 and 1986 NPDES  permits.
 Since.the permits were issued to the  Modine
 facility in 1975 and 1986, Modine had committed
 many violations of the state-issued permits.
Modine operates an Alfuse production line at the
facility that Modine has certified is the primary
cause  of the  CWA violations. The current
wastewater  treatment  process has proven
unsuccessful  in treating the Alfuse wastewater
prior to discharge from its permitted outfall. This
decree requires Modine  to phase-out the Alfuse
production process entirely and replace it with a
nearly pollutant-free production process. Modine
has also agreed  to convert its  process,on an
expedited schedule and  to undertake additional
projects that go beyond those needed to achieve
compliance. The pollution prevention  measures
outlined  in the decree shall eliminate all BOD,
zinc,  ammonia, and TSS loading in  Modine's
effluent  from the facility.  In addition, these
measures shall  eliminate the emission of
approximately 73,000 pounds of volatile organic
compounds, 7,800 pounds of particulate matters
and 1,600,000 pounds of sludge annually.

U.S. and Indiana v. New Albany  (S.D. Ind.l: On
June 18, 1993, the court entered a consent decree
between  the United States, the State of Indiana
and the City of New Albany, Indiana. The decree
requires  that New Albany pay a penalty of
$140,000 to  the  U.S. Treasury and $35,000 to
Indiana, for  New Albany's violations of the
Clean Water Act.  New Albany is also required to
conduct extensive work on its POTW and sewer
system, including modifications to the secondary
wastewater  treatment  and sludge  disposal
facilities, as well  as  sewer rehabilitation  work.
New Albany  estimates the cost of its compliance
activities at $17,000,000.

On March 23, 1990,  the U.S. filed a  six  count
complaint against New  Albany,  a municipality
located in Floyd County, Indiana. The complaint
alleged that  New Albany violated the effluent
limits of its NPDES permit, bypassed wastewater
in violation  of its  NPDES permit,  failed to
implement and enforce its pretreatment program,
failed to provide  an adequate alternative power
source and violated an administrative compliance
order issued by EPA.

U.S. v. NICOR National Louisiana. Inc.  (E.D.
La): A barge cleaning facility agreed to the entry
of a court order to  pay civil penalties for its
violation of the Clean Water Act.  On January 12,
1993, the U.S. District Court entered a civil
consent decree in which NICOR agreed to pay
$225,000  in  civil penalties.  The  complaint
                                             3-12

-------
                        FY1993 Enforcement Accomplishments Report
alleged  that NICOR had violated  the CWA by
discharging pollutants  into  navigable  waters
without a NPDES permit. Also, after receiving a
NPDES  permit,  NICOR  violated  effluent
limitations  in the permit and failed to monitor
and report in accordance with its permit.  NICOR
was  in  the business of cleaning and  repairing
barges, tugboats, and oil field supply boats,at its
Belle Chasse, Louisiana shipyard.   NICOR has
ceased operations at this facility. This case is an
example of an  increasing  effort to examine
transportation  facilities  for violations  of
environmental requirements.

U.S.  v. Oak Crystal Inc. d/b/a McCov Electronic
Company: On November 17,1992 a consent decree
was entered in the U.S. District Court (M.D. PA)
in which Oak Crystal Inc.  agreed to pay a
$335,000 up-front penalty and agreed to  expend
$325,000 to install a wastewater recycling system
which would  both  substantially  reduce  their
discharge flow and significantly  improve the
quality  of  their effluent discharge to the Mt.
Holly Springs, PA, Wastewater  Treatment Plant
(WWTP).   The current discharge is now 1,500
gallons per month versus 45,000 gallons per month
prior to the project.  The effluent quality of the
current discharge is also far below the limitations
imposed  for  metal finishers under Metal
Finishing Existing Sources Category Regulations,
40 C.RR. 433.15 et seq.  The effluent violations
were detected from data which Oak Crystal,  Inc.,
submitted  to EPA as the pretreatment  control
authority for this industrial user.

United  States v.  Pacific Southwest Airmojlm.
IlK. (S.D. Cal):  On October 16, 1992, the court
entered a civil consent decree in which U.S. Air,
successor to Pacific Southwest Airmotive (PSA),
agreed  to  pay $335,000 in  civil  penalties in
settlement of an action brought under the CWA.

PSA owned and operated a  jet engine overhaul
facility in San  Diego,  California from  1974
through October  1991, at which  time U.S. Air
purchased PSA.  The violations  are based on the
discharge of industrial wastewater in violation
of the pretreatment standards for metal finishing
operations. During its operation, PSA discharged
an average of 73,000 gallons per day of regulated
industrial wastewater through the sewers to San
Diego's Point Loma Wastewater Treatment Plant.
Permzoil and Quaker State; Two CWA consent
decrees were lodged in the District Court (W.D.
PA) in November 1992 against Pennzoil and
Quaker State Corporation which addressed
unpermitted discharges of brine from stripper oil
production.  Pennzoil paid an up-front penalty of
$1,150,000 and Quaker State paid an up front
penalty  of  $450,000.  Both  companies were
required to cease discharging without a permit.

U.S. v. Port  of Portland (D. Ore.): On May 12,
1993,  a consent decree was entered in federal
district court against the  Port of Portland. for
unpermitted toxic discharges posing potential
hazard  to  human  health and  the  marine
environment. The decree requires  the payment of
a  $92,000  penalty  plus  two  supplemental
environmental  projects for the analysis and
removal  of  contaminated  sediments (a $58,000
study of priority pollutants in sediments near
storm water drains.)

U.S.  v.  Puerto  Rjco Aqueduct and  Sewer
Authority; During FY 1993, EPA  filed four more
quarterly  Motions to  Enforce the terms  of the
judicial consent decree in this long-standing action
against PRASA.   Also during  the year, EPA
collected  about  $1.1  million  in stipulated
penalties arising out of past motions to enforce
that decree.  To date,  over $3.3 million in
stipulated penalties  have  been sought, and
nearly $2 million have been collected. Although
violations are still being routinely identified,
PRASA's overall  level of compliance with  the
terms of the decree has improved in recent years.

PRASA  remains  one  of  the  most  serious
environmental violators in Region II, not only
with respect to the Clean Water Act and not only
at its major sewage treatment facilities, but under
other statutes and at other facilities as well.

U.S.  v. Puerto Rico Industrial Development
Company (PRIDCO): On June 21, 1993, a consent
decree was  entered  in  the U.S. District Court
(DPR).  Under the terms of the decree,  PRIDCO
must take necessary actions to bring its Las
Piedras Industrial Park Sewage Treatment Plant
(STP), Cayay Industrial  Park STP and Naguabo
Industrial Park STP into compliance with their
NPDES permits by July 1, 1994, July 1, 1993 and
July 1, 1994, respectively,  by ceasing discharge.
The settlement also requires PRIDCO to pay a
civil penalty of $1 million for its past violations
                                             3-13

-------
                            FF1993 Enforcenwnt Accomplishments Report
of the Clean Water Act.  A complaint was filed in
this action in August, 1990.

Qty of Rock Springs (Wyoming):  A Class II
administrative  penalty order was issued on
August 11, 1992,  against Rock  Springs  for
violations of  its NPDES permit.  The complaint
cited  Rock Springs for  failure  to  properly
implement and .enforce federal pretreatment
regulations. This  case  upholds  the preventive
nature of the pretreatment program promulgated
pursuant to the Clean Water Act. A compliance
order was also issued on  August 11,1992, directing
the City to  correct  the  deficiencies of its
pretreatment program and  comply  with its
NPDES permit. A consent order was issued on
August 30,1993, that requires Rock Springs to pay
a civil penalty  of $45,000 and undertake SEPs
totaling  $41,000. The  SEPs  that  will  be
undertaken include development of a -household
hazardous waste program, an on-site assistance
program  for small communities, and a workshop
on pollution  prevention assessment^ and waste
minimization for  Wyoming state pretreatment
coordinators.

U.S. v. City  of Starke. Florida:  The City of
Starke settled an administrative  penalty action
on November 23,  1992. The agreement includes  a
penalty of $10,300 and a SEP.  The SEP consists of
a land .application/reuse  project which will
reduce the discharge  to Alligator Creek by 40%.
The project is  estimated  to cost $1,600,000,, and is
to be  completed by September 30, 1995.

The City  of Starke is located in Bradford County
approximately 45 miles northeast of Gainesville,
Fla. The  City operates  a waste water treatment
plant,  having a capacity of 1.25 MGD, which
discharges into Alligator Creek. The facility has
a valid NPDES permit  with an effective date of
August 1, 1989, Beginning in August, 1989, and
lasting through  August  1991,  the  facility
experienced numerous violations of permit limits
for  biochemical oxygen demand (BOD),  total
suspended solids (TSS), total nitrogen (TN), total
residual chlorine (TRC), pH and fecal coliform.
Numerous schedule and  reporting  violations
occurred during the same period.

In the Matter of Town of Taos. New Mexico: An
administrative penalty, under  the Clean Water
Act was assessed on July 8, 1993, for failure of a
municipality  to handle its sewage  sludge in
accordance with the requirements of regulations
regarding disposal of solid waste under RCRA.
The RCRA requirements for handling solid waste
were the basis for the requirements in the NPDES
permit issued to Taos for sludge handling.  The
administrative complaint was issued under the
C WA because Taos failed to adequately treat and
dispose of its sewage sludge.  Specifically, Taos
failed  to treat land-applied  sludge with  a
process to significantly reduce pathogens or with
a process to further reduce pathogens. The case
was settled with a civil penalty of $125,000 and
the  requirement   to  immediately  install
temporary  means of  treating the sludge in order
to meet the requirements of 40 CFR Part 257. In
May 1992, Taos initiated  lime  stabilization to
meet the requirements.

U.S. v.Tennessee Gas Pipeline Co. (W.D. LA): A
civil action concluded  on  August 13, 1993 was
EPA's first enforcement case against a natural gas
transmission  pipeline for  water  pollution
discharges from one of its pumping stations.  The
court entered a  final order  for dismissal after the
company and EPA reached agreement on a penalty
of $725,000 under the CWA for the unauthorized
discharges of PCBs from a  pumping station near
Natchitoches, Louisiana.   The  company had a
NPDES permit to discharge specific quantities of
pollutants from its pumping station into the lake
serving as the public drinking water  supply for
the City of Natchitoches.  Tennessee Gas had
exceeded NPDES  permit effluent limitations for
the pollutant  parameters  for  oil, grease  and
chemical oxygen demand, had  failed to submit
timely self monitoring reports to EPA as required
by the permit, and had discharged PCBs from me
station into the  lake  without NPDES permit
authorization.

U.S. v. Texas Tank Car Works. Inc. (N.D. Texas):
Due to the Agency's  increased effort to examine
transportation  facilities  for  violations  of
environmental requirements, a  rail  car cleaning
facility agreed to a court order to  pay civil
penalties and to prevent unauthorized discharges
of polluted water.   On June 2, 1993, the U.S.
District Court entered a consent decree in which
Texas Tank Car Works  agreed to pay $60,000 in
civil penalties  in settlement of a civil action
brought under the CWA. This action arose out of
Texas Tank  Car's  failure  to obtain  a NPDES
permit for its discharge of hydrostatic test water
from its San Angelo, Texas rail car repair facility.
                                            344

-------
                       FY1993 Enforcement Accomplishments Report
The water had been used to determine whether
the rail car was leak-tight, and the water would
be contaminated by the material which had been
in the car previously. In addition to the penalty,
Texas Tank Car  must  develop a  recycling and
disposal program for the hydrostatic test water
and  make quarterly  reports  to  EPA on the
implementation of this program.

y.S.  v.  V^ayne County Michigan et al.   (E.D.
Mich): On July  2, 1993, the court  entered an
interim order that requires Wayne County and 12
downriver communities to  implement a Project
Plan  that will significantly  expand the carrying
capacity of the sewer collection system and will
increase the capacity of the Wyandotte POTW.
Costs are  estimated to exceed $150 million for
this project, construction of which will extend into
the next century.

As part  of the  sewer  improvements, the
defendants will construct a mini  "deep tunnel"
designed to hold rain waters during storm events.
The  order  also requires all the 12 downriver
communities to finance and construct the Project
Plan, thus reducing the likelihood that any one
defendant city could refuse to finance the needed
improvements and thus keep the improvements
from going forward.

Terms of the order were negotiated between the
U.S., Michigan and Wayne County after it had
become clear that the court intended to issue some
sort of order to enable the defendants to become
eligible for loan monies (SRF funding).  The case
was  originally filed  in 1987 against Wayne
County; an amended complaint was filed in 1988
adding the 12 downriver communities as parties
defendant.
Oil Pollution Act
         Pipeline Company:    EPA  issued a
unilateral administrative order pursuant to §311
of the CWA, as amended by the Oil Pollution Act
of 1990, against the Colonial Pipeline Company
on April 2, 1993.

EPA, with the assistance of state, local and other
federal representatives directed the  response of
the Colonial Pipeline Company to a March 28,
1993 spill of over  400,000 gallons of fuel oil
catastrophically  released  from a  ruptured,
thirty-six-inch pipeline near Hemdon, Virginia.
The spill severely impacted Sugarland Run and
deposited oil and oil sheen on the Potomac River
as far south as Alexandria.  Under the direction
of the  EPA, immediate  cleanup  efforts  by
Colonial's  contractors,  the U.S.  Coast Guard
Strike team, and the Navy Supervisor of Salvage
resulted in the recovery of 343,000 gallons of fluid
oil.  Despite  these efforts, areas where oil  was
continually deposited contributed oil and sheen to
the waterways, and other remedial measures
were warranted. In accordance with EPA's order.
Colonial has undertaken measures to address the
release of oil  into the Sugarland Run Creek and
the Potomac River by way of excavation  and
bioremediation techniques, as  well  as natural
attenuation.

Star Enterprises! On April 9,  1993, EPA issued a
unilateral administrative order pursuant to §311
of the CWA, as amended by the Oil Pollution Act
of 1990, and §7003  of RCRA against  Saudi
Refining, Inc., Star Enterprise, Texaco,  Inc. and
Texaco  Refining  and  Marketing  Inc.   Star
Enterprises is the owner and  operator of an 18-
acre terminal  that operates nine 1.4 to 2.8 million
gallon above-ground oil storage tanks and eleven
550 to 10,000 gallon underground storage tanks.

In the fall of 1990, an oil sheen was discovered at
a nearby creek.  Further investigation  revealed
that a large underground oil plume, estimated to
contain over  100,000  gallons of oil, extended
northeast of the Star Terminal across Pickett
Road into commercial and residential areas.

The order requires the respondents to study,  abate,
mitigate, and eliminate such threats from oil,
hazardous  substances  and/or solid wastes  that
may exist to  the public health, welfare and/or
the environment,  at and around  the site.  The
respondents shall accomplish this by:  operating,
maintaining,  monitoring and modifying the
existing on-site removal systems; providing data
for EPA's comprehensive assessment of the current
and  future   risk(s);   conducting   long-term
monitoring;  evaluating long-term  corrective
action  alternatives  for  the  comprehensive
cleanup of oil, hazardous substances and solid
waste   in  all  media  at  the  site;  fully
implementing the EPA selected remedy;  properly
closing  site systems  and restoring  properties
affected by the work; and, undertaking whatever
                                            3-15

-------
                            FY1993 Enforcement Accomplishments Report
other actions are necessary to protect the public
health, welfare and the environment at  the site
from imminent and substantial endangerments or
threats.  The order also requires reimbursement to
the U.S. for costs it incurs in association with
removal action under the order.

U.S. v. U.S. Oil and U.S. v. Texaco (W .D. Wash>:
In FY 1993, EPA  settled the first  two judicial
penalties assessed under the new Oil Pollution
Act of 1990. One was against U.S. Oil & Refining
Co., and arose out of a January 1991 spill of more
than 600,000 gallons (14,000 barrels) of oil from a
ruptured  pipeline  into a drainage ditch  that
ordinarily drains  to Commencement  Bay in
Tacoma, Washington.

The other was against Texaco Refining  and
Marketing  Inc.,  and   involved  a spill of
approximately 210,000 gallons (5,000 barrels) of
oil  from  a  burst pipeline booster pump.  A
significant amount of the oil entered Fidalgo Bay
near Anacortes, Washington, causing an oil slick
that killed more than 140 birds.

Under  the settlements,  U.S.   Oil  had civil
penalties in the amount of $425,000 while Texaco
had penalties in the  amount of $480,000. U.S. Oil
and Texaco were both made to acquire and install
state-of-the-art spill detection  and prevention
equipment at an estimated cost of $800,000 each.
U.S. Oil is to reimburse federal spill response
costs of  $60,000 and Texaco must reimburse
$125,000.  The  estimated complete spill cleanup
cost for U.S. Oil is $4,000,000 and $8,000,000 for
Texaco.

These cases form a  very significant landmark in
the implementation of OPA.  They represent the
nation's first two judicial penalties assessed under
OPA, and  established the maximum civil penalty
for an oil  spill as $1,000 per barrel spilled rather
than $5,000 per spill.  Achieving  such significant
penalty amounts in  the first two  cases  under the
new act, when one  spill (U.S. Oil) caused nearly
no environmental impact and the other (Texaco)
involved nearly no fault on the defendant's part,
establishes the new Act as an extremely powerful
enforcement tool and a deterrent to future spills,
as Congress clearly intended.
Marine  Protection  Research  and
Sanctuaries Act (MPRSA)

Ocean Dumping Bart Act Cases

       The   New   York  and   New   Jersey
municipalities  which  were  dumping  sewage
sludge at the 106-mile site  off the coast of  New
Jersey for many  years have now eased  dumping
sewage sludge  into the ocean, as  required  by the
Ocean Dumping  Ban Act of 1988 (ODBA). The
Office of Enforcement was heavily  involved  in
the  negotiation   and drafting  of  the federal
judicial consent orders that  were  negotiated  with
the municipalities.

       The   ODBA  amended   the  Marine
Protection,  Research and Sanctuaries  Act, 33
U.S.C 1401  et see}., and required NY and NJ
municipalities  to  cease  ocean  dumping  by
December 31, 1991.   The Nj municipalities were:
Bergen County Utilities Authority, Joint Meeting
of Essex and  Union Counties,  Linden  Roselle
Sewerage   Authority,   Middlesex   County
Utilities Authority,  Passaic  Valley  Sewerage
Commissioners  and  Rahway Valley  Sewerage
Authority.   All  the Nj  municipalities  ceased
dumping by March  17,  1991,   New York  was
granted a six month  extension of time to  comply
with   the  statutory deadline.    NY  ceased
dumping half of its sludge by December  31,  1991
and completely ceased dumping by June 30, 1992.

In the Matter of Port Authority of New York and
New Jersey; Region II issued an administrative
order memorializing a settlement of this ocean
dumping case brought under §105 of MPRSA. The
settlement provided for payment of a $35,000
penalty, and included a supplemental enforcement
project under which the Port  Authority  will
provide a $15,000 grant to  a private, non-profit
organization for the  purpose of purchasing and
preserving wetlands in the New York Harbor
area.  The maximum penalty available under the
MPRSA is  $50,000  per violation.  The  Port
Authority had received a permit from the U.S.
Army Corps  of  Engineers to dredge dioxin-
contaminated  material  from Newark Bay, and
then  ocean-dispose  of  the dredge spoils  at a
specific location  within the "Mud Dump Site,"
where  it would then  be  capped  with clean
material.   The  Port  Authority's  contractor
disposed of 500 cubic yards of dredged material at
                                             3-16

-------
                        FY1993 Enforcement Accomplishments Report
the wrong location in the Mud Dump Site, thus
violating the Port Authority's  permit. The Port
Authority subsequently capped the  improperly
disposed of dredged material  with 30,000 cubic
yards of clean fill.

Enforcement of Ocean Pumping Ban Act CQpBA)
Consent Decrees: In FY 1993, Region II continued
to ensure compliance with consent decrees entered
into by municipal sludge dumpers under the Ocean
Dumping Ban Act.  Several enforcement actions
were brought to penalize municipalities in non-
compliance  with their ODBA consent decrees.
The Bergen County Utilities  Authority was
ordered, in December 1992, to pay stipulated
penalties of $55,000.  In a second action against
Bergen County, it  agreed to  pay penalties  of
$500,000 and to deposit $780,000 into an escrow
account to be returned only if it complies with the
consent decree. That consent decree amendment,
which also included revisions to interim dates in
the schedule of compliance, is  before the U.S.
District Court for signature.

A third action was brought against  the City of
New York for its violations  of the long  term
schedule for alternative sludge disposal.  The
result was an order in August 1993 shortening the
schedule for implementation  of Phase I of the
City's long  term alternative and adjustment of
interim dates in the Phase II schedule, without a
change to the final date. Additionally, the City
was required to  pay $1.5 million into an escrow
account, which can only be recovered  if  it
commences  construction of Phase II facilities by
August 18, 1995.  The City was also  required to
pay $250,000 to the U.S., and $750,000  to an
escrow account  to purchase either wetlands or
open space in New York City, subject to approval
by  the N.Y, State Department of Environmental
Conservation.
Wetlands Enforcement (§ 404)

       Section 404 of  the  Clean  Water  Act
establishes  a  joint  EPA  -  U.S.  Army Corps of
Engineers  permit  program  to  regulate  the
discharge  of dredged  or  fill   material  into
wetlands  and other  waters of the United States.
The  two agencies share  enforcement authority.
Pursuant to a Memorandum of Agreement (MOA),
the  Corps retains  the  lead  on  violations  of
Corps-issued  permits and  EPA has  the  lead on
 specific categories of permitted  discharge cases.
 The Wetlands Program places a  high priority on
 enforcement against  unpermitted discharges. The
 program utilizes judicial  and   administrative
 enforcement  authorities  as well  as voluntary
 compliance,   as   appropriate,    to   obtain
 environmental results and create deterrence, EPA
 relies on information provided by the Corps,  the
 U.S.  Fish  and Wildfire  Service, the states, and
 the public  to plan these  enforcement efforts. The
 Wetlands  Program  participated in  geographic-
 based  initiatives as  they  were defined within
 the Office  of Water.

 Casinos: On September 30, 1993,  EPA issued
 penalty orders against three separate casino
 interests who  had violated §404 of the CWA.
 These violations occurred during the movement of
 barges off the Mississippi River  into  adjacent
 areas for use as waterfront gambling operations.
"AH three have entered into consent agreements
 totaling $110,000, as well as separate mitigation
 agreements. A total of seventeen gaming permits
 have been applied for Involving similar barges to
 be used in this area of Mississippi. It appears
 that each one will require a separate permit from
 the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers.

 Custom Sand and Gravel. (Charles City County,
 VA):   An administrative  order was issued on
 December 29,  1992,  for the unauthorized
 construction of dikes and roadways,  and  the
 clearing and leveling activities  associated with
 this sand  and gravel mining operation.  This
 facility has operated for  at least  the  past  six
 years, significantly impacting a  wooded swamp
 adjacent  to  the  Chickahominy  River  in
 Southeastern Virginia. In response to this order, a
 restoration plan was submitted which will result
 in the  restoration of approximately 65 acres of
 wetland habitat.  Restoration activities  have
 commenced with the planting of woody species in
 a previously cleared, but  un-mined area.

 El Dorado Gold. Inc. (Utah); On September 30,
 1993, EPA filed a consent order settling a  CWA
 administrative penalty action against  K.  Terry
 Lindquist, the president of El Dorado Gold, Inc., a
 now-defunct Utah corporation  that operated a
 placer  mining operation  on a stream named
 Browns Gulch Creek in Madison County, Montana.
 The mine operated in violation of CWA  §402 and
 §404 from 1989 to 1990, and also violated state
 mining laws. In addition to  paying a $10,000
                                             3-17

-------
                            FY1993 Enforcement Accomplishments Report
penalty for the CWA violations, the operator of
the mine assisted in the restoration of the mine
and Browns Gulch Creek. However, the majority
of the  reclamation work was completed by  the
State of Montana  through  forfeiture  of  the
company's reclamation bond.

U.S. v. Charles v. Hansen. Ill  (E.D. TX):  On
February 5, 1993, the court entered a consent
decree in which Charles Hansen agreed to pay
$32,500 in penalties and perform restoration of
wetlands.  The penalty has been paid.  Hansen
had  repeatedly filled coastal wetlands adjacent
to Keith Lake, a tidally influenced  salt water
lake near Beaumont, Texas, without  a CWA
permit. The original penalty of $24,000 had been
assessed against Hansen in  an  administrative
penalty action, which Hansen appealed to a U.S.
District Court.  After the court had affirmed  the
penalty, Hansen continued to refuse to pay it. The
U.S.  then filed an action to require Hansen to pay
the previously ordered penalty and interest and
costs,  and  to  pay  additional   penalties  for
additional violations,  as well as to restore  the
wetlands

Holland  Landfill.   (Suffolk,  VA>:      An
administrative order was issued on September 8,
1993, against John C. Holland Enterprises, Inc. of
Suffolk, Virginia for the unauthorized filling of
up to 70 acres of wetlands adjacent to the Dismal
Swamp in Southeastern Virginia over the last  15-
20 years .  The enterprise has agreed to comply
with the order and is  developing a restoration/
mitigation  plan to offset  the impacts of  the
unauthorized discharges. Approximately 22 acres
are proposed to be restored on-site, 50 acres of PC
cropland purchased and  reconverted to wetlands
at a  nearby location, and a yet to be determined
amount of wetlands acquired and put  into a
conservation easement.
       Kendell.  Kap  Brothers  Excavating
Company. & Eddy L. Shaw Construction Company
(Utah): On June 23, 1993, EPA issued a consent
agreement  and order for compliance under the
CWA. Under the order, Allen Kendell, owner of
property along the  Weber River in Utah, and two
contracting companies agreed to  remove several
thousand cubic yards of building demolition
debris and rubble that had been discharged in the
Weber River without the authorization required
under §404 of the CWA. The impacted reach of
the Weber River  is rated  as a high priority
fishing area by the'State of Utah and is valued
for its considerable natural beauty. In addition to
its  naturally  reproducing  populations  of
cutthroat, brown and rainbow trout, the river's
riparian  habitats  and  associated  wetlands
support  nesting birds  and  are corridors  for
wildlife  in the urbanizing area  near  Ogden,
Utah.  The  area  supports  concentrations of
wintering bald eagles, and  the Boy  Scouts of
America have adopted this portion of the river
as  a  clean  river  and a  wildlife  habitat
enhancement project.

U.S. v. Marinijs Van Leuzen and Ronald Neal
Hornbeck (S.D. TX):   The U.S. District Court,
after a trial, ordered Van Leuzen to take a number
of actions to mitigate repeated  filling of coastal
wetlands and to pay a penalty. Hornbeck, a truck
driver who had hauled fill material for Van
Leuzen, was assessed a nominal penalty  of $900.
Van Leuzen had  repeatedly  filled  wetlands
adjacent to  Galveston Bay in Texas without a
permit, claiming that he could get away with it
because he was so old.  The court ordered him to
pay penalties of between $33,600 and $50,400 over
the next 8 to 12 years, and to restore the wetlands
by removing a residence, a septic system, and fill
material from wetlands over those years.  He was
also ordered  to construct a billboard  on  the
adjacent  highway, explaining his restoration
activities and the reason that he had to conduct
the activities.  This  billboard is currently in
place, visible to passers-by on the busy coastal
highway adjacent to  the violation site.

Western Diversified Builders. Inc. (Black Hawk,
CO): On February 24, 1993, EPA entered into an
administrative order on consent for a CERCLA
removal action and an order for compliance with
§404  of  the" CWA  with Western Diversified
Builders, Inc., a construction company responsible
for a major road and parking facility built to
accommodate visitors to  casinos in the Town of
Black Hawk, Colorado. The project disturbed and
redirected the flow of the National Tunnel mine
drain and discharged dredged and fill material
into natural  drainage in the project area. The
National Tunnel discharge is an acidic mine drain
included in  the  Black  Hawk/Central City
CERCLA  NPL (National Priorities List) site, and
it  and other drainage affected by  the Western
Diversified project are subject to the requirements
of §404 of the CWA. In addition to agreeing to
cease all  unauthorized activities, the firrn.will
                                             3-18

-------
                        FY1993 Enforcement Accomplishments Report
develop and implement a workplan to remedy the
acid mine discharges from the National Tunnel
and apply for a Corps of Engineers permit to leave
the fill material in the natural drainage affected
by the project.

Wells County Water Resources District: On August
8,1993, EPA filed a consent agreement and order
for compliance resolving violations by the Wells
County Water Resources District, a North Dakota
assessment district  that allegedly  drained
approximately  2,400 acres of prairie pothole
wetlands in north central North Dakota without
the necessary authorizations under the CWA
§404. Under the order, the Wells County Water
Resources District will restore drained wetlands
on an acre-for-acre basis pursuant to plans being
developed by a team comprised of the U.S. Fish
and  Wildlife Service, the North  Dakota Game
and Fish Department, and representatives of the
water resources district.

U.S^jy.  Windward  Properties.  Inc. (N.D. GA):
On  May  4, 1993, the court  entered  a partial
consent decree in which Windward  Properties,
Inc,   agreed to  settle  three CWA  wetlands
violations for;   $75,000  in   civil  penalties;
$55,000  to fund  a wetlands  restoration  study;
and   up   to   $60,000  for  the  purchase and
preservation of  off-site wetland  acreage.  The
restoration study, which will  be performed  in
conjunction  with the University of Georgia, is
believed to be  the  first  of its kind  in the
nation.

Windward  is a corporation which specializes in
development  of residential  and commercial
properties and is a related subsidiary of  Mobile
Oil Company.  These violations arose  out of
Windward's  filling  of  wetlands  without
obtaining the required CWA  permits during the
construction  of  its  3,500  acre  residential
development near Alpharetta,  Georgia.
Safe  Drinking  Water  Act  (SpWA)
Enforcement

Public  Water Supply  System Program
(PWSS)                              |
                                       i
       The  PWSS program establishes drinking
water  standards  for  public  water  systems
(including Maximum  Contaminant  Levels  or
MCLs)  for  a   variety  of  contaminants.
Enforcement priorities for  FY  1993 emphasized
compliance  with  regulations  newly  in  effect,
including the lead and  copper rule,  targeting
lead in  water  systems,  and the surface  water
filtration  rule.  The program continued  to  work
toward  measured reductions in  the numbers of
microbiological,  turbidity,  organic/inorganic,
and VOC significant noncompliers.

        In  FY  1993,  the  program  began  an
enforcement initiative targeting drinking  water
systems  serving over  50,000 people which have
violated  the  surface  water filtration  rule.  As
part  of  the   Data  Quality   Initiative,  the
program  emphasized  violations  involving the
non-reporting  or falsification  of  compliance
information  by  public   water  systems.   The
program also continued  to  promote compliance
through enhanced training and  support for
regional,  state,  and  Indian  tribe  compliance
programs.

U.S. v. Bethlehgp 'Village District (D. N.H.):
This past year, EPA settled a civil court action
against the Bethlehem Village District in  New
Hampshire  for violations of the Safe Drinking
Water Act.  This was the first case  nationally
which was referred to enforce the June 29, 1993
deadline for  installing  filtration  under the
Surface Water Treatment Rule.

The District had  voted  not  to provide the
necessary funding to comply with this rule, but
has now voted to comply and is cooperating with
state and federal regulators.  About $2.5 million
will be  spent on a filtration  plant and other
system improvements in  order to ensure the
provision of clean drinking water to the residents
of the district.  The District also agreed to pay a
$15,000 civil penalty as part of the settlement'.
 Butte Water Company (Montana): EPA reached a
 settlement  (pending judicial approval)  with
 Butte Water Company for a $900,000 penalty! for
 violations of the Safe Drinking Water Act, the
 largest penalty ever collected for drinking water
 violations. It is also the only judicial SDWA case
 impacting a population of 30,000. A portion of
 this penalty went to the state for their role in the
 settlement.
                                             3-19

-------
                               /99J Enforcement Accomplishments Report
U.S. v. Sellggk Water  System  (W.D. Wash):
Region X obtained expedited injunctive relief
against the  Selleck  Water  System,  a small
community water system near  Ravensdale,
Washington,  under §1431  of the SDWA.  The
district court granted the motion for a temporary
restraining order to compel the system to take
immediate steps to  remedy  an imminent and
substantial endangerment to public health caused
by  fecal contamination of the water supply
provided to about 150 people,, including a day-
care facility.   The system has a  long history of
SDWA violations,  Selleck  stipulated  to a
preliminary injunction to take the steps necessary
to remedy the situation.

In June 1993, Region X received reports of people
getting sick from drinking the water provided by
Selleck. On June 22, Region X issued an emergency
administrative order directing Selleck to, among
other things,  properly operate and maintain its
treatment system, advise users to boil water until
a disinfection system was installed and  working,
and submit a corrective action plan.   Selleck
refused to comply with the  order.  A court action
followed.

This case is significant in that it is one of the few
cases nationwide in which EPA sought injunctive
relief under the Safe Drinking  Water Act.  It
confirmed the  effectiveness  of  the  Act  in
providing a means for quick relief to avoid  an
immediate threat to   public  health   from a
contaminated water supply.

U.S.  v.  Virgins  Islands  Housing Authority
(VIHA) (D. VI): On February 24,1993, the court
entered an amended consent decree in this case.
Under the amended decree,  VIHA is to undertake
various capital and O&M improvements at six of
its housing projects encompassing over sixty public
water  supplies.   The  decree also imposes a
monitoring program  on  VIHA  for   various
contaminants  subject to MCLs.   VIHA  is also
required to pay $12,000 in stipulated penalties for
its violation of the original decree, which was
entered on January 20,1989.
Underground   Injection
Program (UIC)
Control
       The UIC program  regulates  underground
injection  practices for five classes of wells. The
FY 1993  enforcement priorities included a  'second
round'  initiative  against  national oil  company
service  station  Class V wells.  Other program
priorities   included   potential   releases   to
groundwater,  wellhead  protection efforts, and
oversight of state groundwater  protection  plans.
Particular emphasis will be given to compliance
efforts  on wells that have  a potential  impact  on
water  sources and wells  subject  to. the Toxic-
Characteristic  Leaching   Procedure   (TCLP)
amendments to the RCRA regulations.

       As  part  of the national Data  Quality
Initiative,  the   UIC  program    emphasizes
reporting  requirements  involving  Class  V
shallow wells at  industrial and transportation
maintenance facility wells.

BALCQ Inc. (Montana): On December 7,1992, the
federal judge in Billings, Montana, in a default
judgment, ordered Balco Inc. to comply with their
UIC permit and pay a $1 million penalty for its
violations. The  violations occurred at Balco's
commercial salt water disposal well located in'
Richland County,  Montana and included injection
without authorization, injection over pressure,
and, failure to  submit and maintain financial
responsibility. Injection at this well  has since
ceased due to actions by the State of Montana.
The U.S. has been unable to collect the penalty
and the company is threatening bankruptcy. Liens
have been filed against assets the company holds
in Montana and North Dakota.

Getty Oil Corporation and liffy Lube Corporation:
Administrative orders  were issued to both the
Getty Petroleum Corporation and the Jiffy Lube
Corporation.  These orders  were  significant
because they ordered the  corporations to take
action at all of  their facilities  in  Region  III
having underground injection wells.  Since EPA
Region III discovered violations in some of the
corporations' facilities, the orders required the
Corporations  to inventory all facilities, to conduct
necessary remediation   activities,  and  to
implement waste minimization plans.

Mickey's Carting  Inc. v. EPA:  In an October 28,
1992 decision, the Second Circuit Court of Appeals
affirmed an administrative order issued by EPA
Region II to enforce UIC provisions.   The court
affirmed  a  district  court  ruling  that  the
administrative order was based on  substantial
evidence and that the $17,000  penalty assessed
was reasonable and in accord with EPA standard
                                             3-20

-------
                         FY1993 Enforcement Accomplishments Report
penalty  policy.   Region II had issued  the
administrative order  in  March 1991, finding
Hickey in violation of UIC requirements.  The
order required Hickey to cease injecting fluids into
three Class V wells and to pay the penalty for its
past violations.  Hickey  had sought judicial
review of the order.

U.S. v. Residual  Technologies. Inc. (N.D. OK):
EPA assessed one of the largest penalties for UIC
violations occurring under a delegated program.
On March 25,1992, a complaint was filed against
Residual Technologies, Inc. (RTI).  The company
had used excessive pressures in its injection of
hazardous waste and had failed  to  meet the
various parameters required for proper injection.
RTI agreed to the consent decree which assessed a
monetary penalty of $300,000 and resulted in the
construction of a monitoring well. The cost of
construction and monitoring is valued at $58,000.
Resource Conservation and Recovery
Act (RCRA) Enforcement

       In  FY 1993,  ihe  RCRA  enforcement
program    emphasized    compliance    with
regulations  regarding incinerators,  boilers,  and
industrial  furnaces.  The  program  conducted
statutorily  mandated  inspections of Treatment,
Storage,  and  Disposal  Facilities  (TSDFs) to
ensure   compliance   with  both   operating
requirements and corrective action  schedules (if
any), as  well  as  inspections of transporters and
large quantity generators.  The  regions and states
also  gave high priority  to  addressing facilities
that  have  had  significant noncompliance for
extended  periods,

       In FY 1992, the program  conducted an
"illegal  operators'  initiative against hazardous
waste facility  owners and operators, generators
of  hazardous  waste,   and  transporters  of
hazardous  waste who failed  to  notify  federal
and/or  state  authorities  as  required   under
RCRA,    This  reflected  the importance  the
program  attaches  to  identifying  and   taking
enforcement action against those  who  operate
outside of the regulatory  system. Together, the
regions  and states filed over  fifty civil  and
criminal enforcement cases in this effort,  twenty-
seven of  which were federal cases.  Emphasis on
those individuals and companies  that  may be
operating  outside the RCRA program continued
to be a high priority in FY 1993,
       For  FY 1993,  the  RCRA enforcement
program  implemented the  Strategic Management
Framework for  the  corrective action  program.
This  framework targets  the  highest  priority
facilities  to  reduce .existing  risk  and prevent
future risk.  The major criteria the program used
to evaluate  a facility's overall  priority  are  its
environmental  significance  and  long  term
environmental benefit.

       The   RCRA  enforcement   program
continued to use its Import/Export Data tracking
system to  ensure  compliance with notification,
reporting, and manifest  requirements   regarding
the shipment  of hazardous waste. In particular,
the program    targeted illegal hazardous waste
activity   and   participated   in   bilateral
enforcement activities   along   the   U.S./Mexican
and  U.S./Canadian borders.

       The   RCRA   program   emphasized
deterrence    through   the   assessment   of
appropriate    civil   penalties,  including
implementation  of  the   revised  RCRA Civil
Penalty Policy. The program also  continued  to
integrate       pollution   prevention/waste
minimization   efforts  into program operations,
including  incorporating  pollution prevention
conditions in  settlements.

       The  RCRA  program  offers  extensive
training  and guidance  to states, tribes,  and local
governments  through  the   RCRA   Inspector
Institute, including an Advanced  Institute which
commenced in  FY 1993. It also will continue to
provide support for  NAAG  and the four state
regional  associations.  RCRA  attorney  training
through NETl is an additional ares of emphasis.

The   Hazardous  Waste  Combustion
Initiative

       On September 28, 1993, EPA announced a
cluster  filing  of  enforcement  actions  against
violators  of  hazardous   waste  combustion
regulations.  The actions seek over $22 million in
civil  penalties  and,  where  violations  are
ongoing,  to compel  the  facilities  to return to
compliance.  A total of 30 federal administrative
complaints, one state  complaint, and  8 federal
administrative  consent agreements  were filed.
                                             3-21

-------
                             FY1993 Enforcement Accomplishments Report
       The   Combustion   Initiative  is   an
important  component of EPA's ongoing efforts  to
minimize  risfo  associated with the burning  of
hazardous  wastes.   The initiative will serve  to
penalize and return to  compliance  boilers  and
industrial  furnaces  (BIFs)  and  incinerators
identified  by EPA as operating in violation  of
RCRA requirements, emphasize  to the regulated
community  the  importance  of  complying with
BIF  and  incinerator rules, and  address   the
public's  legitimate  interest  in ensuring  that
facilities  burning  hazardous  waste  do   so
properly.  Moreover, the  initiative  is  consistent
with   EPA's  "Draft  Combustion   Strategy",
announced  on   May 18,  3993.    The Draft
Combustion   Strategy   reinforces   EPA's
commitment  to protecting human health  and  the
environment  from  hazardous  waste  risks   by,
amongst other things,  emphasizing  enforcement
of rules governing the burning of such  waste and
the importance of pollution prevention,

In re: Chemical Waste Management. Inc.: On
December 31,  1992, EPA  signed a consent
agreement and  final order (CAFO)  resolving
RCRA   violations   at   Chemical   Waste
Management, Inc.'s Trade  Waste  Incineration
facility  in Sauget, Illinois. As Chemical Waste
had ceased its on-site ash stabilization activities
prior to the filing of EPA's complaint, the CAFO
required that prior to the  initiation of any future
on-site treatment of incinerator ash, the company
must  submit to Illinois  EPA a revised waste
analysis plan for review and approval as part of
a Class 2 modification to  its permit. In addition,
Chemical  Waste will  pay  a  civil  penalty  of
$275,000.

PSM  Chemicals North America,  Inc.:    In
September 1993, DSM Chemicals North America,
Inc., agreed to  pay a  $121,000  penalty  for
violation of §3008(a) of RCRA.  On August 31,
1992, EPA  Region TV had issued a complaint and
compliance order for violations relating to the
BIF rule.  DSM is also required to demonstrate
compliance with  the BIF rule.

ICI Acrylics, Inc.:   On September 20, 1993,  ICI
Acrylics,  Inc. of Olive  Branch,  Mississippi,
entered into a CACO, agreeing to pay a $104,000
penalty for violations of RCRA, The settlement
also calls  for the submission of a certification
stating that the company  has ceased the burning
of hazardous waste in the boiler unit and that the
company intends to close the unit pursuant to  the
RCRA closure requirements.

La Farge Corp.:  Pursuant to a CAFO filed on
September 28, 1993, La Farge Corporation has
agreed to pay a penalty of $594,000 for violations
of RCRA.   The facility  was also required  to
certify closure of its cement kiln dust waste pile
pursuant to Alabama regulations.  La Farge, who
sold its facility to the Medusa Corporation on
February  1,  1993,  had  operated  a  cement
manufacturing kiln in Demopolis, Alabama.

Nutcasweet Company: A CAFO was filed against
Nutrasweet Company of Augusta, Georgia, on
May  13, 1993.  The respondent agreed to pay
$80,000 for violations of RCRA.  On August 31,
1992, an administrative complaint  had been filed
against   Nutrasweet  alleging failure   to
continuously monitor and record the feed rate of
feed streams being burned in two boilers, failure to
make  a hazardous waste determination  for
certain wastes which are stored  at the  facility,
and  accumulating hazardous wastes on-site in
excess of 90 days.

3V Chemical Corporation:   On  September 22,
1993, EPA signed a CACO  requiring  the  3V
Chemical Corporation to pay a $57,500  penalty
and  perform a supplemental environmental
project estimated  to cost at least  $960,000.  The
central component of the project is the construction
of a closed loop non-contact cooling water system
which would produce significant  environmental
benefits. In addition,  the  settlement includes
provisions for  the submission to EPA  of  the
documents  necessary  under the BIF  rule  to
authorize the facility to again burn  hazardous
waste in the boiler unit.

The Illegal Operators Initiative

       EPA announced its  second RCRA Illegal
Operators ("ILOP") Initiative, in two "waves",
on July 1  and July  16,  1933,  respectively.   A
follow-up  to the February 1992 ILOP Initiative
that   involved 50  civil  actions,  this  initiative
against  "illegal operators" of  RCRA facilities -
facilities  that had  tried to sidestep the system
by disregarding RCRA requirements -- included
41 civil actions and 15 criminal actions.

       The   success  of   the  RCRA  Illegal
Operator  Initiatives  highlights  a continuing
                                             3-22

-------
                        FY1993 Enforcement Accomplishments Report
multimedia   enforcement  emphasis  on   data
integrity  violations.   Under several  statutes,
EPA  relies  extensively  on  self-reporting  and
other  data requirements not only  to keep track of
compliance and make regulatory and enforcement
decisions, but  also  to  identify  the  regulated
community.    Complete and  accurate  data  are
essential  to EPA's mission and compliance  with
these  laws is  critical to  the  Agency's  effort  to
safeguard  the  environment.   By targeting these
violations  of  reporting  and   recordkeeping
requirements, EPA  is  emphasizing  that  such
violations  are  not  just  sO'Called  "paper
violations".    Furthermore,  this   initiative
demonstrates  EPA's  commitment to  end  the
illegal storage and dumping of hazardous waste
that results in  injury to  both people exposed  to
the offending  facility  and   the  surrounding
environment.

General Electric Co.:  By a  CACO entered on
September 27,1993, the General Electric Company
agreed to pay a civil penalty  of $83,000 to settle
an administrative action  filed under §3008(a) of
RCRA as part of  the July 1993 Illegal Operator
Initiative. EPA filed a complaint and compliance
order against GE  on July 15,  1993, for failure to
make a hazardous waste determination on the
electrostatic precipitator dust as required under
40  C.F.R  268.7(a).   GE  operates  a  facility  in
Lexington,  Kentucky,  that   manufactures
incandescent light bulbs.  In 1987, GE installed an
electrostatic precipitator (EP) on the furnace
stacks to collect particulate matter generated in
the furnace.  During inspections performed  in
December 1992, the Commonwealth of Kentucky
learned that GE had not been making hazardous
waste determinations on the EP dust.  As a result
of  this   enforcement  action,  GE  is  now
appropriately disposing of the EP dust

See U.S.  v. Sherwrn-Williams. Co. (N.D. 111.) in
multi-media section of this chapter.

U.S. v. Navajo Refining Company. Inc., {D. NM):
As  part  of the Illegal Operator Initiative,  the
U.S.  filed suit against  the Navajo Refinery
Company, Inc., in July of 1993, for injunctive relief
and civil penalties in the amount of $7,000,000.
The suit alleges violations at its Artesia, NM,
refinery that include  failure to: notify for the TC
(Toxicity Characteristic)  waste benzene (D018);
make  a proper waste determination; file a Part A
permit   application   amendment;   certify
groundwater   monitoring  or  financial
responsibility;  have a  closure plan;  have an
adequate groundwater monitoring system; or have
an adequate waste analysis plan.  The facility
continues to release up to one million gallons per
day  of wastewater through  a three mile long
pipeline to evaporation ponds.  The wastewater
contains regulated levels of benzene, which has
been regulated under the toxicity characteristic
rule since September 25,1990. Sampling by EPA
and state agencies, upon which the case is based,
has also found benzene in the groundwater.

Land  Disposal  Restriction   (LDR)
Follow-up Initiative

       On May 13, 2993, EPA and  DO} followed
up on  the 1991 LDR  Initiative  by announcing
settlements totaling $6.35 million  in four  major
cases involving violations of. the  RCRA  LDRs.
The  $6.35  million  in  RCRA   civil  judicial
penalties   represents   more  such  penalties
announced in one day than in the previous fiscal
year.   This  initiative illustrates EPA's continued
commitment  to   enforcement  of  the  LDR
requirements and its interest in securing pollution
prevention  commitments  that are  not otherwise
required by law.

U.S.  v. Dana Corporation (S.P. Ind.): On April 20,
1993, the district court  entered a consent decree
resolving the litigation  in  U.S.  v. Dana. The
decree requires  Dana  to  pay  a penalty  of
$1300,000 and close surface impoundments and a
waste  pile  where lead-bearing  sludges were
allegedly  deposited   at  their  facility   in
Richmond, Indiana. The  current estimate for the
injunctive relief based  on the estimated cost of
closure and post- closure care is $3,699,788.

EPA  became aware of the violations after a EPA
Region V review of state inspection records and
Dana's response to a RCRA §3007 information
request.  Dana  had  discharged  wastewater
containing lead from cupolas to several settling
areas. Dana excavated sludges containing lead
from the surface impoundments and placed  the
sludges in a landfill elsewhere on the property of
the Dana Richmond facility, thereby creating a
waste  pile  in  violation of the land  disposal
restrictions.

U.S^ v. Group j?ekko International. IQC. (N.D.
Ind.):  A civil  consent decree requiring  Group
                                            3-23

-------
                             FY1993 Enforcement Accomplishments Report
Dekko International, Inc. to pay a $550,000 civil
penalty was lodged on May 13,1993. In addition,
the settlement required Group Dekko to exhume
and treat approximately 11  million pounds of
lead bearing waste. Group Dekko must also; close
the waste pile under a plan that requires either
exhumation or on-site treatment of an additional
50 million Ibs. of waste; pay up to $20,000 in
oversight costs; maintain an in-line treatment
system that eliminates lead-bearing waste from
the firm's waste stream; and  implement interim
mfeasures  to  contain  the -waste  pile  while
treatment is proceeding.

This action arose out of Group Dekko's violation
of RCRA's land disposal restrictions  for  its
disposal of lead-bearing waste in a large  on-site
waste  pile at its  facility  near Kendallville,
Indiana.   This facility is  operated  through a
division of Group Dekko called Reclaimers, Inc.,
and is designed to recover copper from scrap wire
and cable.

U.S. v. Grumman St Augustine Corp. (M.D. Fla,):
This consent decree, entered on July 20, 1993,
settles a  RCRA enforcement action  as well  as
potential governmental contractor suspension and
debarment claims against Grumman,  The decree
calls for a civil penalty of $2.5  million. Grumman
will initially  pay  $1.5 million in cash.   If
Grumman completes several innovative pollution
prevention projects, then the  settlement amount
will be reduced by $1 million.

Grumman strips, paints,and refurbishes aircraft
at its St. Augustine, Florida facility. The U.S.
brought this action against Grumman on February
22, 1991, as part of the RCRA Land  Disposal
Restrictions Initiative.

The pollution  prevention   provisions  will
substantially reduce or eliminate several  highly
toxic waste streams, including  a paint stripper,
methylene  chloride   and  ozone-depleting
chemicals  (e.g.  CFCs).  Substituting  a
nonhazardous paint stripper  for  methylene
chloride may set a precedent for paint strippers
across the country as most of them use hazardous
solvents in their operations. EPA  estimates that
up to 240,000 pounds of hazardous emissions per
year will be eliminated and toxic sludge will be
reduced if Grumman is in compliance with  RCRA.
Furthermore, approximately 2,412,000 gallons of
potable water will be conserved.
U.S v. Sanders lead Co. (M.D. Ala.): A consent
decree was entered on July 15, 1993, requiring
Sanders Lead to pay $2 million in civil penalties.
In addition,  the consent decree provides for
injunctive  relief whereby affiliated companies
will  treat wastewater as hazardous waste and
conduct corrective action under the Sanders Lead
permit to  dispose of blast  slag, used as fill
material for parking lots.  This consent decree
resolves alleged  violations involving illegal
disposal of lead-bearing  hazardous wastes into
approximately eight land disposal units for up to
three years after the facility  lost interim status
by operation of law, as well as  for placement of
lead-bearing  acidic  waste  into  a  surface
impoundment in  violation  of land  disposal
restrictions.

This was the first civil judicial case that the U.S.
filed to enforce the land disposal restrictions and
settles a RCRA enforcement action  concerning
violations  at  a Troy, Alabama secondary lead
smelter.  The facility manufactures refined lead
alloys through the smeltering and  refining of
lead-bearing scrap materials,  including old lead
acid  batteries.

Geographic  Enforcement Initiative

       An  important   geographic  initiative
focusing  on  a  heavily  industrial  area  of
southeast  Chicago  and  northwest   Indiana
continues  to  target  violations  of  nearly  all
environmental statutes.     Collectively,  the
industry in this corridor has contributed to  severe
water quality  degradation  of  both surface  water
bodies —  including  Lake  Michigan  —  and  a
groundwater aquifer, as well as  to  chronic  air
pollution problems,

U.S.  v. Bethlehem  Steel (N.D. Ind.): On August
31, 1993, the  district court ordered Bethlehem
Steel to pay $6 million in penalties for violation
of RCRA and RCRA-related aspects of the SDWA
permit at its facility in Burns Harbor, Indiana.
Although Bethlehem Steel had argued that  the
waste mixture in question was not regulated due to
the holding in Shell Oil, the court declined to
focus on defendant's mixture argument and instead
focused on whether Bethlehem Steel's waste met
the F006 hazardous waste listing description.
The court also denied Bethlehem Steel's motion
for summary judgment on July 19, 1993, holding
                                            3-24

-------
                        FY1993 Enforcement Accomplishments Report
that the  Paperwork  Reduction  Act  is an
affirmative defense that must be timely pled or it
is waived.

This case was brought as part of the Great Lakes
Initiative in  response to  Bethlehem  Steel's
failure to perform corrective action as required by
its SDWA permit and its failure to treat its waste
as hazardous.  The penalty judgment was one of
the highest ever obtained in an environmental
action under any media.  The large penalty was
influenced by a finding that Bethlehem Steel's
violations were willful.  This case is currently on
appeal to the Seventh Circuit.

U.S. v. federated Metals. Inc.   (N.D,IndJ: On
November 17, 1992, the district court entered a
consent  decree resolving Federated  Metals'
violations of a 1989 consent agreement and  final
order (CAFO). As  part  of  the  settlement,
Federated Metals agreed  to  pay a $675,000
penalty and perform a corrective measures study
and possible corrective action valued in excess of
$5,000,000. This settlement is the first resolution
in a cluster of complaints filed against  companies
as part of EPA  Region V's  Northwest  Indiana
Geographic Enforcement Initiative. The case is
also  part of the Agency's  lead and primary
metals enforcement initiatives.

EPA and Federated Metals had entered into the
CAFO on February 1, 1989,  in order to resolve
RCRA  violations at  the Whiting, Indiana,
facility. The CAFO  required  the  company to
provide   acceptable  evidence  of  liability
insurance, clean up  lead pollution  and other
hazardous substances, and submit written costs
estimates, for closing  and conducting the annual
post-closure  monitoring and  maintenance of the
facility.  Federated Metals failed to  fully comply
with  these  requirements  within  the time
specified in  the CAFO. Hence, on October 16,
1990, the Agency filed a judicial  complaint
seeking  civil  penalties  and injunctive relief for
the CAFO violations.

Other Major RCRA  Cases

In the  Matter of  Abbott Chemical, Inc.:   On
December  10,   1992,  EPA  executed  an
administrative order on  consent  resolving a
complaint  alleging  that Abbott  discharged
methylene chloride into the headworks of its
wastewater treatment system in concentrations
exceeding  the  25  pprn  limitation  in the
headworks exemption.  Under the order, Abbott
agreed to pay a penalty of $180,000 and perform a
sampling program to demonstrate that methylene
chloride had  not been  released  from  its
wastewater  treatment   system  into  the
environment.  The agreement  further required
corrective measures if determinative levels  of
methylene chloride were detected.

In the Matter of Bloomfield Refining Company,
Bloomfield, New Mexico:  A corrective action
RCRA Administrative  Order on Consent was
signed on December 31, 1992, for the Bloomfield
Refining Company in Bloomfield, New Mexico.
Bloomfield had been in operation since 1963. It is
an active petroleum refinery  and  consists  of
approximately  287 acres.  The facility has
released or caused to be released hazardous waste
and  hazardous  waste  constituents  to the
ground water, surface water, and soil at the
facility.  Surface water contamination consists of
elevated levels of organics and inorganics.  Light
non-aqueous   phase  liquids   exist  in the
groundwater beneath the  facility.  The  order
requires interim measures, A  RCRA  Facility
Investigation, and a Corrective Measures Study.

Boeing  Helicopter;  EPA has entered into  an
administrative  consent  order  with  Boeing
Helicopter of Ridley, PA, requiring the company
to pay a cash penalty of $800,000 and to make an
additional payment of  $350,000 to a non-profit
environmental  group, for violating hazardous
waste regulations.  The  non-profit  group, the
Institute for Cooperation in  Environmental
Management, (ICEM),  based in  Philadelphia,
will   use the   penalty  funds  to  develop
individually tailored  programs  for   small
businesses on how to prevent and reduce pollution
in their daily operations.

U.S.  V. Buckeye Products. Inc., (E.D. Mich,); On
January 30,1991, the district court issued an order
holding Buckeye Products, Inc. (Buckeye)  in
contempt for failing to comply with a 1987 consent
decree.  The contempt order includes provisions
requiring  defendant   to,  inter  alia:  (1)
immediately commence groundwater monitoring
on a quarterly basis;  (2) fully and timely
implement post closure care; (3) pay  $104,871.26
as payment of the outstanding civil penalty due,
plus interest;   and (4)  pay $5.31  million  in
stipulated penalties for violating the consent
                                           3-25

-------
S *» \
(jay
                            FY1993 Enforcement Accomplishments Report
decree.  Buckeye did not appeal the contempt
order.  The government subsequently began to
garnish Buckeye's assets to satisfy the contempt
order.  On October  17, 1991,  Buckeye filed a
Motion to Vacate the Contempt Order, Quash the
Writ of Garnishment,  and Quash the  Writ of
Execution. This action was subsequently settled on
May 13,1993; however, Buckeye failed to  fulfill
the payment arrangement.  On September 15,
1993, the  U.S. District Court for  the  Eastern
District of Michigan entered a judgment against
Buckeye for $5.4 million.

In the Matter of Chem-Met Services. Inc:  On
February 23, 1993, an administrative law  judge
(ALJ) denied Chem-Met Services, Inc.'s motion to
dismiss an administrative enforcement action.
Chem-Met argued that the wastes at issue were
treatment residues  derived  from  hazardous
wastes and thus not subject to any RCRA subtitle C
regulations due to the  D.C. Circuit's vacatur of
the "derived from" rule in Shell Oil v. EPA. The
ALJ, however, confirmed EPA's argument that it
had the  authority  to regulate  mixtures and
derived-from residues without relying on  the
specific regulatory  provisions known as  the
"mixture" and "derived-from" rules.

In the Matter of Chemical Waste Disposal Corpj
On February 25, 1993, EPA executed a RCRA
§3008(h) administrative order  on consent with
Chemical  Waste Disposal Corp.   The  order
provides for remediation of contamination  at the
facility located in an urbanized portion of Queens
County, New  York. The order requires a RCRA
Facility Investigation  and  various  interim
measures to deal with environmental problems at
the site.    A Corrective Measures  Study and
Corrective Measures must also be carried  out if
EPA determines they  are necessary based on the
Facility Investigation results.  The order was
based on an initial administrative order issued in
August 1991.  Chemical Waste Disposal Corp. and
a related company had conducted businesses at
the facility involving  both the transportation
and processing of hazardous wastes.

In the Matter of Cypress Aviation; On November
17, 1992,  the Environmental Appeals Board
(EAB) held that wastes generated during paint
stripping operations, consisting of wastewater,
dissolved paint, paint chips, and spent solvent
(paint stripper),  met the description  for "F"-
listed spent solvents.  The EAB rejected  Cypress
                                                   Aviation's argument that Shell Oil v. EPA should
                                                   result in dismissal of the claims.  The holding
                                                   affirmed a $25,000 civil penalty assessed by the
                                                   administrative law judge.

                                                   This case was initiated following an inspection of
                                                   the  facility operated by  Cypress  Aviation in
                                                   Lakeland,  Florida which  revealed prohibited
                                                   solvent contaminated waste water on the land.

                                                   U.S v. Ekco HousewjtteSjJnc.;  On September 20,
                                                   1993, the U. S. District Court granted most of the
                                                   U.S.' Motion for  Partial  Accelerated Decision
                                                   holding that when Ekco Housewares, Inc. (Ekco)
                                                   caused listed hazardous wastes to be mixed with
                                                   groundwater,  the  wastes  remained  RCRA
                                                   regulated under a "contained in"/ continuing
                                                   jurisdiction principle.  The court also held  that
                                                   when Ekco physically disturbed hazardous waste
                                                   disposed  of prior  to November  1980, Ekco
                                                   "actively managed" the waste, thereby subjecting
                                                   it to RCRA jurisdiction.   These holdings  are
                                                   significant  because  they  are among the  first
                                                   judicial precedents confirming RCRA jurisdiction
                                                   over listed  waste mixtures after the Shell   Oil
                                                   decision.  On January 28,  1994, the  U.S. District
                                                   Court ordered Ekco to pay a civil penalty of $4.6
                                                   million.

                                                   DOJ filed the complaint in the summer of 1992, on
                                                   behalf of  EPA,  for the company's failure to
                                                   maintain  liability  coverage and  financial
                                                   assurance in connection with an on-site hazardous
                                                   waste surface impoundment, as required by RCRA.
                                                   Ekco   owns  and   operates  a   bakeware
                                                   manufacturing facility in  Massillon, Ohio.   As
                                                   part of its manufacturing process, Ekco generated
                                                   waste products which it discharged to an on-site
                                                   surface impoundment. Between 1980 and 1983,
                                                   Ecko pumped on-site groundwater, contaminated
                                                   with, among other things, cadmium, lead,  and
                                                   organic constitutes, which it utilized as a cooling
                                                   water.  Afterwards,  Ekco   discharged   the
                                                   wastewater back into the surface impoundments.

                                                   In the Matter of Hardin County, Ohio c/o Hardin
                                                   County Commissioners:  This  case involved an
                                                   EPA  administrative action  alleging  that a
                                                   municipality unlawfully  received hazardous
                                                   waste without interim  status or a  permit.
                                                   Administrative Law Judge  Nissen dismissed
                                                   EPA's case  on the grounds that the Shell   Oil
                                                   decision operated to void  the mixture  rule
                                                   retroactively from the date of its promulgation.
                                           3-26

-------
                        FY J993 Enforcement Accomplishments Report
EPA appealed Judge Nissen's  decision to the
Environmental Appeals Board (EAB), which
held oral argument on the case on September 30,
1992. In support of its position before the EAB
that Shell Oil vacates the mixture and derived-
from rules prospectively only, EPA cited the D.C.
Circuit's concern with discontinuity in hazardous
waste regulation, its invitation  to reinstate the
rules without notice and comment, and its remedy
of vacatur and remand. On November 6,1992, the
case was remanded to the ALJ for determination
of whether federal or state law applied to the
violations, and it did  not rule on the retroactivity
argument. On remand, Judge Nissen reaffirmed
his earlier position, ruling on May 27, 1993 that
Shell Oil is retroactive.   EPA  appealed  that
decision, and the EAB heard oral argument on
December 8,1993.

U.S. v. ILCO. efc al. (llth Cir. 1993): On August 4,
1993, the U.S. Court of Appeals  for the Eleventh
Circuit reversed  the district court and held that
lead components from spent automobile batteries
were discarded and hence could be regulated as
"solid waste" under RCRA. The Court of Appeals
affirmed  the district court's award of $3.5 million
in civil penalties and $845,033 in response costs.
The action  arose  from the  ILCO's  former
operations at its secondary lead smelter in Leeds,
Alabama, which reprocessed  spent  lead-acid
batteries from cars and trucks.

U.S. v. Marine Shale Processors. Inc. (W.D, La.):
At the close of Fiscal  Year 1992,  the civil  judicial
action against Marine  Shale Processors,  Inc.
(MSP) was  reassigned  to U.S. District Judge
Adrian  Duplantier of the  Eastern District of
Louisiana.  Despite the reassignment  to an
Eastern  District  Judge,  (which  was effective
August 13,  1992), the case is  still technically
within the jurisdiction of the Western District of
Louisiana.

On August 2,1993, Judge Duplantier, among other
things: (1) permitted the  intervention of the
State of  Louisiana through the Department of
Environmental Quality; (2) postponed the trial of
this matter  to April 11,  1994, in New Orleans,
Louisiana (the  trial has since been rescheduled to
begin on April 18, 1994); (3) granted the United
States' Motion to Amend its Complaint  to include
additional claims under CERCLA, CAA,  and
RCRA against MSP and the two  intervening
defendants (with regard  to the  RCRA claims
only), Southern Wood Piedmont Co. and Recycling
Park, Inc.; (4) granted the United States' Motion
for a Protective Order with regard  to MSP's
discovery of matters driven by MSP's "selective
prosecution" defense; (5)  granted  the  U.S.'s
Motion to Strike MSP's affirmative defenses of
double jeopardy, primary jurisdiction and failure
to exhaust administrative remedies, estoppel,
laches, statute of limitations, and the defense
based on  the existence of MSP's patent.

On August 24, 1993, Judge Duplantier dismissed
nine out  of MSP's ten counter claims against the
U.S., citing as precedent another RCRA-related
decision  in  an  underground  storage  tank
enforcement action, U.S. v. Ownbev Enterprises.
Inc. MSP's counter-claims covered a wide array of
legal theories based on assertions of negligence,
takings, and breach of contract by the U.S. The
court agreed  wilh the reasoning of the District
Court for the Northern District of Georgia in
Ownbey,  which found that a claim for damages is
not a proper counter-claim to a  government
regulatory enforcement action. The ninth counter-
claim, which was not  dismissed by the court,
alleged that the U.S. had failed to sufficiently
respond to MSP's requests to EPA pursuant to the
Freedom  of Information Act.

Mqnsanto Chgniical Company;  On June 21,1993,
EPA entered into a consent agreement and order
with  the Monsanto Company in Springfield,
Massachusetts.  Monsanto will pay a minimum
cash penalty of $26,750 and perform  a SEP at a
minimum cost of $160,500. Monsanto will receive
$80,250  credit  towards  settlement  upon
completion of the SEP.

As part  of the SEP, Monsanto has proposed to
install equipment   to  their melamine  resin
manufacturing process which would enable them
to recover methanol from  the  methanol-rich
distillate waste  stream  which  is  currently
generated at a rate of 3 million pounds per year.
Monsanto estimates that the recovery will result
in a 60%  reduction of the waste stream or a 1.8
million pound per year reduction.

In re; Feoria. Disposal Company: On May 12,1993,
EPA entered into a consent agreement with Peoria
Disposal  Company (PDC) requiring PDC to pay
$25,000  in penalties . and  to  implement  a
Supplemental  Environmental Project valued at
$70,000. The SEP is a pollution reduction project,
                                            3-27

-------
     \
m)
FY1993 Enforcement Accomplishments Report
  consisting of: 1) the construction of a containment
  system  for storage  of loaded  roll-off boxes
  containing hazardous waste which are being held
  at PDCs transfer facility for periods of 10 days or
  less; and 2) asphalt paving over the traffic areas
  of  PDC's truck terminal to assure that any
  spillage of hazardous waste which might occur is
  prevented from being released to the environment.
  EPA had filed an administrative complaint on
  August 30,1991  against PDC for violations of the
  transfer facility  storage regulations of restricted
  hazardous wastes, under § 3008(a)(l) of RCRA, as
  amended.

  Precision fabricating and Cleaning Inc: A consent
  agreement and  final  order providing for  a
  $100,000 penalty in  settlement of  a complaint
  alleging violations of RCRA's Land  Disposal
  Restriction Requirements was signed by Precision
  Fabricating and Cleaning, Inc., Cocoa, FL on
  August  24, 1993. On August 12, 1992, EPA had
  filed an administrative action against Precision
  for improper land disposal of acid (D002), freon
  (F002), methylene chloride (FOOD,  and acetone
  (FQ03),  and  for failure to  determine if these
  wastes were restricted as required by 40 CFR §
  268.7 (c).  The violations were discovered as a
  result of an inspection by Florida Department of
  Environmental Protection (FDEP). Since FDEP is
  not authorized to enforce Land Ban violations,
  EPA took the lead in this enforcement action.

  In  re:  Safety-Kleen Facilities:  A  consent
  agreement and final order, concerning RCRA
  import-notification violations at Safety-Kleen
  facilities in Hebron, Ohio, was filed on May 7,
  1993. Safety-Kleen has agreed  pay civil a civil
  penalty  of  $227,925.  EPA  had filed  an
  administrative  complaint on  April  8.  1993,
  alleging that between 1988 and 1992 Safety-
  Kleen received numerous shipments of hazardous
  waste for which it did not appropriately notify
  EPA.  In addition,  other violations included
  notifications sent less than four weeks in advance
  of receipt of shipments of waste and notifications
  which  incorrectly  identified the waste to  be
  received.

  In the Matter of Sequoyah Fuels Corporation.
  Gore,  Oklahoma;      A  corrective  action
  administrative order on consent under RCRA was
  signed and made effective on August 3,1993, for
  the Sequoyah Fuels Corporation located in Gore,
  Oklahoma.   The  facility  engaged  in  the
                    conversion of uranium ore to uranium hexafluoride
                    and  the conversion  of  depleted  uranium
                    hexafluoride into uranium tetrafluoride which
                    are used to produce nuclear reactor fuel rods and
                    armor-piercing bullets, respectively, from June
                    1970 to June 1993. This order required corrective
                    action activities to be performed at the site to
                    address the investigation and remediation of past
                    releases  of  hazardous constituents  to   the
                    environment from the facility.  The order  was
                    developed and is being implemented in conjunction
                    with activities  of the Nuclear  Regulatory
                    Commission  (NRC).  NRC regulates  Sequoyah
                    because they manage  radioactive substances.
                    Sequoyah is  implementing decommissioning
                    activities under the oversight of the NRC.  EPA
                    and NRC have developed the decommissioning
                    and corrective action programs at the site to
                    ensure  that  all activities at  the site   are
                    coordinated.

                    Sharon Stggh  A  unilateral  RCRA  §3008  (h)
                    initial administrative order was issued  by  EPA
                    Region  III  to  the  Sharon Steel Corporation
                    following a  breakdown   of consent order
                    negotiations.  The unilateral order was appealed
                    on January 22, 1993. An Administrative Hearing
                    was held on July 22,1993. On August 5,1993, the
                    Regional Judicial Officer (RJO)  recommended
                    that the order be issued as written, with only a
                    few minor modifications.  There were  several
                    disputed issues of fact and law raised by Sharon
                    Steel Corp., many challenging the scope of EPA's
                    authority to require corrective action under RCRA
                    §3008 (h), all of  which were  decided in EPA's
                    favor.

                    The RJO concluded that the broad  corrective
                    action  definition  of  "facility"  recently
                    promulgated  in  the  Corrective  Action
                    Management Unit Rule was properly applied in
                    this  case.   Under this definition,  property
                    separated from  the regulated  RCRA  interim
                    status unit by a river, but connected by a trestle
                    bridge  used  and owned by the respondent, is
                    included within the scope of the order. The RJO
                    further concluded that EPA need only show the
                    release of any one hazardous  waste into  the
                    environment  to satisfy the statutory requirement
                    of a "release of hazardous waste." The RJO also
                    agreed with EPA's position  that  although a
                    substance may not be a listed, hazardous waste or
                    hazardous  constituent, if  it  may  pose a
                    substantial present  or potential  hazard to the
                                             3-28

-------
                        FY1993 Enforcement Accomplishments Report
environment, then it falls within the statutory
definition of "hazardous waste" (RCRA §1004
(5)).  As such, it can  provide the basis for a
corrective action order.  Finally, the RJO affirmed
EPA's position that "to  compel corrective action
investigations or studies, EPA need  only identify
a  general  threat to  human  health  or  the
environment."

In  the  Matte;of Sivyer  Steel  Corporation.
(Bettendorf, lo.h  On August 9, 1993, EPA  and
Sivyer Steel Corporation  (Sivyer)  entered  a
consent agreement and consent order in settlement
of the RCRA § 3008(a) complaint  filed  against
Sivyer on September 30,1991. The complaint had
alleged failure to conduct a hazardous waste
determination on hazardous waste stored in drums
at the facility and on waste arc dust, and  also
alleged storage of hazardous waste for longer
than 90 days without a permit or interim status.
The order required Sivyer to; 1) pay a penalty of
$51,437.50 ($11,617.50 of which is deferred until
completion  of a  supplemental environmental
project, described below); 2) undertake closure of
its  illegal  hazardous  waste storage area; 3)
dispose of its waste arc dust as hazardous waste
until such  time as  it  can  show,  to EPA's
satisfaction, that the dust is no longer hazardous;
and 4) undertake a SEP.  The SEP requires Sivyer
to undertake a waste minimization assessment of
all waste streams at its facility and to implement
the findings of the assessment in accordance with
a time schedule to be approved by EPA. Sivyer
must also submit a report on the findings of the
assessment and the implementation of waste
minimization practices to EPA.

IJ.S. v. Taracorp Industries. Inc.: On June 8,1993,
the U.S. District Court granted in part and denied
in  part EPA's motion for summary judgment
finding Taracorp Industries, Inc. (Taracorp) liable
for the cleanup of a hazardous waste site that it
bought from the National Lead Company (NLC)
in 1979. The court rejected Taracorp's claim that
it was "impossible" to obtain financial insurance
for the site  once it became listed  on the NPL,
reasoning that "impossibility" went to the issue
of relief not liability. On September 2,1993, the
court reversed an earlier decision and found the
Taracorp site to be a landfill.  A  hearing  on
September 20, 1993 determined civil penalties.

Teradyne Infc:  On July 19,1993, Teradyne Inc. and
EPA entered into a  settlement agreement for a
1991  RCRA  enforcement  action  against the
company.  This matter was settled for a total
penalty of $120,000.   This includes  a cash
payment of $50,000 plus  credit towards the
performance of two supplemental environmental
projects.  Teradyne will expend approximately
$800,000 for  the  purchase and installation of
solvent replacement  units, one at the Nashua
facility (approximate cost of $350,000), and one
at the Boston facility (approximate cost of
$450,000).  EPA has granted Teradyne a credit of
$70,000 for the proposed projects. Teradyne has
certified that  it is presently in compliance with
RCRA requirements.

Tesoro Alaska Petroleum Company. (Kenai,
Alaska).: In an administrative enforcement action
involving a series of complex RCRA regulatory
issues, EPA negotiated a settlement  with Tesoro
Alaska Petroleum  Company in  which the
company agreed  to pay a $550,000 penalty. This
was EPA's largest cash settlement to date in the
Pacific Northwest in  an  administrative case
involving hazardous  wastes. The complaint was
part  of  the  nationwide Illegal  Operator's
Initiative.

U.S.  v. United  Technologies Corporation (D.
Conn.): The court lodged a consent decree settling
this case on August 23,1993. The decree provides
that United Technologies Corporation (UTC) will
pay a total  penalty of $5,301,910,  of  which
$4,251,910 will go to the U.S. and $1,050,000 will
go to the State of Connecticut.  The decree also
incorporated  an  auditing agreement  which
requires UTC  to implement an extensive multi-
media environmental audit at all UTC facilities
located in EPA Region I.

This case was first referred  to the EPA following
an inspection of UTC facilities.  The inspections
detected a wide  range of  RCRA violations at
eight  UTC  facilities,  including its  Pratt &'
Whitney,  Sikorsky,  and  Hamilton  Standard
operations. The auditing provisions in the UTC
settlement are amongst the most extensive ever
incorporated  into the  settlement  of an EPA
enforcement action,

Washington State University. (Spokane, WA.): In
an  agreement with  EPA,  Washington  State
University (WSU) took the first steps toward
creation  of an  on-campus  facility  to reuse
chemicals and other  substances that previously
                                            3-29

-------
                             FF1993 Enforcement Accomplishments Report
required expensive handling as a hazardous
waste. According to the agreement, WSU would
start  work  on developing  plans for  a waste
exchange  on  campus  that  would  allow
researchers,  instructors and  students in  one
university department  to  be  able  to reuse
materials that had  already been used  in other
departments.  Officials  at WSU estimated the
campus waste exchange would cost more than
$87,500.  The agreement resulted from an EPA
enforcement  action  involving  violations of
hazardous  waste  regulations discovered  by
inspectors from EPA and the Washington State
Department of Ecology. EPA agreed to a  penalty
of only $22,500 because the university will be
implementing the waste exchange and reduction
program.

Weyerhaeuser Co., Longyiew. Washington: In a
settlement  reached  between Weyerhaeuser  and
EPA in February 1993, it was agreed that unless
Weyerhaeuser  succeeded  in  reducing  the
.hazardous waste generated by certain equipment
at  its Paper Company  plant  in Longview,
Washington by 45 percent, the company would
pay a  penalty of  $38,948  to   settle  a EPA
complaint alleging  hazardous  waste violations.
The arrangement in the settlement would allow
Weyerhaeuser  . to  pay   only  $20,000   if
Weyerhaeuser  completes the  waste reduction
program and achieves the reduction. The waste
reduction   project  involves  Weyerhaeuser's
replacement of 13  devices that  have relied on
solvents to wash parts at the plant. In 1991, the
use of the  solvents produced more than 53,000
pounds of hazardous wastes. The waste reduction
project was proposed by Weyerhaeuser during
negotiations   to   settle an   administrative
complaint EPA issued to the company in the
summer of  1992.   EPA  had  alleged  that
Weyerhaeuser failed to follow  a number of
regulations for  the proper  management of
hazardous  waste.   Suspending part  of" the
Weyerhaeuser penalty in exchange for the waste
reduction project was EPA's first use in the Pacific
Northwest  of  such an arrangement  in  an
administrative case  involving hazardous wastes.
Regional Initiatives Cases:

Region III RCRA Data Integrity Initiative.-  On
September  16,  1993 Region  III issued  five
administrative  complaints,  with  penalties,
pursuant to §3008(a) of RCRA in support of the
Agency Data  Integrity Initiative.  The Region is
seeking penalties totaling over $2.5 million.

Region jl Lead-Based Paint Enforcement: During
FY  1993,  the  Region  initiated    three
administrative   enforcement   cases,  seeking
penalties totaling nearly $1  million, for RCRA
violations arising out of the removal of lead-
based   paints  from  architectural  structures.
Considerable concern  has  been  voiced  by
residents  in New  York  City  and  elsewhere
about the impact of improper disposal  of lead-
containing paint chip wastes.

Region  II Waste Oil Enforcement Cases; In FY
1993, Region II settled two waste oil enforcement
cases.  These  cases had been  filed as part of the
Region's waste oil enforcement initiative, carried
out during the past several years. On January 4,
1993 the U.S. District Court (DNJ) entered  a
consent decree in U.S.  v. B & L Corporation. The
decree  requires the  company  to pay  a civil
penalty of $25,000 and  implement a workplan
intended to insure compliance with the waste oil
regulations. On  January 8,1993 the -District Court
entered  the consent decree for U.S. y. L & L Oil
Service, Inc.  This decree imposes a civil penalty
of $55,000, and  requires L &  L to comply with a
detailed workplan insuring its compliance with
the waste oil regulations. The workplan includes
provisions which exceed the scope of the RCRA
regulations.  In both cases, substantial stipulated
penalties are  provided in case of failure by the
Defendant to comply with the  terms of  the
Decrees.

Underground Storage Tanks

       The UST enforcement program continued
to be  implemented primarily by state, local, and
tribal  governments, EPA   provides  technical
support and  enhancement  of  state  and local
enforcement   capability  as a  prerequisite  for
obtaining program  approval.

       During FY 1993, the phase-in of release
detection  requirements  began  to apply to all
tanks  installed before  1980, The federal  program
uses  these  requirements  as  the   focus  for
developing  strong    state   enforcement  and
compliance programs.
                                            3-30

-------

                        FY1993 Enforcement Accomplishments Report
       The   federal   program   also   helped
develop  tools such as self-certifications  and the
use of administrative field citations. During FY
1993, the EPA continued  some direct  compliance
and   enforcement   efforts   for   portions  of
regulations  which  are not fully  regulated  by
states.  Federal efforts will  target health  and
ecological   risk  by   focusing  on  sensitive
geographic   areas,  e.g.,  ones  with  vulnerable
groundwaler, large tank populations,  and  poor
compliance  histories.

In Re the Ciiele K Corpof ation, gt. M.: On March
29,1993, EPA, DOJ, and the National Association
of Attorneys General (NAAG), on behalf of thirty
states, announced a $30 million settlement in
bankruptcy court with  Circle K  Corporation
(Circle K) and affiliated companies.  Circle K
operates convenience stores and gasoline stations
nationwide. The settlement agreement  resolved
Circle K's  RCRA  liabilities  with respect to
potential  petroleum  contamination from the
underground storage tanks at approximately 1,100
stores that Circle  K no  longer operates.   The
settlement amount will be paid in six installments
into  a State trust fund and used to remediate any
contamination  from petroleum  leaks  at  these
sites.   This  case  represents the  growing
cooperation between EPA  and  the states in
enforcing the underground storage tank provisions
of RCRA.

In the Matter of Frank Mustafa: On September 1,
1993, EPA  Chief  Administrative Law  Judge
Frazier, issued an Accelerated Decision and Order
in an enforcement action under Subtitle I of RCRA
governing regulation of underground storage tanks
(USTs). The decision was the first in the nation to
construe EPA's Penalty Guidance for Violations of
UST  Regulations.   Judge Frazier found the
respondent liable  for failure  to notify the
designated state agency  as to the existence of
USTs owned by respondent,  and for failure to
provide  a  method of release detection,  and
assessed a civil  penalty  of  $74,105. Frank
Mustafa, owns and operates underground storage
tanks at two (once three) service stations in the
U.S.  Virgin Islands.   The complaint  charged
Mustafa with two counts, failure to notify and
failure to provide a method of release detection
for six underground storage tanks.  The parties
stipulated  as  to  respondent's liability,  and
submitted the issue of the  amount of  the civil
penalty to the Judge for resolution.
U,S. v. Somerset Refinery Inc. (EJD.Ky): This case
was one of the first judicial actions to enforce the
newly listed petroleum refinery hazardous waste
FO37. EPA filed a complaint on July 16, 1993, for
RCRA Subtitle I (underground storage tank)
violations and for RCRA Subtitle C (hazardous
waste) violations.  The complaint was filed as
part of the National RCRA  Illegal  Operators
Initiative. The defendant is located in Somerset,
Kentucky.  The  complaint requests  injunctive
relief  and civil penalties for 148  UST violations
and for violations  in  conjunction with  the
operation    of   a    hazardous   waste
treatment/storage/disposal  facility and  for
corrective action.   The  majority  of  these
violations are for failure to comply with leak
detection regulations. This case, the first civil
referral in the nation to enforce the UST leak
detection regulations, arose as a result of a multi-
media inspection performed by Region IV RCRA
and UST Programs, as well  as the Kentucky
OSHA program.   Somerset is the second largest
UST owner in Kentucky.

In re:  USX Gary Works: On July 26,1993, EPA and
USX entered into a consent agreement and final
order (CAFO) resolving EPA's  claims relating to
violations of RCRA and the underground storage
tank  (UST)  regulations  at USX's Gary  Works
facility.  In  the  CAFO,  USX  agreed  to  pay a
penalty of $164,550 and   undertake  significant
corrective actions at  the facility. EPA had issued
a complaint against  USX on January 24, 1992
alleging numerous violations  of  RCRA and the
UST regulations, including violations relating to
the manner in which USX had closed certain UST
units.
Comprehensive Environmental
Response, Compensation, and
Liability Act (CERCLA) Enforcement
(Superfttnd)

       Superfund potentially responsible party
(PRP)    commitments    have    increased
dramatically  over   the  last   several  years
(reaching a record high  of almost $1.5 billion for
private party cleanup in FY  1992 and exceeding
$1.0 billion  in the two  prior years).  Currently,
responsible  parties  account  for  almost  three-
quarters   of  the Superfund  response  action
commitments now being obtained.
                                            3-31

-------
mj
   a*?
                             FY1993 Enforcement Accomplishments Report
       The  Superfund  enforcement  program
emphasizes timely and thorough  PRP searches
and  negotiation  of  Remedial  Investigation/
Feasibility    Study    and    Remedial
Design/Remedial  Action  agreements  within
established firm deadlines.     The enforcement
program  supports  the   implementation   of  the
Superfund  Accelerated  Cleanup  Model  by
participating  in negotiations  on enforcement
activities for  PRP  responses at earlier stages  of
the Superfund process.  EPA is  also emphasizing
compliance   with    consent   decrees   and
administrative •  orders,  and   takes  enforcement
actions  where  necessary  to  compel compliance
with  the  terms  of  settlement  agreements,
unilateral orders, and judgments to  implement
response  actions.

       In  order to  reduce "transaction" costs,
EPA  seeks to resolve the liability  of more parties
and  deal with  "collateral"  PRPs (e.g., small
parties)  earlier in the process through the use of
"de minimis"  settlements.    To  further reduce
transaction costs, EPA  published its final  lender
liability  rule in June  1992,  making clear  that
lenders    with   mortgages   on   contaminated
properties  are  not   candidates for enforcement
actions   unless  they   actually  controlled
operations  at  the  facility  or  foreclosed  on  the
property  and caused contamination at the  site.

       The program  maintained its emphasis on
case  referrals against  noncompliers  and  non-
settlers  to the  Department of  Justice. The  cost
recovery  component  stresses  targeted  case
referrals  and  improved  claims  resolution  to
maximize reimbursement of Trust Fund revenues.
In addition to pursuing §107  cost recovery civil
actions  (including  treble  damage  claims),  the
program  also  increased the  use  of Alternative
Dispute  Resolution  (ADR) and mediation  for
settling cost recovery actions  administratively.

       As part of the FY 1993 Data  Quality
Initiative, the   program emphasized compliance
with information requests pursuant to  §W4(e)
and with §103 release reporting requirements.

       Enforcement   of   CERCLA   §104(e)(2)
information   requests continued to  be  a   high
priority.    Compelling  compliance  with  such
requests  helps    to    generate    acceptable
settlement  offers from PRPs.    PRPs will,  for
example,  be  more  willing  to  settle when  they
                                                   are assured that  other  parties  are  not escaping
                                                   participation   by ignoring  EPA's  information
                                                   requests  or filing  incomplete responses.

                                                           During FY 1993, the Agency filed  several
                                                   additional  cases  enforcing  CERCLA §l04(e){2)
                                                   requests  as   well  as  continuing  to  litigate
                                                   previously filed cases.    The  Agency  has  now
                                                   filed  over 30  such  civil  judicial actions  (not
                                                   including  administrative orders  it has  issued
                                                   pursuant  to  CERCLA  §W4(e)(5)(A)).  For
                                                   §W4(e)(2) enforcement,  FY  1993 was  a  highly
                                                   successful  year in  several  respects,  including
                                                   assessment of a record  penalty  and  development
                                                   of favorable case law.

                                                   CERCLA 104 Cases

                                                   Cherokee County MPL Superfund Site, (Kan.): On
                                                   December 19, 1993,  EPA Region VI! issued six
                                                   administrative  orders  for  access pursuant  to
                                                   §104(e) of CERCLA to individuals who  own
                                                   property at the Cherokee County site in Galena,
                                                   Kansas. In order to conduct the estimated $13
                                                   million remedial action at this NFL mine-waste
                                                   site,  EPA  needed access to property owned  by
                                                   approximately 150 different individuals. Most of
                                                   the  property  owners voluntarily agreed  to
                                                   provide access to EPA. However, six individuals
                                                   denied EPA access to the site, and administrative
                                                   orders were issued requiring them to provide EPA
                                                   with  all access necessary to perform the remedial
                                                   action. Each  owner  complied  with the  access
                                                   order, and remedial action construction activities
                                                   were able to begin  as  soon as the design was
                                                   completed. The case exemplifies the Agency's
                                                   commitment to obtaining access quickly and using
                                                   EPA's enforcement tools under CERCLA §l04(e).

                                                   U.S.  v. Custom  Leather  Services.  Inc. CE.D.
                                                   Perm.):   On  April 14,  1993, the court issued a
                                                   decision upholding  EPA's  authority to request
                                                   information from a parent corporation  respecting
                                                   its relationship to — and  ability to pay for  -
                                                   the   CERCLA  liability  of  a  subsidiary
                                                   corporation.   The  court  cited U.S.   v.  Pretty
                                                   Products  Inc.. 780  R  Supp.  1488 (S.D.  Ohio
                                                   1991)  as  support  for  the  proposition  that
                                                   Congress intended  a  broad  reading  of EPA's
                                                   §104(e)(2> authority. Consequently,  the  court
                                                   directed Katy Industries, Inc.  to comply  fully
                                                   with  EPA's  requests related  to  the  American
                                                   Street Tannery site.
                                             3-32

-------
                        FY1993 Enforcement Accomplishments Report
U.S.  v.  M. Genzale  Plating (E.D.N.Y,):  In
November 1992, the court issued a judgment  for
$40,000  in  penalties  against  M.   Genzale
Plating,  Inc., the  estate of  Michael  Genzale,
and  Pasquale   Genzale for  the   defendants'
failure to comply  with  an administrative order
issued by Region  II pursuant  to § 104{e)(5> of
CERCLA.   The  administrative order,  which
directed the named parties to provide EPA and
its contractors with access to their property  for
response work,  was  issued in 1989.  When
defendants refused  to comply, EPA  promptly
obtained a  court order compelling  compliance.
Thereafter,  the  U.S. sought  a determination
that the defendants'  had unreasonably  failed
to  comply  with  the  order,  which  is a
jurisdictional prerequisite to  the assessment of
penalties. The court granted that determination
in October  1991.   In  October 1992, a hearing
determined  the  appropriate penalty  amount.
The court assessed a penalty of $2,000 for each
day of noncompliance, or a total of $40,000.

U.S. v. Fetersen Sand & Gravel. Inc. N.D.I1);  On
May  12, 1993,  the district court  approved a
consent decree relating to EPA's response action
at the Petersen Sand  &: Gravel Superfund site
in Libertyville, Illinois. The  settlement  required
Petersen Sand  & Gravel,  Inc.  (PS&G)  to  pay
EPA $700,000.  Specifically,  the decree provided
for  recovery of $590,000 in  EPA's  past costs, a
$100,000 CERCLA penalty, and a $10,000 CWA
penalty  for noncompliance with information
requests. In addition to the penalties, the decree
obligated PS&G to provide  a full response to
EPA's  original  information  requests and to
certify the  completeness of  such  response, at
the risk of incurring  liability  for stipulated
penalties if  the  response is again  found to be
inaccurate or lacking.

EPA's §104(e)(2)  enforcement action arose  from
PS&G's failure to furnish accurate  and complete
information relating to its disposal of hazardous
wastes at the Libertyville site.   PS&G mined
sand and gravel at the roughly 1,000-acre site
from  the 1950's until 1980.  Several hundred
drums of paints, solvents, and other  industrial
wastes  were dumped  at   the site during this
time.  In 1977, the company removed  some 400
drums from the site. In response to a 1980 CWA
request by  Region V, PS&G failed to identify
certain  additional drums  that  still  remained
buried on the site. In 1983, Lake County Grading,
Inc., which was operating the site at that  time,
discovered   these  additional  drums.  EPA
subsequently oversaw the removal of the drums.
In 1986, using CERCLA and  ECRA authority,
Region V  again  requested PS&G  to  provide
information  relating   to   these  wastes;  in
response, PS&G denied any knowledge of them.
In 1990, EPA made a third  request, but PS&G
still failed to provide a full history of its past
disposal  of  wastes at  this  site.   During  a
subsequent deposition of a PS&G  employee, EPA
finally  learned   that  PS&G's owner  and
president,  Raymond  A. Petersen, Sr. (now
deceased), had buried these  wastes at  the site
around 1969.

U.S. v. Roger L.  Tannery  N.D. Tx):    The
$12,475,000 penalty in this case  represents the
largest penalty ever for noncompliance with a
CERCLA information request, and one of the
largest penalties  in  the  history  of  EPA
enforcement.   The court assessed the record
penalty on December 7,1992 and also ordered the
defendant to provide a full response to EPA's
information request.

EPA's  information  request  arose  from  Mr.
Tannery's failure  to  furnish information  relating
to his involvement with a Superfund  site in
Fort Worth,  Texas, known  as  the American
ThioChem site. When  Mr. Tannery  did not
comply with the information request, the  court
assessed  the  maximum penalty  of  $25,000 for
each day of noncompliance.

Bankruptcy cases

In the Matter of National Gypsum: On November
9, 1992,  and  February 16, 1993,  the U.S.
Bankruptcy Court (N.D. Tex.) entered settlement
agreements  resolving  environmental  claims
between the U.S. and National Gypsum.  Under
the agreements. National Gypsum will pay EPA
$2,650,000 for the  Millington Portion  of the
Asbestos Dump Superfund Site in New Jersey, and
$2,000,000   for   the   Salford   Quarry  in
Pennsylvania.  Additionally, EPA received an
allowed  claim of  $89,259,148  for  five  sites
(Operating Unit 2 of the New Jersey Asbestos
Dump Site,  the  Coakley  Landfill  in  New
Hampshire, the H.O.D. and the Yeoman Creek
Landfills in Illinois, and the Yellow Water Road
site in Florida) plus legal fees for litigation costs.
Additionally, pursuant to the agreements, a trust
                                            3-33

-------
m
   ^
FY1993 Enforcement Accomplishments Report
  was created for  the Salford Quarry site and it
  received an allowed claim of $10 million.  The
  agreement also provides a mechanism by which
  the  U.S.  may   make  claims  against   the
  reorganized National Gypsum Corporation in the
  future.

  In May 1990, National Gypsum Company and it's
  parent, Aancor Holding, Inc. filed a voluntary
  petition in bankruptcy under Chapter 11 of the
  Bankruptcy Code in the U.S. Bankruptcy Court for
  the Southern District of New York.  The U.S.
  filed  a multi-site, multi-region proof of  claim in
  May 1991.  During May 1992, the court conducted
  an estimation hearing to determine the size of
  EPA's claim at the Asbestos Dump site  and the
  Salford Quarry Site. The settlement agreements
  resulted from negotiations  between the parties
  before and after the estimation hearing.

  In the Matter of Terald  Gershon  (D. Kan): On
  September 3,  1993, the bankruptcy   judge
  confirmed  a settlement agreement and stipulated
  order which settled bankruptcy claims of EPA
  against Jerald Gershon concerning environmental
  response costs incurred and to be incurred by EPA
  at three sites in Kansas. The  settlement arises out
  of the filing by  EPA of a cost  recovery action
  against Chemical Commodities, Inc., a  defunct
  corporation  in which  Gershon was  the  sole
  shareholder, and Gershon  personally.  Gershon
  responded by filing a  Chapter 7 bankruptcy
  petition. Subsequent to  the  filing of Gershon's
  bankruptcy, EPA  filed  a proof  of claim  for
  response costs incurred and to be incurred by it for
  clean-up  activities  undertaken  and to be
  undertaken by EPA at the sites. In  addition, EPA
  filed  a Complaint Objecting  to  Discharge of
  Debtor under §727 of the Bankruptcy Code and an
  Objection to Claim of Exemptions by Debtor under
  §522 of the Bankruptcy Code. Gershon also  filed
  an action in the bankruptcy proceeding requesting
  a stay of the cost  recovery action against  him and
  requesting that  the bankruptcy court  make  a
  determination  as to Gershon's  liability for the
  environmental claims EPA had raised in the cost
  recovery action.
  The settlement concludes all of the above pending
  actions. Under  the terms  of  the settlement,
  Gershon  is  required  to pay  $200,000 to  the
  bankruptcy trustee for distribution to creditors, of
  whom EPA is by far the largest. EPA estimates it
  will receive 70%-75% of the  money paid into the
  bankruptcy estate. This settlement represents the
                    most significant monetary contribution made by
                    Gershon  relating  to the clean-up of the three
                    Kansas sites. This is  also  the first  time that
                    proceedings such as an Objection to Discharge and
                    an Objection to Exemptions have been pursued by
                    EPA in a Chapter 7 bankruptcy.

                    Other  Superfund cases

                    Aberdeen Pesticide  Dumps Sjte,  (Aberdeen,
                    N.C.):  On May 3,1993, EPA Region IV issued 44
                    unilateral administrative orders  (UAOs) under
                    §106 of CERCLA to 44 generator PEPs at this site.
                    The UAOs require the PRPs to perform thermal
                    desorption on pesticide-contaminated soils at the
                    five separate disposal areas which comprise this
                    site. The large number of UAOs reflects the fact
                    that only certain of the  PRPs were involved at
                    each of the areas  and  that probable third-party
                    defenses would preclude enforcement of site-wide
                    UAOs to each PRP.  In an attempt to achieve
                    economies of scale, the UAOs allow the PRPs to
                    cooperate by constructing and operating a common
                    treatment facility,

                    Groundwater at the site will be addressed in two
                    subsequent RODs.  In addition, the  site is
                    currently the subject of litigation under §107 of
                    CERCLA to recover over $7 million in  past
                    response costs incurred by EPA  for removals and
                    the  RI/FS.

                    U.S. v. Airco Plating j^ompany. Inc., et.al.. (S»D.
                    Fla.h  On February 24, 1993,  the district court
                    entered a civil consent decree pursuant to CERCLA
                    in which Airco Plating Company, Inc., (Airco) and
                    11 other persons agreed to pay a total of $415,158
                    to reimburse the Superfund  for  response costs
                    incurred by EPA through  October 31,1991, at the
                    Airco Plating Superfund site in Dade County near
                    Miami, Florida.  One of the eleven other settlors,
                    Allied Products Corporation, is  a Fortune 500
                    company that had for several years owned most
                    of the land comprising the site.  The remaining
                    ten  settlors are individuals  who were either
                    involved with the site as current or previous
                    landowners, or  are persons who had a past or
                    present  responsibility for  making  waste
                    management decisions at Airco.

                    In the mid-1950s, Airco and its founders began an
                    electroplating business at the  Dade County
                    location  where it still  continues to operate.
                    Airco's metalplating process generated a waste
                                              3-34

-------
                        FY1993 Enforcement Accomplishments Report
effluent high in toxic metals such as cadmium,
copper, and zinc, and from about 1957 until 1972
Airco discharged this waste effluent directly into
three unlined pits.  In 1971, the State of Florida
and EPA investigated conditions at the site, and
the next year Airco altered its disposal practices.
Nevertheless, in 1990 the site was placed on the
NPL  after an expanded site investigation showed
serious contamination of soil and groundwater.
EPA  recently selected the remedy for  this  site,
and is preparing to undertake negotiations with
the same settlors for the final site cleanup, and
reimbursement  of response costs  incurred by the
U.S. subsequent to October 31,1991.

U.S.  v. U.T. Alexander.,  et  al.. (S,D. Texas): On
July   23, 1993, Judge  Kent  granted   the  U.S.
motion  to enter the MOTCO Consent Decree.
Parties to the consent  decree included  the U.S.,
Amoco  Chemicals  Company,   Amoco   Gas
Company,  Amoco  Oil   Company,   Amoco
Production Company,  Marathon  Oil Company
(successor by merger  to Marathon Petroleum
Company), Monsanto   Company,   Quantum
Chemical  Corporation  (formerly   National
Distillers  and  Chemical  Corporation)   and
Texas City Refining, Inc.

Under the decree,   the defendants agreed  to
carry out  a  combined  operable  unit (OU)
remedy   (OU-1,   Source  Control;  OU-2,
Management of Migration)  and  to pay the  U.S.
$1.3   million  in  past  response  costs  and  all
future response  costs.   The U.S. agreed   to
forgive  $2.25  million  in  past   response  costs
in consideration  for  defendants'  waiver  and
termination   of  all remaining   reimbursement
claims   under   the   1987  mixed   funding
agreement for source control remediation.

ILS. y. Allied Corporation, et al.  (W.D.N.YJ;Qn
December 14, 1992, two judicial consent decrees
were entered  by the district court concerning the
Kentucky Avenue Wellfield Superfund  site
located  near  Horseheads, New  York.   Allied-
Signal, Inc. and Purolator Products Company, Inc.,
the current and prior owners and operators  of
what is referred to as the Facet  Enterprises
Facility,  executed  one  consent   decree;
Westinghouse Electric  Corporation, the current
owner   of    the   Westinghouse   Facility,
independently executed a separate decree.  Both
these facilities were determined by Region II  to
have contributed to contamination of groundwater
at the site.
The  Allied  and Westinghouse decrees required
the respective  defendants to make payment to
the U.S.  of $1.1 and $3.9 million, respectively,
for past response costs incurred at the site as well
as certain future response costs that were to be
incurred.  Those future costs included  in the
settlements are limited to the costs associated
with the ongoing design and construction of an air
stripping unit at the Sullivan Street Wellfield, a
municipal well in the southern portion of the site.
This response action is being performed by EPA.

UfSt yt American Seating Company, et al.  (W .D.
Wise.): On November 25, 1992, the district court
entered a consent decree in resolution of this
CERCLA action. The decree, which concerns the
Mid-State Disposal  NPL  site  in Stratford,
Wisconsin, requires the defendants to reimburse
the U.S.  for  $1,578,958  in past response costs.
With this settlement, parties other than the U.S.
will fund $20,579,000 of the  $20,677,000 in costs
necessary to remediate the site.

The American Seating consent decree is the second
decree approved by the court concerning the NPL
site. The first consent decree was entered by the
court on  March 28, 1990, and contained four
settlors' commitment to reimburse a portion of the
Agency's costs  and  to perform Remedial
Action/Remedial  Design (RD/RA). Two months
later, the court  thwarted  three non-settlors'
attempt to stall the cleanup by  denying their
motions to intervene, vacate, and  reconsider the
entry of the decree. The court's opinion, which is
highly favorable  to the U.S.  in  denying their
motion to  intervene  and  in upholding the
President's discretion in exercising the United
States' CERCLA §122(a) settlement authority, is
published in the Federal Rules Decisions Court
Reporter, 131  F.D.R. 573 (W.D. Wise 1990).

The Mid-State RD/RA decree was modified on
November 18, 1992, when the court entered an
order adding  16  Wisconsin municipalities as
settling defendants. Three of the non-settlors from
the earlier RD/RA  negotiations,  two of whom
were also denied intervention and vacation of the
Mid-State Disposal decree, are  now settling
defendants in American Seating. Together, these
two decrees  represent a  99.6% recovery by the
U.S. of the total cost of remediating this site.

U.S. v. Anaquest Caribe. et al.:   On January 8,
1993, a consent decree between the government and
                                            3-35

-------
.oe!>
                               FF1993 Enforcement Accomplishments Report
   four PRPs at the Fibers Public Supply Well site in
   Guayama,  Puerto  Rico was entered in  U.S.
   District Court (DPR). The decree provides for
   performance  of cleanup  activities  and  for
   reimbursement of costs spent by EPA at the site.
   The PRPs agreed to implement a pump-and-treat
   and excavation remedy, and to reimburse EPA for
   $436,000 of its $586,000 in past costs spent at the
   site, as well as all future RD/RA oversight costs
   incurred by EPA.  The  RI/FS for the site was
   performed by  several of the PRPs pursuant to
   three administrative consent orders  issued by
   Region II in 1985, 1986 and  1989. The projected
   cost of the remedy  is about $6.7 million.  The
   settling defendants  are  Anaquest Caribe,  Inc.,
   Phillips Petroleum Company, Chevron Chemical
   Company and American Home Products Corp. One
   PRP, the Puerto Rico Industrial Development
   Company, declined to participate in the decree.

   U.S. v. Anchor Motor Freight (N.D. Ohio): On
   August  27,  1993,  the court granted   the
   government's motion to enter three consent decrees
   lodged last February in U.S. v. Anchor Motor
   Freight. Within thirty days of the date of entry,
   the settling parties collectively  are required to
   deposit $2.7 million into the Hazardous Waste
   Superfund. This represents  a 92.4% recovery of
   the settling defendants' second-round volumetric
   share  (the  calculation   of   each  settling
   defendant's portion of non-reimbursed response
   costs) of  the  government's  costs,  including
   enforcement costs and interest.

   The United States  filed this  §107  action  to
   recover non-reimbursed response costs incurred by
   EPA in connection  with the Laskin/Poplar Oil
   Superfund site in Ashtabula County, Ohio.  Two
   decrees  had   been  entered  earlier in  this
   litigation:  the first  recovered   $1.47  million in
   past costs, and the second for remedial design/
   remedial action and recovery of $1.4  million.

   Arctic Surplus:  EPA  entered into an AOC  with
   the   Alaska   Department  of Transportation
   (ADOT)  to  conduct  removal  activities  on
   Badger Road which  is contiguous  and adjacent
   to  the heavily contaminated portions of  the
   Arctic Surplus site. The  ADOT has owned and
   continues  to  own  the  portions  of  the  road
   which were contaminated during the operation
   of  the Arctic  Surplus Scrap Yard. This order,
   entered on November 4, 1992,  provides for,the
   removal  of  highly contaminated  soil  and
capping of  lower levels of contamination both
under  the  road  and  in  the adjacent  bike
line/path.  The  road  will be  repaved as part
of this  project.

The ADOT order  is being conducted concurrently
with the RI/FS order with the. Defense Logistics
Agency (DLA) signed on  July 24, 1992, which
provides for the  conduct of the RI/FS by DLA, a
significant  contributor of  scrap (transformers,
batteries, vehicles, drummed liquid chemicals)
to the site.

U.S. v. Ariens (E.D. Wise.): On October 20,1992,
the court entered a consent decree requiring the
PRPs in this CERCLA action to implement the
Remedial Design and Remedial Action (RD/RA)
required by the  Record of Decision (ROD) for
Operable Unit 1  at the site. This remedial work,
which  will cost approximately $20 million,
includes the construction and maintenance of a
slurry wall around the landfill's perimeter and a
clay/soil landfill cap and gas collection system.
In addition,  the decree requires the PRPs to
reimburse the Agency for $700,000 in past response
costs, thereby funding over 94% of the past costs
at this  site. .

Lcmberger Landfill, Inc.  and  the  Lemberger
Transport and Recycling facilities operated as
disposal facilities near the Village of Whitelaw
in  Franklin  Township,  Manitowoc County,
Wisconsin.  The two former landfills are located
within  a quarter mile of each other.

Arkansas Peace Center,  et  al. v. Arkansas
Department of Pollution Control and Ecology, ej
al.. (Jacksonville, Ark.):  In  July 1993, the U.S.
Court of Appeals  for the  Eighth Circuit ruled
that a federal district court lacked jurisdiction to
entertain a lawsuit brought under CERCLA by
opponents  to an incinerator at  the  Vertac
Superfund  site.  Opponents to the incinerator
sought a permanent injunction against EPA and
the  State  because  of allegations  that the
incinerator  did not  comply  with  federal
regulations concerning performance.  The district
court judge issued a preliminary injunction on
March  17,1993, which was stayed by the Eighth
Circuit court on that same  day.  In the July 1993
ruling by the Eighth Circuit, the court found that
plaintiffs'  lawsuit  was barred by  the  plain
language of CERCLA §113(h) until completion of
the response action.  The appeals court panel also
                                              3-36

-------
                        FY1993 Enforcement Accomplishments Report
stated that, if the panel had jurisdiction to rule
on the merits of the case, it had no doubt that the
district court erred in its interpretation of the
incinerator performance regulation which served
as the basis for the preliminary injunction order.

Augusta/Hyde Park.(Augusta. Ga.):  EPA Region
IV expended more than $1 million in response to
citizens' concerns  about contamination of the
Hyde Park/Virginia Subdivision neighborhoods
in Augusta, Georgia,   EPA had  issued an
emergency order under the SDWA in 1989 to
address groundwater contamination in the area.
After receiving additional citizens' complaints
regarding high incidence  of disease in the
neighborhood in the summer of 1992, EPA held a
meeting  with  local,  state  and other federal
agencies, including a task force organized by the
Governor of Georgia, and  determined that there
were legitimate concerns  for the health of this
community. EPA developed  a work plan for the
area during the fall of 1992, and began sampling
surface  soils,  surface  water, groundwater and
sediments in  February  1993.   EPA  tested
residential areas as well  as 18 industrial sites
within the neighborhood.  Over 1,000 samples
were taken  and then  analyzed for up to 176
constituents, including dioxin  analysis for  a
percentage of samples.

This effort  represents the largest  scale site
assessment in Region IV.  This area is a lower
income  and predominantly African-American
neighborhood, and EPA is very conscious of the
environmental  equity issues inherent in the
situation.  EPA from the beginning included in its
consultations the Governor's Task Force,  which
includes a number of citizens from the area, and
met  with the community prior to beginning the
sampling effort and attended a May 15,  1993,
McKinney-organized  community  meeting  to
address citizen concerns.

EPA released the technical report of the data
collected at a September 10,  1993  meeting of
interested governmental organizations, and has
asked ATSDR  to analyze  the data for health
implications.   EPA held  a public  meeting in
Augusta on September 16,1993 to present the data
to citizens. The data were such that the Region
did  not believe an imminent and substantial
endangerment exists, and the Region is awaiting a
reassessment by ATSDR of the possible connection
between contaminants found and health impacts
claimed before making final determinations of
action for the area.

U.S. v. AVX Corporation, etal. (P. MAJ:  On
April 23,  1993, the court entered the consent
decree for the  second operable  unit at  the
Sullivan's Ledge Superfund site in New Bedford,
MA.  Simultaneously, the court also entered a
First Amendment to Consent Decree pertaining to
the consent decree for the first operable unit.  The
expected cost of the remedy is $5.8 million.

The site is an  old granite  quarry,  located in an
industrial/suburban area of New Bedford.  The
site is owned by the City of New Bedford. From
about 1935 through the 1970's, the City owned
and  operated  the  Ledge  as a dump for local
industrial wastes and solid wastes.  The site  was
listed on the National Priorities List in 1984,
The settlement requires the PRPs to excavate an
ecologically sensitive marsh which lies in the
midst of a golf course.  Excavated  sediments are
then to be  disposed of  beneath  a  cap to be
constructed at the first operable unit. Work at the
first operable unit is subject to a previous consent
decree. The remedy to be performed by the PRPs
is  precedent-setting in  that  it is driven by
ecological  risks, rather than human health risks.

Under the decree, fifteen entities,  including the
City of New  Bedford, agree to  perform  the
remedy.  However, the responsibilities of  the
parties vary greatly.  AVX Corporation agrees to
perform all the work (consisting of the remedial
action  plus operations and maintenance).  The
City of New Bedford agrees to perform specific
portions of the remedial action {not  including
O+M) and secure access and institutional controls.
The consent  decree  sets  up  triggers  and
mechanisms  whereby AVX  must  undertake
unperformed  obligations of the  City.    The
remaining parties, all of whom, like AVX, settled
for the first operable unit,  agree to accept under
the cap at the first operable unit  those wastes
that are generated by the second  operable  unit
remedial action,  litigation to recover further
past costs for the first and second operable units is
currently underway.

B & B  Chemical Company Site. {Hialeah,  Fl.):
On May 11, 1993,  a  Unilateral Administrative
Order  to  Cease Extraction and  Treatment of
Groundwater was issued  to B & B  T ritech.  Inc.
regarding its activities at the B & B  Chemical
                                            3-37

-------
m
FY1993 Enforcement Accomplishments Report
  Company Superfund site in Hialeah, Florida,
  pursuant to §106(a) and §122(e)(6) of CERCLA.

  B & B is a manufacturer of detergents, oxidizing
  agents, metal cleaners, corrosive inhibitors, and
  paint strippers.   The  release of hazardous
  substances  into the soil and groundwater at the
  site resulted from the company's former methods
  of handling and disposing of process wastes. Such
  contaminants include vinyl  chloride, benzene,
  chlorobenzene, and chromium.  These substances
  have been detected in the groundwater at the site
  in concentrations exceeding the  allowable MCLs
  under state and federal law.

  Subsequent to EPA's  publication of  a proposed
  plan for remediation, EPA obtained sampling
  data  indicating unexplained  increases in
  groundwater contaminant concentrations.  B & B
  ascribed  these increases to its operation of the
  county-ordered groundwater treatment system for
  30 days prior to EPA's sampling. Accordingly,
  EPA issued the order to B & B requiring it to
  cease groundwater extraction and treatment until
  further notice, remove the groundwater pump, and
  allow EPA  to install a lockable well cap.  The
  facility agreed to comply, and  the  sampling  is
  proceeding on schedule.  This will allow EPA to
  select an appropriate remedy for the site.

  U.S. v. BASF Corporation; Carolina  Plating and
  Stamping  Corporation:   Colpniaj Heights
  Packaging  Inc.; E-Systepi.Inc.? Metal Products
  Corp.; and  SteyMftg Winthrop Inc1Jf (D S.C.h On
  January 4,1993, the court entered a civil consent
  decree, in .which the  settling parties agreed to
  perform the remedial design and remedial action
  and pay past costs totaling $71,569. These actions
  arose out of CERCLA violations for improperly
  disposing metal substances in lagoons on-site. The
  site was listed on the NPL  in June 1987.

  Under the terms of the decree, the settling parties
  were required to pay past costs to EPA on or before
  February 4, 1993. The settling  parties failed to
  make timely payment, and on March 3,1993, EPA
  issued a letter informing them that stipulated
  penalties were accruing.  EPA received payment
  for the past costs on March 12,1993, 36 days after
  the required date in the decree.  On April 12,
  1993, EPA sent a demand letter for payment of the
  stipulated  penalties  and after  negotiations on
  May 13, 1993, the settling parties paid  EPA
  $83,000 in stipulated  penalties.
                    U.S. v. BASF-lnmont. et al.. (E.D. Mich.): On
                    March 17,1993, the court entered a consent decree
                    concerning the Metamora Landfill  site in Lapeer
                    County, Michigan. The decree requires  that 34
                    PRPs perform remedial action  at  the  site,
                    estimated to cost $50,000,000. This  remedial
                    action work consists of incinerating barrels at the
                    site, capping the landfill, constructing  and
                    operating a groundwater pump and treat system,
                    and  remediating site soils. The decree- also
                    requires that the settling PRPs reimburse EPA for
                    its oversight costs.

                    The Metamora Landfill site is a 160 acre site that
                    operated from the rnid-1950's until 1980.  Both
                    municipal and industrial waste was disposed of
                    at the site. EPA has incurred response costs at the
                    site in excess of $30 million dollars. Because the
                    decree does  not  recover EPA's  response  costs
                    incurred prior to  the entry  of the decree, EPA's
                    final action at the site is recovery of these costs.

                    LH.  Baxter Superfund Site. (Weed Cal.1: On
                    September 30,  1993 EPA entered  into  an
                    administrative consent order for 92.5% of EPA's
                    past costs ($2,324,381,10) incurred at  the  J.H.
                    Baxter  Superfund  site  located in  Weed,
                    California.   This is Region IX's first  use of
                    Alternative  Dispute  Resolution (ADR)  in  a
                    Superfund context and was proposed for use here
                    as part of the Superfund Improvements Initiative.

                    The site is located on the northeastern margin of
                    the city of Weed, Siskiyou County, California,
                    and  was listed on the NPL in 1989 due to the
                    presence of arsenic, creosote, and PCP in site soils,
                    surface water runoff, and groundwater. The PRPs
                    to this settlement include J.H.  Baxter & Co.
                    (Baxter), International  Paper (IP), Roseburg
                    Forest Products Co. (Roseburg), and Beazer East,
                    Inc. on behalf of the American Lumber & Treating
                    Company Interests  (Beazer  East,  Inc., Chicago
                    Bridge & Iron, Inc., and the Aluminum Company
                    of America.)  In late July 1991, negotiations
                    between EPA  and the PRPs failed to  result in
                    settlement  for performance of  the  remedial
                    design/remedial action (RD/RA) under the model
                    consent  decree.  To avoid  a repetition of the
                    unsuccessful  RD/RA negotiation  experience,
                    Region IX proposed mediation for cost recovery
                    negotiations to assist in coalescing the PRP group
                    and reaching  settlement with EPA. With  the use
                    of mediation, EPA was able to reach settlement
                    quickly.  The PRPs continue to perform the cleanup
                                              3-38

-------
                        FY1993 Enforcement Accomplishments Report
(valued at $40 million and consisting of extensive
soil  and  groundwater  remediation) under  a
CERCLA §106 unilateral order issued in August
1991.

In the Matter of Beazer East. Inc..:  On March
1,  1993, EPA issued a unilateral administrative
order for  remedial design  and  remedial action
(RD/RA) for the Koppers  Texarkana Superfund
site  located in  Texarkana,  Texas. The 62 acre
site is contaminated primarily with polynuclear
aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs).   The site was a
wood  treatment facility  from 1910 until 1961.
The  respondent,  Beazer East, Inc., is performing
the RD/RA pursuant to the unilateral order. The
congressionally-mandated     residential
subdivision buyout (approximately  $5.6 million)
and  the relocation of residents were  completed
in July 1993.  The unilateral order, among other
items, requires demolition  of structures, removal
and  disposal  of structures and  debris in an
appropriate  facility, and removal and treatment
of contaminated soil and groundwater.

U.S.  v.Town of Bedford, et al.: On March 18,1993
a consent decree was entered by the U.S, District
Court (S.D.N.Y.)  pursuant  to   which  six
defendants agreed to pay a total of $1.17 million
in settlement of pasts  costs incurred at the
Katonah  Municipal Well Superfund  site.  This
consent decree settles an action which was filed in
1990. One of the defendants, the Town of Bedford,
performed the remedial design pursuant to a 1988
EPA  consent order, and completed  the remedial
action construction under the terms of an earlier
consent decree. The five remaining defendants are
the owners or operators of dry cleaners or owners
or sublessors of property where a dry cleaner was
located.   These defendants had previously"
declined to participate in or contribute to cleanup
work at this site.

U.S.  v. Arthur Belanger et aL.CW.D. Mo): On July
16, 1993, a consent decree was lodged in court in
settlement  of this  cost  recovery  litigation
initiated in March, 1991.  Under the terms of the
consent decree, defendants and third-party and
fourth-party defendants  (59 of  63)  will pay
$1,215,880 for past response costs incurred by the
government at the B & B Salvage site located in
Warrensburg, Missouri. The settling defendants
include utility companies, corporations, state
agencies, and two federal agencies.
In late 1987, EPA responded to a report submitted
by   the  City  of  Warrensburg  that  PCB
contamination had been discovered at the B & B
Salvage Company  facility. EPA discovered that
B & B Salvage had  accepted several hundred
scrap PCB and PCB-contaminated transformers in
1985 and 1986 from the Martha C Rose Chemicals
Company located in Holden, Missouri. EPA's site
investigation  revealed  considerable  PCB
contamination in soils and buildings at the one
acre B & B Salvage facility. EPA conducted a
removal action  at this non-NPL site in the fall
and  winter of 1987 and  1988, resulting in the
expenditure of response costs.

EPA has taken prior  enforcement  actions at the
Holden site, which is currently being cleaned  up
by a generator  steering committee representing
over 700 generators  of PCBs taken  to the site.
Three individuals went to prison  as a result of
EPA's criminal prosecution.

BFI-Rockingham Landfill Superfund Site: The
BFI-Rockingham  Landfill  Superfund  site
represents EPA's first  comprehensive application
of the Superfund Accelerated' Cleanup Model
(SACM) at an NPL site in Region  I.  The use of
SACM expedited response activities at the site
by one to two years. Moreover, SAGM saved EPA
and  the PRPs  substantial transaction costs in
connection with the performance of an RI/FS and
the negotiation  of an administrative order  for a
non-time critical removal action.

The BFI-Rockingham site is a municipal  landfill
located  in Rockingham, Vermont. The settling
parties in this case include Disposal Specialists,
Inc., the owner and operator of  the  site, and
Browning-Ferris Industries of Vermont, Inc., the
transporter  of  waste  to the  landfill.    Both
companies are wholly-owned  subsidiaries of
Browning-Ferris Industries, Inc.
The BFI entities entered an administrative order
to perform the RI/FS in August 1992. During the
RI/FS, the Region recognized the opportunity to
apply  EPA's new presumptive  remedy for
municipal landfills.  In February 1993, the PRPs
agreed to initiate an engineering evaluation/cost
analysis (EE/CA) for the source control component
of the remedy. Based upon the EE/CA, EPA issued
an action memorandum in September 1993, which
selected a multi-layer  landfill  cap as the  non-
                                            3-39

-------
                            FY1993 Enforcement Accomplishments Report
time critical removal action.  With the ultimate
goal of constructing the cap in the summer of 1994,
the  Region conducted  non-special  notice
negotiations on an extremely expedited schedule,
reaching agreement with the BFI subsidiaries by
the end of September. The Region has continued
this expedited approach during the design phase
of the work.  The environment will benefit from
prompt implementation  of the source control
measures, which will reduce further migration of
contaminants to  the environment, most notably
groundwater.

This case represents a highly successful use of
enforcement and response program initiatives to
expedite cleanup at all stages of a Superfund case,
including site investigation and development of
response alternatives, negotiation of a response
agreement, and performance of the action itself.

In re: H. Browji Superfund Site; On November 20,
1992, EPA  entered into  its  first pre-ROD  de
minimis settlement with 145 PRPs, in accordance
with the June 1992 Early De Minimis Settlement
Guidance, and CERCLA §122(g). According to the
administrative order on consent, the settling PRPs
are required to pay their volumetric share of the
U.S.' past response costs and estimated future
response costs  for remediating the H. Brown
Superfund  site.  In addition, these parties  will
pay a  settlement  premium of 1.0 (i.e.  a 2.0
multiplier) for the estimated future response costs
for the remediation. Approximately $650,000  was
recovered by EPA  in  this settlement, which
represents 50% of past response costs to date.

The H. Brown site, located in Walker, Michigan,
had been placed on the NPL on March 29,1985. It
is contaminated  with lead, antimony, cadmium,
copper, chromium, and nickel as a result of the H.
Brown Company having cracked, shredded,  and
scattered battery casings over the entire  site
during  its  lead  reclamation activities.  On
September  30, 1992, EPA issued a Record of
Decision which called for the following remedy
components;  solidifying,   in   place,   the
contaminated surface and subsurface soil  and
sediments in a cement-like form; constructing a
multi-layer  cap  over  the  solidified  soil;
surrounding the  solidified  soil   with  a
containment wall;  collecting,  treating,  and
discharging groundwater and surface water from
the shallow aquifer; and  demolishing  buildings
which are contaminated.
In the Matter of Caldwell Trucking Site: In 1993,
EPA issued  two  administrative orders  for
performance of remedial action and groundwater
investigative work at the Caldwell Trucking site
in Fairfield, New Jersey.  On April 19, 1993, the
first order was  issued to eleven respondents,
requiring them to perform the remedial action for
the contaminated soils and sludges at  the site.
The respondents are the current site owner, OKON
Corporation, the site operator, Caldwell Trucking
Company, and  nine generators of hazardous
substances found at the site.  These parries had
declined  to perform  the  remedial  action
voluntarily, but work  under  the order  has
commenced. The remedial action is valued at up
to $25 million.

On June 29,1993 Region II issued the second order
to fifteen  recipients requiring them to  conduct
design investigation studies of the contaminated
ground water plume at the Caldwell site valued
at about  $1  million.   The additional  parties
include a second site owner, Baureis Realty Inc.

U.S. v. Charles George "Rucking Company. Inc.. et
al. (D. Mass.): On May 24,1993, the court entered
a  civil consent  decree in which 54  settling
defendants agreed to pay $34,713,000 for response
costs at the Charles George Land Reclamation
Trust Landfill  Superfund  site  in  Tyngsboro,
Massachusetts and $1378,350 for natural  resource
damages in a cost recovery action brought under
CERCLA.  The original lawsuit was filed in 1985
seeking past and future costs,  responses to
information requests, and access to the site for the
remedial action.  The court  granted summary
judgment on noncompliance with the information
requests and imposed  civil penalties.  The court
also issued an access order.

The  landfill disposed  of hazardous wastes and
also accepted   commercial, municipal, and
domestic wastes.  Estimates are that the full 69
acre site contains about four million cubic yards of
refuse. The site cleanup consists of three Records
of Decision: ROD I issued December 29, 1983 to
install  a  permanent  waterline connecting
Tyngsboro to City of Lowell water system which
began operation on October 12,1988; ROD II issued
July 11, 1985, was to cap the landfill (which was
completed in October  1990); and ROD III issued
September  29,  1988, to  treat  groundwater,
leachate and landfill gases, which is presently
being implemented.
                                            3-40

-------
                        FY1993 Enforcement Accomplishments Report
                                         .*»
Chevron Chemical Company  Site.  (Orlando
Fla.h   On January 25, 1993, an administrative
order by consent (AOQ for the RI/FS for the
Chevron Chemical Company  site in Orange
County,  Orlando, Florida was entered into by
Region IV and Chevron Chemical Company. This
site is unique in that it has been chosen as one of
the Region's pilot SACM projects. In the spirit of
SACM, Chevron agreed to conduct the RI/FS and
pay  all  EPA's past and oversight costs incurred
with respect to the site although the site has not
been finalized for the NPL,  Further, to keep the
project moving along, Chevron agreed to conduct
the RI/FS in only three hundred days.

The analytical results from the samples collected
during  the site investigation  indicated  the
presence of pesticides, benzene,  toluene, xylene,
chlordane, naphthalene, and metals. In addition,
the  analytical  results for  the ground water
samples indicated the presence  of metals,
benzene, trichlorethylene, xylene, pesticides,
toluene, and chlorobenzene.

The  purpose of  the RI/FS is to investigate the
nature and extent of groundwater contamination
at  the   site.  Chevron  has  submitted  its
preliminary findings from the RI.

U.S. v. Chrysler Corp.. et al. (E.D. Mich.); On June
4, 1993,  the court entered a  CERCLA RD/RA
consent  decree  under which  the  settling
defendants will clean  up PCB contamination at
the Carter Industrials Superfund site in Detroit,
Michigan and pay about $3 million  in past costs,
The total cost of the clean up is estimated to be
$24,000,000. Settling defendants include Chrysler,
Ford, GM, Michigan's  two public utilities, and
the City of Detroit.  Unusual  features  of the
decree include provisions for EPA to perform some
of the work, and a special covenant not to sue in
accordance with §122(0(2) of CERCLA.
The  Carter Industrials  facility was the site of a
scrap metal business where electrical equipment
was  stripped of valuable metals while dielectric
fluids, including  PCB oils, were allowed to drain
onto the ground. These activities resulted in high
levels of PCB contamination  on  the facility
property and in  an adjacent  residential area. In
1986, EPA  undertook a removal  action  to
consolidate PCB-contaminated soils and debris
and contain it on-site. The site was placed on the
NPL in 1989. On September 18,1991, EPA issued a
Record of Decision, calling for low temperature
thermal desorption of PCB-contaminated soils.

U.S. v. Ciba-Geigy; (D. N.J.) On September 30,
1993, the EPA signed a judicial consent decree
between the U.S. and Ciba-Geigy Corporation.
The decree was lodged on October 18,1993. Under
the proposed settlement, Ciba-Geigy agreed to
conduct  remedial  design,  remedial action,
operation and maintenance and post-remediation
monitoring  for  the  first  operable  unit
(groundwater) for the site, located in Toms River,
New Jersey.  The estimated cost of the work is
approximately  $60 million.   Ciba-Geigy also
agrees to pay all unreimbursed response costs,
approximately  $10 million, incurred by the
United States for operable unit one and operable
unit two (source areas),  resulting in a  total
settlement value of approximately $70 million.

The site is on the NPL. Groundwater at the site is
contaminated  with  organic  and  inorganic
compounds. On April 24, 1989, EPA  selected  a
river discharge remedy in a Record of Decision for
operable unit one.   The  ROD also  called for
sealing contaminated  residential  irrigation
wells,  monitoring groundwater and  the  Toms
River, evaluating lower portions of the aquifer,
performing studies on contaminated groundwater
to determine appropriate cleanup technologies,
and further studying of  source  areas. On
September 30, 1993, the Region also signed an
Explanation of Significant  Differences  (ESD) for
the site. The Region modified the ROD  to require
the recharge of treated groundwater to  the upper
portion of the aquifer underlying the site instead
of the discharge of treated groundwater to the
Toms River.

U.S.  v. Jack  and  Charles  Colbert  et aL
(S.D.N.Y.)i On  August 10,1993, a partial consent
decree was lodged which provides for payment of
$22,500 in civil penalties for the Signo Trading (11
Hartford Avenue) Superfund site by defendants.
Jack and Charles Colbert and four of the Colberts'
companies.   The penalties  arise out of those
defendants'  failure  to comply with a  1984
administrative order.  The §106 order required
the Colberts, and others, to  perform  a removal
action at the site, located in Mount Vernon, New
York. A warehouse located at the site was used
by the defendants to store  hazardous substances
and  other items.  When  defendants  failed to
comply with the order, EPA Region II conducted
the removal action itself. In 1992, the government
                                            3-41

-------
     -
m)
FY1993 Enforcement Accomplishments Report
entered into a consent decree with several other
PRPs pursuant to which they agreed to reimburse
EPA for $71,000 of its past costs at the site.  The
Colbert brothers served several years in prison for
charges  arising out  of  their mishandling of
hazardous chemicals.

U.S. v. Colorado (990 F.2d 1595 (10th Cir. 1993H:
The Tenth Circuit held that, at least with regard
to a state authorized to enforce its  hazardous
waste program in lieu of RCRA, the state has the
independent right  to  enforce  state  law,
administratively or judicially, at CERCLA sites
within the state's jurisdiction. More specifically,
the court held that: [1]  §113(h)  does not bar a
federal court from hearing a state suit to enforce a
state administrative order  that addresses a
CERCLA site because enforcement of provisions of
a state-delegated program cannot per se be a
challenge to CERCLA response action. The court
also held that the state can always enforce state
law in state court anyway (to which 113(h) does
not apply.) (Here the state had ordered the Army
to submit a closure plan for an Operable Unit that
was being addressed by a $100 million CERCLA
removal  action, and the  state order specifically
prohibited any cleanup/closure activities unless
the state first approved); [2] NPL listing has no
effect on the application of state law; [3] There is
no conflict between the permit waiver at CERCLA
§121(e) and a  state ordering a party to apply for a
state TSD or closure permit for cleanup activities
at  an  NPL  site;  [4]  EPA's interpretation of
§122(e)(6) as giving EPA  final  authority to
determine what remedial actions can take place
at an NPL site (and thus there can be no remedial
action unless EPA approves of it) is "contrary to
the plain and sensible meaning" of the statute,
and "we do not afford it any deference"; [5] A
state may independently order compliance with
state law whether or not that law,is deemed an
ARAR; and [6] RCRA specifically authorizes a
citizen suit to enforce RCRA at any CERCLA site,
regardless of whether a CERCLA  response action
is ongoing at that site (and the court suggests, but
does not hold;  that a  state could enforce a
delegated state law program as a RCRA citizen
suit).

U.S.  v.  Commencement Bay   - Nearshore/
Tideflats (Sitcum Watefway).(W.D. Wash): A
consent decree for Superfund remedial action was
signed by the Port of Tacoma, Washington, on June
1, 1993, and entered in court on October 8, 1993.
                  The Port,  which previously  performed  the
                  remedial design under an administrative order on
                  consent,  is   the sole  settling  Potentially
                  Responsible Party (PRP) and has agreed not to
                  pursue the site's 49 other PRPs for contribution for
                  this action.  (They may seek contributions for
                  additional response actions if such actions become
                  necessary.)   The  remedial  action consists of
                  dredging contaminated sediments and confining
                  them  in a nearshore fill  in another  waterway;
                  the estimated cost of this work is $22 million. In
                  addition,  the Port  will perform  habitat
                  mitigation work at two   area 'wetlands  to
                  compensate for  the adverse  environmental
                  impacts of dredging  and filling. The Port will
                  also reimburse EPA for $1.3  million in past costs
                  and interest, and settle its liability for natural
                  resource damages by paying  $12  million in
                  reimbursement and implementing development
                  restrictions on two properties. Natural resource
                  trustees for the site include two federal agencies,
                  the state of Washington, and two Indian tribes.

                  In  the  Matter of Dow Chemical  Company.
                  Hercules  Incorporated. Uniroyai  Chemical
                  Company Ltd.:  On  June 22,  1993,  Region VI
                  issued a unilateral administrative  order (UAO)
                  to  Hercules,  Dow and Uniroyai  for remedial
                  design  and remedial action (RD/RA) for  the
                  off-site  operable  unit at  the Vertac  Superfund
                  Site  located  in   Jacksonville,   Arkansas.
                  Hercules is conducting the RD/RA  under the
                  terms of the  UAO,  The off-site operable unit
                  encompasses approximately 36 square  miles, and
                  is  located  south  of  the  Vertac  Plant  site.
                  The site is contaminated  with dioxin from the
                  operation of the  Vertac facility to  manufacture
                  herbicides  and  pesticides,  including  Agent
                  Orange.

                  In re:  Dunn City Disposal Landfill: On March 15,
                  1993, Region V issued a unilateral administrative
                  order, pursuant  to CERCLA §106,   to Waste
                  Management of Wisconsin, Inc. for performance of
                  the remedial  design  and  remedial  action
                  (RD/RA) at the City Disposal  Landfill site in
                  Dunn, Wisconsin. The  remedy  for the landfill
                  requires a cap, soil vapor extraction of  VOCs, and
                  groundwater remediation, with an estimated cost
                  of approximately $14.7 million.

                  The site is a  former  landfill  operated by  a
                  corporate predecessor of Waste  Management of
                  Wisconsin, Inc. The order was  solely issued to
                                             3-42

-------
                        FY1993 Enforcement Accomplishments Report

Waste Management, despite the presence of other
viable  PRPs due to  the significantly stronger
evidence against Waste Management (which is
the former site operator and  transporter, and
current site owner). Issuing the order to Waste
Management alone, also exercises the Region's
enforcement discretion and may deter other PRPs'
from relying on the assumption that EPA will
issue an order to all PRPs following the close of an
unsuccessful RD/RA negotiation.

Enterprise Recovery Systems Site. (Byhalia, Ms);
On September  27,  1993, EPA  executed an
administrative order on consent (AOC) with 29
PRPs regarding a removal action at the Enterprise
Recovery Systems site  in  Byhalia, Marshall
County, Mississippi.   Respondents included
Carrier Corporation, Exxon  Company, U.S.A.,
Borg Warner and Teledyne.  The AOC required
the respondents to perform the removal action
and  pay all  past  and future  costs, including
oversight. The removal action required under the
order  includes arranging  for  a  permanent
alternative  potable water supply  to  local
residents  whose wells are contaminated by
releases  from  the site,  disposing of waste
materials stored in on-site drums and tanks, and
disposing of contaminated soil and debris.

The Enterprise Recovery Systems, Inc. facility
operated from approximately 1979 to 1991 as a
fuels blending and  solvent recycling facility. The
facility ceased operations in October 1991  when
its insurer canceled insurance coverage after
discovering significant soil and  groundwater
contamination.  Hazardous substances included
benzene, xylene, toluene, tetrachloroethylene,
trichloroethylene,  naphthalene, acetone,  1,1,1-
trichloroethane,   bis(2-ethylhexyl)phthalate,
methyl  ethyl  ketone,  ethanol,  methanol,
isopropyl alcohol, oils,  methylene chloride,
perchloroethylene, and chlorinated waste water .

In the Matter of Ewan  Property  Si{g:   On
September 30, 1993, Region  II finalized an
CERCLA §122(h) administrative agreement with
16 PRPs  for 100%  of past costs incurred at the
Ewan Property Superfund site, plus interest, from
the date  of the demand letter, $2,438,295.  EPA
performed RI/FS work and issued RODs for the
two operable units at the site, located in Shamong
Township, NJ. EPA identified nineteen  PRPs
which  received unilateral administrative orders
to perform RD/RA work on the first operable unit
at the site.  This unit includes the removal of the
drums, sludges and soil which contain the source
contamination.   The  PRPs are currently  in
compliance with those orders and are completing
the remedial design work.  In August 1991, EPA
requested reimbursement of its past costs.  The
PRPs   initially   challenged   EPA's   cost
documentation, but finally agreed to pay 100% of
the past costs plus interest.

In the Matter of Fibers Public Supply Wells: On
July  26, 1993, four PRPs paid the Superfund
$150,000 (plus interest) in full reimbursement for
the remaining past costs  at the Fibers Public
Supply  Wells Superfund site. Under a consent
decree entered in district court in January 1993,
those PRPs had agreed to reimburse EPA for
$436,815.79 of its $586,815.79 in  past costs, in
addition to agreeing to implement a pump and
treat and excavation remedy and reimburse EPA's
future response costs. $150,000 in past costs were
"carved  out" of that settlement because the Puerto
Rico  Industrial   Development  Company
(PRIDCO), the owner of the property and a PRP,
refused to enter into the settlement Subsequent to
entry of the decree, EPA made it clear to PRIDCO
that a cost recovery action would likely be  filed
against  it if the $150,000 in remaining past costs
was  not paid by September  1993.   PRIDCO
thereafter  entered  into negotiations with  the
other PRPs. The result was an agreement among
themselves whereby the four settling PRPs would
reimburse EPA for the unpaid balance of the costs
in exchange for PRIDCO's commitment to provide
in-kind services valued at $465,000.

U.S.  v. Fleet Factors Corp.. (S,D. Ga.); A bench
trail was held, in district court  concerning Fleet
Factors  Corporation's liability for costs incurred
in the   removal  action   conducted  at   the
Swainsboro Print Works  (SPW) facility  in
Swainsboro, Georgia. EPA conducted a two-step
cleanup of the site which is  not on the NPL. From
February 6 to 26, 1984, EPA addressed abandoned
chemicals that had been left at  the site.  These
chemicals included sodium cyanide, xylene, and
varsol.  While the cleanup was  underway,  the
presence of asbestos was confirmed at the site.
EPA  undertook the second part of the response
action, the removal of the asbestos, in 1984.

On May 12, 1993, following the bench trial, the
court entered a Memorandum and Order finding
Fleet jointly and  severally liable under CERCLA
                                            3-43

-------
                        FY }993 Enforcement Accomplishments Report
In 1984, EPA  placed the  site on  the NPL,
identifying 59 hazardous substances in the site's
soil and groundwater. A ROD was signed on June
30,1989, calling for both a landfill cap and ground
water treatment. The consent decree was filed in
December 1989, however, in January of 1990,
Container Corporation of America (CCA), a party
with the fourth largest  allocated share for a
nongovernmental PRP for the site, filed a Motion
to Intervene.

The Court  heard oral arguments regarding the
Motion to Intervene in October of 1989. DOJ filed a
Motion to Enter the Consent Decree in January of
1990. Upon the referral of a cost recovery case,
DOJ filed a complaint against CCA in December
of 1992. CCA  Hied a third-  party  complaint
against  eight signatories of the pending consent
decree. In September of 1992, DOJ filed a Motion
to withdraw the  U.S.'s  opposition  to  CCA's
intervention on a limited bases. Upon  permitting
CCA limited discovery on the "fairness of the
settlement," on March  30,  1993, the court entered
the decree, excluding CCA, With the decree being
entered, the eight third-party  defendants will
receive  contribution  protection against  CCA,
thereby terminating CCA's third-party claim.

U.S.  v,Jgould, et al.:   In April 1993, a judicial
consent decree was entered in U.S. District Court
(S.D.N.Y.) concerning the Marathon Battery site.
The  settling  parties  are  Marathon  Battery
Company (Marathon), Gould Inc. (Gould) and the
U.S. on behalf of the Department  of the  Army
(Army).  Under the  terms of the settlement, EPA
will recover $9 million in  past costs and interest,
$1.5 million in future costs, and oversight costs  for
the remedial action (RA) of up to $3 million.
Gould has agreed to perform the RA in accordance
with   EPA's  design and  approved   value
engineering modifications and to conduct long-
term monitoring and maintenance at the site. EPA
estimates the remedial action cost at $91 million,
making the total value of  the settlement package
nearly $110 million.

For the remedy,  Marathon will contribute  $4
million and the Army $37 million in addition to
their previous cash settlements (in » prior partial
consent decree) of $5.25 million and $5.6 million,
respectively. This is a complete settlement of all
EPA's claims against the viable PRPs, and a
resolution  of  complicated legal  issues.   EPA
agreed to forgive $7.28 million in past costs and
interest in the  settlement, and thus recovered
about 94% of its costs.  The case raised interesting
and  complicated  questions of  law because
Marathon and Gould were released from liability
for "discharges" from the site in a 1974 settlement
with the U.S. under the Refuse Act of 1899.

Hamilton  Island: •  Region  X  negotiated  a
CERCLA § 120 Agreement with the  US  Army
Corps of  Engineers  for  a  comprehensive
investigation and  remediation of  the site. This
is the first such agreement with  the Corps of
Engineers  nationally,  and  it   includes  an
expedited schedule for the  cleanup.  The final
cleanup Record of Decision will  be completed in
1996.

In  the.  Matter of Imperial  Oil/Champiorj
Chemical Site.:  EPA received  payment  in the
amount  of $251,685  as  reimbursement  for a
removal action  performed at  the  Imperial
Oil/Champion Chemical Superfund site in New
Jersey. The action  consisted  of the removal and
disposal of a pile of PCB-contaminated  waste
filter clay sludge. The money was disbursed from
an escrow account maintained by the Monmouth
County Probation  Department  This escrow
account was  established as  a result of a plea
bargain agreement to settle a  criminal  action
between the Monmouth County Prosecutor's Office
and   the  Imperial Oil  Company, Champion
Chemical Company, and three corporate officers.
The  purpose of the account was to  reimburse
parties that performed environmental  cleanup
actions at the site.  Region  II had notified the
Monmouth County  Prosecutor's Office that EPA
had performed this work and  requested payment.

International Depository Inc. Removal Site: In
the International Depository, Inc.  (IDI) removal
case, EPA achieved  an  administrative cost
recovery settlement under CERCLA §122(h) for
$1.1  million  with  56 potentially responsible
parties.  Additionally, after  EPA had conducted
initial response measures, it issued  the site owner,
the Rhode Island Department of Transportation,
a unilateral administrative order under CERCLA
§106  for approximately half of  the necessary
cleanup activities.

The IDI site is located  near the Narragansett Bay
in North Kingstown, Rhode Island. The site was
an abandoned hazardous waste transfer facility
that  contained approximately 3,000 drums of a
wide range of improperly stored waste materials.
                                            3-45

-------
t&)
                            FY1993 Enforcement Accomplishments Report
§107(a)(2), 42 U.S.C. § 9607(a)(2), for all response
and  enforcement costs (totaling $1,046,541.70)
associated with  the removal  of  hazardous
substances at the site.  The  court found  that,
although Fleet was a secured lender to SPW, and
the Lender Liability Rule did apply, the actions
of Fleet's agents voided the statutory  exemption
for secured  creditors.   Fleet  hired Baldwin
Industrial Liquidators (Baldwin) to auction off
SPW's equipment and inventory.    After the
auction, Fleet allowed Nix Rigging Company to
salvage the remaining equipment and  machinery.
It was the actions of Baldwin  and Nix that
voided the protection of the Lender Liability
Rule and of the statutory exemption.

In  the Matter  of Frontier Chemical:   On
September 30,1993, EPA issued an administrative
order on consent to some 275 PRPs requiring them
to conduct  a removal action at the Frontier
Chemical Superfund  site,  located in Niagara
Falls, N.Y. The response  action is to include the
removal of over 4,000 drums  of waste from the
site, as  well as  6,700 pounds  of   laboratory
chemicals.  The work is estimated to  cost about
$4.7 million.  The consent  order also requires the
consenting PRPs to reimburse the U.S. for $519,219
in past costs incurred by EPA and also pay certain
additional costs which have  been and will be
incurred by FJA thereafter.

On September 30,1993, EPA Region II also issued a
parallel  unilateral administrative  order  to
approximately 103 PRPs which had declined  to
sign on to the consent order.  The unilateral order
requires  the recipients  to cooperate  and
participate with the settling PRPs in conducting
the same response actions as those required by the
consent order.

Frontier Chemical Waste Process, Inc.  operated a
business  at the site from  1974 until 1992, which
was  primarily engaged  in  hazardous waste
processing  and   management,   including
wastewater treatment, fuels blending and bulking
for off-site disposal.  During the course  of its
operations, Frontier was the subject of numerous
orders issued  by the New York State Department
of Environmental Conservation  for  regulatory
violations.  EPA initiated  response action at the
site in December 1992.

Fuels and Chemicals Site, (Coaling,  Alabama):
On July 20,  1993, EPA  Region IV, executed
                                                   "participate  and  cooperate"  administrative
                                                   orders for a PRP-lead removal action at the Fuels
                                                   and Chemicals site in Coaling, Alabama.  The
                                                   site currently is not  listed  on the NPL.  The
                                                   "participate and cooperate" orders represent an
                                                   innovative approach to CERCLA enforcement and
                                                   PRP-lead  removals.   The orders consist of an
                                                   administrative order on consent with a group of 11
                                                   cooperating  PRPs,   and   a   unilateral
                                                   administrative order (UAO) issued to three PRPs
                                                   who chose not to cooperate with EPA and the PRP
                                                   Steering Committee,

                                                   The orders were the first in the nation to use the
                                                   "participate and cooperate" language developed
                                                   in conjunction with DOJ.  The UAO requires the
                                                   respondents to work with the cooperating PRPs
                                                   and either perform or pay for part of the work at
                                                   the site.  Use of the "participate  and cooperate"
                                                   UAO improved the  sense  of fairness in  the
                                                   Superfund process, and  the progress of AOC
                                                   negotiations  with  the cooperating PRPs,  by
                                                   requiring response action of the recalcitrant PRPs.

                                                   The Fuels and Chemicals, Inc., facility operated
                                                   from 1981 to 1992 as a fuels blending and treating
                                                   facility and was abandoned  in September, 1992.
                                                   The site includes 31 tanks  with a total capacity of
                                                   840,000 gallons and approximately  1,200 drums.
                                                   The approximately 800,000 gallons of hazardous
                                                   substances stored on-site in unstable and  leaking
                                                   tanks and drums  included:  lead, chromium,
                                                   mercury;   perchloroethene>  trichloroethane,
                                                   methylene chloride, and 1,1,1-trichloroethane.

                                                   The cooperating PRPs continue the removal
                                                   activities at the site as required in the AOC. In
                                                   anticipation of additional removal activities at
                                                   the site, EPA and the PRP Steering Committee are
                                                   working together  to  identify additional PRPs.
                                                   EPA also  is evaluating options  to enforce the
                                                   orders against respondents who did not comply.

                                                   U.S. v. General Refuse, et. al. (S.D. Ohio): On
                                                   March 30, 1993,  the  court  entered a  RD/RA
                                                   consent decree for the Miami County Incinerator
                                                   site. The decree embodies an agreement between
                                                   the Agency and 120 governmental and industry
                                                   PRPs.  It  calls  for  the settling  defendants to
                                                   conduct 100% of the selected remedy and to  pay
                                                   50% of future  oversight  costs. The  settling
                                                   defendants are also required to pay up to 50% of
                                                   past response  costs after the U.S. uses "best
                                                   efforts" to recover past response costs from non-
                                            3-44

-------
                            FF1993 Enforcement Accomplishments Report
Numerous containers stored in the open bays were
exposed to the elements, and there was evidence
of drum leakage. In some instances, incompatible
wastes were stacked three drums high, posing a
threat of explosion and fire.

EPA staged, sampled, properly containerized the
waste materials and disposed  of the extremely
hazardous and sensitive materials.  Pursuant to
the unilateral administrative  order, the  site
owner is currently disposing of the remaining
drummed wastes, excavating contaminated soil,
and decontaminating the buildings and  storage
bays.

The settling parties under the administrative cost
recovery   agreement  are  generators   and
transporters of hazardous  substances sent to the
site.  The agreement provides  that the  settlors
will pay EPA $1.1  million, the majority of EPA's
costs.  In an effort to  facilitate settlement, the
Region  developed a volumetric  ranking list
which the PRP group used to develop its  internal
allocation scheme.  The majority of the  settlors
are commercial entities.  A  number  of  federal,
state and local entities also participated in the
settlement.

U.S. v, |.Jones Hggygling fN.D. III.): On July 8,
1993,  the court entered judgment for costs and
treble damages exceeding $10 million against four
defendants in the  CERGLA  cost recovery cases
involving the I. Jones Recycling, Clinton Street
site in Fort Wayne, Indiana. The judgment order:
(1) holds Aqua-Tech, Inc; I. Jones Partnership;
Frederick J. Cook, Jr.; and Thomas J. Hanchar
jointly and severally liable for $784,400.77 in
anum response costs and prejudgment interest on
those costs; and (2) holds each of the latter three
defendants liable  for   treble  damages of
$9,663,884.94 for  their failure  to comply with
three unilateral orders issued for removal actions
at the site.

The  I.  Jones  Recycling, Clinton  Street  site
collected, stored and treated a wide variety of
hazardous  substances  from   1980 through
September, 1986. The facility was closed after a
chemical fire emitted potentially toxic fumes and
required evacuation of adjacent areas, leaving a
vast number of containers  holding  hazardous
substances, and widespread contamination within
the buildings and soil. EPA filed its cost recovery
complaint  on  March  25,  1991,  against  all
owner/operators of the site and against the one
viable generator (Aqua-Tech) that  had  not
entered  into  administrative cost  recovery
settlements for the site.

EPA issued unilateral orders on October 14; 1986
and September 3, 1987,  requiring the owner/
operators to perform extensive removal actions.
The owner/operators did not  comply and EPA
performed  removal actions costing over $2.3
million. By the time EPA was ready to initiate
the final phase of site cleanup, the Agency had
identified a group of over 150 generators who had
sent waste to the site. On July 27,1988, EPA issued
a  unilateral  order  to   all   generators and
owner/operators. A group of generators complied
with that order incurring costs in excess of $3
million.

In the Matter of Kin-Buc Landfill: On November
11, 1992, EPA issued a unilateral administrative
order in connection with the Kin-Buc Landfill site
in New Jersey. The order requires that eleven
respondents,  responsible parties at  the site,
perform the RD/RA for the second operable unit
(OU2) component  of the remedy  which was
selected in  the ROD issued  by Region  II in
September,  1992. The work required under OU2
includes excavation of PCB contaminated soils
and sediment from an area known as the Edmonds
Marsh located next to one of the fills at the site.
The excavated material is to be placed onto the
landfill before it is  capped.  OU2 also requires
that mitigation measures be carried  out in
wetlands at the marsh area from which the PCB
contaminated material is  to be excavated. The
estimated cost for the OU2 work  is $4.1 million.
The respondents were all owners and/or operators
of the landfill.

Lindane Dump Site. (Harrison Township, Pa): On
June 28, 1993, in a consent decree entered by the
court (E.D. PA), Elf Atochem North America, Inc.
agreed to reimburse EPA  100% of its past costs
totaling $238,451 and implement the site remedy
totaling $15  million. Additionally,.the decree
introduces an alternative dispute resolution
provision providing for non-binding mediation for
issues arising under the additional work and
periodic review provisions of the decree, the first
such language in a judicial decree.

Mathis Brothers/South Marble  Top  Road
Landfill NPL Site. (Walker County, Georgia): On
                                            3-46

-------
                       FY1993 Enforcement Accomplishments Report
at the  Mathis  Brothers/South Marble  Top
Landfill NPL  site in Walker County, Georgia.
The order, which was issued after no PRPs were
willing to enter into  a consent decree with EPA
after a 120-day negotiation period, requires the
PRPs to implement the remedial action/remedial
design (RD/RA) for the site. The remedial action
selected by EPA  provides for excavation and
incineration of landfill wastes  and associated
soil,  excavation  and  bioremediation  (an
innovative technology that will be tested during
remedial design) of contaminated subsurface soil,
and   trenching   to  collect  contaminated
groundwater for off-site treatment. The remedy is
estimated to cost $12.98 million.

The site is a landfill which was operated under a
state permit between 1974 and 1980. Wastes at
the site include wastes from the production of
dicamba and benzonitrille by Velsicol Chemical
Corporation,  and  wastes from  the latex and
carpet industry. Hazardous  substances to be
addressed at  the site include benzonitrille,
dicamba,  phthalates,  dichlorobenzene, and
styrene.

In the Matter of ILLS,  v. Morrison-Quirk Grain
Corporation, FAR-MAR-CO Subsite. (D.Neb.):On
April  19,  1993, the court  entered a  CERCLA
§107(a)  cost recovery consent decree  for  costs
incurred in connection with the FAR-MAR-CO
subsite   of   the   Hastings  Groundwater
Contamination site.  The  decree  required the
defendant  to  pay $2,150,000 for investigative
costs incurred by the U.S. through December 31,
1990,  and entered  declaratory judgment for all
future costs. The defendant has already paid the
past costs as required by the consent decree.

The consent decree settled an action that the U.S.
had commenced on December 31, 1988. The U.S.
had won a summary judgment motion on liability
and was set to go to trial on the amount of costs
owed to the government. Because the costs were
incurred in connection with a subsite of the
Hastings Groundwater  megasite, numerous cost
allocations were performed to arrive at a figure
representing the FAR-MAR-CO subsite costs.

U.S. v. Motorola.Inc.. (D. Ariz.)-. On August 11,
1993,  the  court entered  the second  and  final
remedial  design/remedial  action  (RD/RA)
consent decree for  the North Indian Bend Wash
(NIBW) Superfund site.  Together with the first
settlement, this consent decree  provides for
private sector cleanup of the entire NIBW site,
including the restoration of the area-wide aquifer
and provides for the recovery of 95% of EPA's past
costs and all future costs.

The  Indian Bend Wash Superfund site (IBW)
encompasses approximately  13 square miles in
Scottsdale and Tempe, Arizona and consists of two
study areas - NIBW  and South  Indian  Bend
Wash.  The NIBW site encompasses ten square
miles  and  includes land  developed  for
residential, commercial, and industrial uses. The
site was placed on the NPL  in 1982 due to the
presence of VOCs in the groundwater.

The decree requires the defendants to conduct the
RD/RA  for  the vadose zone and shallow
groundwater as specified in the NIBW Record of
Decision (ROD) dated September 12, 1991. The
estimated value of this  work, including EPA
oversight costs, is $11 million  to  $14  million.
These remedial actions build upon the remedy
and corresponding first consent decree for deep and
middle-depth groundwater selected in the 1988
Scottsdale Groundwater  Operable  Unit  ROD.
The decree also requires the payment of  EPA's
past response costs of $5,066,048,44, as well as
future oversight costs which are estimated at $2.5
million.

|p re: Mu^kego Sanitary Landfill: On December 9,
1992, EPA issued  a unilateral administrative
order to 46 potentially responsible parties  at the
Muskego Sanitary Landfill  Superfund site in
Muskego, Wisconsin. This order requires the PRPs
to perform a source control operable unit remedy
that includes:  establishing  site  controls;
upgrading the landfill cap; instituting a leachate
control  system; and  performing  soil vapor
extraction of a  specified fill area. EPA selected
this remedy in its June 12,1992 Record of Decision
(ROD), and estimated  that the remedy would
cost $12,9 million.

After issuance of the ROD,  EPA and the PRPs
cooperated to expedite the cleanup process so that
the PRPs could  begin performing the cleanup in
1993. In particular, the  parties agreed  that EPA
would  forego the special notice process and
simply proceed to issue a unilateral order after
making  an effort to identify additional  PRPs.
EPA  also helped facilitate an ADR process to
help the PRPs  develop an  allocation process.
                                            3-47

-------
                           FF /99J Enforcement Accomplishments Report
Establishing this process before compliance with
the order was required helped EPA obtain broad
participation by the PRPs; 42 of the 46 PRPs
agreed to perform the work.

National Electric Coil/Cooper Industries  Sife,
Day hoi t, KenL):   A  unilateral administrative
order for performance of an interim action remedy
was issued to Cooper Industries, Inc.  on December
15,1992, after the respondent refused to conduct
the remedy voluntarily.   Cooper operates an
equipment  rebuilding  and  remanufacturing
facility at the site in Dayhoit,  Kentucky. The
site is located on  the flood  plain of  the
Cumberland River and is in close proximity to a
small mobile home park.  Cooper  Industries,  a
subsidiary of McGraw-Edison Co.,  acquired the
facility from National  Electric  Coil in 1987.
Solvents used to clean industrial equipment were
released to the ground surface on the banks of the
Cumberland River and through drainage pipes
leading from the site to the river. PCB laden oils
were also released.

In February 1989, the Kentucky Department of
Environmental Protection (KDEP) detected high
concentrations  of volatile organic compounds
mainly trichloroethane,  dichloroethene, xylene
and toluene in residential wells near the site.
The site was proposed for the NPL in July 1991
and listed in October 1992.  Cooper is conducting
the interim response activities concurrently with
RI/FS and post-RI/FS activities.

U.S. v. City of  Newport, et al.f  (E.D, Ky.h  On
December 29, 1992, the court entered two civil
consent decrees representing a partial settlement
of the  CERCLA cost recovery litigation for the
Newport Dump Superfund site, Wider, Kentucky.
The decrees involve five of  the six potentially
responsible parties (PRPs) named in the original
complaint.  The settlement collectively provides
for the recovery of $2.4 million, representing
approximately 50 percent of the  total past costs,
and also  provides  for  the performance of
operations and maintenance activities.

On July 26, 1993,  the U.S.  Bankruptcy Court
lodged a  proposed Stipulation of Settlement
addressing the U.S. claim against the remaining
PRP, G. Heileman Brewing Company, Inc. Under
the Stipulation of Settlement, the  U.S.1  claim
against the company will be  allowed as an
unsecured claim in the amount of $800,000.
U.S. v. Niagara Transformer Corporation:  On
January 20,  1993, a consent decree was lodged
which  partially  resolved  this  1989  action
concerning  the  Wide  Beach  Development
Superfund site. The decree reflects a Ae minimis
settlement with six of seven defendants in the
lawsuit.  The  complaint was filed against the
settling de  minimis  defendants  and Niagara
Transformer Corporation.  Under the decree the
settlors will  pay a total of $575,000 to the U.S.,
and $57,500  to  the  State  of New  York, in
reimbursement  of  past governmental site
expenditures.  Region II intends to pursue the
action against  Niagara Transformer Corporation,
and  will continue  to  investigate  whether
additional persons may be liable for remaining
response costs at the site, estimated to be between
$32 and $40 million dollars.

LfA^fr Qiban Industries. Inc.: On April 23,1993,
an amended  default judgment was entered by the
U.S.  District Court  (W.D.N.Y.)  imposing
penalties upon a defunct corporation, Orban
Industries, Inc., under CERCLA §106 for failure to
comply with a Region II administrative order in
connection with the Madison Wire Site Superfund
site located near  Buffalo, N.Y.   The court
awarded $925,000 in  penalties.  Previously, in
August,  1992, the court had awarded  EPA
$500,000 in  response  costs and $1.1 million in
punitive treble damages for failure to comply
with the order; however, the court did not award
penalties pursuant to CERCLA §106(b)  at that
time.  The court had erroneously read CERCLA as
requiring proof of willfulness in order to  impose
§106 penalties. In this amended order, the court
corrected that error.

U.S. v. Ottati & Goss  (D.M.H.); IMCERA Group
Inc. v. EPA, et.  al (D. NH); In September of 1993,
the United States lodged a civil consent decree in
which IMCERA Group, INC. (IMCERA) and 355
contribution action defendants (sued by IMCERA)
agreed to pay  to the U.S. and the State of New
Hampshire a total of  $4,000,000 as a "cashout"
settlement, effectively ending approximately 13
years of litigation.   The settlement  resolves
claims initially brought under  RCRA §7003,
seeking injunctive relief for cleanup of the site,
and under §§310 and 309oftheCWA.  In 1983, the
U.S. amended  the complaint to seek injunctive
relief and recovery of  past costs under  CERCLA
§§106 and 107 arising from the disposal of
                                            3-48

-------
                        FY 1993 Enforcement Accomplishments Report
different chemicals  were  found at  the  site,
including volatile organic compounds , acid and
base/neutral compounds, metals, cyanide, and
PCBs.

The site is  located in the town of Kingston in
southern New Hampshire and was placed on the
NPL in September 1981. On January 16,1987, EPA
issued  a ROD outlining remedial action for the
site.  The ROD called for on-site incineration of
contaminated soils and sediments and for a pump-
and-treat system for contaminated groundwater.
Under  the terms of settlement, the remedy and
associated operation and maintenance for the site
will be completed by  the U.S, and the State.

In the Matter of Philmar Electronics:   On
September  30,  1993, EPA  entered  into  an
administrative cost recovery agreement with the
United States Air  Force (USAF) regarding the
Philmar Electronics site located in Morrisonville,
New York.  Under the Agreement, the USAF will
pay EPA $864,493 in reimbursement for all of
EPA's unreimbursed  past response costs  with
respect to  the site as of July  30, 1993.  The
agreement  will  become effective after a public
comment period is held, pursuant to CERCLA
§122(i).  USAF is  the  major source of  the
hazardous substances  at the site.  For a number of
years,  55-galIon drums  containing hazardous
substances, such as cleaning solvents, used oils and
jet fuel, were picked up from the Plattsburgh Air
Force Base and disposed of  at the site.  The past
costs covered by the agreement were incurred in
connection  with a removal action performed by
EPA at the site.

U.S. v. Purqlator Products Company. Inc.: On June
17,1993, a judicial consent decree was entered by
the U.S. District Court (W.D.N.Y.) concerning the
Facet Enterprises  Superfund  site.   Purolator
Products Company, Inc., the current and a prior
owner and operator of what is referred to as the
Facet  Enterprises Facility, executed the decree.
The  consent  decree  requires  Purolator  to
implement the remedy selected by EPA Region II
for the site, estimated to cost about $4.8 million.
In addition, Purolator will pay $625,174.09,  plus
interest, for past response costs incurred by EPA at
the site, and make payment to the United States
of future response costs that will be incurred in
overseeing the implementation of the remedy.
Redwing  Carrigiff.  Inc.  (Saraland)  Site.
(Saraland, Ala); On July 16, 1993, EPA issued an
UAO for RD/RA against ten private parties to
cleanup the Redwing Carriers, Inc. (Saraland)
Superfund  site  in  Saraland,  Alabama.   The
Redwing Carriers, Inc. site is located at 527 U.S.
Highway 43 in the City of Saraland. From 1961
to 1971, Redwing  Carriers, Inc., operated a
trucking terminal at the site using the property to
maintain, clean  and park its fleet of trucks and
tank trailers, which transported  chemicals,
asphalt and other substances.   During  the
cleaning process,  residual  portions  of  the
substances transported in the trucks were released
untreated to the ground. AKZO Chemical, Inc.
and Olin Corporation used Redwing to transport
hazardous materials in  tanker trucks residual
portions of which were disposed of at the site.

A low  income housing apartment  complex was
constructed  on  the site  in 1972.  Saraland
Apartments, Ltd, the current owner, rather than
removing the contamination, contracted with the
Meador Construction Company who graded the
property, burying pools of tar and spreading the
contamination over the entire site.

The  UAO was issued to Saraland  Apartments,
Ltd,  its general partners. Roar Company and
Robert  Coil, and its limited partners who exercise
pervasive control over the partnership, Hutton
Advantaged Properties and H/R Special.   Also
included in the UAO  are Redwing Carriers,
AKZO, Olin, Meador, and the managing agent,
Marcrum Management Company,  Redwing and
AKZO  gave notice of their intent to comply with
the UAO. The partners of Saraland Apartments,
Ltd., and Olin responded that they would not
comply. Neither Marcrum nor Meador submitted
a response.
In the Matter of Richardson Jiill RoAd Landfill
Sjle:  During 1993, EPA  issued two unilateral
administrative  orders and one consent order
regarding the Richardson Hill Road Landfill
site,  located in Sidney, New York.   The  first
order, issued unilaterally on June 21 to Amphenol
Corp., requires the company to deploy absorbent
booms and pads to remove an organic sheen from a
pond at the site. The second order, issued on
consent on  September  22 to Amphenol  and
Allied /Signal, Inc., requires the respondents to
                                            3-49

-------
                              FY1993 Enforcement Accomplishments Report
  install in-house water treatment units at certain
  residences near the site.  The third order, issued
  unilaterally September 30, also to Amphenol and
  Allied /Signal, requires respondents to excavate
  and remove waste material and contaminated soil
  .and debris from a waste oil pit and two other hot
  spots located  within the landfill.  The third
  order also requires the respondents to design and
  implement a system that can contain and remove
  light  non-aqueous  phase  liquid  from the
  groundwater and that can also remove and treat
  free phase liquid.

  The purpose of the  system is  to mitigate the
  migration of contaminated water into the "South
  Pond" at the site, which is on the NPL.  A RI/FS
  is presently being conducted by  the respondents
  under an administrative consent order issued in
  1987. The response actions required by the third
  1993 order  are not intended  to  serve as  a
  permanent remedy, but rather as an interim  or
  "early" response action.

  In the 1960's, the Bendix Corporation contracted
  with an independent contractor to  dispose  of
  hazardous substances, including waste oil, at the
  site.  Respondents are successors of  the  Bendix
  Corp.,  and  therefore  liable as PRPs  under
  CERCLA. The work required under the three 1993
  orders is estimated to cost about $434 million.
U.S.. et
                     & Haasr gt al.:  On January
  19, 1993, a consent decree was lodged with the
  U.S. District Court (D.N.J.),  partially resolving
  this action  concerning the Lipari Landfill, the
  highest  scoring site on the  CERCLA National
  Priorities List. In this decree, the U.S. and the
  State of New Jersey settled the liability for work
  done pursuant to the first two  Records of Decision
  (RODs) and two components  of the third ROD at
  this site. The settlors were the three primary
  defendants  at this site: Rohm & Haas, Owens-
  Illinois, and ManorCare. These companies have
  agreed to a cash-out valued at nearly $53 million.
  These three defendants sent or transported an
  estimated 92% - 98%  of the hazardous wastes
  dumped at the site.  The first ROD  required the
  construction of a containment wall keyed into the
,  underlying  clay, enclosing a 16-acre  site.  The
  second  ROD required  batch-flushing of  the
  contained area and treatment of the wastewater.
  The two components of the third ROD covered by
  this settlement  relate to the installation  of a
  French drain  and an  extraction system for an
underlying aquifer  and  the  treatment  of
wastewater collected from these systems.

On September 27, 1993, EPA issued an unilateral
administrative Order requiring Rohm & Haas to
perform  those portions of the third ROD not
settled in the January consent decree.  ROD III
addressed  the "off-site" portions of the Lipari
site.  In addition to the elements described above,
that  ROD also  provided for excavation and
treatment of marsh soils by low temperature
volatilization, excavation of sediments from two
streams adjacent to the marsh  and from the
downstream Lake Alcyon, with treatment of
those sediments if necessary.  Under this order,
Rohm & Haas is required to implement all of
these remaining  components of the ROD  III
remedy,  work valued at  approximately  $48
million.  When added  to the cash-out under the
consent  decree,  the total   value of  these
enforcement actions exceeds $100 million.

Sapp Battery Site, Cottondale, Florida:   On
September 30,   1993,  EPA   entered   into
administrative  settlements with  thirteen  de
minimi's generator PRPs under §122(g) of CERCLA
at the Sapp Battery  Superfund site  located
outside of Cottondale, Florida. The settlements
total $152,180, of which $105,746 will be applied
to EPA's outstanding past costs. This settlement
had been offered to 39 recalcitrant  de  minimi's
generators. In addition, five generators accepted
an earlier de minimis offer made to 25 generators.
EPA anticipates sending out two more de  minimis
offers to an additional 60 generators.  De minimis
generators were defined in this case as those PRPs
generating less than 0.1% of the total documented
waste disposed of at the site.

The  site  is contaminated with lead, acid and
battery casings. An emergency cleanup was done
at the  site by  the  Florida Department  of
Environmental Resources, in response to citizen
concerns about the high level of acid and lead in
nearby Steele City  Bay.   EPA conducted  a
removal, RI/FS and RD in  1989-1991.  The site
was listed on the NPL in August 1982. A number of
PRPs are now conducting Operable Unit One (soil)
under a consent decree which will constitute 80%
of the cleanup.  No agreements have yet  been
reached  for groundwater  remediation under
Operable  Unit, Two, or the cleanup of nearby
Steele City Bay {Operable Unit Three).
                                              3-50

-------
                        FY1993 Enforcement Accomplishments Report
U.S. v. Shell. (C.D, Cal): On September 28, 1993,
the district court  granted the Governments'
Motion  for  Partial  Summary Judgment  on
Liability against four major oil companies in the
McColl Superfimd site cost recovery action.  The
McColl Site is  located in Fullerton, California,
and has been on the NPL since 1983. The 22-acre
site contains over 100,000 cubic yards of highly
acidic refinery sludge dumped in the early 1940's.
The  sludge,  which  contains a  variety  of
hazardous substances including benzene, toluene,
and arsenic, periodically seeps to  the  surface,
emitting high levels of sulfur dioxide and posing
a threat of dermal contact.

The court ruled as a matter of law that Shell,
Union  Oil, ARCO, and Texaco are liable for past
and future cleanup costs as arrangers for disposal
under  CERCLA §107(b){3). The court also ruled
that  McAuley  LCX Corporation,  a small
privately-held company, is liable as the owner of
the site property, rejecting an innocent landowner
defense. The U.S. and the State of California, as
co-plaintiffs, are seeking over $25 million in past
costs.  EPA recently selected a remedy valued at
$80  million.   The  four oil  companies  are
performing remedial design activities pursuant to
unilateral administrative orders.

In granting summary judgment on liability,  the
court  rejected  the oil companies' "act  of war"
defense.  This  is  the  first reported  decision
interpreting the defense, which the court held
should be narrowly construed.  The oil companies
claimed that disposal  occurred  as part of  a
government-directed war effort. The court also
granted the Governments' motion to bifurcate the
case and permit the cost phase  to  proceed
immediately.    Plaintiffs  have  now  filed  a
summary judgment motion for these past costs.
The court  further  stayed  the  companies'
counterclaim against the U.S., ruling that  the
contribution action should not interfere with the
replenishment of theSuperfund.

Silresim Superfund  Site (D. Ma.):  On  April  27,
1993,  the court lodged  the consent  decree  for
the Silresim Superfund site. The consent decree
consisted of a  global  settlement  with   223
parties,  179 of those parties   were de  minimis
settlors.  The  parties  paid approximately  $41
million for  a cash-out settlement.  The decree
also included  a re-opener if the  remedy costs
more  than  $54.8  million.
The  Superfund site is located in Lowell, Mass.
The Silresim Chemical Corporation operated a
chemical  waste  reclamation facility  on   the
site.   The  original  facility   consisted   of
approximately 4.5  acres,  however the extent of
contamination includes  approximately 16 acres
and  groundwater contamination.  The major
problem  at the site  is contamination by dense,
non-aqueous phase liquids in the groundwater.

U.S. v. Snmggler-Durant. Inc. (823 F. Supp. 873 (D,
Colo. June 8, 1993)):  The  court  held  that  the
defenses  provided  by CERCLA §107(b)  are
exclusive, and struck all of the equitable defenses
asserted   by  defendant  Pitkin   County.
Additionally, the court held that defenses which
alleged that the governments* response costs were
not "cost effective or prudent" or "reasonable"
were not valid affirmative  defenses because the
only issue as to recoverability  of response costs is
consistency with the National Contingency Plan.
The court also held that the defendant could not
challenge the listing of Smuggler Mountain
Superfund site on the  NPL  as an affirmative
defense in this action.

U.S.v. Texaco Inc.. (CD. Cal):  On August 22,1993,
the court entered a consent decree for performance
of the remedial design and remedial action at the
Pacific Coast Pipeline  Superfund  site in Fillmore,
California . Under the consent decree, Texaco, Inc.
and its subsidiary Texaco Refining and Marketing
Inc., the sole  PRPs, will construct and operate a
soil vapor extraction system and a groundwater
extraction and treatment system as required  by
the ROD.  The primary contaminant of concern is
benzene,  which  is  present  in  the soil  and
groundwater  at the site.  The remedial action is
expected to cost $4,000,000.  Under the decree, the
defendants have agreed to reimburse California
for past response costs  and the U.S. for future
response costs. Texaco, Inc. paid EPA's past costs
pursuant to an administrative order on consent for
the RI/FS. EPA has the lead for  the site and the
California Department  of   Toxic Substances
Control is the support agency.   The Pacific Coast
Pipeline Superfund site was listed on the NPL on
October  4,  1989.   Texaco,  Inc. is  currently
conducting the remedial design of the remedy in
accordance with the consent decree.

U.g, v. Union Scrap  Iron &  Metal, ej q|t  (D.
Minn-l: On January 14-15, 1993, the court entered
three consent decrees under which a total of 65
                                             3-51

-------
                            FY1993 Enforcement Accomplishments Report
defendants will pay approximately $1,450,000 of
EPA's past response costs for the cleanup of the
Union  Scrap   Iron  &  Metal  facility  in
Minneapolis, Minnesota.

The Union Scrap facility was the site of a battery
breaking  business. During  its operation, the
company purchased spent lead acid batteries from
numerous customers and reclaimed the lead plates
by cracking  open the plastic  battery cases and
extracting the  plates. This  process  highly
contaminated the soil at the site  and seriously
threatened human health and the environment.
In 1986 and 1988, EPA undertook several remedial
activities  to remove the lead-tainted soil and
debris.  Then, in  1989, the  Agency initiated
CERCLA  §107  proceedings against  various
defendants in order to recover the approximately
$2.1  million expended during the remediation.
Allocation issues,  however, were  extremely
difficult  since  Union Scrap  had  declared
bankruptcy in 1985, and  few site records  were
available from which to construct a waste-in list.
A mediator was subsequently employed to help
resolve these  matters after the conclusion  of
discovery and while the case was  on the court's
trial  call.

U.S. v. WJjj. Case & Sons Cutlery €04  On
November 30,  1992, the U.S.  District Court
(W.D.N.Y.) entered a consent decree in this action
against W.R. Case & Sons Cutlery  Co. (Case).
The decree required Case to pay  EPA $700,000
toward EPA's past and future response costs at the
Olean Well Field NPL site and also required Case
to pay a $50,000 civil penalty to EPA as a result of
Case's  noncompliance  with   a   unilateral
administrative order issued in 1986 under §106(a)
of CERCLA.  That order, issued to six PRPs
including Case, required respondents to carry out a
remedial action at the site. The remaining five
respondents  complied, but Case declined  to
participate. In 1988, the government filed a cost
recovery action against all six PRPs to recoup its
past expenditures,  and also  included  a count
against  Case  for  civil  penalties  for  its
noncompliance  with the order.  The five other
PRPs agreed to pay $1,175,000 of EPA's past costs
in a partial consent decree entered in August, 1989.
The 1992 decree settles the remainder of the 1988
lawsuit.

Western Processing Superfund Site: As part  of
the remedial action for the Western Processing
Superfund site  in  Washington State, a consent
decree entered on October 16, 1986 required  the
PRPs  to clean up  a creek  located on site. The
site falls within  the boundaries of the City of
Kent, which  demanded that the PRPs obtain a
city permit for the creek cleanup.  EPA and the
PRPs  responded  that,  under federal law, no
permit was  required for this work.  The city
then issued a stop work order to the PRPs, and
the PRPs  ceased   creek cleanup activity.   In"
response, EPA obtained a declaratory judgment
from the federal  district  court stating  that  no
permit was required to perform  the  cleanup
work   The  city then lifted its stop work order,
and cleanup proceeded.

Westingrtouse Superfund Site, (Sunnyvale Ca,): In
September  1993,  EPA   issued   a  unilateral
administrative  order  (UAO) for RD/RA  to
Westinghouse Electric Corporation for design of
the groundwater  treatment  system  for  the
Westinghouse Superfund  site.     The  UAO
terminated an administrative order on consent
(AOC) for  remedial design negotiated in 1992,
except for provisions related to payment of .EPA
response costs.  Westinghouse, the  sole PRP
identified for the site, submitted a  timely Notice
of Intent to Comply in November 1993. Issuance of
the UAO is  anticipated to allow remediation of
soil contamination  to proceed prior to the final
approval  of  the  design  for  groundwater
remediation. Termination of the AOC will allow
some remedial  action to  begin  prior  to  the
completion of all remedial design  tasks without
the complications of overlapping and potentially
conflicting orders.

The  Westinghouse Site was formerly used to
manufacture electrical  transformers and  is
currently used to manufacture steam generators,
marine propulsion systems, and missile launching
systems for the Department  of Defense. Releases
of PCBs, volatile organic compounds and fuel
compounds have resulted in soil and groundwater
contamination.  The October 1991  Record  of the
Decision for the site requires remediation of PCBs
in the soil, containment of PCB contamination in
groundwater in the source area where dense non-
aqueous phase liquids are present, and cleanup of
all other groundwater contaminants throughout
the site.

Whitemoyer Laboratories  Superfund Site.
(M.D.Pa.):  On November 4, 1993, the consent
                                            3-52

-------
                       FF1993 Enforcement Accomplishments Report
                                                                                            *.'m*r
decree between  the Estate  of Clarence  W.
Whitmoyer,  Sr.  and the  United  States  for
reimbursement of $2.9 million in past costs was
entered in court.  This past costs-only settlement
is significant in that the PRP's estate  agreed to
reimburse the U.S. to resolve the  PRFs CERCLA
liability for the Whitmoyer Laboratories site in
Jackson Township, Pa.

Earlier, on February 9, 1993, the consent decree
between SmithKline Beecham Corporation and
Rohm and Haas Company  and the  U.S.  for
reimbursement of $250,000 in past costs and
implementation of the $124 million RD/RA was
entered in the U.S. District Court (M.D.Pa.). This
combined settlement, in excess of $127 million,
represents a 98.3% settlement of all site-related
costs for one of the largest Superfund cases
Toxic Substances Control Act
(TSCA) Enforcement

       The Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA)
allows EPA  to  regulate commercial  chemicals—
both those already in  the market  (§6)  and new
chemicals   prior   to   market   entry   (§5
premanufacture notice), as  well  as  chemicals for
import arid export (§§12 and 13).  The act also
requires  reporting about  chemicals  and  their
effects  (§8) and chemical testing  (§4),

       One focus for FY 1993 was to emphasize
workplace  compliance  with  chemical  controls,
More than 500  individual  chemicals  are subject
to specific EPA  administrative  orders  requiring
workplace  or  manufacturing controls.  Under a
Memorandum of  Understanding (MOW,  EPA and
the   Occupational   Safety   and   Health
Administration (OSHA) share information and
target joint inspections to detect noncompliance.
The  program  also continued to emphasize PCB
compliance and enforcement priorities, including
disposal and commercial storage facilities,  other
high  risk  facilities,  underground  mines,  pulp
mills, and natural gas pipelines. Inspections  of
in-progress asbestos  abatement  activities  was
also  a  priority.

       TSCA enforcement  efforts focused  on
assuring   accurate  and   timely  data  about
chemical    substances,   specifically  those
involving  adverse  health   or  environmental
    .  The program is currently implementing an
initiative  regarding   TSCA    §8(e)   data
(information that indicates  the  chemical  may
cause  significant   risk)   under   the   CAP
(Compliance Audit  Program) program in which
323  companies,  representing more than 1,000
futilities, are auditing records for  8(e) data.  The
program   targets subpoenas  and  conducts field
investigations of  selected firms  that are not  part
of the CAP program.

        As part  of  the  national  Data Quality
Initiative,  the program  conducted inspections  at
chemical testing facilities in order to ensure that
such   facilities  were  in  compliance  with
established Good  Laboratory  Practices, including
the use of a  Quality  Assurance Program  and
proper  record  keeping.   It  also  targeted non-
submitters  of  §5  premanufacturing  notices
(PMNs),

        In the  international  enforcement  arena,
the program  ensures  that-  chemicals imported
into  the  United  States  are  properly  registered
under the TSCA Chemical Inventory, In FY 1993,
EPA  continued working  with the U.S.  Customs
Service  to  evaluate  customs  declarations  and
shipping   manifests   to  ensure  compliance,
Following  the  recent  favorable decision  of  the
U.S.  Court of Appeals  for  the  Second  Circuit
affirming EPA's  ability to enforce  both  TSCA
and Customs  requirements in unified enforcement
actions, EPA expects  to step up border patrols for
non-conforming substances.

        Section 313  of The Emergency Planning
and   Community-Right-tO'Know  Act .(EPCRA)
requires   certain   categories   of  industrial
manufacturers to provide annual  Toxic Release
Inventory  (TRI)  data  regarding  the  total
emissions level of certain  toxic  chemicals from
subject facilities.  These data are now used by all
Ike agency's media  compliance  programs  to  help
target  inspections   and  identify  settlement
conditions. The program  will  expand enforcement
against non-reporters.  As  part  of the  national
Data  Quality  Initiative,  the program ensures
that   TRI data are  timely, comprehensive,  and
accurate by prosecuting violations of false or late
reporting  discovered  during data form reviews  or
facility  inspections.
                                              3-53

-------
                           FF1993 Enforcement Accomplishments Report
       During the last several years, the  TSCA
program  has been in  the  forefront  of  agency
efforts  to  foster    innovative    enforcement
approaches,  including  environmental auditing
and  pollution prevention.   During  FY  1992,
almost   eighty   percent  of  all  pollution
prevention-oriented  SEPs  were  negotiated  as
part  of  EPCRA 323  administrative settlements.
During FY 1993, the TSCA program continued to
negotiate administrative  consent  orders  which
emphasized source reduction.

Briggs Aiiociates. Ing,:  A consent agreement and
order was signed on December 30,1992, concerning
Briggs Associates, Inc.'s alleged failure to conduct
adequate air clearance monitoring at numerous
asbestos  abatement response actions at various
local education agencies (public schools) in New
Hampshire.   The violations  were  alleged
pursuant to  Title II  (the  Asbestos Hazard
Emergency Response Act of 1986) of TSCA,

The settlement consists of a $34,000 cash penalty
payment plus a  supplemental environmental
project (SEP) valued at $23,800. The SEP required
Briggs Associates to offer free asbestos handling
training to employees of local education agencies.
The training sessions are to be conducted over a
twenty-four  month period beginning January 1,
1993, until the value of the training project as a
whole has  reached  at  least $23,800.   The
settlement also required Briggs to return to the
locations of violation to conduct the required
sampling.

In the Matter of Chemical Waste Management
Inc.:   On December 7,  1992, EPA executed a
settlement  of an  administrative enforcement
action initiated  in  1989  against CWM  for
violations of the  TSCA regulations governing
disposal  of PCBs.  The complaint alleged that
CWM operated a mobile PCB disposal unit that
had an incorporated heating unit  which had not
been approved by EPA.  Use of the unit with the
heater  resulted   in  disposal  of  PCBs  at
temperatures greater than those specified in the
EPA Approval.  CWM has agreed to pay a cash
penalty of $300,000 and to expend $730,000 on two
supplemental environmental projects. CWM will
purchase an emergency response vehicle and other
related equipment for Niagara County, New York
and will train local volunteers in their use. The
vehicle and equipment were to be donated to
Niagara County, a county with heavy chemical
transportation  and  major  hazardous waste
facilities.   CWM has  also  developed  and
implemented a household hazardous waste
collection and disposal project in Niagara County,
which includes outreach programs to apprise the
community as to the  nature of household
hazardous wastes.

Ciba-Gelgy: The Environmental Appeals Board
approved a consent  agreement between Ciba-
Geigy and  EPA.   Pursuant to this agreement,
Clba-Geigy conceded  to EPA's conclusions of law
and fact as alleged in the complaint and agreed to
pay a cash penalty  of $62,000 and perform  a
TSCA §5 audit  to ensure compliance with EPA
regulations. The stipulated penalties resulting
from  this  voluntary audit  are capped at $1
million.  This case was  part  of the TSCA §5
initiative  filed between December 17-18,1992.

Cressona Aluminum Company;  In FY 1993,  a
judicial consent decree was  entered into under
TSCA. This decree was an innovative solution
which addressed the  improper use, storage, and
disposal  of PCBs  at the Cressona Aluminum
Company.  As part of  the decree, Cressona is
required  to remediate the PCB contamination at
the 115  acre  facility.   All plant equipment,
including  the  hydraulic  and  wastewater
treatment systems, will be decontaminated, the
concrete floors will be removed where necessary,
and the  plant outfalls will undergo a toxics'
reduction evaluation  to eliminate the discharge
of PCBs into the Schuylkill River.

Dow Corning:    Dow  Corning, of  Midland
Michigan, agreed to pay a penalty of $46,000 and
perform a SEP in settlement of a TSCA §5 PMN
and TSCA §13 case.  EPA  filed a  complaint
against the company  in 1992 for $172,000.  The
Agency provided a 50% reduction in the proposed
penalty for timely and voluntary disclosure of the
violation; 15%  for good attitude  and  a  15%
reduction for the SEP.   The SEP involves  the
installation of a spill control measure which
involves  a  skimmer  attached  to the  pipe that
leads  to  one of the  outfalls in  the  Carrol ton
plant's NPDES permit which in turn leads from
this plant  to  the Ohio  River.  Dow Corning
certified that the project would cost a minimum of
                                            3-54

-------
                         FY1993 Enforcement Accomplishments Report
$500,000 and the project would capture spills of
chlorosilanes or silicones. Dow Corning will begin
the construction of the project within one month of
the effective date of the agreement,

In re: General Electric Company: On November 9,
1992, EPA filed a  consent agreement and final
order  (CAFO)   in  settlement  of  EPA's
administrative action  against General Electric
Company, GE Aircraft  Engines. Pursuant to the
CAFO, GE must pay,  after offset in  consideration
of  its  having spent over  $272,750  .on  a
supplemental • environmental  project, a  $1,000
civil penalty and maintain compliance with the
requirements of TSCA.

Region  V filed a complaint on August 18, 1989,
alleging in  two counts that GE  had  violated
TSCA's PCB requirements, 40 C.F.R. §§ 761.20(a)
and 761.40(a)(7),  by failing  to reduce  the PCB
concentration in  its  Building  703 Cell Five
hydraulic test stand to less that  50 parts per
million by July 1,1984;  by failing to mark the test
stand;  and  by   improperly using  a PCB
contaminated oil/water separator and drainage
collection system. After EPA filed its complaint,
GE investigated other  areas of the facility and
found extensive PCB contamination of, among
other things, compressor systems and piping. As a
result of this discovery, GE is completing a
comprehensive cleanup of PCB contamination at
its  Evendale, Ohio, facility at a cost exceeding
$5,000,000.

In addition  to the above  mentioned corrective
action, GE has undertaken  an extensive pollution
prevention supplemental environmental project.
Specifically, GE has removed several  score of
PCB transformers not required by law. While GE
could legally continue to use these  transformers,
removal significantly reduces   the  risk  of
accidental discharge of PCBs to the environment.

Hall-Kimbrell Environmental  Services Inc.:
Since February 1990, EPA Regions II, V, VII, VIII,
and IV  filed more than 20 civil administrative
penalty  actions against this Lawrence, Kansas,
company for violations of the requirements of the
Asbestos Hazard Emergency Response  Act
(AHERA) and its implementing regulations. The
violations  most   often  cited against  Hall-
Kimbrell, one of the nation's largest asbestos
consulting services, consisted  of the failure to
identify all materials suspected of being asbestos-
containing during Hall-KimbreH's inspections of
primary and  secondary schools  pursuant to
AHERA.  Other alleged violations included the
failure to properly prepare asbestos management
plans, also required by AHERA, for certain school
districts in Regions V and IX.

All of these cases  against Hall-Kimbrell  have
been  settled  in the  past  year.  In  total, the
settlement of these 20 cases included $445,000 in
penalties. Prior to settlement, Hall-Kimbrell
provided EPA with documentation that it had
already spent more than $5,000,000 during the
course of  negotiations to address problems with
asbestos inspection reports  and management
plans.  All of  the settlements  require  Hall-
Kimbrell  to  revisit schools  with  deficient
asbestos management plans.

Halocarbon Products Corporation:  This TSCA
administrative civil penalty action is one of the
few cases involving  alleged violations of the
substantial risk reporting requirements of §8(e) of
TSCA.  The case arose from  a chemical release
incident exposing two Halocarbon employees at
the company's Hackensack, New Jersey facility,
which resulted in one fatality.  The settlement
includes a payment of $60,000, and the conduct of
a  TSCA  §8
-------
                             FY1993 Enforcement Accomplishments Report
administrative complaint  issued in December
1990 against the Housing Authority of the City of
New Haven, a  federally funded  low-income
housing provider.   The  complaint  alleged
violations   of   regulations   governing
polychlorinated  biphenyls (PCBs) uncovered
during an inspection,  in June,  1990, of an
unoccupied, seven-building, low-income housing
complex known  as the Elm  Haven Extension
Housing project in New Haven. Specifically, the
Housing Authority was cited by EPA for failing to
properly dispose of PCBs, failing  to  maintain
records concerning PCBs, and failing to properly
mark and store PCB transformers. The Elm Haven
complex was built in the 1950s and demolished in
1990.

The settlement requires the  Housing Authority, in
lieu  of  paying  a penalty, to spend at  least
$112,000 on an environmental compliance program
designed to protect public housing residents from
future environmental  risks  through better
identification and reporting  of  potentially
hazardous conditions involving pollutants such as
PCBs, asbestos,  pesticides,  and rodenticides.
Specifically, the settlement requires the Housing
Authority to hire an environmental consultant to
train Housing Authority personnel at all levels in
recognizing  and reporting environmental
problems, as well as to perform an environmental
audit of all 32 Housing Authority properties.
This sort of settlement, known as a supplemental
environmental project, permits those targeted for
EPA enforcement to offset penalty payments with
environmentally  beneficial expenditures  not
required by law.

This settlement evidences  EPA's commitment to
principles  of environmental justice and  reduces
the  environmental risks to the  low-income
tenants.  Because of the age and  condition of
available housing stock, such tenants arguably
face potential hazards from pollutants commonly
associated with such housing such as asbestos,
lead paint, pesticides and rodenticides.

Kennecott Utah Copper (Utah).: On  November 3,
1992, Kennecott Utah Copper and the EPA agreed
to settle a complaint issued by the Agency on
December  30, 1991, for  violations  of TSCA,
CERCLA,  and EPCRA in  the proposed penalty
amounts of $1,129,000, $22,500, and $269,850
respectively,  for  a  total  proposed penalty of
$1,421,350. The  respondent agreed to a cash
payment of $480,000 and to purchase an upgraded
emergency computer system valued at $70,000 for
the Salt Lake County Local Emergency Planning
Committee.  As a  part of the settlement, the
respondent agreed to remove and properly dispose
of all transformers containing fluids  with PCB
concentrations of 50 ppm or more. A significant
cash payment  was insisted upon by the EPA to
emphasize the seriousness of the violations. This
complaint corresponds to an instance of the
ubiquity of PCB use by the mining industry. The
nationwide use of PCBs in the mining industry and
the need for regulation has been a concern for some
time.

Lonza, tec^ A consent agreement and consent order
(CACO) was approved  by the Environmental
Appeals Board on August 5,1993 in which Lonza,
Inc. (Lonza), agreed to pay a civil administrative
penalty of $240,640 for violations of §5 and P of
TSCA. In 1988, Lonza self-disclosed that it had,
on two occasions, manufactured for commercial
purposes a potentially new chemical  substance
without submitting a prernanufacturing notice
(PMN) to EPA.  In 1990, Lonza self-disclosed
eighty (80)  errors including 13 nonreportihg
violations, 6 under-reporting violations, and  61
over-reporting violations in the original Forms U
submitted to  the EPA pursuant to the TSCA
Inventory Update Rule (IUR).

In rg; Mi|sui & Company (U.S.A.). Inc., {Houston,
Texas);  A CACO under TSCA was signed on June
15, 1993, assessing a $58,500 civil penalty against
Mitsui & Company. The CACO concluded an EPA
Region VI enforcement action against  Mitsui for
failing to submit to EPA by February 12, 1987,
Preliminary Assessment Information Reports
(PAIR) for two imported chemicals, as required  by
§8(a)  of TSCA. A PAIR is required for chemical
manufacturers and processors to report production,
use, and exposure-related information on  listed
chemical substances.

PPG IndustriesJnc^:  On January 14, 1993, EPA's
Environmental Appeals Board issued a consent
order settling  the Agency's civil administrative
enforcement action against PPG Industries, Mazer
Chemicals Division,  of Gurnee,  Illinois.  PPG-
Mazer  was  charged  with  failure  to file
premanufacturing notices  (PMNs) 90 days before
commercial  manufacture of five new chemical
substances, and late submission of TSCA Inventory
Update Reports for fourteen chemical substances,
                                            3-56

-------
                         FY1993 Enforcement Accomplishments Report
in violation of TSCA.  The order requires PPG-
Mazer to pay a civil penalty of $359,550.

In the Matter of^JPuerto  Rico Department of
Health, et aL: On August 27,1993, EPA issued an
administrative consent order requiring the Puerto
Rico Department of Health to  pay  a penalty of
$49,920. The order also includes a supplemental
enforcement project, requiring the respondent to
certify that it has retrofilled and reclassified its
four PCB transformers to  non-PCB status;  this
work is estimated to cost approximately $142368.
The  order settles a September 1991 complaint
which alleged that the Health Department  and
the Arecibo Community Health Care Center  had
not timely registered its PCB transformers with
appropriate fire response personnel; did not have
records of inspection and maintenance history for
four of its transformers; had  not begun cleanup of a
leaking transformer within  48 hours of discovery;
and  did not have  annual documents for  trie
disposition of its PCBs and  PCB items for a
specified period.   The Arecibo Health Care
Center filed a motion to dismiss the complaint
against it and,later, for reconsideration of the
ALJ's adverse ruling. Both motions  were denied.
Puerto  Rico filed  a motion  to  dismiss  the
complaint and the motion also was denied.

Sanncog Industries. Inc.:    In  this TSCA
administrative action, the failure by Sanncor's
Leominster, Massachusetts, facility  to submit
TSCA §5 premanufacture  notifications (PMNs)
and a TSCA §8(b) notice of commencement (NOC)
was alleged. The consent agreement and consent
order settling this case requires payment of a
$211,050 penalty, a  TSCA  compliance audit by
Sanncor with stipulated  penalty provisions,  and
the development and implementation  of SEPs
consisting of isocyanate and hydrazine closed-
loop  storage and delivery  systems.   The
isocyanate and hydrazine closed-loop storage  and
delivery systems  will substantially reduce
atmospheric emissions, employee exposure  and
handling, and potential spillage of  isocyanate
and hydrazine used by Sanncor, and eliminate the
isocyanate/hydrazine-contaminated rinse water
generated from cleaning the transport/storage
drums which otherwise  must be disposed of as
hazardous  waste.  These SEPs   will cost
approximately $240,000,  and  are  due to  be
completed in December 1994.
Sika Inc.:  Sika Inc.  of Lyndhurst, New Jersey,
settled  this  TSCA  §5  administrative civil
penalty action  for $1,120,700.  Sika imported
chemicals from  Europe that were not registered
with the TSCA Inventory of Chemical Substances
in violation of TSCA. In the CACO executed by
the Environmental Appeals Board, Sika agreed
that it violated  TSCA and is  liable for the  full
penalty proposed in the complaint of $6,500,000.
Due to Sika's demonstrated inability to pay the
full proposed  penalty, and remain in business, EPA
agreed to  a  reduced  payment of $1,120,700
following an exhaustive analysis of financial
records.  This settlement amount is one of the
largest penalties ever collected under TSCA §5,
which requires chemical manufacturers to notify
EPA prior to manufacturing a new chemical.

Texas Eastern  Consent Decree:    The first
modification of the Texas Eastern consent decree
was finalized and submitted to the U.S. District
Court in Houston in June 1993. Negotiations on the
second modification to the Texas Eastern decree
regarding the integration of  the  Pennsylvania
Agreement with the  federal decree are nearing
completion.  The intent of the modification is to
harmonize  the existing  state  and  federal
agreements into one comprehensive agreement. To
date,  17 of  the 49 Texas Eastern sites have been
characterized  and remediated  under the consent
decree for PCBs and other hazardous substances.
The period of performance of the consent decree,
estimated to cost more than $750,000,000, is from
1989 to 1999.

3M Company v. EPA  (U.S. Court of Appeals for
the D.C. Circuit):  On March 4,1994 the Court of
Appeals  held that  the 5-year  federal statute of
limitations does apply to TSCA penalty actions.
In 1988, EPA  had assessed a  $1.3 million fine
against 3M for importing two  new  chemical
substances between 1980  and  1986  without
submitting  a  premanufacture notice  (PMN) as
required  by §5  of TSCA.  After a hearing,  the
Administrative  Law Judge (ALJ) reduced  the
penalty to $104,700.  EPA appealed the penalty
reduction on  the ground that the ALJ  had  not
properly  applied EPA's TSCA §5 enforcement
response  policy. During the appeal, 3M argued
that the ALJ  erred in narrowly construing  the
general statute of limitations as not applicable to
an administrative action for the assessment of a
                                            3-57

-------
mf
  <*
-------
                        FY1993 Enforcement Accomplishments Report
accidents.    In  addition, facilities must report
accidental  releases,  of  "extremely  hazardous
substances" and CERCLA "hazardous  substances"
to state and local response officials, and report to
state and  local officials inventories of chemicals
on  their  premises for which  Material Safety
Data sheets exist,
pp Qi | Refinery (Ferndale, Wa.): EPA contended
that BP Oil had failed  to provide immediate
notification of releases of reportable quantities of
sulfur dioxide in 1992 to the State Emergency
Response  Commission (SERC) and to the Local
Emergency Planning Committee  (LEPC)  in
violation of §304 of EPCRA. A resulting consent
agreement and consent order assessed $162,000,
one of the largest EPCRA §302-312  penalties ever
collected.

Catano  Region of Puerto R|CJ>: On  February 24,
1993, Region II filed administrative  complaints
charging  four  Puerto  Rico companies  with
failing    to   submit   hazardous   chemical
information  to  the Commonwealth  and  local
planning and emergency  response  organizations,
in  accordance with §311 and 312 of  EPCRA.
Region  11 is  seeking $980,220 in total penalties
for the violations.   These complaints are part
of EPA's  multi-media environmental initiative
in the Catano region of Puerto Rico.

\r\ ftp Matter of Crown Metals. Inc.:  An EPA
administrative  law  judge  issued an Initial
Decision  in this case  involving three separate
violations of  §313  of  EPCRA.  The complaint
alleged that respondents had failed to timely
submit its EPCRA Forms R for three chemicals it
had used  at its Kenilworth, New Jersey facility.
A hearing was held in October  1989,  during
which, pursuant to EPA's oral motion, the judge
entered a  finding of partial liability for reporting
failures. The hearing then focused entirely upon
the amount of an appropriate penalty.

EPA sought  $5,000  for  each  violation.   An
administrative law judge ordered respondent to
pay $1,500 altogether, $500 per violation. The
judge's decision was based upon a series of earlier
decisions  that similarly  had  rejected  the
reasoning in EPA's  December 2,  1988 penalty
policy,  Respondent had  filed the Forms on
September 15, 1988.  Under the 1988 policy, a Form
R submitted after the July 1st deadline and which
is also  submitted  after EPA has contacted the
facility is nonetheless  considered a "failure  to
report" for purposes of assessing a penalty.  As
had several  other, administrative law judges,
this judge refused to enforce this provision. The
judge's reasoning parallels that of the other ALJs:
the size of the penalty should be proportionate to
the extent of the delay in providing the report,
regardless of whether or not there has been
intervening EPA contact with the facility.
Since the reports in question here were ten weeks
late, the judge assessed the figure that the 1988
penalty policy matrix  assigns for such reports
where no EPA contact with  the facility has
occurred.  In addition, the judge emphasized that,
at  the time  of  Crown Metal's  violation,  the
EPCRA program had just been initiated and that
respondent had undertaken "significant efforts to
determine its own responsibilities  under the new
program".

Enforcement Initiatives: In June 1993, the ten EPA
Regions issued civil administrative complaints
seeking   $2.8  million  against  thirty-seven
facilities for failures to file Form Rs under § 313
of EPCRA.  The facilities cited include a wide
variety   of   industries,  including  paper
manufacturers,  motor vehicle manufacturers,
makers  of railroad  equipment,  makers  of
ammunition, and many others.  Region V issued
eleven administrative complaints as part of the
initiative, with total proposed penalties of over
$1 million.   EPCRA §313 established the Toxics
Release  Inventory  and  requires certain U.S.
facilities to report by each July  1 their releases
and transfers of almost 400 listed toxic chemicals.
In addition, under the  Pollution Prevention Act,
those facilities  must  include in  their reports
certain  toxic  chemical source  reduction and
recycling  activities.
Fujitsu America. fo<;t. (Hillsboro, Oregon): Fujitsu
America is a manufacturer of computer equipment.
The company was inspected for compliance with
TRI requirements  in September  1992.  The
inspection  documented that the company had
failed to file Reporting Form R for the chemical
Freon 113 for five years from 1987 to 1991. The
company  was  issued   an  Administrative
Complaint with a proposed penalty of $77,375.

The company  was given a 25% reduction in
penalty in  consideration  of  its  cooperative
attitude and the  rapid nature in which it came
into compliance. A CACO was signed on August 2,
                                             3-59

-------
                            FY1993 Enforcement Accomplishments Report
 1993, which obligated the company to pay a final
 assessed penalty of $58,031

.Genicom Corporation:  The   Environmental
 Hearing Board affirmed  Administrative Law
 Judge  Harwood's decision to assess $74,812 in
 administrative penalties  against Genicom
 Corporation in Waynesboro, VA  for its failure to
 immediately report two releases of cyanide to the
 authorities designated pursuant to §304 of EPCRA
 and §103 of CERCLA, The Board determined that
 use of the EPCRA/CERCLA penalty policy was
 appropriate and that EPA properly applied that
 policy.

 The Board, expressly rejecting Genicom's appeal,
 ruled that the §304 (a) .EPCRA requirement does
 not require that actual exposure to harmful levels
 of a hazardous substance must be shown to
 establish an EPCRA reporting violation.  "Under
 EPCRA §304 (a), once a facility owner or operator
 has  knowledge of a  release of a reportable
 quantity of  a  hazardous substance from the
 facility, the obligation to notify  is triggered
 without further consideration  of  risk."   This
 overturns an Order on Motion in Holly Farms. Inc.
 in which the ALJ found that §304 (a) of EPCRA
 requires some exposure to humans.

 The Board  also confirmed that each  release
 carries its own  reporting obligation, and §103 of
 CERCLA and §304  of EPCRA relate to the failure
 to notify, not the  failure  to prevent a second
 occurrence.

 The Board never reached the issue of  whether
 notification to the  State Water Control Board, as
 a member  of the  Virginia Emergency Response
 Commission, could be imputed to satisfy the §304
 EPCRA reporting.  The Board concluded that the
 Region properly objected,  in a Motion to Strike,
 pursuant to 40 CF.R. § 22.30 (c), that this  issue
 had not previously been raised in the proceedings.

 Geneva Steel Company: On August 18,  1993,
 Geneva Steel Company of Orem, Utah and the
 EPA reached a consent agreement resolving all
 issues  arising under an administrative complaint
 for violations  of  EPCRA. The  complaint and
 consent agreement were filed simultaneously. The
 respondent agreed to a penalty of $82,600. The
 EPCRA violations dealt with  the failure of
 Geneva Steel to file Form Rs for five §313 toxic
 chemicals, and  the failure of Geneva  Steel to
adequately notify customers of the presence of
toxic  chemicals above  de minimis  levels  in
mixtures and trade name products supplied to the
customers.

Golden Foods/Golden Brands;  On December 15,
1992,  EPA approved a consent agreement and
consent order (CACO) entered into by EPA and
Golden Foods/Golden Brands in settlement of
three   administrative complaints issued  for
violations of EPCRA §311, 312, and  313.  The
initial complaint included violations of §103 of
CERCLA and §304 of EPCRA for failure to report
a release of sulfuric acid. The CACO provided for
payment of a civil penalty of $50,000 in addition
to several supplemental  environmental projects
(SEPs).

The SEPs included the donation of $90,000 to the
Local  Emergency Planning Committee (LEPC) for
a Hazmat truck and the expenditure of $120,000
on  a  project  to install  of a clarifier  at  the
respondent's facility.   The  purchase  of  the
Hazmat truck  was a  result  of the Region's
coordination with the LEPC. The installation of
the clarifier is intended to reduce loading to the
Metropolitan  Sewer  District  to which  the
respondents presently discharge,

fa re; J.W. Harris Company. Inc.: On October 21,
1992, a consent order resolved an administrative
complaint against J.W. Harris Company, Inc. of
Cincinnati, Ohio. The order requires the company
to correct its  past violations of EPCRA and
maintain  compliance, to pay a  civil  penalty
$10,950, and to  expend  $180,000 to modify its
industrial processes. EPA estimates that these
modifications will reduce the company's total
metal fume and partkulate matter emissions for
silver by 713 Ibs/yr, for copper by 1392 Ibs/yr, for
antimony by 55 Ibs/yr, for zinc (fume) by 5,847
Ibs/yr, and for nickel by 15 Ibs/yr.

The Agency's action in this matter had begun on
December 4, 1991, with a complaint against J.W.
Harris Company for its failure to file  timely the
required Toxic  Chemical  Release  Inventory
Reporting Form, for its use of copper and silver at
its facility in calendar years 1987 and 1988, and
for its use of antimony and lead at its facility in
calendar year 1988, in violation of EPCRA §313.

In re. Inland Steel: On December 30,1992, Region
V settled its  EPCRA  administrative action
                                            3-60

-------
                        FY1993 Enforcement Accomplishments Report
against Inland  Steel of East Chicago, Indiana.
Pursuant to a CAFO, Inland must pay, after offset
in consideration of its having spent $165,000 on a
supplemental environmental project, a $100,000
civil penalty and maintain compliance with the
requirements of EPCRA.

EPA's  action  in this  matter  had begun  on
December  16, 1988, when the Region  filed a
complaint alleging in 33 counts that Inland had
violated EPCRA §313 by failing to  file Form Rs
by July 1, 1988, for its releases of toxic materials
during 1987.

The supplemental environmental project Inland
agreed to implement will reduce Inland's use of
percloroethylene, a  toxic chemical, by about
200,000 pounds per year.  The SEP  involves
modifying a parts cleaning process and replacing
percloroethylene with a non-toxic cleaning agent

Kemira. Incorporated'   On November 25, 1992,
EPA issued a CACO concluding an administrative
action  against  Kemira,  Inc.  (Kemira),  of
Savannah,  Georgia, to settle Title  III  CERCLA
and  EPCRA violations pending  against  the
company.  An administrative complaint was filed
against the company, a manufacturer of titanium
oxide for white paint production, for violations of
§§103 and 109 of CERCLA and §§304,311,312, and
325 of EPCRA. The complaint charged Kemira for
failure to notify and or provide a written follow-
up notice following a June 25, 1989, release of
sulfur dioxide  that exceeded the reportable
quantity  for sulfur dioxide; for failure to notify
the National Response Commission following
nine separate releases of sulfuric acid over the
1,000 pound reportable quantity limit; and for
failure to submit material safety data  sheets as
well as  Georgia Emergency  and Hazardous
Chemical Inventory Forms for propane and
Number 2 fuel.

Kemira agreed  to  a  $25,000  penalty and  to
perform two supplemental environmental projects.
The major SEP  is a pollution prevention project
that should result in an average net reduction of
approximately 135 pounds of sulfur dioxide per
hour  from  Kemira's  Savannah  facility.   This
involves  the installation of a $1.4 million sulfur
dioxide scrubber system in its Savannah facility's
calciner system.   In addition, Kemira agreed to
make a $100,000 cash contribution to the Georgia
State Emergency Response Commission  for the
purpose of establishing a Chatham County Local
Emergency Planning Committee,

In re; Eli Lilly & Company: On October 28,1992,
EPA signed a consent agreement and final order in
settlement of  the an  administrative  action
against Eli Lilly & Company's Clinton, Indiana,
facility.  The company has  agreed to  pay a
penalty  of $99,025  for violations of EPCRA
§304(a) and (c) and CERCLA §103(a).

Region V had filed its complaint on June 9, 1992
alleging that Lilly's July 10, 1991 notifications of
its July 5, 1991  release  of an estimated 21,516
pounds of dichloromethane was not "immediate"
under either CERCLA §103(a), which contains a
knowledge requirement, or  EPCRA §304, which
does  not. The  complaint further  alleged that
Lilly's EPCRA  §304(c) follow-up notifications,
submitted between one week and three months
after  the  release,  were  not  "as  soon  as
practicable." It is extremely important in EPCRA
enforcement to litigate the issue  of immediate
notification, as the purpose of law is to provide
for immediate response, if necessary.

In the Matter of Mobil Oil Corp.:  On August 13,
1993, Region II executed consent orders resolving
nearly   all   counts  contained   in   three
administrative complaints issued against Mobil
for violations of EPCRA §304 and CERCLA §103
at its  Paulsboro, N.J. facility. The orders provide
for payment of penalties totaling  $35,000.  One
remaining count  could  not be  settled.   An
adjudicatory hearing was held, also in August,
1993,  on both  liability and  penalty issues with
respect to that count; a decision is pending.

The settlements arose out of Region II's successful
Motion  for Partial Accelerated Decision in the
three  cases, which EPA  Chief  Administrative
Law Judge Frazier, granted without qualification
on September 30, 1992.  That motion addressed
two legal questions:  (!) what is  a "federally
permitted release," and (2) what is "immediate"
notification  to  the National Response  Center
("NRC") pursuant to §103(a) of CERCLA.

What constitutes  a "federally permitted"  air
release was an issue of first impression.   Mobil
argued  that so  long as  a  facility has  an air
emissions permit,  the EPCRA  and  CERCLA
reporting requirements do not apply to it, even
where the air release  exceeds  the  quantity
                                            3-61

-------
                            fY /99J Enforcement Accomplishments Report
authorized by a permit  This argument was based
on the use of different statutory  language to
define federally permitted  air releases,  as
opposed  to federally  permitted releases into
other media.  While the statute exempts air
releases that  are "subject to" a permit or control
regulation, the statute exempts releases regulated
by other federal regulatory programs, such as the
Clean Water Act and the Solid Waste Disposal
Act,  only where the subject releases are "in
compliance  with" permits or control regulations.
EPA   attempted  to  clarify  this  apparent
ambiguity by issuing a  1988 Notice of Proposed
Rulemaking  ("NPRM")  which  explicitly
addressed this issue. The NPRM however, does
not have  the force of law, and Mobil accordingly
challenged  EPA's interpretation.  Judge Frazier
dedicated  31 pages of  his decision to  the
federally permitted release issue and found EPA's
interpretation to be eminently reasonable and
consistent with the purposes of both CERCLA and
EPCRA.   He stated "I find  the validity and
persuasiveness  of  EPA's  reasoning  to  be
unassailable".

On the issue of whether Mobil had  immediately
notified the NRC, Judge Frazier found that Mobil
delayed  approximately 26 hours  where the
statute  unambiguously  requires  immediate
notification..  On   this count  Judge  Frazier
concluded that Mobil "did not even come close to
meeting [the immediacy] requirement under the
circumstances presented in this case".

Philadelphia  Newspapers, Inc. (PNI); A consent
agreement and consent order (CACO) was signed
July  15,  1993,   concerning  Philadelphia
Newspapers, Inc. (PNI),  resolving claims that
the company  failed to report the presence of
hazardous substances at its production  facil ities
as required by  §312 of EPCRA.  The CACO
imposes a fine of  $67,500 on PNI for neglecting to
prepare or submit  emergency and hazardous
chemical inventory forms to state  and  local
environmental and  public safety  authorities for
1989,1990 and 1991.  PNI self-confessed to EPA.

PNI, publisher of The Philadelphia Inquirer and
The^PhiladelphiaDaily  News,  maintains
supplies of gasoline, diesel fuel and oil-based ink
at its main  plant  in Philadelphia.    These
materials are highly  flammable and  contain
hazardous  chemicals such  as the  carcinogens;
toluene, xylene, and  hexane. EPCRA requires the
owner or operator of a facility where these
materials are stored to submit an inventory form
to the state emergency response commission, the
local emergency planning committee, and  the
local fire department for emergency planning and
preparedness purposes. PNI has now submitted
emergency and hazardous  chemical inventory
forms for 1989,  1990, and  1991  to  the  proper
authorities.

In the Matter of San Antonio Shoe. Inc.. (Conway,
Ark.): In an Interlocutory Order issued on March
18,1993, Chief Administrative Law Judge Frazier
ruled on a controversial issue in the EPCRA §313
program. Section 313 requires the reporting of the
releases  of certain chemicals for  the Toxics
Release  Inventory,  The issue was  whether  a
facility has violated the §313 requirements and
should  be penalized  when the facility's best
information, at the time the Form R was required
to be submitted to EPA, indicated that it was not
required to report for the chemical, although the
facility later received clear information showing
that it should have reported. San Antonio Shoe
admitted that.it  did know that acetone was in
the product, but claimed that it  did not know the
percentage of acetone. EPA argued that because of
this  knowledge, San  Antonio Shoe knew,  or
should  have  known,  that  the acetone in  the
product was "otherwise used", and  thus had  a
duty  to  make  an  investigation  about  the
percentage of acetone in the product. San Antonio
Shoe claimed to have received  a Material Safety
Data Sheet (MSDS) showing the acetone content
of the product being used only after the 1988 Form
R was required to be filed but before the 1989 Form
R was due. The judge ruled that after receipt of
the MSDS, San  Antonio Shoe was liable  for
penalties.  The judge found, however, that  San
Antonio Shoe  was not liable for penalties with
respect to similar failures to report for 1987 and
1988 for the same substance, and he dismissed the
complaint with respect to these allegations.  In
dismissing those violations, Judge Frazier noted
that San Antonio Shoe did not  have  information
indicating that it  was required to report for
acetone for 1987 and 1988 until "long after" the
Forms R  were  due.   He  held, "there is no
requirement  in  the  EPA regulations  that
facilities,  which  acquire  the  necessary
information described in §372.30(b){3)(iii) after
the  due  date  of  a  Form  R,  retroactively
recalculate its  releases to include the additional
amounts of a toxic chemical that may have been
                                            3-62

-------
                        FY1993 Enforcement Accomplishments Report
contained  in  a  trade name product."   In the
complaint, EPA  had  alleged that San Antonio
Shoe  knew  or  should  have  known  the
concentration of the acetone being used.

Sara Lee Corporation:  On September 29, 1993,
EPA Headquarters issued a civil  administrative
complaint against the Sara Lee Corporation for
self-disclosed violations of EPCRA § 304, EPCRA
§ 313, and CERCLA § 103.  On the same day, Sara
Lee and EPA signed a consent agreement which, if
approved by the Environmental Appeals Board,
will settle the case for a penalty of $118,830 and
the conduct of a corporate-wide compliance audit.
The self-disclosed violations occurred at three
different Sara Lee food facilities: one in  Forest,
Mississippi, one  in Fort Worth, Texas, and one in
New London, Wisconsin. The violations included
failure  by  the Mississippi facility to report an
emergency release of ammonia to the National
Response Center and to  file written follow-up
notification of that  release to state and  local
authorities; failure by the same facility to  submit
Toxic Release Inventory  forms (Form  Rs) for
ammonia; and failure by the Wisconsin and Texas
facilities to submit Form Rs for ammonia, sulfuric
acid, and  hydrochloric  acid.  The complaint
contained fifteen counts and sought a penalty of
$139,800;  that amount included  the maximum
allowable reductions  for voluntary disclosure
under the EPCRA and CERCLA penalty policies.

In the  agreement, Sara  Lee  has agreed  to  a
supplemental  environmental project  in which  it
will audit over 140 of its manufacturing and food
service distribution facilities for compliance with
all provisions of EPCRA and §103 of CERCLA,
and  pay  stipulated  penalties  for violations
detected.  The stipulated penalties range from
$8,000 for violations  of EPCRA §§311 and 312 to
$20,000 for  violations of EPCRA §304 and
CERCLA  §103.   The final adjusted $118,830
penalty includes a fifteen-percent reduction in
recognition of Sara Lee's agreement to conduct the
compliance audit. This case is the first issued by
Headquarters  under  EPCRA §313 or CERCLA§
103.  The Agency hopes to  use the settlement as a
model to encourage voluntary disclosures  of
violations by other corporations.


Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, &
Rodendcide Act (FIFRA) Enforcement
        States .  have   primary  enforcement
authority  under  the    Federal    Insecticide,
Fungicide,   and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA). EPA
issues  national  guidance  establishing  national
enforcement priorities  and activities  which are
implemented by  the states and  overseen by EPA
regional offices.

        The program   emphasizes  protection of
the public  from pesticides. Priority attention is
given  to  ensuring  compliance with  the  new
farmworker   protection    regulations    (e.g.,
specifications on times that fields must not be
entered  without  protective equipment    and
clothing). These  requirements   require  relabeling
for  more  than  8,000  commercial  products.
Enforcement of  relabeling requirements  and,
ultimately, use  restrictions  is  being phased in
over a  two-year period beginning in FY 1993.
Training  seminars for states and  technical
assistance  for public  and private groups  was
included in this effort.

        Anti-microbials  (chemicals  that  kill
viruses  or bacteria,  including those  used in
hospitals)  must  be registered  with  EPA under
FIFRA  EPA has initiated a program to  test all
registered  sterilant  and  disinfectant  products
through  EPA and Food and Drug Administration
(FDA)  laboratories. Enforcement efforts  against
violators of registration  requirements continued
throughout FY 1993. The program also  continued
to emphasize enforcement of major  cancellation
and suspension  violations; changes  in a  pesticide
product's classification  or labeling  to restrict its
sale,  distribution,  and/or use;  and  FIFRA
§B(c)(2)(B)  suspensions.
        As  part  of the FY  1993 national  Data
Quality  Initiative,   the   program  targeted
inspections,  tracked  compliance  with  data
submission requirements,  and  continued  to
emphasize  inspections  of  registrants   and
contract laboratories  under the  Good Laboratory
Practices  (CLP)   enforcement    program   to
identify noncompliance with   established  lab
practices.  Pesticide  testing  studies submitted in
support  of  product  registrations  also  are
evaluated as are adverse effects data submitted
under FIFRA § 6(a)(2).

Anti-microbial Initiative

        In  FY 1993, the Agency continued the
aggressive  implementation of the anti-microbial
                                            3-63

-------
                              FY1993 Enforcement Accomplishments Report
enforcement  strategy  through  issuance  of civil
.administrative   complaints   against   major
producers  of  ineffective  sterilant  products,
including  Sporocidin  International   (proposed
administrative  civil  penalty  of  $450,000)  and
Healthcare  P^mAncts  of  Canada   (proposed
administrative   civil  penalty  of  $200,000).
Under the authority of FIFRA, EPA is working to
ensure  that  registered disinfectant products are
safe and  effective.   In the  past four  years, the
agency  has done much to  evaluate the efficacy of
hospital and medical  office sterilant products to
ensure  that  they  kill life  threatening  bacteria
and viruses, including tuberculosis. Hepatitis  B
and HIV.    FIFRA  requires that, such products
that  kill   microorganisms  be   registered  as
"pesticides"  and  that  data  be  submitted to
demonstrate  effectiveness.

        In 1991, the Agency filed  the first of a
series  of  cases  against  ineffective hospital  and
medical  office-grade  disinfectants   including
Sporocidin International^   Sporocidin  is  most
notable   in  that   it  fulfilled  an   Agency
commitment  made  to  Congress  to  investigate the
disinfectant product  industry.   The  Sporocidin
case  is further  noteworthy  in   that  it  was
effectively coordinated with  the  Department of
Justice, Food & Drug Administration (products
failed   to  sterilize  medical  devices,  such  as
kidney  dialysis  equipment) and  Federal  Trade
Commission,  (false and   misleading  advertising
claims) which,  also took enforcement  or seizure
actions against  the company and its products.  A
settlement was  reached  with  Sporocidin  which
included payment of an $86,000 civil penalty and
cancellation of the product's registration.

Bulk Repackaging Initiative

         In  its  ongoing   efforts  to prevent the
distribution  and sale  of  contaminated pesticides,
Region  VII  continued  its  regional  initiative,
commenced during FY 1992, for enforcement of the
FIFRA  bulk  repackaging requirements. During FY
1993,  the  Region filed 12 additional cases which
name   both  the  repackager  and  the  original
pesticide  registrant as Respondents jointly  liable
for the contamination of  repackaged pesticides.

         Two  of the  cases  have been  settled
 through payment in full of the penalty  proposed
 in  the  complaints  by   the  repackagers.  In
addition,   partial  consent agreements  have  been
reached in five cases  in which  the repackagers
have  paid total  cash penalties  of $6,900 and
have agreed  to the performance  of  SEPs  valued
at $343,990,  in  order  to  settle total  proposed
penalties of $25,000. The SEPs include conversion
to equipment  dedicated  to  sole  use for  bulk
repackaging  activities,  thereby  eliminating  the
possibility of  product  contamination,  and  the
installation  of enhanced  diking,  storage, and
loading   facilities,   which  minimizes   the
likelihood  of spills of  the  pesticides  into  the
environment.

Data Quality Initiative

       On April 16, 1993, EPA issued  seven civil
administrative  complaints  against  pesticide
registrants,  seeking a  total of  $223,000  in
penalties  for  violations of the  FIFRA  Good
Laboratory Practices Standards  (GLPs),  §8  of
FIFRA, and  § 6(a)(2)  of FIFRA.   Respondents
include Clarke Mosquito Control Products,  Inc.,
Riverdale Chemical Co., Rhane-Poulenc  Ag. Co.,
Wexford   Labs,  Inc.,   Roussel  Uclaf  Corp.,
Baehringer  Ingelheim,  and  Dupont.  EPA  also
issued  warning  letters  citing  FIFRA   GLP
violations   to  other   registrants   and   to
laboratories which  conducted studies  supporting
pesticide  registrations.     Recipients   include
Cosmopolitan  Safety  Evaluation,   Innovative
Scientific  Services,  CBC  Biotech  Laboratory,
P.A.C.E.   International, Abbott   Labs,   Plant
Sciences,  Ciba-Geigy,  Nichimen  America and
Stillmeadow Inc. Bio Test Laboratory.

        FIFRA §14  authorizes the  assessment of
a civil penalty of up to $5,000 per offense against
the registrant of a pesticide.   Other  persons, such
as  pesticide  testing, facilities,  must  receive  a
written warning  prior  to being  assessed a civil
penalty.    FIFRA  also  allows for a Notice of
Warning to  sponsors/registrants of studies for
minor violations, if such warning  is  determined
to  be adequate  to  serve  the  public  interest.
Failure  to  comply with EPA's GLPs and the
Pesticide    Adverse   Effects     Reporting
Requirements  hinders  EPA's   ability   to
adequately assess  the  risks posed  by pesticides
and  to   ensure  that  pesticides  do  not  pose
unreasonable  risks  to public  health  or  the
environment

Biotrol  InternationaL  Inc.: EPA  and Biotrol
International settled two existing cases involving
                                               3-64

-------
                        F71993 Enforcement Accomplishments Report
                                        1  «* \
                                        0*y
                                        ^4. __*SF
this pesticide producing establishment (1990 and
1992 civil complaints)  for a $21,000 penalty. A
third civil action was issued on September 30,
1993, against Biotrol  and Stepan  Company
(subregistrant and registrant) seeking $15,000 and
$5,000 respectively  for  making unsupported
claims for the disinfectant Vacusal.

Boehringer Ingelheim Anirnal Health^  |n,gt;
Boehringer  Ingelheim  agreed to settle a case
charging the pesticide registrant with four counts
of falsifying information submitted to EPA by
representing that a  study complied  with the
FIFRA  Good Laboratory  Practice Standards
(GLPS), when in fact  the study contained at least
four significant deviations from  the GLPS.
Boehringer Ingelheim moved to dismiss on the
grounds that because it only submitted a single
statement affirming compliance with  the GLPS,
there could only be one unlawful act and only a
single penalty assessed. EPA argued  vigorously
that Boehringer Ingelheim made four implicit
representations  of compliance with  particular
requirements of  the GLPS, which can be proven
false, and  that  each  of the  four  violations
independently affects the quality of data relied
upon by EPA. Boehringer Ingelheim agreed to
settle the case for 80% of the proposed penalty
rather  than  wait  for  a  decision by an
Administrative Law Judge.

Circle  of Poison and  Agricultural Pesticides:
Certain  pesticides exported from the  U. S. may
return to consumers as toxic residues in imported
food products.  Many of the fruits and vegetables
consumed annually are  produced outside the U.S.
borders.  EPA, with FDA  assistance,  imposes
permissible tolerances  for pesticide residues on
food products.  FDA is responsible for analyzing
imported food  while  EPA is responsible for
ensuring  that  any  exported pesticides meet
certain export requirements.  In the past, beef,
winter fruits, and even coffee have been found to
be contaminated  with toxic pesticides.

Existing pesticide export requirements include
bilingual  labeling  instructions  (to aid  in
providing appropriate foreign worker protection
and proper application; methods and allowable
crops) and foreign purchaser acknowledgements,
given to EPA and the nation of destination and
use. This helps to ensure that illegal or unwanted
pesticides  are   not  illegally exported or
improperly  used.  In the past two years, EPA
enforcement actions against exporters have
collected over $700,000 in fines, (see Shield-Sri te
case below)

Craven-Labs: On November 20,1992, EPA issued
Notices  of  Suspension   against   Craven
Laboratories, Inc., Don Craven, Edward Peterson,
Dale Harris, and Donald Hamerly, based on their
criminal indictments  for violations of the FIFRA
Good  Laboratory Practice  Standards.   The
laboratory and each individual are suspended
from all direct federal  procurement and from
participation in federal assistance, loan and
benefit  programs and activities.  Suspension is
temporary pending completion of investigation or
ensuing debarment proceedings.

E.I. Dupont de Nemours and Co.. Inc.. gi^k  A
CAFO  was  signed on April 27, 1993, assessing a
penalty of $97,200 for  sale/distribution of an
adulterated pesticide. The settlement represents
a partial resolution to a civil complaint issued in
1991 against  E.I. DuPont  de Nemours and
Company, Inc., et al, for sale/distribution of a
herbicide-contaminated fungicide, DuPont's
Benlate 50DF.

fn, K; Environmental Chemical Corporation: On
October. 16, 1992, EPA filed a consent agreement
and consent order resolving the enforcement action
brought  against  Environmental  Chemical
Corporation of Canton, Ohio. The action had been
initiated on September 30,  1991,  pursuant to
FIFRA  §14(a), when EPA filed  a complaint
alleging the company's failure  to register an
establishment, failure to report, and  misbranding.
Environmental Chemical is obligated to  maintain
future compliance with FIFRA and to pay a civil
penalty of $16,000.

In the_  Matter  of FPPF Chemical Co.. Inc.:  On
December 16,1992, EPA settled one  of its largest
FIFRA  misbranding cases. The FPPF Chemical
Co. Inc. of Buffalo, New York, agreed to pay a
civil penalty of $14,400 for violating FIFRA.
After receiving evidence regarding the sale in
North   Carolina  of a  diesel  fuel   product
manufactured by FPPF, the label of  which made
pesticidal claims, EPA obtained sales records
from FPPF  indicating additional  sales of the
product. EPA issued a complaint charging FPPF, a
manufacturer fuel propellants, with four counts of
distributing and selling an unregistered pesticide
in violation of  FIFRA § 12(a)(l)(A).
                                            3-65

-------
                            FY1993 Enforcement Accomplishments Report
U.S. v. Orkin. Inc,t  EPA assisted DOJ to bring a
probation revocation action against Orkin.Jnc. for
violating the terms of a court ordered probation.
The probation was part of the sentencing in a 1988
criminal case involving pesticide misuse in which
two  people died when a Galax, Virginia home
was improperly  fumigated  by Orkin.   A
probation-revocation hearing was held on June 1,
1993, in the  U.S.  District Court in  Roanoke,
resulting in the court finding Orkin had violated
the terms of its  probation and reinstating $35,000
of the  original  suspended penalty.  Orkin had
already paid  $350,000  in  penalties in the case
prior to this  probation-revocation action.  This
was  the first time a company, not a person, had
been placed on probation for a FIFRA violation
and  also the first  time a company was being
accused of violating the terms of its probation,

|n re Rek-Chem Manufacturing Corporation.
(Albuquerque, N.M.): After an  administrative
hearing on October 14-15, 1992, Administrative
Law Judge Frazier issued an  Initial Decision
dated May 10, 1993, finding Rek-Chem liable on
all four counts and assessed a civil penalty of
$12,996. EPA had issued a FIFRA administrative
complaint on March 22, 1989, alleging that Rek-
Chem Manufacturing Corporation violated §12 of
FIFRA on  four counts.   These  counts were:
distribution  of  an  unregistered  pesticide;
distribution of a misbranded pesticide (failure to
include an EPA Establishment Number on the
label);  failure  to submit required reports of
production or distribution data required under
§7(c) of FIFRA;  and  distribution of a misbranded
pesticide.  On August 2, 1993, the Environmental
Appeals Board  dismissed Rek-Chern's  appeal of
the decision since the appeal was filed  late.

Sporic|<|laTJ|tterij^tlonqI;     This case was
commenced December 13,1991 with the filing of a
civil administrative complaint and a  Stop Sale
Use and  Removal Order against a sterilant
product with  FDA laboratory  analysis had
shown to be ineffective. This was the first case
filed in the sterilant initiative.   The litigation of
the case was concluded  with  the signing of a
consent agreement in June 1993 and voluntarily
cancellation  of "Sporicidin  Cold Sterilizing
Solution."  An important ruling came out of the
litigation;  the judicial opinion  was that  the fact
that EPA and FDA  had followed an abbreviated
set of laboratory procedures other than the  the
full GLPs  did not mean "as a matter of  law  the
test results are unreliable and may not be used to
support  the  the misbranding alleged in  the
complaint."  This was important to EPA which
had saved resources by eliminating many of the
non-scientific and record keeping requirements of
the GLPs in order to expedite the testing process.
It was also important for all of the ensuing cases
in the initiative because they were also based on
the abbreviated test methods.

Sporicjd|in International. Inc:.  This second civil
administrative case was filed in October  1992 as a
result of a GLP laboratory audit which showed
that the respondent had  failed to  respect the
Stop Sale Use and Removal Order issued against
its  product prohibiting  the  shipment  of its
product.  The audit uncovered not only the fact of
six violative shipments but also produced further
evidence  of the  product under the SSURO's
failure to act effectively as a sterilant.   The
opinion in this case  reiterated  that FIFRA is a
strict liability statute and  that any shipment of a
product in violation of the terms of the order was
a violation of FIFRA J2£1S£.
Multi-Media Enforcement

AVCO Corporation. Textron Lycomirtg? On August
19, 1993,  EPA  entered into the settlement of
administrative actions filed under TSCA and the
RCRA  against  AVCO  Corporation,  Textron
Lycoming  of Stratford,' GT.  The proposed
agreement requires a penalty payment of $151,625
($84,500 for the TSCA violations and $67,125 for
the RCRA violations).   The  agreement  also
requires respondent to perform a SEP valued at at
least $434,800. The project consists of the facility
replacing its  current method of parts  cleaning
using  1,1,1-trichloroethane with an alternative
method  using an aqueous  based  cleaner  or
ultrasonic cleaning. The effects of this  SEP will
be the reduction  of the trichloroethane waste
stream, lessening the potential for spills and
ground contaminations and reducing the levels of
hazardous waste generated at the facility.

U.S. v. Bethlehem Steel Corporation (N.D. IIP:
On August  31,  1993, the court ordered  the
Bethlehem Steel  Corporation to pay a $6 million
penalty for violations  of RCRA  and  SDWA. The
court  found  that a $4.2  million penalty was
appropriate for  Bethlehem's RCRA and SDWA
violations of the  corrective action requirements of
                                            3-66

-------
                        FY 1993 Enforcement Accomplishments Report
                                         m
its UIC permits, and a $1.8 million penalty was
appropriate for Bethlehem's various violations
of RCRA requirements related, to its landfill. This
is the highest RCRA/SDWA penalty assessed by
any court

The case  involved Bethlehem's  past  and
continuing noncompliance with the corrective
action program required under the UIC permits
which EPA issued to defendant, and also based on
Bethlehem "s  past and  continuing failure to
comply with the applicable RCRA interim status
performance standards  for a landfill and two
polishing lagoons containing the listed hazardous
waste F006.

On March 19, 1993, the U.S.' Motions for Partial
Summary Judgment was granted, and the court
ordered the injunctive relief requested by the
government. After the U.S.' request for injunctive
relief was granted, the court held a civil penalty
hearing, which was concluded on July 21,1993.

In the Matter of Burlington Northern Rajlrpa^
Company: On April 1,1993, EPA Region VII issued
a  unilateral  administrative  order,  under the
combined authorities of §7003 of RCRA, §106 of
CERCLA, and §311 of the CWA,  as amended by
the Oil Pollution Act of  1990, to Burlington
Northern Railroad Company, Inc., concerning its
Hobson  Yard  facility  located  in Lincoln,
Nebraska. The order required Burlington, among
other things, to immediately cease the discharge
of oil and hazardous constituents into an inland
saline wetland located in the Hobson Yard,

Burlington's Hobson Yard stretches over four miles
on the west side of Lincoln where, among other
activities, the fueling and service of locomotive
engines takes  place.  A comprehensive "french
drain" storm sewer system lies beneath much of
the Hobson Yard, through which storm water run-
off is drained into the wetland area and
ultimately into a  creek  bordering the facility.
The wetland is heavily  contaminated with  oil
and chlorinated  solvents resulting from the
release of  diesel  fuel and various chlorinated
solvents from the facility into the facility's storm
sewer system.

As a result of the issuance of the order, BNRR has
nearly completed a storm water processing
facility designed to capture and treat storm water
run-off before its discharge into the wetland area.
The  order also  requires BNRR to conduct a
removal  of the  contamination present in the
wetland area. BNRR has developed a work plan,
currently under review by EPA, proposing, among
other things, bioremediation of  soils in the
wetland area.

In the Matter of Conagra, Inc.i Consent agreements
and  final orders were entered during FY 1993
settling six multi-media complaints which had
been filed  against  Conagra,  Inc.   and  its
subsidiaries  for violations of the TSCA PCB
regulations, TRI reporting  requirements  under
EPCRA  §313,  and  the  accidental release
notification requirements under CERCLA § 103/
EPCRA § 304 at six Conagra facilities  in Region
VII. The complaints had been filed  in May, 1992,
and  sought total  penalties of $196,300.  In
settlement of these matters, Conagra and  its
subsidiaries  agreed  to the  performance  of
supplemental environmental projects at a cost in
excess of $900,000, and involving  the six facilities
named in the complaints as well as  six  other
Conagra- owned facilities located in Region VII,
In addition, respondents are required to pay cash
penalties totaling  $70,000, with  penalties  of
$126,300 deferred pending successful completion of
the SEPs.

The SEPs include: 1) installation of ammonia leak
detection  systems  at  five  facilities, which
systems are designed to detect ammonia leaks in
an expedient manner,  thereby  allowing the
facility to isolate  the  leak  and  turn off the
ammonia flow to that area more  quickly than in
the  past; 2) reduction of  ammonia  usage as
reportable pursuant to EPCRA §313 at a Conagra
facility located in  Lincoln, Nebraska, to below
10,000 pounds per year (usage of ammonia during
FY 1991  for the  facility was in excess of 51,000
pounds);  and 3) installation of computerized
auditing systems to track all EPCRA  chemicals
used at seven facilities,

US. v. City of Gary. (N.D.  lad.): On October 23,
1992, the court issued an order entering the Second
Modified Consent  Decree  in this case,  which
involves both CWA  and  TSCA  claims. Still
pending  before  the  court is  an Agreed
Modification of Certain Dates  in the Second
Modified Consent Decree, which was  filed as a
part of the United States' Motion to Enter. The
government will advise the court by letter that
this Agreed Modification remains  unresolved.
                                            3-67

-------
®
                            FY1993 Enforcement Accomplishments Report
The Second Modified Consent Decree is the third
decree entered into by the City of Gary and the
Gary Sanitary District since 1978. It requires Gary
to  undertake  and  complete  capital  and
operational  improvements  at  its wastewater
treatment plant, adequately fund operations and
maintenance, and   pay  a   civil  penalty  of
$1,250,000. In addition, Gary  has agreed  to
perform a supplemental environmental project,
valued at $1,700,000, which  consists of a study
and the development and implementation of a
remedial plan for sediments located in the Grand
Calumet River, covering an  area of submerged
lands, from Gary's main outfall to Cline Avenue.

U.S. v. Georgia-Pacific Corporation  (D. Me.); On
September 9, 1993, EPA, the  State of Maine and
Georgia-Pacific Corporation lodged  a  consent
decree resolving a  multi-media  enforcement
action against Georgia-Pacific Corporation's pulp
and paper mill in Woodland, Maine.  The case
was originally filed as part of  EPA's pulp and
paper mill enforcement initiative in September
1992.

The consent decree settles an enforcement action
against Georgia-Pacific for violations of the CAA
and CWA at  the Woodland, Maine facility.. In
1990 and 1991,  Georgia-Pacific intermittently
violated air emission and water  discharge
standards as well as frequently failed to comply
with its  air  license's monitoring requirements.
The enforcement action arose out of a joint EPA-
state  inspection and  review of emission and
discharge reports submitted by the company. The
consent decree requires Georgia-Pacific  to pay a
civil penalty of $390,000 for these violations, to
be  split  between the State  of  Maine  and the
federal government  The action reflects Region I's
commitment to coordinate enforcement between
different media  and  between state and federal
governments. Maine was an  active participant in
the development of the case and in the settlement
negotiations with the company.

U.S. v. Inland Steel (N.D. Ind.): On June 10,1993,
on  behalf of EPA, the court entered a consent
decree  against  Inland  Steel Company  worth
approximately $54.5  million. The decree, which
assessed a $29.5 million penalty against Inland,
requires Inland  to pay a cash civil fine of $3.5
million,  and   perform   $26   million  on
environmental projects in Northwest  Indiana.
This large penalty is in addition to the estimated
                                                   $25 million Inland will spend to undertake RCRA
                                                   corrective action  in an  innovative phased
                                                   approach, address NPDES permit violations
                                                   through  treatment  upgrades  and  source
                                                   investigations,  and  eliminate  air discharge
                                                   violations through-  operational  and  design
                                                   changes at their coke batteries and no. 405 boiler.
                                                   The injunctive relief package was developed and
                                                   is being overseen by a cross-program team to insure
                                                   that the complex environmental problems at the
                                                   facility are addressed in an efficient manner.

                                                   In August 1990, EPA re-referred three previously
                                                   referred  cases under  the CWA, RCRA, SDWA
                                                   (UIC), and CAA to DOJ. The combined re-referral
                                                   sought  the  original injunctive  relief  and
                                                   penalties, and sought to include the previously
                                                   un-obtained sediment remediation as part of the
                                                   injunctive relief in the consolidated complaint. In
                                                   October  1990, DOJ filed this  inaugural  multi-
                                                   media case.

                                                   The SEPs obtained will result  in measurable
                                                   environmental cleanup  in NW Indiana and
                                                   demonstrate EPA bias for action.  Inland will
                                                   spend $19 million to clean up  contaminated
                                                   sediments adjacent to its property, and to  study
                                                   and sample sediments  in the Canal, Grand
                                                   Calumet River and Roxanna Marsh, a wetland
                                                   area in NW Indiana.  As much as 750,000 cubic
                                                   yards of  sediments will  be cleaned up in this
                                                   environmental restoration project.  Inland also
                                                   must spend $7 million on pollution prevention and
                                                   waste reduction projects  at its facility. Through
                                                   these projects, EPA's  pollution prevention goals
                                                   and the reduction of TRI emissions in the Region
                                                   will  be  emphasized.  Overall,  the holistic
                                                   approach to  the  negotiations  allowed the case
                                                   team considerable  flexibility  in designing the
                                                   injunctive relief and considering SEPs. Through
                                                   the decree, the Region  obtained a nationally
                                                   significant resolution of the Agency's first multi-
                                                   media complaint, thereby making an outstanding
                                                   contribution to the Agency's Great Lakes Water
                                                   Quality Initiative. •

                                                   In the Matter of The Krtapheide Mfg. Co.: The
                                                   Knapheide Mfg. Co. manufactures truck bodies at
                                                   several locations  in the Midwest. One facility is
                                                   located in West Quincy,  Missouri.  The facility
                                                   generates paint waste.  The RCRA  3008(a)
                                                   complaint, issued as part of the  RCRA  1992
                                                   Illegal Operators Initiative, alleged the facility
                                                   failed   to   conduct  a  hazardous  waste
                                            3-68

-------
                        FY1993 Enforcement Accomplishments Report
determination,  illegally operated a hazardous
waste  treatment  and storage facility  without
obtaining interim status or a RCRA permit failed
to label containers  as hazardous waste, retain
copies of  land  disposal notifications, maintain
adequate aisle space in  storage areas, maintain
an updated contingency plan, maintain training
documentation,  and  properly manifest hazardous
waste shipments.

EPA reached a  multi-media settlement with the
facility  that   included  additional  EPCRA
notification  violations,  for  a  penalty  totaling
$428,533.  The  settlement  includes  SEPs  to
partially offset  the  penalty. The initial SEP is an
environmental compliance audit, which in part
will identify and propose additional  SEPs as
binding commitments under a process defined in
the  settlement. The  facility  was extensively
flooded during  the  1993 Midwest flooding, and
work has been delayed. It was  featured  on
national news.  EPA suggested the enforcement
schedule  extensions to reflect the disruption
caused by the flood.  However, the environmental
audit will now be expanded to study  whether
contaminants had been transported to or spread at
the facility as a  result of the flood.

U.S. v. LTV Steel fS.D. New York): On April  15,
1993, the bankruptcy court approved a settlement
agreement  and  stipulated order,  resolving
environmental claims of the U.S. for Superfund
liability as well as  civil penalties pursuant to
RCRA, CWA, CAA, and TSCA.  The agreement
also provides a mechanism by which  the U.S.
may make claims against the  reorganized LTV
debtors in the future. Pursuant to the order, EPA
will receive cash of  $1.2  million plus an allowed
claim of $28.2 million for Superfund claims at 16
sites in Regions IV, V, VI, and VII, and an allowed
claim of approximately $2.5  million  for pre-
petition penalty claims under RCRA, CWA, CAA,
and TSCA for facilities in Regions III and V,

In July  1986, the 66 related LTV debtors filed a
voluntary  petition in bankruptcy under Chapter
11 of the Bankruptcy Code in the U.S. Bankruptcy
Court for the Southern District of New York. The
U.S. filed a multi-site, multi-region proof of
claim in November  1987. The U.S., the debtors,
and certain other interested parties  appealed the
court's opinion of March 1990. In March 1990, the
court ruled that CERCLA claims arise when there
has  been a  release  or  threaten release  of
hazardous substances, whether or not known to
either EPA or the debtor.  In September 1991, the
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second  Circuit
affirmed   the  district  court's  decision.
Negotiations conducted since  that appellate
decision  have  resulted  in  the  settlement
agreement and stipulated  order approved by the
bankruptcy court

U.S.  v. MTD  Products. lt\c.  and Columbia
Manufacturing Company.  Inc. (D. Mass.);  The
court entered into a consent decree on August 11,
1993 with defendants MTD Products, Inc. and
Columbia Manufacturing Company,  Inc.  for
violations of RCRA and  the CWA. MTD and
Columbia are the former and present owners and
operators, respectively, of a bicycle and furniture
manufacturing facility in Westfield, MA.  The
initial action was filed on February 22, 1991, and
was amended on November 8,1991.

The decree provides that defendants pay a civil
penalty of $100,000  to  the U. S. ($90,000 for
RCRA and $10,000 for CWA).  In addition, the
decree requires the defendants to complete any
RCRA  corrective action  determined to  be
necessary at the site and to assess  the adequacy of
the plant's CWA treatment facilities.

Columbia Manufacturing Company, which owns
the real property at the  site filed a Chapter 11
bankruptcy petition.  Without this consent decree,
therefore, the site would  likely lay unexamined
for years.  Entry of  this decree is extremely
beneficial because it will  result in completion of
an  RCRA Facility Investigation  and corrective
action,

U.S.  v, Murphy Oil USA. Inc.  (E.p,  LAfc
Separate air and water enforcement cases were
combined in one consent decree. On December 16,
1993, one consent decree was entered to settle two
enforcement cases under different environmental
statutes with a civil penalty of $235,000. Under
the CWA, Murphy Oil USA, Inc., at its  Meraux,
Louisiana, refinery,   had  discharged  water
pollution in excess of  the effluent limitations in
its  NPDES permit.  Under the  CAA, the same
facility had constructed two volatile  organic
compound storage tanks  subject  to New Source
Performance Standards and had failed to provide
the required notification to EPA.  The CWA
penalty was $210,000, the CAA penalty was
$25,000.
                                            3-69

-------
 .
(35)
FY1993 Enforcement Accomplishments Report
    U.S. v. Sheprin-Williams. gg, {N.D. III.):  On
    July 16,  1993, the U.S.  filed a civil  complaint
    against  Sherwin-Williams  for  violations  of
    RCRA, the CAA, the CWA, and the Emergency
    Planning and Community Right-to-Know  Act
    (EPCRA). In addition to demanding substantial
    penalties, the government is seeking to ensure
    that Sherwin-Williams  attains and  maintains
    compliance  with all environmental  laws.  Of
    specific concern is the possibility that solvents
    and heavy  metals from  the facility may be
    leaching into the already seriously contaminated
    groundwater in  the  area.   Furthermore,  the
    facility may be contributing to the pollution of
    nearby Lake Calumet.

    The Sherwin-Williams facility that is subject to
    this action is a 123-acre  facility which is located
    in an area where there are numerous other sources
    of  pollution and  where   the  surrounding
    neighborhood is largely  populated with African
    Americans as well as people of  lower income
    levels.    At this facility,  Sherwin-Williams
    manufactures both solvent based and latex paints.
    In the past,  the company has also  manufactured
    or  used  resins, varnishes,  lacquers,  and other
    substances   that  have contributed  to  the
    environmental problems at the site.  This action
    was brought as a result of an inspection which
    revealed violations  including  the  illegal
    management of  hazardous  waste without  a
    permit or interim status, the use  of improperly
    closed,  marked,  and  inspected tanks  and
    containers, and the failure to maintain adequate
    waste analysis and  contingency plans.   This
    announcement underscores EPA's commitment to
    data  integrity  enforcement, cleanup of  the
    Southeastern   region   of  Chicago,   and
    environmental justice.

    U.S. v. UrtjtecjTechnologies Corporation (P. CTh
    On August 23,1993, a consent decree was lodged
    and a second amended complaint was filed in
    which United Technologies Corporation (UTC)
    agreed  to pay penalties totaling  $5,301,910 for
    violations of federal  and state hazardous waste
    and water pollution control laws.  As  part of the
    settlement,  UTC will implement an extensive
    multi-media environmental audit  at all of its 26
    New England facilities.

    The decree requires the payment of $3,701,910 by
    UTC to the U.S.  for violations of RCRA  and
    marks the highest civil penalty ever obtained in
                    a settlement of a civil RCRA action.  UTC will
                    also pay a penalty of $1.6 million for  violations
                    of the federal CWA and state water protection
                    laws, with $1,050,000 paid to Connecticut, and
                    $550,000 paid to the U. S.

                    Central  to the settlement  is  a  multi-media
                    environmental audit in which UTC must retain an
                    independent management consultant to make
                    recommendations concerning how UTC can alter
                    its management systems in order to improve its
                    environmental compliance. After recommended
                    changes to its management systems are made, the
                    company must retain  an outside audit  firm to
                    conduct  a compliance audit.  Penalties  for any
                    violations will be negotiated in accordance with
                    the relevant penalty policies, and the company
                    will have 60 days  to correct the violations.
                    Additional annual follow-up  compliance audits
                    will verify  that UTC is complying with all
                    environmental laws.   The  audit process is
                    expected to cost millions  of dollars  and  take
                    several years to complete, during which time EPA
                    and the state DEP will continue to inspect UTC
                    facilities for compliance.

                    The violations under RCRA included improper
                    handling  of hazardous  waste,  storage of
                    hazardous waste without a permit, inadequate
                    recordkeeping, inadequate training  of personnel,
                    failure  to  complete  waste  analysis,   and
                    inadequate groundwater monitoring. Under the
                    CWA, UTC was  cited for  the discharge of
                    pollutants without a  permit, the  discharge of
                    inadequately treated wastewater to  surface
                    waters, and  the discharge of water with a high
                    pH  that caused a fish kill in the  Connecticut
                    River.

                    UTC was cited for violations at ten UTC facilities
                    located in Connecticut: seven Pratt and Whitney
                    Aircraft  Division facilities  (in the  towns of
                    Southington,  East  Hartford,  North  Haven,
                    Middletown, Rocky  Hill), a Hamilton Standard
                    Division  facility in Windsor Locks, the Sikorsky
                    Aircraft facility in  Stratford, and the  United
                    Technologies Research Center in East Hartford.
                    UTC facilities named  in the suit design and
                    manufacture jet engines and parts, aircraft and
                    spacecraft components, and helicopters.
                          USX  and EPA entered into a consent
                    agreement, under §3008(h) of RCRA, on April 20,
                    1993, in which USX agreed to conduct a RCRA
                                               3-70

-------
                        FY1993 Enforcement Accomplishments Report
Facility Investigation (RFI), Corrective Measure
Study (CMS), and to implement Interim Measures
at the site. .This is a multi-media case since EPA
is focusing on several media including the cleanup
and stabilization of PCB's, slag, sediments from
NPDES discharges, petroleum and other wastes
potentially  threatening human health  or  the
environment.   The  USX  site is  a  steel
manufacturing  and finishing facility located in
Fairless Hills,  PA, along  the west bank of the
Delaware   River.   The   plant   occupies
approximately  3,000  acres  of land.  Steel
manufacturing and finishing operations at USX
have been active since the 1950's. The production
of coke stopped in the early 1980''s and .production
of raw steel ceased in  1991.  At  present the only
major  steel operation at  the  facility involves
steel finishing.

In  the  Matter  of Virgin Islands Alumina
Corporation: In  PY 1993, Region  II executed two
administrative  consent orders   with VIALCO,
resolving violations identified  in a 1992 multi-
media  inspection  One order, issued in March,
1993 under  §113 of the  Clean Air Act, arose  out
of a  complaint  alleging  that  VIALCO  was
subject to, and  had violated numerous federal
New  Source Performance  Standards.  In  the
settlement,   VIALCO committed   itself   to
compliance  with those requirements, and also
agreed  to   install  a  . continuous emissions
monitoring  system on  its  aluminum oxide kiln
and  comply  with the standards set forth  in
the  Virgin Island  Rules  and  Regulations.
VIALCO also agreed  to pay a  civil penalty of
$ 110,000. The other order, issued in February,
involved violations  of  the underground storage
tank   (UST)   leak   detection requirements
promulgated pursuant to RCRA.  VIALCO and
Texaco,  Inc., a  co-respondent  in this  matter,
agreed to  pay  a penalty of $12,678 for this
violation.
Federal Facilities Enforcement

In the Matter of Camp Stanley Storage Activity
and Lackland Air Force Base. (San Antonio, Tex.):
Camp Stanley  Storage Activity is located just a
few  miles  northwest of San  Antonio, Texas.
Lackland Air Force Base is located a few miles
southeast of San Antonio. Based upon information
received from the RCRA  permits staff,  case
development   inspections  (CDIs)  of  these
facilities were conducted in January 1993. It was
determined during the CDIs that both facilities
had existent  active  Open  Burning/Open
Detonation  (OB/OD) Units that had never
notified, received a permit, or attained interim
status under RCRA. Furthermore, Camp Stanley
had not included the  OB/OD  in  its facility
closure plans.

The risk to the environment and human health
associated with these OB/OD units comes from
the hazardous constituents of the waste ordnance.
For instance, trinitrotoluene (TNT), an aromatic
hydrocarbon,  breaks down  biologically  into
isomers that are known to be carcinogenic and
mutagenic, and have been extensively used by the
military as an explosive for decades.

Complaints  were issued to Camp Stanley and
Lackland AFB on June 30,1993, for operation of
hazardous waste  units without  a permit  or
interim status. High priority violations mandate
multi-day penalties.   Proposed  penalties
requested were $693,000 against Camp Stanley
and $346,500 for Lackland AFB.

In re; U.S. Department of Energy (Fernald, Oh,):
On April 9, 1993, EPA signed an Agreement
Resolving Dispute Concerning Denial of Request
For Extension of Time to Submit Operable Unit 2
Documents with the U.S. DOE for the Fernald,
Ohio site.  Pursuant to the agreement, DOE must
pay a cash penalty  of $50,000, spend $2,000,000
implementing a supplemental environmental
project, accelerate work on three other operable
units, and submit  the Operable Unit 2 (OU 2)
Proposed  Draft  Record of  Decision (ROD) by
January 5,  1995,  or  pay an  additional cash
penalty of $25,000.

On February 9,1993 EPA notified DOE that it did
not approve a DOE request for an extension of time
to submit a Remedial Investigation Feasibility
Study,  Proposed Plan  reports, and the ROD for
OU 2, and  further that it intended to assess
stipulated penalties for U.S. DOE's failure  to
submit the  reports by February 8,  1993.  On
February  16, 1993, DOE invoked the  dispute
resolution provisions  of the Amended Consent
Agreement (ACA) regarding EPA's February 9,
1993 non-concurrence.

Implementation of the SEP  required  by  this
settlement will significantly reduce discharges of
                                           3-71

-------
                            FY1993 Enforcement Accomplishments Report
uranium from the Femald site to the Great Miami
River.  In  addition, the assessment  of  a  cash
penalty will require U.S.  DOE to  report to
Congress  the reasons  for  the penalty.  The
combined value of the SEP and penalty amount to
over 90% of U.S. DOE's exposure in this matter.

In re;  U.S. Department of Energy (Portsmouth
Plant,  Oh.): On May 10,  1993, EPA  signed an
Agreement Resolving Dispute Concerning Revised
Quadrant  III RCRA Facility  Investigation Work
Plan for the Portsmouth Gaseous Diffusion Plant
facility in Piketon,  Ohio.  Pursuant  to  the
agreement, U.S. DOE must pay a cash penalty of
$50,000 for past violations of  the  AOC; spend
$1,000,000  to   implement  a  supplemental
environmental  project; and perform  a EPA-
approved  modified RFI workplan. In addition,
the combined RCRA 3008(h) and CERCLA 106(a)
administrative order by consent (AOC)  for the
facility was amended.

On December 14, 1992, EPA  had issued  DOE a
notice of violation alleging violations of numerous
requirements of the AOC. EPA agreed to the
stipulated penalty provisions based  largely on
the Fernald facility AOC with DOE, with the
express proviso  that EPA does  not consider the
provisions to be  precedent for other  federal
facility orders, decrees, or agreements, or at other
federal  facilities.

In  the  Matter  of  the  Federal  Aviation
A^mjrtisft-ation Technical Center Superfund Site:
On August 18,1993, EPA entered into a  Federal
Facility Agreement with the Federal Aviation
Administration (FAA) under §120  of CERCLA.
The agreement requires FAA to  remediate
approximately 25 areas of contamination at the
FAA Technical Center Superfund site  in Atlantic
City, New Jersey. The site covers 5,052 acres and
is contaminated largely due to fire  and crash
testing exercises as well as the testing and storage
of jet fuels, Section 120 of CERCLA requires that
agencies, such as the FAA, enter into  an agreement
with EPA to  address the contamination at sites
they own which are on the CERCLA NPL. This is
the first agreement under CERCLA §120 for  the
cleanup of a  U.S. Department of Transportation
facility. The work required under the agreement
is expected to cost approximately $55,000,000.

In the Matter of Griffiss Air Force  Base;  On
January 13,  1993, EPA  issued a  ten count
administrative complaint to Griffiss Air Force
Base for failure to  properly classify restricted
waste,  failure  to  maintain  a container  of
hazardous waste in good condition, failure to
submit notifications  for restricted waste shipped
off-site, failure to mark the accumulation start
date on containers of restricted hazardous waste,
failure to develop  a  complete waste  analysis
plan, failure to properly manifest waste off-site,
unauthorized storage of hazardous waste, failure
to maintain adequate personnel  records, and
failure to post a warning sign. The complaint does
not propose  a penalty  because the violations
preceded the effective date (October 6, 1992) of
the newly enacted Federal Facility Compliance
Act (FFCA).  The violations were detected during
inspections at the base between 1987 and 1992.
Previously, a  Notice  of Deficiency had been
issued to the Base in December, 1986, regarding a
deficient  Part B  permit  application.   This
complaint was intended to resolve all outstanding
violations.

On July 19,  1993, Region II executed a consent
agreement and consent order with the Air Force
resolving the matters  raised in  the  January
complaint.  Both the complaint and the consent
order are among the first such documents to be
issued in the country under the FFCA. Pursuant to
the order, the  facility submitted  a statement
detailing the remedial actions taken rectifying
the alleged violations  at the site.

Loring Ajr Force Base_Superfund Site.  (Maine):
On May 19, 1993, the Air Force agreed to  pay
stipulated penalties  in the amount of $50,000 for
failure to meet enforceable deadlines under the
Loring Air Force Base CERCLA Federal Facility
Agreement (FFA). The Air Force also agreed that
in the future EPA may assess stipulated  penalties
under the FFA for any documents which are
technically incomplete because they fail to meet
the requirements of CERCLA, the  National Oil
and Hazardous Substances Contingency Plan,
applicable EPA guidance, or applicable state law.

Loring Air Force Base is a federal facility on the
Superfund NPL. The Air Force is conducting the
cleanup under the FFA which  includes the Air
Force, EPA and  the State of Maine as parties.
Loring is also a closure base under the Defense
Base Closure and Realignment Act of 1990.

On February 1, 1993, the Region  assessed the
                                            3-72

-------
                        FY 1993 Enforcement Accomplishments Report
penalties for failure of the Air Force to meet the
enforceable FFA schedule for two deliverables (a
Remedial  Investigation  and  a  Remedial
Investigations/Focussed  Feasibility  Study
(RI/FFS)) relating  to two operable units at the
facility. In December, 1992, the Region with state
concurrence denied  an Air Force  request for
extension of time to submit the documents. The
Air Force based its request on lack of available
funds in October and November, 1993, even though
the Air Force had  assured the State and EPA in
early October that new DOD budget funding had
already been given  to the base.

The agreement  reached with the  Air Force
reflects the Region's efforts to ensure that DOD
components will  submit technically complete
documents in a timely manner at federal facility
NPL sites.

Naval  Construction Battalion Centey (R.I.): On
September 30,1993, EPA issued an administrative
complaint and compliance order (complaint) to
the Naval Construction Battalion Center (NCBC)
located in the town of Davisville, Rhode Island
for hazardous waste violations.  The complaint
proposes the assessment of a civil penalty in the
amount .of $101,062.

On March. 31, 1993,  representatives  of EPA
conducted  a RCRA  compliance  evaluation
inspection (CEI) at the NCBC.  On the basis of
this inspection,  EPA  determined that  the
respondent failed to properly conduct hazardous
waste  determinations, failed to  include the EPA
hazardous waste number and corresponding waste
treatment  standard  on the  Land  Disposal
Restriction (LDR) Notice, failed to retain copies
of LDR notices on site for certain shipments of
waste  restricted from land disposal, failed to
provide annual hazardous waste  training to its
employees who manage hazardous waste, failed
to maintain a written hazardous waste training
program  and other  required  records  for  all
personnel who handle  or manage  hazardous
waste,   failed  to  label  hazardous  waste
containers with the dates of accumulation, and
failed to conduct weekly container inspections.

In the Matter of Reese Air Force Base. (Lubbock,
Texas):  An administrative order under RCRA
§7003  was issued  to Reese Air Force Base as a
result  of  an  imminent  and  substantial
endangerment to  health resulting  from Base
activities.  In March 1993, EPA learned that
Reese had detected trichloroethylene above safe
drinking water  standards in some privately-
owned drinking water wells near the Base. After
confirming the data,  EPA issued an agreed-on
administrative order under §7003 of RCRA on June
1, 1993.  The order requires the Base to collect
water samples from water wells in a 36 square
mile area (within a 2 mile perimeter of the Base)
in  order to  determine  the  extent .of  the
contamination,  to notify the  owners of any
contamination, to supply an alternate source of
drinking  water   to  the  residents  with
contaminated wells, and to monitor the ground
water in and adjacent to the plume.  Reese has
completed the initial sampling of  about  950
wells, provided  carbon  filters  for  all  the
impacted water wells, and connected some of the
users to the City of.Lubbock's water system. The
city is in the process of connecting its water lines
to the residents  that live within the city  limits.
The residents living outside the city limits may
use the water wells after carbon filtering.
Criminal Enforcement - All Statutes

       Criminal enforcement continues to be the
fastest  growing  component   of  the agency's
enforcement effort.  New  criminal  investigator
offices opened last year in Houston, Los Angeles,
Buffalo, St.  Louis,  and Miami.   FY 1992  set
records for criminal fines ($66.9  million before
suspension, almost a five-fold  increase  over  the
previous    record    year),   court-ordered
imprisonment cases  successfully prosecuted, and
new referrals to the  Department of Justice. In FY
1993,   the   criminal  enforcement  program
continued   to  support   program-specific
enforcement priorities  and  was increasingly used
to  support  multi-media  and  international
enforcement efforts and to  address  interstate
violations.  In  addition, the program referred 140
new cases to DO/, a 31% increase over  the prior
record number in FY 1992.

       In  FY  1993,  the  Office  of Criminal
Enforcement  (OCE)  worked   closely  with  the
media   programs  to  implement  the   new
Guidelines  of  the U.S.  Sentencing Commission.
for  Organizational   Defendants   (primarily
corporations)  convicted of environmental crimes.
Implementing   these  guidelines  will  call  for
                                            3-73

-------
.<«? •Rijj,.
                              FY1993 Enforcement Accomplishments Report
  extensive regional program technical input and
  coordination  to  develop  recommended conditions
  of  corporate  probation  including   restitution,
  remediation,   and compliance-related relief. The
  goal  is smooth  coordination within the limited
  timeframe  so that  EPA can provide support  to
  sentencing judges and probation  officers.

         The 1990 Pollution Prosecution Act  called
  for no  less  than 110  criminal  investigators on
  board during 3993.    This gave EPA a unique
  opportunity  to  seek out a  new kind of Special
  Agent — the hiring strategy in the  OCE shifting
  from  a focus  on experienced  law  enforcement
  officers  (who  were  then  expected to  develop
  their  expertise in environmental law) to a focus
  on  recruits, including minorities and  women, with
  existing technical and scientific environmental
  expertise  who are  trained  as  law  enforcement
  officers. The criminal  enforcement  program  is
  strengthened by combining  the  experience  of its
  veteran  Special Agents and the environmental
  background of the new recruits.

         The  Criminal Enforcement Addendum  to
  the  Policy   Framework  for   EPA/State
  Enforcement   Agreements  improves  coordination
  and  communications among federal, state, and
  local  law enforcement units.  Its major provisions
  include the designation  of one or more intrastate
  contacts to serve as  a focal point for exchanging
  information  regarding  the status  of  criminal
  investigations and cases,  cross referral  of  cases,
  technical support and  training,  and  coordination
  of  state/federal  civil and  criminal  proceedings.
  It  also calls  for  the  increased  use  of  Law
  Enforcement  Coordinating  Committees  and
  environmental  task  forces  as appropriate  to
  investigate  specific  cases,  enhance   reporting  of
  state  criminal enforcement accomplishments, and
  continued  federal  support  to heighten  state
  criminal enforcement capability.

         State,  local,  and  tribal  criminal -law
  enforcement  capability  are   enhanced   through
  the association   networks, the  Federal   Law
  Enforcement  Training Center (FLETC),  and the
  National Enforcement Training  Institute (NETl),
  including  the  tribal  investigator  training pilot
  developed  by  OE-FLETC  and  the Office  of
  Federal Activities  (OFA).  In  order to  support
  state  accomplishments, OE worked with the four
  regional  state  association  law   enforcement
  networks   in   FY   1993  to  collect   more
comprehensive non-federal environmental crimes
data.   One  potential  use  of these  data is to
indicate,  in general terms,  the  level  of criminal
enforcement activity on the state and  local level.

U.S. v, Action Manufacturing Company (E.D. Pa.l:
An explosives manufacturer was sentenced to pay
a $500,000 fine ($400,000 suspended) and $500,000
in clean-up costs of a hazardous waste disposal
area  contaminated  by  years  of unpermitted
hazardous waste dumping. Action Manufacturing
Co. of Atglen, Pa., was sentenced September 2,
1993.  The company paid $100,000 of the fine at
sentencing, with $400,000 of the fine suspended
pending completion of  a five-year  period of
probation. Terms of probation include clean up of
the "burn pits" under  the direction of EPA and
compliance  with  a  debarment  compliance
agreement negotiated among Action, EPA, and the
Department of Defense.  Action  manufactures
explosives primarily for the U.S. government,
and failure to comply with the  terms of the
probation will result in debarment.

Following a joint criminal investigation by EPA,
the FBI,  and  the Army CID, the company  was
charged  with illegally disposing  of hazardous
waste for several years  by pouring liquid and
sludge  wastes  resulting  from  explosives
manufacturing into "burn pits" and igniting the
material.   At about  the same time,  EPA  was
overseeing a  CERCLA response action, and  EPA
then  negotiated  a  debarment  compliance
agreement because the company,  in shaky
financial  condition already, would go out of
business if it was debarred, leaving no choice but
for the government to pay for a site clean up. At
sentencing, the judge noted that incorporation of
the compliance agreement and clean up provisions
in the plea agreement  was "a hammer" over the
company that caused him to approve the terms of
the plea.

U.S. v. Action Testing and Consulting (N.D. Ga.):
A generator  of hazardous waste  and its owner
were  sentenced  for the illegal  dumping  and
subsequent runoff from drums of hazardous waste
at three  separate sites in Dekalb County near
Atlanta, Ga.  At the direction of James R. Hunt,
owner of Action Testing and Consulting, company
employees had hired workers  to transport and
abandon the  drums, many of which contained
ignitable and  corrosive wastes.
                                              3-74

-------
                        FY1993 Enforcement Accomplishments Report
On July  8, 1993, the company was sentenced
pursuant to its guilty plea to a felony violation of
RCRA. It received three years of probation and a
fine of $142,749. Hunt, who pled guilty to a
misdemeanor violation of CWA, was sentenced to
four months of home detention, a $25,000 fine, and
three years of probation.

This case relates to the conviction and sentencing
in 1991 of Reginald Max Goldsmith to forty-six
months of incarceration for two felony violations
of RCRA for  the illegal transportation of the
drums  of hazardous  waste.    Goldsmith's
fraudulent company had been hired by Action
Testing and Consulting to transport and dispose of
Action's hazardous waste.

U.S.  V.  Advance Plating  Works arid Eugene
Doughty (S.D. Ind.): On March 24,1993, Eugene
Doughty and  Advance Plating Works, Inc. were
charged  in  a four-count indictment alleging
violations of the CWA and RCRA at two Advance
facilities  in Indianapolis. Doughty, the president
and an  owner of Advance, was charged with
numerous  violations  of  the  pretreatment
standards for electroplaters,  tampering with a
monitoring  device  installed by  the City  of
Indianapolis,  and  lying to an  Indianapolis
Department of Public Works employee about an
unpermitted discharge point. The corporation was
charged  with the pretreatment violations,  as
well as  with  illegal storage and disposal  of
hazardous waste under RCRA.  On October 8,1993,
Doughty was sentenced to one  year in jail.

According to the indictment,  Advance Plating's
Shelby Street facility discharged  nickel,  zinc,
copper,  and  chromium in excess  of  the
pretreatment standards between February and
May 1992. In February 1992, the City installed an
automatic sampler  inside Advance Plating's
Shelby Street plant. Doughty opened up the
sampler, and replaced the contents of the sample
jar with  clean water. During the  same period,
Doughty also  falsely told a City inspector that
all waste was routed through a single sample
point. Finally,  Advance Plating  stored and
disposed of F006, F007, D002, and D007 hazardous
wastes at both of its facilities without a permit.
The case was  developed with the assistance of
the Indianapolis DPW  and  the FBI, working
through the Indiana  Environmental Task Force,
chaired  by the U.S. Attorney's Office for the
Southern District of Indiana.
U.S. v. Aerolite Chrome Corporation (D. Nev.,
aff'd 9th Citl: During 1993, the Ninth Circuit
Court of Appeals affirmed the 1990 conviction of
a  corporation, despite  the acquittal  of  the
individual  perpetrator, the corporate president.
The Aerolite  Chrome Corporation had been
convicted on December 11, 1990, for ten felony
violations  of  CWA pretreatment requirements,
involving  discharges of large volumes  of
wastewater contaminated by metal processing to
a public sewer system flowing to the  publicly
owned  Reno-Sparks treatment works.   It was
sentenced on July 12, 1991, to a $55,000 fine, six
years of  probation,  and as a  condition  of
probation, to no longer engage in electroplating
operations.

But the  company president and sole  agent of the
corporation involved in the illegal acts, Arthur
Thomas, was acquitted by the jury on all counts, so
the corporation appealed asserting that it too
must be acquitted as a matter of law. The Court of
Appeals disagreed, stating that an apparently
inconsistent verdict could easily be as wrong
against the  government as against the defendant,
or could in actuality be the result of jury lenity
toward the individual defendant, and that there
was ample testimony supporting the corporation's
conviction for the illegal acts of its agent Thomas.

U.S. v.Tariq Ahmad, et al.(C.D. Call: Following
a jury trial  in a case that generated international
interest, a chemical laboratory owner's scheme to
burn down his lab for the insurance proceeds and
his illegal export to Pakistan of hazardous waste
generated by the lab led to heavy prison sentences
on the individuals convicted. On August 9,1993,
Tariq Ahmad,  the  lab owner, was sentenced to 97
months  of imprisonment upon his conviction on
April 15, 1993, for the illegal export of hazardous
waste, conspiracy to commit arson, and for money
laundering  and  racketeering.   Rafat Asrar,
Ahmad's colleague, was sentenced to 60 months
following guilty verdicts for conspiracy to commit
arson, money laundering, and racketeering.  An
appeal is pending.

This case stemmed from a scheme by Tariq Ahmad
to burn down his analytical  laboratory  in
Southern California for the insurance proceeds in
1990.   In  its processes, the lab generated
hazardous-waste chemicals. To avoid the costs of
disposal, Ahmad shipped the  chemicals  to
Pakistan for incineration and dumping  down a
                                            3-75

-------
s in \
(SB
 %
FK 7995 Enforcement Accomplishments Report
   mine shaft. When the government of Pakistan
   learned of the shipment from a news reporter, the
   chemicals were refused entry into  Pakistan and
   returned to Long  Beach, California, where the
   U.S.  Customs  inspected  and sampled  the
   container.

   U.S. v. Applied Coating Services. Inc. (S,D, Tex4:
   The illegal handling of paint and  sandblasting
   wastes by an off-shore oil rig painting company
   resulted  in  the  company's  conviction and
   sentencing for violating RCRA. On  April 5,1993,
   A jury convicted Applied Coating Services, Inc. of
   transportation without a manifest  to its  North
   Houston facility, of four counts of illegal storage
   there, and of disposal without a permit. On July
   21, 1993, the company was sentenced to  pay a
   $50,000 fine, and ordered to reimburse clean-up
   costs by the payment of $20,000 to Liberty County
   and $105,000 to the Union Pacific Railroad.

   U.S. v.  Walter Baker and Matthew Girdich
   £W .D. Pa.l: In a case of special interest to those
   concerned with data quality  and information
   integrity provided  to meet CWA requirements,
   two former municipal officials  have  been
   sentenced for  NPDES  reporting  violations
   involving the Penn Hills, Pa,,  Water Pollution
   Control Department. At one sentencing, the judge
   commented that environmental crimes are very
   serious  because  the  responsible  regulatory
   agencies  rely so extensively on truthful data, and
   that the message has to get out to  the regulated
   community that falsifying data  will not  be
   tolerated.

   On April 2, 1993, Walter Baker, former Assistant
   Director  of the Penn Hills, Pa., Water Pollution
   Control Department, was sentenced  to one year of
   incarceration, one year of supervised release, and
   a $5,000  fine for falsifying discharge  monitoring
   reports. Baker was convicted on February 3,1993,
   on six counts of falsifying DMRs in  the late 1980s
   to cover up NPDES permit violations at several of
   the municipality's sewage treatment plants.

   On March 19,  1993, Matthew Girdich (Baker's
   predecessor) was sentenced to five years of
   probation, a  $5,000  fine, and two years of
   community service, Girdich had pled guilty on
   December 30, 1992, to one count of falsifying
   DMRs.  Girdich was responsible for NPDES
   reporting for the five sewage treatment plants in
   the municipality until he retired in 1988.  Over
                    several  years,  violations  in  reporting were
                    uncovered by  the  Allegheny County  Health
                    Department, which sought federal assistance in
                    investigating and prosecuting the violations.

                    U.S. v.  Gordon S.  Bird. Tr. (D.  Utah): The
                    president and  owner-operator  of a  mineral
                    recovery company was convicted and sentenced for
                    unpermitted storage and disposal of arsenic and
                    cadmium in pits or surface impoundments at his
                    gallium  recovery operation located in Blanding,
                    Utah. On February  12, 1993, Gordon S. Bird, Jr.
                    was sentenced to perform 1,000 hours of community
                    service that must be related  to environmental
                    protection, and he also was placed on three years
                    of probation.  On December 3, 1992, Bird was
                    convicted by a jury of one count of violating RCRA
                    and one count of aiding and abetting in violation
                    of 18 U.S.C. § 2.

                    U.S. v.  Robert M. Briftingham and  John J.
                    LjjMonaco  (N.D. TexasJ.: Two prominent Dallas
                    businessmen, high-ranking former officials of a
                    substantial corporation, were .convicted and
                    sentenced to pay multi-million dollar fines for
                    ordering subordinate  employees  to illegally
                    dispose  of the  hazardous waste in  a gravel pit.
                    On  May 21,   1993,  defendants  Robert  M.
                    Brittingham and John J. LoMonaco were sentenced
                    to pay a total of $12 million for violations of
                    RCRA.  Brittingham must pay a $4 million fine,
                    LoMonaco must pay  a $2 million  fine, and
                    together they must  pay $6 million into a trust
                    account  set up  to administer a  lead abatement
                    community service project.  Each defendant also
                    received a  five-year term of probation, during
                    which they each must spend a substantial number
                    of hours Weekly to implement  the community
                    service project.  The project is designed to abate
                    the City of Dallas' lead problem and its effects on
                    children by  funding  educational awareness
                    programs on lead exposure and by testing children
                    who may suffer learning disabilities as a result of
                    lead exposure.  The defendants must also place an
                    advertisement  in  a  widely-circulated trade
                    journal   describing   their  violations   of
                    environmental requirements.

                    Brittingham was former chairman of the board
                    and part owner, and LoMonaco was president and
                    a former board member, of their former company,
                    Dai-Tile Corporation, which was sold to  an
                    investment group in  1990. Dai-Tile, which makes
                    ceramic  tiles, has several plants and warehouses
                                               3-76

-------
                        FY1993 Enforcement Accomplishments Report
and employs more than 5,500 people throughout
the United States and Mexico. During 1987, Dal-
lile used lead-based compounds in glazing and
coloring ceramic tiles at its large plant in Dallas.
Evidence showed that  Dai-Tile's  ceramic tile
process produced waste  sludge with  high
concentrations of lead which can cause serious
health effects, including  damage to the central
nervous system.   Although laws  require that
heavy metals, like lead, must be disposed of in an
approved hazardous waste disposal facility, and
even  after  Dai-Tile  employees  warned
Brittingham and LoMonaco that the sludge was
toxic and being disposed of illegally, Brittingham
and LoMonaco ordered that the toxic sludge be
dumped in a gravel pit  in the Dallas suburb of
Seagonville.

U.S.  v. Walter  M. Caldwell. Ill (W.D. La.): The
owner of a Louisiana truck stop,  who cleared
approximately twenty-five acres  of wetlands,
filled several acres, and  dug a ditch across his
property to drain the  wetlands  behind his place
of business without a  U.S.  Army Corps of
Engineers' CWA § 404 permit, was sentenced for
his violation  of  the  CWA. On June 30, 1993,
Walter M. Caldwell, III, was sentenced to three
years of probation, to  pay $6,500 for the costs.of
his supervision and a fine of $5,000, and to restore
the  property  to  its original condition in
compliance  with a restoration plan agreed to
with EPA. Caldwell had pled guilty on  April 21,
1993, to a CWA misdemeanor charge.  Caldwell's
103 Truck Stop is located along  Interstate 20, near
West Monroe, Louisiana.

U.S.  v. Darrell W .Caster (D. Mtl: The president
of a  precious metals  plating business  was
convicted and sentenced for the illegal disposal of
hazardous waste, namely mixtures of acids and
heavy metals,   into  a  large,  unpermitted
underground tank located on the business premises
near Bonner, Montana.   On February 2, 1993,
Darrell W. Caster was sentenced to  six months of
home  incarceration, three  years of probation,
$8,000 in restitution, and  100 hours of community
service. On December 1,1992, Caster pled guilty
to one count of unpermitted disposal of hazardous
waste in violation of RCRA.

U.S.  v. Craven, et ah (W .D. TX): A criminal case
involving  a contract laboratory for EPA  has  a
mistrial in U.S.  District Court, an appeal on
double jeopardy grounds, and affirmation by the
Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals for a new trial. On
September 22, 1992, Craven Laboratories, Inc.,
(Craven Labs) Don Craven, Donald  Hamerly,
Dale  Harris and  E.  Stanley  Peterson  were
indicted and charged with 20 felony  counts in
connection  with  pesticide residue analysis
testing.  The charges filed against the defendants
included  violations  of 18  U.S.C  §1001 (false
statements to the government), 18 U.S.C. §371
(conspiracy), 18 US.C. §1341 (mail fraud), and 18
U.S.C. §1505 (obstructing agency proceedings).

The case proceeded to trial on February  1, 1993.
Four defendants (Craven Labs, Craven, Hamerly
and Harris) moved for a mistrial after learning
that  one  of  the Government's witnesses  had
spoken to a juror, and had discussed being nervous
about  testifying.   Peterson  objected  to the
mistrial, and indicated that he was ready to
proceed with the case with the jury that was
sitting.   After  the court granted the defense
motion for a mistrial for all defendants, all five
defendants  moved to acquit  or  dismiss the
Indictment,  claiming that the mistrial was the
result of bad faith or Government misconduct The
court ruled that the mistrial was not the result of
any bad faith on the part of the Government, and
denied the defense motions.

The defendants then filed Motions for Acquittal
and/or Motions for Dismissal of the Indictment,
claiming  that  jeopardy  will  attach  if the
defendants were retried.  When these motions
were denied, the  defendants appealed to the
Fifth Circuit.  On  September 9, 1993, the Fifth
Circuit  affirmed  the  judgment of the  district
court, and sent the case back to  the district court
for retrial.  To date, twelve individuals  have
pleaded guilty to charges ranging from FIFRA
misdemeanors to conspiracy.   The case  is
scheduled to be re-tried on November 29,1993.

U.S. v. lohn Hoyj Curtis (D. Alaska, aff'd 9th
Cit): On March 8,  1993, the Ninth Circuit Court
of Appeals affirmed the defendant's conviction,
holding that individual employees of the federal
government, acting within the course and scope of
their  employment,  are  subject  to  criminal
prosecution for violations of the  CWA. On June 7,
1993, a petition for a writ of certiorari was filed
with the Supreme Court.

John Hoyt Curtis, a civilian, federal employee of
the U.S. Navy, was the Fuels Division Director
                                            3-77

-------
w
FY1993 Enforcement Accomplishments Report
  for the Naval Air  Station  at  Adak,  Alaska
  during late 1988 and early 1989.  On March 18,
  1992, he was found guilty by a jury of unpermitted
  discharges of jet fuel that he repeatedly ordered
  to be pumped through a pipeline that he knew
  was leaking, thus causing hundreds of thousands
  of gallons of fuel to spill into Sweeper Cove, an
  inlet of the Bering Sea.  On May 26, 1992, he was
  sentenced to  ten months of incarceration.  On
  appeal,  the Court  of  Appeals  held that Mr.
  Curtis as a federal employee is a "person" covered
  by  the  CWA, and  that he  is not entitled to
  federal sovereign immunity.

  U.S. v. Gale E. Dean (E.D. Tenn., aff d, 6th Cit,
  cert, denied!: A conviction and  sentence  to 40
  months  imprisonment were, in effect, upheld on
  April 19,  1993, when a petition  for a writ of
  certiorari  was denied  by the Supreme Court,
  finally concluding this case. On July 8, 1992, the
  Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals had affirmed
  Gale  E.  Dean's  conviction,  holding  that
  knowledge of a permit requirement is  not an
  element of the  crime  of knowingly treating,
  destroying, or  disposing of hazardous  waste
  without a permit, and  that an employee of the
  owner or operator  of  a facility  could be held
  criminally liable for storing and disposing of
  hazardous wastes without a permit, even though
  only owners and operators are required to obtain
  permits.  In August 1991, he had been sentenced to
  40 months imprisonment after being convicted of
  discharging  chromic  acid   rinse water and
  wastewater  sludges into an open  lagoon in
  violation of RCRA.

  U.S. v. Dttyjd Dellinger..et_a|. (D. R.I.1: A scrap
  hauler, who during rush hour let PCBs spray from
  his truck onto Interstate 95 near Providence, R.I.,
  received the longest prison term yet awarded to a
  federal   environmental defendant  in  New
  England. On September 15,1993, David Dellinger
  was sentenced to 27 months of incarceration and
  ordered that  he pay a  percentage  of his future
  salary as restitution toward  $50,000 in clean-up
  costs  incurred by the City of Cranston, one of the
  affected sites. On June 25, 1993, Dellinger pled
  guilty to one count of disposal of PCBs in violation
  of TSCA and one count of failing to notify the
  federal  government of  a release of a hazardous
  substance in violation of CERCLA.
   On January 29, 1993, Giacomo Catucci and David
   Dellinger were indicted for violations of TSCA
                    for  the illegal disposal of PCBs in violation of
                    federal law.

                    Catucci hired Dellinger  to remove PCB-filled
                    transformers  from  his  mill in  Providence.
                    Dellinger  let  the oil spray  on the highway,
                    drained more PCBs onto and along a side road,
                    stripped the  copper  wire, and abandoned the
                    casings in the woods and at an isolated sandpit in
                    Coventry,  R.I.  Catucci went  to trial,  and on
                    October 22,1993, he was convicted by a jury of two
                    counts of violating TSCA'and two counts of
                    violating CERCLA. Sentencing is pending.

                    U,S, y. William "Dave" Denison and Tames Gary
                    White (S.D. TX1: A "shell game" of  moving
                    hazardous waste -  just before  a scheduled
                    government inspection would find that the waste
                    had been stored in violation of RCRA regulations
                    - has ended in the sentencing of the two culpable
                    individuals.   On August 31, 1993, defendant
                    William "Dave" Denison was sentenced to fifteen
                    months incarceration and a $5,000 penalty as a
                    result of his illegal storage of hazardous waste in
                    violation of interim status requirements and the
                    illegal  transportation  of hazardous  waste
                    without a  manifest.  On September 15, 1993, co-
                    defendant James Gary White was sentenced to six
                    months of  home detention, two years of probation,
                    and 200 hours of community service; no fine was
                    imposed because of his poor financial status. On
                    June 1,1993, White and Denison pled guilty to one
                    and to three RCRA violations, respectively^

                    U.S. v. Dexter Corporation (D. Conn,};  Dexter
                    Corporation, a Fortune 500 company and the
                    oldest member of the New York Stock Exchange,
                    pled  guilty  and entered into  a large  and
                    innovative global settlement.  In addition to
                    payment of a $4 million fine for  eight felony
                    violations of CWA and RCRA, Dexter agreed to
                    the payment of civil penalties  totaling $9 million
                    for the violations, and to conduct environmental
                    audits at  all  of its  divisional manufacturing
                    facilities across the country.   These and other
                    actions resulted in the lifting of EPA's suspension
                    and debarment action which precluded Dexter
                    from obtaining government contracts.

                    Dexter operates facilities  nationwide, and at its
                    Windsor  Locks,  Connecticut, facility  Dexter
                    manufactures specialty paper products used in the
                    production of tea bags, food processing,  and
                    disposable medical  gowns, and operates a co-
                                              3-78

-------
                        FY1993 Enforcement Accomplishments Report
(
V
                                          SB
generation facility.  Dexter was charged with
illegally disposing of carbon disulfide, listed as
an acute hazardous waste, at its Canal Bank
Road facility in Windsor Locks. Dexter received
carbon disulfide  in 55  gallon drums.  After
transferring the chemical from the drums to a
storage tank, the drums were then turned over and
the residual carbon disulfide was dumped onto
the ground.  The government also charged Dexter
with  discharging  carbon disulfide  into  the
Connecticut River  through an overflow pipe
which led  from the storage tank  to  the river.
(The settlement was signed on September 3,1992,
but was not reported in OE's 1992 annual report.)

U.S. v. Electrochemical Co.. Inc.. .et.al. (M.D. Pa.l;
Frank Leaman, an electroplater was sentenced to
15 months in prison for illegally  disposing of
hazardous waste,  failing to report a release of a
hazardous  substance, making  false statements,
and falsifying documents.  This minimum sentence
was  imposed only  because of other  disastrous
losses  his  actions  brought upon  himself, his
family, and his company.  These include the loss
of his company that is in bankruptcy, the loss of
more than $100,000 invested by family members
in the company,  and the loss of  his personal
residence pledged as collateral for bank loans.

On January 15,1993, Leaman, of York, Pa. and his
company,  Electrochemical Co.,  Inc.,  were
sentenced. The company was engaged extensively
in cadmium plating as a DOD subcontractor.  The
sentences were imposed for (1) failing to notify
authorities about an accidental 2,QGQ~gaUan spill
of spent acids in  1989 and for lying to the Pa.
Department of Environmental  Resources  (DER)
about the amount of the spill, (2) pumping the
contents of a 750-gallon tank of  caustic (pH of 13)
parts cleaner into a "groundhog  hole" on company
property after  the  City  refused to renew the
company's pretreatment discharge permit, and (3)
submitting false manufacturing and performance
certifications to DOD regarding plated parts used
in military vehicles.

The company was sentenced to pay a $250,000 fine
for  violating  CWA pretreatment   discharge
standards in 1989 and 1990. The court suspended
$225,000 of the fine if the company or its successor
would enter into  a written agreement with the
DER  for  cleanup  of  contaminated  areas of
company property.
Two company employees were sentenced each to
one year of probation, a fine of $1,500, and 100
hours of community service.  Russell S. Walker, Jr.,
a company supervisor, was sentenced for failing to
report the spill.   Glenn  L. Stover,  Jr., was
sentenced for removing copies of certifications sent
to DQD and other documents to prevent mem from
being seized during execution of a search warrant.
The investigation was conducted jointly by EPA,
the FBI,  DCIS and NIS, with the assistance of
the City of York and the Pa. DER.

U.S. v. William B. Ellen {D, Md,, affd 4th Cit,
cert, denied!: On October 5, 1992, a petition for a
writ of certiorari  was denied by the Supreme
Court,  finally concluding this case.  On April 27,
1992, the Fourth Circuit Court  of Appeals had
affirmed the defendant's conviction, holding that
the application to the defendant's prior conduct
of the definition of "wetlands" from the 1989
federal wetlands manual did not violate the U.S.
Constitution's due process  or ex,  pogf: facto
prohibitions, and that under the guidelines of the
U.S. Sentencing Commission it was proper to
increase the sentence for committing an ongoing
offense and for discharging without a permit.

On April 15, 1991, Ellen was sentenced to six
months in prison, one year  of probation, and 60
hours  of community  service  relating to his
conviction for unpermitted  filling of 86 acres of
wetlands on  the  Eastern Shore  of Maryland.
Ellen was the project manager for the property
owner,  Paul Tudor Jones, II, a top Wall  Street
financier, who previously had  pleaded guilty,
paid a substantial  fine, and  agreed  to site
restoration.

U.S. v. Environmental Waterway Management.
Inc., et al. (S.D. Fla.): Illegal use of the pesticide
Direx on aquatic areas, a pesticide not approved
by EPA for use there because it is poisonous to
aquatic invertebrate organisms  (the foundation
for the food chain) and also directly causes fish to
suffocate,  led   Environmental  Waterway
Management, Inc.,  and its owners, Alan Chesler
and Andrew Chesler to sentencing following tineir
guilty pleas. The defendants knew that  their use
of the  pesticide was illegal, and their  sentence
included the largest criminal fine ever imposed in
the U.S. for the unlawful use of pesticides.

On February 17,  1993, the  company  (having
previously pled guilty to five FIFRA and five
                                            3-79

-------
                            FY1993 Enforcement Accomplishments Report
felony mail fraud counts) was fined $400,000 and
sentenced  to  five years of probation.   Alan
Chesler and Andrew Chesler (each having pled
guilty to five counts  of FIFRA) were each fined
$25,000 and sentenced to five years of supervised
probation.

Despite the knowledge that application of Direx
to  waterways was  illegal,  the  defendants
regularly so used it because of its effectiveness in
destroying certain types  of  vegetation.   In
addition to the FIFRA violations, the company
used  the U.S. mails to solicit and attempt to
solicit customers  with  written contracts  which
falsely  represented  that  it  used  only EPA
approved products in removing and controlling
unwanted aquatic vegetation and algae growth.

U.S. v. Victor Figuetpa 
-------
                        FY1993 Enforcement Accomplishments Report
fertilizer overseas, several corporate  executives
and companies pled guilty to violations of RCRA
or TSCA, and several have been sentenced. The
"fertilizer"  was  made with baghouse dust, a
hazardous  waste removed from air pollution
control equipment in the United States and toxic
for lead and cadmium under RCRA regulations.
Between 1,000 and 2,000 tons of this material was
applied  directly by  hand  to  food crops  in
Bangladesh. Discovery of the incident resulted in
international  controversy involving  foreign
governments, environmental groups, the United
States government and the Asian Development
Bank.  Although some charges are still pending,
and any defendant  must be presumed innocent
until  proven or pleading guilty,  this  case is
reported now. The case is a matter of considerable
public interest,  and it is important to  let the
world  know that a number of the perpetrators
have been brought to justice.

On November 1, 1993, Gaston Copper Recycling
Corporation (Gaston)  and Southwire Company
(Southwire) were sentenced. Gaston was ordered
to pay $600,000, which the judge said may be used
to treat or dispose of the portion of the fertilizer
that is still  in storage in Bangladesh, and to pay
$200,000 to the  South Carolina  Department of
Health and Environmental  Control.  Southwire
was  fined  $190,000.    Both  companies were
sentenced to two years of probation, ordered to
perform environmental assessment studies  on
their  facilities,  and  ordered   to publish  in
newspapers a  formal  apology to the people of
South Carolina.  On December 22,  1992,  Gaston
and Southwire each  pled guilty to eight counts of
violating TSCA,  Southwire executive Bruce E.
Betterton also pled guilty on December 22,1992, to
a single TSCA violation.  On November 1, 1993,
Betterton was fined $10,000 and sentenced to two
years of probation and 100 hours of community
service.  The three defendants' TSCA violations
were for failing to report to EPA  the distribution
in commerce of a chemical substance or mixture
while possessing information that  it  presents a
substantial risk of injury to  health  or  the
environment.

On August 17,1993, Robert D. Weaver pled guilty
to two counts  of violations of RCRA for illegal
transportation without a manifest and illegal
export of hazardous waste, and Arthur G. Heinel
pled guilty to one count of illegal transportation
of hazardous waste  without  a  manifest  in
violation of RCRA. Their sentencing is pending.

Stoller Chemical Company (Stoller) of Jericho,
S.C., was the manufacturer of micro-nutrients used
to enhance fertilizer.  Weaver was the General
Manager of Stoller, and the person responsible for
ordering materials for the plant.  Heinel is the
President  and owner of Hy-Tex  Marketing,  a
hazardous waste broker, located in Beaufort, S.C.
[n return for a $50,000 kick- back from Heimel,
Weaver and Heimel caused baghouse dust (with a
total lead content as high as thirty-one percent)
to be transported  without a hazardous  waste
manifest from Gaston, S.C., to Stoller's Jericho
plant.  Stoller then mixed this hazardous waste
with other material, some of which was another
hazardous waste,  to produce 3,000  tons of
contaminated micro-nutrient fertilizer which was
then exported overseas.  The export of the new
mixture, which  was  also  hazardous  waste
characteristically toxic for lead and cadmium,
occurred without the required consent of the
receiving country,  Bangladesh.    Stoller was
indicted in 1992 and is now in bankruptcy.

Southwire is  headquartered in  Carrollton,
Georgia and is the primary stockholder of Gaston,
a company that operates a copper recycling plant
in Gaston, S.C.  Betterton is a corporate executive
of  Southwire  and  participated   in  the
management of the baghouse dust generated at
the Gaston plant.  In September and October of
1991,  Gaston generated  and shipped baghouse
dust  to Stoller  while  having  knowledge,
including  their own material safety data sheet,
that the baghouse  dust presented  a health
hazard because it contained high concentrations
of lead and cadmium; the dust can be toxic by
ingestion and inhalation.

This case involved significant federal, state and
local cooperation. EPA was assisted by the South
Carolina   Department   of   Health   and
Environmental Control's Criminal Investigation
Division,  by  the  Charleston County, South
Carolina, Sheriff's Department, and in Australia
and Bangladesh by the U.S. Customs Service that
obtained key samples and conducted liaison with
foreign governments.

U.S. y. Herman Goldfajen. et al. (N.D.  Tex.,
afi'd, Sth  Citl: In the first federal prosecution
filed (in 1990) in the U.S. for enforcement of a
city's  EPA-approved pretreatment program to
                                            3-81

-------
                            FY1993 Enforcement Accomplishments Report
implement the CWA, after the second of two
appeals,  the  individual  responsible  was
sentenced to 33 months of imprisonment. Both the
individual and his company, which did not
appeal, had pled guilty on October 5, 1990, and
his company was sentenced to  pay a fine  of
$1,000,000.

On March 17, 1993, the Fifth Circuit Court of
Appeals affirmed the second sentence, 33 months
of imprisonment, imposed on July 23, 1992, to
Herman Goldfaden. The court held that a four-
point offense level increase under the Sentencing
Guidelines for disposal without a  permit applied
to a defendant convicted of unlawful industrial
waste discharge, even  if he could not have
obtained a permit for his conduct due to his use of
improper  equipment,  and that the vacating of
defendant's initial sentence did not preclude (at
the  time of  resentencing)  offense-level
enhancement  for obstruction of justice based on
perjured  testimony  given  at  the  original1
sentencing hearing.

Goldfaden's recent, failed appeal  followed his
earlier appeal in  this case, in which Goldfaden
had successfully obtained a  ruling by the Fifth
Circuit on April 22, 1992, that vacated his first
sentence (to  three years imprisonment and  a
$75,000 fine, imposed July 16,1991) and remanded
the case for resentencing or withdrawal of his
plea agreement.

Goldfaden pled guilty  to one CWA felony for the
1989 unpermitted  discharge  of industrial
wastewater into a private sewer  in East Dallas,
from which it flowed  into a sewer. His former
company,  Control Disposal Co.,  Inc., which  he
controlled, was in the business of  cleaning grease
and sludge traps and sewer lines. The company
pled guilty to the same CWA violation and also a
RCRA violation for falsifying documents  on a
shipment  of  hazardous waste.  The  RCRA
violation occurred in 1988, when Control Disposal
workers hauled waste  from the city of University
Park. Although  city officials told them that the
waste was hazardous  used paint thinner, mostly
methyl  chloride,  the  company misrepresented
the waste on federal  forms as being hydraulic
fluid that can be disposed of more  cheaply. The
case was  investigated in a cooperative effort of
EPA, the  Water  Utilities and the Health and
Human Services Departments of the City of
Dallas, and the FBI.
In a closely related case, on February 11, 1993,
Ronald L. Voda, Sr., owner of Voda Petroleum
Company of White Oak, Texas, was sentenced to
60 days of  incarceration, 120 days at a halfway
house, 400 hours of community service, a $3,000.00
fine, and five years of probation. In 1987, Ronald
Voda and his company entered into an agreement
with Goldfaden.  In return for a  payment by
Goldfaden of $.10 for each gallon of waste listed
on the paperwork regardless of whether or not it
came to the Voda Petroleum plant, Voda signed
trip tickets and hazardous  waste  manifests
falsely certifying that Voda Petroleum Company
received waste. Much of the waste listed on these
papers was dumped illegally into sewer systems
in the Dallas area by Control Disposal Company.

On February 10, 1989, while executing a search
warrant at  Voda Petroleum, EPA agents observed
a ditch cut through a levee surrounding a process
area  at  the plant.   Wastewater was being
discharged  from this ditch  that exceeded limits
set for oil and grease in Voda's NPDES permit.
Voda's plea agreement with the  government
allowed him to plead to a CWA misdemeanor in
return for his cooperation and testimony in  all
proceedings involving Control Disposal Company
and Herman Goldfaden.

U.S^ v. Samuel Gratz (E.D. Pa.l: Illegal dumping
of chemical wastes  into a storm drain leading to
the Delaware River, and  illegal transport and
storage  in Philadelphia of extremely  hazardous
waste (phosgene and sodium cyanide), led to
sentencing on January  26,  1993,  for   a
pharmaceutical manufacturer.  Samuel Gratz, the
former President of Lannett Company, Inc., of
Philadelphia, was  sentenced  to six  months of
home arrest and three years of probation. He was
also ordered to  pay a fine of  about $210,000,
consisting of $10,000 in cash and 10,000 shares of
stock (trading at approximately $20 a share) in a
company Gratz founded.  The judge was more
lenient  than   the   Sentencing  Guidelines
prescribed, based on Gratz's age (he is in his 70's)
and poor physical condition. At a trial ending on
September 30,1992, Gratz was found guilty of one
count of illegal transportation of hazardous waste
to an unpermitted facility, one count of illegal
transportation of  hazardous waste  without a
manifest, one count of unpermitted  storage of
hazardous  waste, and one count of unpermitted
discharging of pollutants into navigable waters of
the United States.
                                            3-82

-------
                        FY1993 Enforcement Accomplishments Report
 The criminal investigation began after the City
of Philadelphia's Fire Department was unable to
get Gratz to dispose of the wastes, which to the
Fire Department presented a safety hazard.  His
company also failed to comply with a state court
cleanup order.  The waste was stored illegally at
the Lannett facility in Philadelphia from  1987 to
1991, except for the portion of  the waste that
Gratz had dumped down a storm drain from 1987
to 1989. Following a hostile corporate takeover in
which, as a result of the investigation, Gratz was
ousted from management, Lannett Company has
disposed of the wastes properly and conducted a
soil cleanup at the Philadelphia  facility.

U.S. v. Hansen Container Company. et_al. (D.
ColJ.: The first sentences for opacity violations of
the  CAA  were imposed  against  a drum
reeondittoner and its top officers. The business
processed many drums by dumping their liquid
hazardous waste onto  the ground and then by
firing the drums in  an incinerator  to burn off
hazardous-waste  residue  and  paint.   The
incinerator was operated illegally and  caused
plumes of black smoke  and lead  waste to be
released into the environment.

The Hansen Container Company, located in Grand
Junction, Colorado, reconditioned used 55-gallon
drums from industrial and government sources.
The company  did not  have a  RCRA permit to
treat, store or dispose of hazardous  waste.  The
company's president, Christian E,  Hansen, Jr., and
its former executive administrative assistant,
Michael  Bilney, each were sentenced on October
21, 1992, to a one-year  sentence composed of 30
days of incarceration, the balance  to be served on
probation, plus a $10,000 fine.   Each had pled
guilty to a misdemeanor violation of the CAA for
emissions and  smoke  in excess  of  permissible
limits. The company also pled guilty to violating
RCRA by conducting illegal treatment, storage,
and  disposal  activities,  and  it  was fined
$250,000.

U.S. v. Hartford Associates (D. Md,):  A real
estate partnership  was sentenced to  pay  a
substantial  fine and to  grant a conservation
easement for  violations in Maryland  of the
wetlands protection  requirements of the CWA.
Hartford  Associates,  a Berlin, New  Jersey
partnership controlled by  Joseph Samost and
engaged in property development, was sentenced
on October 7,1993, to pay a $100,000 fine and to
grant a conservation easement on more than 100
acres of wetlands.  The conservation easement
will effectively restrict further development of a
large portion of  the property  involved.  The
partnership pled guilty to one count of negligently
discharging excavated fill material without a
permit into four acres of wetlands on a large tract
of land  that the partnership owns near Elkton,
Maryland.

U.S. v. Hi-Tek Polymers. Inc. (W.D. Ky.): The
illegal discharge  of chemical by-products into
the Ohio River caused Hi-Tek Polymers, Inc. to
plead guilty on November 20, 1992, to violating
the Rivers and Harbors Act.  In  accordance with
the plea agreement, Hi-Tek was  sentenced to pay
a  fine  of $125,000 and to  conduct two EPA-
sponsored public educational seminars.

Hi-Tek, located  in Louisville, KY, is a wholly
owned subsidiary of the French chemical firm
Rhone-Poulenc  and  manufactures  industrial
coatings,  resins,  and  synthetic  chemical
compounds. On May 18,1989, Hi-Tek caused the
illegal discharge of refuse material into the Ohio
River during an untested manufacturing process
that Hi-Tek was undertaking for a new product.
The process  caused  chemical  by-products,
including N-Butanol and Xylene, to be discharged
into the Louisville metropolitan sewer system.

U.S. v. Kingsport Shipping. Inc.  (S.D. Tex):
Sentencing has occurred in a CWA pollution case
in which a vessel burned and five crew members
suffered burns and other injuries.  The fire occurred
during the illegal pumping  of hexane, styrene,
xylene, toluene, and benzene from the ship into
the Houston ship channel.  In May 1990, the M/T
SETA was  housed at  the  New  Park Shipyard.
Crew members began pumping the chemicals into
the water while a welder  was also working on
the ship's rudder.  When the welder attempted to
light his torch, sparks  ignited the vapors from
the chemicals.

On April 2,1993, Kingsport Shipping, Inc., owner
of the vessel, pled guilty  to one count for the
negligent discharge of a pollutant without a
permit,  and agreed to A fine of $85,000.  This
resolution  was acceptable to the government
because the two most culpable individuals have
fled to their homeland in the former Yugoslavia.
                                            3-83

-------
                            FY1993 Enforcement Accomplishments Report
U.S. v. Xhomas  T. KowalskL et al. (D. Ohioi.:
Sentences were  imposed upon the creators of
Pennsylvania's   "Marcy  Road"   Superfund
emergency removal site, and $80,000 was ordered
paid as restitution to the Superfund.  The problem
was discovered when barrels of hazardous paint
waste turned up along roadsides in Ohio and Pa.
during 1991.  On August  3,  1993, Thomas J.
Kowalski, Harry J, Meininghaus,  and MCM
Warehouse, Inc.,  located in Ohio, were sentenced
upon  their guilty pleas  relating to an illegal
dumping  of hazardous waste, and an illegal
asbestos  stripping operation  at the  Ohio
warehouse,  in violation of CAA  and RCRA.
Kowalski, manager of MCM, was sentenced to
three years of probation.  Meininghaus, an MCM
foreman who actually disposed of the waste and
previously had served a year in Ohio state prison
in connection with the disposal in that state, was
sentenced  to 100 days of federal incarceration and
one year  of supervised release.   MCM  was
sentenced  to pay $80,000 to EPA as restitution and
to probation for five years.

A  joint  EPA  and  Ohio  EPA investigation
identified those  responsible for the  roadside
dumping,  and  the waste was traced to the MCM
Warehouse, where agents  discovered  that  an
illegal asbestos stripping operation had also been
conducted. Meininghaus and two contract workers
were also convicted in state courts of Ohio and Pa.

U.S. v. Lake Doctors. Inc.. et al.  (M.D.  Fl.):
Another  scheme involving illegal  use of the
herbicides Karmex  and Direx in Florida lakes
has resulted  in heavy sentences for  those
culpable,  which should have a  significant
deterrent effect on Florida aquatic weed control
specialists.    The  misapplication of  these
herbicides can  be very profitable for applicators
and is believed  to be widespread in  Florida.
These powerful herbicides are not registered for
application into water, where they can cause
considerable environmental harm.

On  September 27,1993, James L. Williams, owner
of Lake Doctors, Inc., was  sentenced to three
months in a halfway house,  followed by six
months of home detention, and five years of
probation, to pay a $20,000 fine, and to perform
750 hours of community service.  His company was
placed on  five years of probation, fined $100,000,
and ordered to  perform 1,000 hours of community
service. Both had pled guilty to use of a pesticide
inconsistent with the label in violation of FIFRA,
and  with  fraudulent  use of  the mails  to
misrepresent to customers  that the application
was  environmentally sound, in violation of 18
U.S.C.  1341.   Company Vice President Albert
Semago was sentenced to 30 months of probation,
300 hours of community service, and a $5,000 fine.
Ken  Savell,  manager of the   company's
Jacksonville  office, was  sentenced earlier  to six
months of   probation, 50 hours of community
service, and a $500 fine suspended upon successful
completion of probation.  Six company applicators
are pending sentencing.

This  case was investigated by EPA in conjunction
with a multi-agency task force  which included
the  Florida  Department of Agriculture,  the
Florida Fresh Water Fish and Game Commission,
and the Broward County Sheriffs Office.

U.S.  v. Laska et al..  (N.D.  Ohio):  On April 22,
1993, Michael Laska was  sentenced to serve seven
months in  prison and seven months  home
detention, and pay a fine of $3,000 as a result of
his illegal asbestos renovation  project. Laska is
the owner of a warehouse  in Cleveland,  Ohio.
Laska  hired neighbors to   strip the asbestos
insulation from the warehouse, but provided no
water  for their  use or training. Laska's plea
agreement allows him to remain free while he
appeals a pretrial suppression  ruling. He will
begin his term of imprisonment if he loses his
appeal. A co-defendant, Steven Howell, was
sentenced to a term of probation.

This  investigation was   initiated when  a
confidential  informant contacted  EPA  with
information that Laska had hired a crew to strip
insulation from his warehouse. When the workers
asked  whether  there  was asbestos  in  the
building, Laska informed them that the asbestos
wouldn't hurt them, and provided paper masks.
No water was ever used during the operation,
which lasted approximately six months. EPA, in
conjunction with the FBI, began a surveillance and
observed Laska dumping asbestos waste in a mall
dumpster. EPA then executed a search warrant at
the warehouse to obtain documents, samples and
measurements. Laska was  charged with CAA
violations  relating  to  the illegal stripping
operation, and with a CERCLA charge for failing
to report the release of asbestos in the dumpster.
In pretrial  motions,  Laska  challenged  the
constitutionality of the search warrant, arguing
                                           3-84

-------
                        FY1993 Enforcement Accomplishments Report
that the warrant was based on evidence obtained
through prior warrantless inspections conducted
by the local air agency and EPA. The government
won in the trial court, but permitted Laska to
appeal the ruling as a part of his plea.

U.S.v. Gary Lewis (D. Mt): For the illegal burial
of thirty-eight drums  filled  with hazardous
waste in a gravel  pit in Vaughn, Montana, the
president of a construction company was sentenced
to five years of probation, including four months
of electronically monitored home detention, and
$500,000 in restitution to be paid over the course
of the five-year probationary period.  On March
26,  1993, Gary  Lewis, President  of Lewis
Construction Co., dba Interstate Specialties, Inc.,
was sentenced upon his plea of guilty to  a
violation of RCRA. On January 25,1993, he pled
to one count of disposal of hazardous waste at an
unpermitted facility.

U.S. v. David Liebman. et al.  (D. ConnJ: The
discovery by hunters of approximately 3.5 tons of
asbestos, illegally  dumped  in  a  state wildlife
management area in Tolland, Connecticut, and in
another wooded site nearby, led to the sentencing
on  July 7, 1993,  of the four defendants who
participated in the crimes.

David Liebman hired workers to remove asbestos
from an old mill in Vernon, Connecticut, owned by
his  family, that was to  be sold to a developer.
The asbestos was torn down without any safety
precautions and dumped in the woods. Liebman
was sentenced to ten months of incarceration, one
year of supervised release, and a $3,000 fine, upon
his  plea of guilty to a violation of CERCLA for
not reporting the release.  Louis Lavitt, real
estate  broker  to  the  sale  of the  mill, was
sentenced to five years of probation and a $4,000
fine upon his guilty  pleas  to  a  charge  of
conspiracy to violate the CAA and to a charge of
disposal of asbestos in violation of  the CAA. The
two workers hired  by Liebman were also
sentenced. William Janiak was sentenced to six
months of home detention, 250 hours of community
service, and five years  of probation, upon his
guilty plea to a charge of conspiracy  to violate
CERCLA.  Thomas Janiak was sentenced to five
years of probation  and 250 hours of community
service  upon his  guilty plea  to  a  charge of
conspiracy to violate the CAA,
U.S. vf Jong Services Corporation (D. Wa.): The
dumping of 2,500-3,000 Ibs. of asbestos down the
toilets of  a  public high  school  led  to the
sentencing on June 18, 1993, of Long Services
Corporation  of  Seattle,  Washington.    The
company was ordered  to pay a fine of $25,000,
upon its guilty plea to two counts of violating the
Clean Air Act by illegally disposing of asbestos.
In July 1989, while Long Services Corporation was
under contract to remove asbestos from the Castle
Rock, Washington,  High School, the company
poured large  quantities of asbestos and asbestos
slurry down the toilets and into the sewer system
leading to a  publicity  owned treatment  works
(POTW).   Following discovery of the  illegal
disposal, the  sewer  system had to be cleaned of
the asbestos contamination and the contaminated
POTW sludge disposed of appropriately.

U.S. v. Louisville Edible Oil Products. Inc. (W.D.
Ky.): The illegal  removal of asbestos  from two
facilities undergoing renovation and the release
of asbestos to the air  led to sentencing  of the
defendants. Louisville Edible Oil Products, Inc.
(LEOP) was  sentenced to pay a  $350,000 fine,
with $50,000  conditioned upon LEOP spending
$125,000 on clean up of the asbestos.  On January
8, 1993,  in  addition  to  LEOP,  the  other
defendants, Presidential, Inc., Raymond Carl
Mirrillia,  Jr. (a former Vice-President  of LEOP),
and A. Dean Huff (President of Presidential, Inc.,
and a former  Vice-President of LEOP)  were
sentenced. The individuals each were sentenced
to six months of in-home incarceration, to pay the
cost of their electronic monitoring, to  two years of
probation, and a $2,000 fine.  Presidential was
sentenced  to a $50,000 fine.

This case is significant because of the important,
precedential decision handed down in 1991 after
LEOP  appealed  the indictment to the U.S. 6th
Circuit Court of Appeals. Because the local air
pollution  control agency had previously fined
LEOP  for  the asbestos removal,  LEOP argued
that, because EPA and the local agency worked in
concert, EPA's subsequent pursuit  of criminal
sanctions  violated the  U.S.  Constitution's
prohibition against  double jeopardy.  However,
the appellate  court ruled that EPA and the local
entity  represented separate sovereigns, so that
EPA's  pursuit of criminal  sanctions did not
constitute double jeopardy, thus leaving EPA free
to pursue criminal enforcement despite  prior local
action.  The  U.S. Supreme Court  declined to
review the case.  This decision is significant
                                            3-85

-------
                            FY1993 Enforcement Accomplishments Report
because it allows EPA to backstop local agencies
by seeking federal penalties if necessary.

U.S. v. Ponied Manr4nfr_et_al. (N.0. CaL): The
unpermitted dredging  and disposal  by a San
Francisco boat yard of its dredged spoils into San
Francisco Bay led to a two-year prison term for
the individual  most responsible. The company
president knew that he needed a U.S, Army Corps
of Engineers permit to dredge the channel to his
boat yard in order to bid for U.S. Navy repair
work.  In addition to a two-year prison sentence,
Manning was sentenced to pay a fine of $5,000.
James was sentenced  to a six-month prison  term
and a  fine of $2,000. The company was sentenced
to a $10,000 fine and to three years of probation,
A civil consequence of  the convictions has  been
that the boat yard has been placed on the list of
facilities  ineligible-to receive US.  government
contracts.

U.S. v. Dennis  Marchuk.et al.  (E.D. Pa.):A
lawyer-developer was sentenced to two years in
prison and a $25,000 fine  for violations of the
CAA, CERCLA,  and  TSCA at a Superfund site
contaminated with asbestos and PCBs.  But the
sentencing judge only gave half the permissible
sentence enhancements because the site cleanup
will involve substantial costs. The court observed
that the site had asbestos problems at the time
Marchuk acquired it, and that he had spent more
than one million dollars removing asbestos  from
buildings.

Dennis Marchuk, a  lawyer and real estate
developer {president of Strathaven Realty, Inc.)
from  Crystal take, Illinois, was sentenced for
illegally disposing  of friable  asbestos  and
improperly storing PCBs  at the East  10th St.
Superfund site in Marcus Hook, Pa, On July 23,
1993,   the sentencing   judge concluded  that
Marchuk was guilty of "ongoing, continuous, or
repetitive" releases of hazardous substances.  In
1986,  Marchuk (or his company) had purchased
the Marcus Hook Business and Commerce Center, a
40-acre former FMC manufacturing plant.  During
1987 and 1988, Marchuk had contractors Michael
Kelly  and Robert Tann remove asbestos. Marchuk
and his employees used heavy equipment to bury
thousands of bags of asbestos on the site.  PCB
violations  were  committed  when  he  had
transformers drained and  then stored the PCB
liquid in unmarked drums in various buildings for
a number of years. Marchuk also submitted false
leases and other financial information to banks
financing part of the redevelopment project.

Two of  Marchuk's  co-defendants were  also
sentenced.  On October 8, 1993, Jeanne Alvarez,
Vice-President of Marchuk's real estate company,
was sentenced to 36 months of probation and 100
hours of community service upon her guilty plea to
three felonies for one violation of CERCLA and
two of bank fraud.  Robert Tann, a co-owner with
Michael Kelly of the demolition  contractor that
worked on the site, was sentenced to two years of
probation and 150 hours of community service for
failing to remove all asbestos before demolishing
a building. Sentencing of Kelly is pending.

IJ,S. y.Metrft!Eechnology. et al. (N.D. Tex.}: Prison
sentences were  imposed on the businessmen
culpable  for discharging hazardous wastewater
into the public sewers of the City of Irving, Texas.
In manufacturing electronic circuit boards, the
defendants used  acids and heavy metals such as
cyanide, lead, copper and nickel. Employees used
a temporary "cheater" or by-pass pipe to divert
wastes directly  to the city  sewer instead  of
sending them to the  city's pretreatment system.
The scheme was designed to save the expense of
operating a waste water treatment system and to
evade the conditions imposed by the municipal
ordinance  prescribing  CWA  pretreatment
requirements.  Pursuant to a search warrant, CID
surreptitiously monitored the discharge with the
use of an automatic sampler.  By timing the high
concentrations  of metals  and acids being
discharged without treatment, evidence also was
obtained  which indicated that the "cheater"
pipe was removed quickly and  the waste was
properly treated whenever a city  inspection was
imminent.

In February 1993, each defendant  had pled guilty
to one or more CWA violations. On May 7, 1993,
John Edward Klein,  owner of Klein PC, Inc. a
personal computer company,  was sentenced to
twenty months in  federal  prison and a  year of
probation.  Klein's company was fined $15,000.
Mark  Edward  Jones,  a foremen  at Metro
Technology,  Inc. and the  brother of  a third
defendant, was sentenced a year in prison and a
year of probation.  On May 28, 1993, defendant
Terry Wayne Jones was sentenced to two years of
imprisonment, but not fined because of Ms poor
financial status.   His  company, T.W. Jones &
Associates, Inc., formerly Metro Technology, Inc.,
                                            3-86

-------
                        FY1993 Enforcement Accomplishments Report
                                         j

                                         x
was fined $5,000 and sentenced to five years of
probation.  Both companies, Klein PC and T.W.
Jones, which shared operating premises at  the
time of their violations, were ordered to publish
advertisements in the Water Federation Journal,
a trade publication,  explaining  the nature of
their offenses and the punishment received.

U.S. v. Michelle Irene Toint Venture (W.P. Wa.):
Plastics dumped  at sea  are deadly to marine
animals that ingest them. On November 8, 1993,
in the first criminal prosecution ever to enforce
the provisions of an international treaty that
prohibits  the  disposal  of plastics at  sea,  the
operators  of a large  "fish-factory" vessel were
sentenced  to pay a $150,000 fine over a  five-year
period, with $50,000  to be paid on the day of
sentencing, and to a five-year term of probation,
On April  13,  1993,  the  Michelle Irene Joint
Venture, dba Golden Age Fisheries, entered its
plea of guilty to a charge of knowing disposal of
plastics into the sea in July 1989.  At the time of
the offense, the Michelle Irene Joint Venture was
composed   of   three   Washington-State
corporations, namely,  Westcod II,  Inc., Simonson
Enterprises V, Inc., and BTIIV, Inc. These business
partners were held subject to the conditions of the
five-year term of probation.

The dumping of plastics by American flag vessels
was outlawed on December 31, 1988,  with  the
implementation of Annex  V of the International
Convention for the Prevention of Pollution of
Ships, known as the MARPOL Protocol, adopted
in accordance with the Act to Prevent Pollution at
Sea from Ships. Former crew members  provided
information to EPA  that they  had  dumped
plastics overboard under orders from management
while  the vessel  was  at  sea  beginning  in
December  1988.  The vessel  is a 253-foot fish-
processor  that uses large quantities of plastic
bags, liners, straps, and containers.  Although  the
vessel  was equipped with  a state-of-the-art
incinerator capable  of burning plastic, a fire
shortly  after  it left  port in  December 1988
rendered  the  incinerator virtually inoperable
during the time of the dumping at sea.

U.S. V.Montgomery Tank Lines, et a]tfN.D. Ind.):
Sentences  were imposed on those culpable  for
failure to  report the April 1987 release of over
30,000  gallons of hydrochloric acid  in Gary,
Indiana. The spill created a cloud of acid vapor
that forced the evacuation of over 2,000 people,
caused  over 100  people  to  receive  medical
treatment for exposure to the fumes, and caused a
nearby freeway to be closed. The spill occurred at
a facility  owned by  a national  truck carrier,
headquartered in Florida.  At the sentencing on
March 18,  1993, the  judge said that earlier
notification would have speeded up the cleanup
and helped prevent aggravating the situation.
Gordon D. Babbitt, a former Vice President of
Montgomery Tank Lines, Inc. (MTL), was sentenced
to one year in jail (nine months suspended), a fine
of $120,000, and two years of probation.   He
pleaded guilty  to a CERCLA  felony charge of
failing to  promptly report the spill. MTL also
pleaded guilty to the CERCLA charge, and was
sentenced  to pay a fine of $150,000, to reimburse
the government for cleanup costs, resolve citizen
claims against MTL arising from the spill, and to
pay a $4,000 fine to the Gary Indiana Sanitary
District.  Three other MTL employees pleaded
guilty to  CWA misdemeanor violations  for
allowing the acid to enter the sewer system, and
were sentenced to fines of $2,500 each, and in one
case to a one year term of probation.

The  spill  occurred at a  tank storage facility
owned by MTL, and used by the Gary Products Co.
The president of Gary Products, William Keagle,
who  was  indicted in 1990 for his failure to
immediately report the spill, previously pleaded
guilty and was sentenced to probation.   The
investigation continued and determined that the
MTL  defendants had  tried  to  hide  their
knowledge of the  spill and even their role in
arranging  for the acid to be  shipped to  the
facility.

U.S. v.Myers (W.D. Mich.]; On July 1, 1993, the
U.S.  District Court for the Western District of
Michigan,  sentenced William Myers for violating
CERCLA's  prohibition  against  knowingly
transporting hazardous  waste  without  an
accompanying manifest. Myers was sentenced to
one year in prison, and ordered to pay restitution
in the amount of $50,000 to the EPA.  The
restitution was for costs EPA had  incurred in
disposing  of drums of hazardous  waste which
Myers had paid to be shipped in a trailer from
his property in Cassopolis,  Michigan,  to a
parking lot in Ohio, and abandoned. Myers was
also sentenced to one year of supervised release
after  his  prison term, and  to 416  hours of
community service.
                                            3-87

-------
                            FY1993 Enforcement Accomplishments Report
Myers is the owner and lessor of property in
Cassopolis, Michigan. Myers was also a Trustee of
the Town of Cassopolis. A lessee of his property
operated a plastics manufacturing business at the
site before going out of business and abandoning
drums of chemicals, including hazardous wastes,
at the property. Myers unsuccessfully attempted
to have officials  associated  with the lessee
remove the  drums.  Failing  at  that,  Myers
purchased a trailer  and paid a person to load the
drums onto the trailer, drive it to the parking lot
of a facility in Ohio, at which a former manager
of the plastics manufacturer was then employed,
and abandon it. Myers did not inform the driver
that the drums contained hazardous  material,
and did not prepare manifests to accompany the
wastes.  EPA's costs associated with disposing of
the waste are approximately $180,000 to date.

LLS. v. pjorthwest Etch Technology. Inc.. et aL(P.
Wa.): Sentences  were  imposed  on  a  photo
chemical   milling   company  in  Tacoma,
Washington and its two top officers, for dumping
heavy-metal  laden wastewater into a  storm
drain  leading directly to Puget  Sound.  After the
company had been denied an NPDES  permit to
discharge  treated  wastewater  to  the sanitary
sewer system by the City of Tacoma, the company
made false representations  to  the City that the
company  would  utilize  a new  closed  loop
wastewater recycling system that would generate
no wastewater so that it would not need a permit.
Surveillance established that the company was
in fact discharging  its wastewater into  its
parking lot storm drain before  daybreak using a
portable PVC pipe  apparatus.  The investigation
determined  that  approximately  1/2 million
gallons of  wastewater  had been  illegally
discharged during at least one year.  The company
is a subcontractor producing precision metal parts
for a major contractor with NASA.

On May 21,  1993, Samuel Edward Emery, Chief
Chemist for Northwest Etch Technology, Inc., was
sentenced to two  months of home  detention
(monitored  electronically),   two  years  of
probation, and  to a fine of $1,000, following his
plea on February 25,1993, of guilty to one count of
violating the CWA. On March 29,1993, company
President Carl Leroy Whinery  was sentenced to
four months of home detention,  four years of
probation, and a fine of $2,000,  following his plea
on February 25,1993 of guilty to CWA violations.
Whinery had also pleaded guilty on behalf of
the corporation, which was sentenced to five
years of probation and fined $25,000.

U.S. v. Orkin Exterminating Co. (W.D. Va.): For
committing approximately 300 violations of state
and federal  pesticide  regulations  while  on
probation for prior offenses, and  200  more
violations  that  occurred  subsequent to  the
completion of probation, and by failing to report
such violations,  a  national pest exterminating
company was found to have violated the terms of
its  probation.  In 1993, the U.S.  government
initiated  a proceeding to enforce the terms of
probation imposed after a 1988 conviction of
Orkin for FIFRA violations that resulted in the
death from  pesticide poisoning of an elderly
Virginia couple. On June 1, 1993, the court fined
Orkin $35,000 for having violated the terms of its
probation.   This case  sends  the message that
probation is not a meaningless sanction, and that
the probationer will  face additional penalties if
environmental compliance is not vigorously
maintained.

Orkin Exterminating Company was convicted and
sentenced in 1988 for violating FIFRA during an
application of the fungicide VIkane. The court in
1988  imposed the  maximum fine  allowed,
$500,000, but suspended $150,000 of that amount,
required Orkin to  perform  2,000 hours  of
community service, and placed Orkin on two years
of probation.  Among the conditions of probation
was a requirement to  obey federal, state, and
local laws  and to  notify  the  court of any
violations, which Orkin thereafter failed to do.

U.S. v. Pacific Aqua Tech Ltd.. E.D. Wa.):  On
September 15, 1992, Gerhard Herman Zimm, Sr.,
his daughter Brigette Zimm Punch, and Pacific
Aqua Tech Limited  were charged with conspiracy
to violate CERCLA, conspiracy to violate the
work practices and operating standards of the
Clean Air Act, and with  violations of CERCLA.
Zimm and the corporation were charged with a
knowing endangerment count under CAA. On May
4, 1993, all three defendants entered guilty pleas,
as the result of negotiations with the Assistant
U.S. Attorney.  Brigette Zimm Punch entered a
guilty plea to a pre-1990 misdemeanor violation
of the Clean Air Act.  Gerhard Herman Zimm and
the corporation were placed on probation for four
of the charges on the following conditions: they
must fund a trust annuity having the face value of
$1,000,000  twenty years from the date of  the
                                            3-88

-------
                        FK1993 Enforcement Accomplishments Report
                                                                                             F
sentencing,  naming as beneficiaries the past
employees of Pacific Aqua Tech Limited from the
date of purchase or possession of the facility by
Zimm, with the exception of Zimm, Punch, and
anyone related to either of them. The trust is to
pay the cost of medical and associated expenses of
asbestosis   or   asbestos-related  diseases
commencing in 20 years and lasting for the life of
the last beneficiary to die or 60 years from the
date of sentencing,  whichever is the lesser period
of time.   Zimm and the corporation  are also
required to adequately contain all asbestos in the
corporation's facility and to pay for all Superfund
costs in the emergency response action that was
taken at the corporation's facility in October
1991.

U.S. v.  Pacific NW Jgrminals. Inc.. et al. (D.
Wa.): The  chief executive officer  of a marine
terminal company was sentenced to six months of
home detention, one year of probation, and a
$2,000 fine.   After saying that the  asbestos
removal and disposal regulations was too costly
and  time  consuming, he  then directed his
employees to remove asbestos from the pipes of
his large bulk tank storage facility at the Port of
Tacoma, to drop the asbestos.to the ground and to
abandon it.  The  asbestos was subsequently
cleaned up by Port of Tacoma contractors under the
direction of EPA's Superfund.

On March 19, 1993, Pacific NW  Terminals, Inc.,
and  Ellis (Ray) Riser, the company's owner and
chief executive officer, were  sentenced.  The
company received a $10,000 fine and was ordered
to pay approximately $17,000 in restitution to the
Port of Tacoma. On January 8,1993, Kiser and the
company each had pled guilty  to a one-count
violation of the Clean Air Act.  They admitted to
the knowing disposal of at least 260 linear feet of
dry  friable  asbestos  in a concentration  of
approximately  75%  in  violation  of  the
applicable work  practices  and  operational
standards, during the period April 1988 to June
1989.

U.S. v.  Nobert Pohj (D. NM):   In the first
environmental criminal  case  in New  Mexico
resolved  with a guilty plea, Nobert Pohl, the
former owner of Service Circuits, Inc.,  a circuit
board manufacturing  facility  located  in
Albuquerque, New Mexico, entered a guilty plea
on Wednesday, September 22,1993, to two counts
of storage and  disposal  of hazardous waste
without a permit in violation of RCRA, and one
count  of violating the City  of Albuquerque
pretreatment ordinance, promulgated pursuant to
the CWA. Pohl was indicted on April 7,1993, by
a federal grand jury for these violations as well
as the  failure to submit quarterly reports to the
City as required  by the wastewater discharge
permit.

Pohl generated hazardous waste at the metal
plating facility in Albuquerque from 1985 to 1989.
Operations  involved the  electrolytic  plating
methods used to introduce the metallic phase onto
circuit boards.  The process involved dipping
boards into acidic  solutions containing heavy
metals. Solvents were used to clean and dry the
boards and printing inks were used for labels.
During  this time, Pohl  stored  listed and
characteristic hazardous wastes on site.  Pohl
also improperly discharged lead contaminated
wastewater into the City of Albuquerque's sewer
system.  On several  occasions, Pohl received
information from  the State of New  Mexico and
City of Albuquerque  regarding  the  proper
management of hazardous waste. In 1989, Pohl
ceased operations and abandoned  the  facility.
EPA and the State of New Mexico spent hundreds
of thousands of dollars removing contaminated
soils and 150 containers of hazardous waste from
the site to permitted disposal facilities.  PoM's
sentencing was scheduled for December 20,1993.

LLS. v. Puregro Company (S.D.  Ca,): A major
agricultural pesticide applicator was sentenced to
a $100,000 fine, and to pay $3,000 in restitution to
the Imperial County Health  Department and
$16^00 to EPA's Superfund, after one of its former
managers ordered the dumping of  at least ten
truckloads of contaminated soil in a dry arroyo
leading to the New River near Calexico, Ca. The
manager ordered  that cardboard be taped over
the company-name  signs on the trucks,  and he
instructed the drivers to take circuitous routes to
the dump site.  Elevated levels of the pesticides
dibromomethane,  dichloropropane,  and
trichloropropane, as well as DDT and cadmium,
were detected there. The company completed an
EPA-supervised cleanup of the site in July 1992,
during which over 100 truckloads of contaminated
soil were removed from the site and disposed of
properly in a hazardous waste landfill.

On January 14,1993, Puregro Company, aka Brea
Agricultural Services, of Heber, Ca., a subsidiary
                                            3-89

-------
                            FK 7993 Enforcement Accomplishments Report
of Unocal, pled guilty to one count of knowingly
transporting a hazardous waste to an unpermitted
facility and was immediately  sentenced.  The
investigation into the former manager's conduct is
continuing, and further charges are expected.

U.S. v. William P. Reilly and Tt Patrick Dowd. 
-------
                        FY1993 Enforcement Accomplishments Report
year period of supervised release upon completion
of his prison sentence. Defendant Saroni Sugar
and Rice,  Inc., pled guilty to one  count of
negligently discharging  pollutants  and  was
sentenced to a $25,000 fine.  Separate from the
plea agreement, the corporation will pay $50,000
in restitution to the Oakland Police Department
and the Alameda  County  District Attorney's
office  for  environmental   law  enforcement
purposes. Sarman, Inc., which is now defunct, was
sentenced to two years probation and no fine.

Saroni is the president of both Saroni Sugar and
Rice, Inc., dba Saroni Total Food Ingredients, and
of Sarman, Inc., dba A&L Trucking, of Oakland,
California.  A&L Trucking transported liquid food
products in tank trucks to food manufacturers, and
then, to  accommodate its customers, A&L also
removed and  transported their  wastewater that
was too acidic to  discharge into  local sewer
systems. Saroni dumped the waste illegally into
the storm drain on the premises of Saroni Sugar
and Rice, Inc.

U.S. v. Robert H.  Schmidt and Lawrence B.
Schmidt (D, 111.): Caught after taking deceptive
actions to escape  detection, the two top officials
of an electroplater received  heavy sentences for
serious  violations  of  CWA  pretreatment
requirements.  On September 10, 1993, Robert H.
Schmidt, President and owner of Rock Island
Plating Works of  Rock Island, Illinois, who pled
guilty  to three  environmental felonies,  was
sentenced to 30 months of incarceration, a fine of
$50,000, and two years of probation.  His son,
Lawrence B, Schmidt, a supervisor at the firm,
who also pled guilty to several violations, was
sentenced to twenty-four months of incarceration,
a fine of $25,000, and two years of probation.

Rock Island Plating is a job-shop electroplater,
which discharges  into the Rock Island city sewer
system.  A search warrant was executed at the
facility  in  1992,  and  covert monitoring  was
conducted, which revealed violations of numerous
electroplating  standards.   Witness statements
revealed that the  Schmidts  had routinely
ordered inadequately treated  plating wastes to be
dumped into the sewer. They also directed that
monitoring  probes  installed by  the City be
removed in order to disguise their discharges.
Hazardous electroplating waste was also dumped
in back  of the facility.  Furthermore, Robert
Schmidt  submitted a certification  to the City
that contained a forged engineer's certification
that the pretreatment system was adequately
designed and operated.

U.S. v. Floyd Sptaggins, et al. (W.D. Ok,): For
disposing  of methylene-chloride based paint
stripper into a lagoon in violation of RCRA, an
aircraft refurbishing company, its president, and
its general manager were sentenced on February 3,
1993.   This followed  their guilty  pleas  on
December 3, 1992,  each  to  the  felony of
unpermitted disposal of hazardous waste.

Floyd Leon Spraggins  is the owner and President
of Cimarron Aircraft Corporation, located at the
City of  El Reno Municipal Airpark in El Reno,
Oklahoma.  Kenneth  Lynn Norris is the general
manager  of operations  for  Cimarron at the
airpark.  Spraggins and Norris directed that the
company's hazardous waste, generated  from
stripping paint from  aircraft, be disposed in a
lagoon  at  the airpark.   Spraggins was fined
$5,000 and sentenced to two years of probation and
to four  hours per week of community service
washing police  vehicles.   Norris was fined
$2,500. The company was sentenced to pay a fine
of $100,000, of which  $50,000 was suspended in
recognition of its compliance and remedial efforts,
and if the company completes a term of probation
without additional violations.

In re; Tohn W. Stecldiqg: On February 13, 1993,
John W. Steckling, an attorney in Clarkston,
Michigan, was suspended from the practice of law
for  60  days  by  the  Michigan   Attorney
Disciplinary Board. The suspension stemmed from
Steckling's submittal  of false analyses to EPA
concerning an underground  injection well.
Steckling's partnership, J & J Investments,  was
convicted for the falsifications on August 27,1990.

Steckling and his partnership owned  and
operated a laundromat Waste laundry water is
disposed of through a permitted underground
injection well. J &  J  was required to send in
periodic  lab  analyses  of  the wastewater.
Steckling paid for the first required analysis, and
submitted the  report  to  EPA. Thereafter,
Steckling  failed to obtain any  more  analyses.
Instead,  from 1987  through 1989,  Steckling
directed  his secretary to change  the  date and
report number on the original analysis, and to
submit  the doctored report to  EPA.  J  &  I
Investments was charged  with  providing false
                                            3-91

-------
                            FF1993 Enforcement Accomplishments Report
statements under the Safe Drinking Water Act,
and was assessed a fine. The U.S. Attorney then
brought Steckling's actions to the attention of the
Attorney Disciplinary Board.

U.S. v.Leroy Stern(W.D. La.): The false labeling
of unregistered pesticides resulted in conviction
and sentencing.  Leroy Stem owns and operates
Stem Chemtech, Inc., of Monroe, Louisiana, that
manufactures, packages, sells, and distributes
commercial  cleaning  supplies and  various
pesticide products. From December 1988 through
April  1992,  Stern  manufactured  and  sold
pesticides that were not registered with EPA.
Stern purchased legally  registered  pesticide
products from various companies and ordered the
company chemist to copy formulas off the labels
of these legal products. The chemist formulated
the pesticides, which  Stern packaged and sold
under a false FIFRA subregistration number. Stern
filed annual reports with EPA for the years 1989-
92 that falsely stated that the company had not
produced pesticide products when, in fact, the
company had produced and sold large quantities
of these products.

On December 8, 1992, Leroy Stern pleaded guilty
to a FIFRA misdemeanor charge for the sales of
unregistered  pesticides, and  Stern Chemtech
pleaded guilty to one count of submitting false
pesticide reports to EPA in violation of 18 U.S.C.
§1001.  On March 17, 1993, Stern Chemtech was
fined  $500,000;  however, the court suspended
approximately  $455,000  based upon actual
payment of $45,000 in  fines and  the costs of
investigation and prosecution, and contingent upon
the successful completion of probation and the
payment of the costs of supervision.  Leroy Stem
was sentenced to five years of probation and was
ordered to pay the costs of his supervision.

U.S.  v. Michael  Strand quist (D. Md., aff'd 4th
Gin); On May 13,1993, the Fourth Circuit Court of
Appeals affirmed the defendant's conviction and
sentence in a water pollution case, upholding the
decision of the trial court in all respects.

 In November 1991,  Michael Strandquist was
convicted of violating the CWA by pumping raw
sewage into a storm grate at the boat basin of
Halle Marina, Inc., of which he was the general
manager, in Chesapeake Beach, Maryland.  In
February 1992, he was sentenced to six months in
prison, six months of home detention, and one year
of probation.   He  appealed  his  conviction,
asserting that the government did  not present
sufficient evidence proving that the discharge
reached navigable waters of the United States,
although he admitted  that  he pumped raw
sewage into a storm grate, raw sewage was found
emerging out of a pipe into navigable waters, and
red dye, poured into the storm grate, flowed out of
the same pipe into the waters. He appealed his
sentence on four grounds, one of which was that
the sentencing judge improperly increased his
sentence without specific proof of environmental
contamination.

The appellate court affirmed his conviction and
sentencing  in all respects.   As to the points
mentioned,  the  court ruled that the evidence
presented and the reasonable inferences arising
from  it support both the conviction based  on
conclusion  that sewage  discharged by the
defendant in fact reached navigable  waters, and
also   the  increased   sentence  based  on the
inevitable   occurrence  of   environmental
contamination as the sewage reached the waters.

IJ.S. v. Richard E. Strom (D. Wy.): The pesticide
poisoning of bald eagles led to the sentencing of a
rancher to two years  of probation and a $10,000
fine on February 24,1993. Dick Strom, operator of
a  sheep  ranch near Laramie,  Wyoming,
unlawfully distributed and misused pesticides to
kill coyotes  and other predators.  He illegally
laced  sheep-bait carcasses with thallium sulfate,
sodium  cyanide,  and  a  chemical named
"compound 1080," which resulted in the deaths of
bald  eagles.   He  unlawfully   distributed
pesticides by selling them  to others while not
being a registered dealer. On November 20,1992,
he pled guilty to five counts of violating FIFRA.
This case is one of several that developed from an
undercover  investigation of the U.S. Fish and
Wildlife Service, in cooperation with EPA.

p.S. v. Weaver Electric Company, et al. (D. Col.):
Several individuals received heavy sentences  for
the illegal disposal of PCBs at several locations
in Colorado, and a company was ordered to pay a
fine of $200,000 and  to spend at least $300,000
more for environmental  remediation at two
company facilities in Denver. On January 11,1993,
Michael Slusser, who was  hired by Weaver to
dispose of the PCBs, was sentenced to one year in
prison and one year of probation.  On December 21,
1992,  Weaver Electric Company, which is engaged
                                            3-92

-------
                        FY1993 Enforcement Accomplishments Report
                                         Jf"*"\
                                        ®
in the business of restoring old transformers and
other  electrical  equipment for  resale, was
sentenced  as  stated  above.  Clayton  Regier,
Weaver plant foreman, and  Bud Rupe, another
employee, each were sentenced to five months in
prison, one year of probation (including  five
months  of electronically  monitored  home
detention), and to pay $5,000 in restitution to the
Superfund for PCB clean ups.  Sentencing is
pending for another individual, and  indictment is
pending for three other individuals.

U.gf  v. Michael  Weitzenhofffnd Thomas
Maiiani 
-------
                            FY1993 Enforcement Accomplishments Report
Sequoyah County Utility Service Authority, that
operates the water treatment plant at Lake
Tenkiller, Oklahoma.   In March  1992, Wright
pled guilty to three counts of violating 18 U.S.C,
1001 by filing with a county health department
monthly operational  reports  containing false
turbidity data as to the contents of the drinking
water. In April 1992, he was sentenced to twelve
months of probation.

But he reserved  the right to appeal his federal
conviction  for submitting false reports through
the county health department  to the  Oklahoma
State Department of Health, on the basis that he
did  not know  that a  federal  agency  had
jurisdiction over  the false   reports that he
submitted to the  county.  He also asserted that
false  statements  submitted  to  the county
department of health are not a  matter within the
jurisdiction of an agency or department of the
United  States if the  SDWA program has been
fully  delegated  by EPA  to state and county
officials. He contended that by delegating the
program, as allowed by federal regulations, the
federal  government lost enforcement authority
under the SDWA.

State Enforcement Actions

Alaska

State of Alaska  v. Stewart Smith. (Anchorage
District Court):   Stewart Smith,  a  real estate
broker and owner of an auto repair and towing
shop, pleaded no contest  to seven misdemeanor
violations of Alaska oil pollution and hazardous
waste laws. Facts brought out at the sentencing
hearing were that in the spring of 1992, Smith
directed  an  employee  to  illegally  dump
approximately 12 barrels  of contaminated waste
oil at two sites.  Four barrels leaked  at one site
causing over $18,000 in cleanup  and   site
remediation costs. Smith also pleaded no contest
to the charge of illegal management of hazardous
waste at his auto repair shop.

The case was significant for the several reasons.
It was the first State environmental criminal case
involving  actual Jail  time for the defendant.  It
was  the  first  time  in   the  state  that
"Crimestoppers" was used  to publicize  the
problem of illegal dumping and provide a means
for the public to  report suspected environmental
crimes.  It was the first time a business owner was
convicted of environmental crimes for directing an
employee to  commit the actual dumping in  a
failed attempt to insulate himself from criminal
liability.  Finally, at the prosecutor's suggestion,
the  court  imposed probation requirements
involving both environmental education for the
auto shop industry regarding the proper handling
of waste oil  and contaminants, and hands-on
cleanup of the environment.

Colorado

State of Colorgdo v. CONOCO (penwi; CO);  In
coordinated multi-media State and  EPA actions,
Colorado Department of Health's  NPDES and
RCRA programs took enforcement actions against
Conoco to clean up seeps to Sand Creek. The State
ordered injunctive relief and collected an NPDES
penalty of $200,000. In a related citizen's CWA
suit, the Sierra Club  settled with Conoco for
$280,000  per  year  for five  years  for  a
Supplemental Environmental Project along Sand
Creek. EPA  supported these  settlements  as
recovering Conoco's economic benefit ($200,000
cash penalty to CDH) and appropriate gravity in
the SEP negotiated by the Sierra Club.

Cjpofs  Brewing  Company  (Golden,  CO):  A
compliance order assessing a $1,050,000 fine was
issued by the State of Colorado to Coors Brewing
Company (CBC) on July 21,1993, citing violations
of the State  SIP  resulting  from under-reported
emissions of VOCs  from  the brewing and
packaging of beer. VOCs are known precursors in
the formation of ozone and the Coors brewery is
located within the Denver ozone non-attainment
area. The  emission of  VOCs from CBC is
estimated to exceed 1,000 tons per year, making
mis a major source of VOC emissions and subject to
non-attainment  area  new  source  review
permitting requirements. This case is of national
interest because the actual emissions  from the
facility are substantially higher  than previously
assumed by regulatory agencies and is likely to
result in the fact that many large breweries across
the country are major, rather than minor, sources
of VOCs. This is very significant for such sources
that are located in ozone non-attainment areas, as
many older breweries  are, as well as for PSD
permitting  in  attainment areas.   EPA  is
considering  a national brewery  enforcement
initiative as a result.
                                            3-94

-------
                        FY1993 Enforcement Accomplishments Report
Delaware

AA Waste Oil Service; On August 19,1993, Paul
Levers, owner, and Jay Morris, employee, of'the
AA Waste Oil Service were convicted of criminal
charges (D. De.) for discharge of a pollutant into
the waters of  the U.S. without a permit.  Each
defendant was sentenced to one year in prison and
one year probation for the violation. In addition,
Levers will be required to perform 200 hours of
community service, and Morris, 100 hours.  This is
a case of "midnight dumping"  that occurred in
broad  daylight. Levers directed  employee  Jay
Morris to discharge oily water from an AA Waste
Oil Vehicle into a drain of a wash bay at  the
Harrington Car Wash. The discharge occurred
when Morris pretended to wash the vehicle,  but
was actually discharging the oily waste water
from heating oil tanks that had been collected by
AA Waste Oil.  AA customers paid up to $1.00 per
gallon to have the water removed from their
underground heating  oil tanks. Levers directed
the discharge of the water so that AA Waste  Oil
would not have  to pay $0.50 per gallon  to a
certified company to dispose of the waste water
properly. The oily water discharge was traced
from the drain of the  car wash  to a storm water
ditch from where it eventually empties into the
Delaware  Bay.  Both  State and EPA attorneys
and.enforcement agents worked together on the
investigation and prosecution of the case.

Florida

Smurfit Industries. Inc. d/big Austill Packaging v.
State Department of Environmental Regulation
(Fla. 1st Dist. Ct. App.):  This is a case involving
postjudgment proceedings to enforce payment of
stipulated penalties in a consent final judgment
against Smurfit  Industries,  Inc., a Delaware
corporation.  The  Austill  Packaging Plant  in
Jacksonville is a subsidiary of Smurfit.   Air
Pollution Rules promulgated by the Florida and
the City of Jacksonville required Smurfit to
install and operate emission control equipment to
reduce VOC emissions at the  Austill  plant in
Jacksonville by no  later than the end  of 1982.
Smurfit  did not  comply with the rules,  and
installed no pollution control equipment. In 1983,
the FDER with the City of Jacksonville as  co-
plaintiff sued in circuit court for enforcement of
the rules and for civil penalties. EPA filed its own
administrative proceeding against Smurfit. The
parties agreed  to a settlement in the early part of
1985.  EPA, though not  a  party to the  state
lawsuit, signed  the Stipulation.  Smurfit was
required to show compliance with the laws and
rules regulating air pollution by the end of 1985.
Smurfit "sold"  the  Austill plant to  Austill
Packaging Company on October 1, 1985. In 1987,
the FDER along with  the City of Jacksonville
filed a Motion for Penalties, alleging Smurfit had
violated the consent final judgment by failing to
pay the stipulated penalties. The  circuit  court
rejected Smurfit's  defenses, and enforced the
stipulated penalties provision  by awarding the
face amount of the stipulated penalties. The
circuit court  entered its  Order Enforcing  Final
Judgment and Adjudging Penalties on June 13, 1991.

Smurfit appealed the decision, challenging the
trial court's interpretation of relevant provisions
of the consent final judgment and the existence of
competent substantial evidence to support the
decision. A cross-appeal  filed by the FDER and
the City  of  Jacksonville challenged the  trial
court's interpretation of the  penalties provision.
The penalties provision called for doubling the
amount of penalties in the event of non-payment.
The appellate  opinion  filed  June 15,  1993,
affirmed the lower court decision.  The "sale" of
the plant did not relieve Smurfit of its obligation
to  demonstrate  compliance and  pay the
stipulated penalties. The appellate court  held
there was competent  substantial  evidence to
support the factual findings of the trial court and
that  the  trial   court's  interpretation  of the
judgment was not unreasonable. Furthermore, the
trial court had  discretion  to  decide whether
doubling of penalties was appropriate. Payment
in full to the FDER has been  made in the amount
of $1,661,649.
Pepartment of Environmental Regulation v. S
graphic. Inc. (Fla. 17th Cir. Ct.): A consent final
judgment was filed September 24, 1993, concerning
Sun  Graphic's  violations  of the  Florida
Department of Environmental Regulation (FDER)
rules regulating the emission of VOCs into the
atmosphere.  This was an action brought under
the  "Florida Air and Water Pollution Control
Act", Chapter 403, Florida Statutes. In September
of 1989, Sun Graphic applied to the FDER for
permits for its lithographic blanket production
facility in  Pompano Beach, Florida. Through this
action the FDER learned Sun Graphic had been
operating the facility without air pollution
operation  permits from the date of its purchase in
                                            3-95

-------
 y*
(m)
x*x
FK /99J Enforcement Accomplishments Report
   1981. It also had constructed several new sources
   of air pollution without permits.  Finally it had
   been exceeding  the allowable  standard for
   discharge of VOC to the atmosphere  from its
   coating mixture since July 1, 1982, Operation of
   each source without a permit is a violation of the
   Florida  Administrative Code.  By  failing to
   utilize reasonably available control  technology,
   Sun Graphic failed to limit discharge of VOC
   into the atmosphere. By signing a stipulation of
   settlement. Sun Graphic agreed to pay Florida,
   $205,000, and add additional collection devises to
   capture  fugitive emissions  of VOC  at  its
   lithographic facility in Pompano Beach.

   City of Vero Beach (Indian River County, FL): On
   June 17,1993, a Consent Order between FDER and
   the  City   of  Vero Beach  (respondent),  a
   municipality engaged in  the generation end
   distribution of electric power, was  filed allowing
   the respondent to  implement an in-kind project in
   lieu of a cash payment in settlement of matters
   arising from violations  of  the Florida Air and
   Water  Pollution Control Act. The respondent is
   the owner and operator of a fossil fuel generator-
   located in Vero Beach, Florida.  The facility was
   visited by  DER  on April 30, 1992, and May 11,
   1992. The  recorder for  the continuous  opacity
   monitoring system had been removed. Subsequent
   reports submitted by the respondent failed to
   mention  the downtime of the recorder.    In
   settlement of these matters, Vero Beach chose the
   in-kind  penalty  option  that  consisted  of a
   payment of $71,582.25  to  be  used  in the
   construction of a wet lab for the Learning Center
   located in Indian River County.  As a result of this
   project, future generations of citizens will become
   more environmentally conscious.

   DER v. Martin Electronics. Inc. and Roy York, and
   Roger? Winter (Fla. 3rd Cin Ct):  A stipulation
   and consent final judgment signed February 16,
   1993,  addressed alleged  violations  of  state
   hazardous  waste, industrial waste, and potable
   water regulations. Martin Electronics, Inc.  (MEI)
   is a Delaware corporation authorized to do
   business  in Florida. MEI is the owner of property
   located  in  Perry, Florida. MEI  manufactures
   pyrotechnic devices such as fuses, grenades, and
   flares. This makes the facility a generator of
   hazardous  waste.  From  December  1991 to
   December 1992, the Florida  Department of
   Environmental Regulation (FDER)  conducted
   several visits and inspections of the MEI facility.
                    As a result of its investigation, the FDER alleged
                    multiple violations  of solid,  industrial and
                    hazardous waste management regulations. The
                    alleged violations  included,  among others,
                    failure to comply with  the standards applicable
                    to operators of hazardous  waste  treatment
                    facilities; positive readings for  microbiological
                    contamination;  and  failure to  properly train
                    employees  on  handling  hazardous waste.
                    Violations were also alleged in connection with
                    residues left from  the  burning of reactive
                    hazardous waste.  In settlement of these matters,
                    the MEI agreed to pay  $325,000.00 and install a
                    new water plant

                    Georgia

                    inland  Container  Corporation:  The Inland
                    Container Corporation  owns  a  large pulp and
                    paper mill discharging  treated effluent into the
                    Coosa River in Northwest Georgia. As a result of
                    an internal spill, the wastewater  system  failed
                    resulting in significant NPDES permit violations
                    and  a fish  kill. The  Georgia  Environmental
                    Protection Division first  issued an emergency
                    order closing the mill. After one week of closure,
                    the wastewater  treatment system stabilized and
                    the mill reopened. A  final consent order was
                    issued which contained a $600,000 settlement.
                    The disposition of the settlement was $100,000 to
                    the State of Georgia, $250,000 for water pollution
                    source reduction prior  to September, 1994, and
                    $250,000 for water pollution source reduction prior
                    to  September,   1997.  Strict  controls  were
                    established  for expenditure  of the source
                    reduction funds.

                    Packaging   Specialties.   Inc.:   Packaging
                    Specialties, Inc., operates a flexographic printing
                    press facility in Northeast Georgia. The company
                    is a large emitter of volatile organic compounds
                    into the  atmosphere.  An inspection by  the
                    Georgia Environmental  Protection  Division
                    revealed  the  company  installed  and was
                    operating four presses without permits or without
                    pollution control equipment.  The State issued a
                    consent order containing a $500,000 settlement to
                    be paid to the State of Georgia. The Company
                    was also ordered  to install  the  necessary
                    pollution control equipment and receive a permit.

                    Idaho

                    Safetv-Kleen Corporation. Boise and Pocatello.
                                               3-96

-------
                        FY1993 Enforcement Accomplishments Report
Idaho: Three consent orders were signed over a
four-month period based on inspections performed
from 1990 to 1992.  A RCRA consent order was
signed March 29,1993, concerning Safety-KIeen's
old Boise, Idaho, facility's operation of above-
ground storage product and waste tanks without
secondary containment.   The order provides
conditions outlining final clean closure activities
at the facility in accordance  with  40 CFR  265
standards, submittal and implementation of a
Corrective Measures Plan to address cleanup at
all of the solid waste management units and areas
of concern  identified in the  RCRA  Facility
Assessment.

A consent order was signed  on June 25, 1993,
concerning the release of mineral spirits from an
underground  storage  tank  and   inadequate
implementation  of the  Contingency  Plan at
Safety- Kleen's Pocatello, Idaho, facility.  The
order  provides  for  the removal  and  partial
closure of product and waste underground storage
tanks  in  accordance  with  Safety-KIeen's
operating permit.   A penalty of  $7,000 was
assessed and collected.

On July 30, 1993,  a consent  order  was signed
assessing a $3,900 penalty against Safety-KIeen's
old Boise facility  for five   violations of  the
generator   and  land   disposal   restriction
requirements.  The  order also provides  for
resolution of the violations.

Maryland

Kanasco: A multi-media complaint and order was
issued seeking  an administrative  penalty of
$25,000.  The complaint alleged violations of air
pollution, water pollution, and hazardous waste
regulations.  Kanasco appealed this order and the
penalty to the State  Office of Administrative
Hearings. After a hearing held  in  April, 1993,
the Administrative Law Judge imposed the full
penalty sought by  Maryland Department of the
Environment (MDE).

Kanasco Ltd. is a pharmaceutical manufacturing
firm which employed about 20 people during the
period in  which  the  violations  occurred.
Violations occurred at  the company plant located
in Anne Arundel County.  Synthetic  penicillins
were  manufactured at the site.  In the water
pollution area, the  company failed to report the
discharge of wastewater subject to the categorical
pretreatment standards.  These wastewater were
transported  to  the Aberdeen WWTP on three
occasions.   Air pollution violations included
failure to comply with terms of the permit-to-
operate,  i.e., the company  failed  to perform
vapor detection surveys as required. The company
also caused nuisance odors which traveled beyond
their property lines on three occasions.  In the
hazardous waste area, the  company failed to
comply  with  the  storage  requirements  for
generators  of  hazardous waste, by  not
maintaining overfilling controls on a hazardous
waste storage tank.  The company also failed to
minimize the  release of  hazardous waste
constituents, i,e., wastewater contaminated with
hazardous constituents was discharged to the
Anne Arundel County sanitary sewer system on
two occasions.

Eastern Stainless:  MDE entered into a multi-
media judicial  consent judgment with Eastern
Stainless Corporation of Baltimore, MD.  This
action resolved  certain NPDES, hazardous waste
and air  pollution violations addressed in the
civil complaint  filed on November 27, 1991, and
imposed numerous obligations on Eastern Stainless
to achieve and maintain compliance with the
State's environmental laws. The consent judgment
requires  Eastern Stainless to implement various
corrective actions regarding  NPDES, hazardous
waste, air pollution, groundwater  remediation,
stormwater management, wastewater reduction,
effluent  toxicity, solid waste reduction  and
recycling issues.  In addition, the Department
assessed  a civil  penalty of $1,000,000, to which a
maximum penalty credit of $702,000 was applied
for, various supplemental pollution prevention
control measures. The company's total payable
penalty was $325,450. The company agreed to
expend a minimum of $1,247,000 for pollution
prevention projects which include improvements
to air pollution control equipment, asbestos
removal, acid  piping replacement,  solvent
reduction, process water   reuse  and  sludge
recycling.  The judgment  also provided for
stipulated penalties  in  the  event  Eastern
Stainless  fails  to  comply   with  any effluent
limitation or any reporting  requirement of the
judgment.

Alford Packaging. Inc.;  In  the first criminal
action brought by Maryland  for violations of air
pollution regulations, Alford  Packaging, Inc. was
charged with various criminal violations.  The
                                           3-97

-------
m)
   *<*
                            FK /99J Enforcement Accomplishments Report
company pleaded guilty in court in August of 1993
to four counts of violation of  the air pollution
regulations of Maryland.  In the guilty plea, the
company agreed to pay a $100,000 penalty and to
a  probationary period  of two years.    An
administrative case was  also  pursued for the
violations and a penalty of $25,000 was agreed to
by the company in September of 1993.

The company is a rotogravure printing company
located in Baltimore City, which is  in a severe
ozone non-attainment area. Maryland regulations
for the control of air pollution for this type of
facility require a 65% reduction of VOC emissions
from sources with VOC emissions exceeding 550
pounds daily. Alford's emissions exceed this 550
pound level, therefore,  they  are  required to
reduce emissions by 65%. Alford reduces VOC
emissions  by ducting fumes from their  printing
lines into two afterburners.

A copy of  an internal  company memo was
anonymously received by  MDE in the fall of 1992.
The memo indicated that the company was aware
of some problems with its  air  pollution control
system that would cause  violations of Maryland
air pollution regulations. A subsequent inspection
of the  plant by MDE  established   that an
insufficient amount of fumes from the  printing
lines were being ducted to the afterburners.  This
resulted in less than the required 65% reduction
being achieved.   Based on this inspection and
data about the Company's emissions, a  criminal
case was pursued  in the Circuit Court for
Baltimore City. The violations  were corrected in
the spring of 1993, after the company became
aware of the MDE investigation.

Montana

On July  7, 1992, a  Montana Department of
Agriculture  (MDA)  inspector observed  a FIFRA
§18 Lorsban application  to wheat for Russian
wheat aphid control. No observable drift was
noted; however, the inspector soon became ill and
took refuge in the landowner's house until the air
cleared. The inspector proceeded to a hospital
emergency  room where  she was treated with
atropine.  The incident was investigated  by a
second inspector and Lorsban was found on off-
target vegetation  indicating that drift  has
occurred. A January 4, 1993  consent  order
negotiated between the MDA and the applicator
included a penalty of $200.
                                                  New Jersey

                                                  Standard Tank Cleaning Corporation; On June 10,
                                                  1993, the Superior Court of New Jersey concluded
                                                  the penalty phase of the trial of Standard Tank
                                                  Cleaning Corporation. The court had previously
                                                  found Standard Tank liable for violating its New
                                                  Jersey Pollutant  Discharge Elimination System
                                                  (NJPDES)  permit and enjoined Standard Tank
                                                  from  discharging  in further  violation of its
                                                  permit. The court ordered Standard Tank to pay a
                                                  $3,960,000 penalty for 157 violations  of  the
                                                  effluent limitations in its  NJPDES permit and
                                                  $41,825 for reporting violations during the period
                                                  of May 1988 to August 1990.  The court  further
                                                  found  Jane  Frank Kresch  and  Susan Frank
                                                  personally liable for two of the above-noted
                                                  violations and penalized them each $500,000 as
                                                  responsible corporate officials. In addition, the
                                                  court ordered Standard Tank, Jane Frank  Kresch
                                                  and Susan Frank collectively to pay a penalty of
                                                  $266,000  for  failing  to  pay  a   $175,000
                                                  administrative penalty assessed  by  the New
                                                  Jersey Department of Environmental Protection
                                                  and Energy (NJDEPE). The NJDEPE also revoked
                                                  Standard Tank's NJPDES permit based upon these
                                                  violations and Standard Tank has withdrawn its
                                                  challenge to the revocation.

                                                  Witco Corporation: On  February 24,  1993, the
                                                  U.S. District Court for the  District  of New
                                                  Jersey  signed a  Judicial  Consent Order 0CO)
                                                  between the NJDEPE, Witco Corporation, Perth
                                                  Amboy and the   NJ Public  Interest Group
                                                  (NJPR1G).    The  JCO  settled a citizen  suit
                                                  brought  by  NJPIRG in  which the  NJDEPE
                                                  intervened.  Under the terms of  the settlement,
                                                  Witco paid a penalty of $10 million for  surface
                                                  water violations  that occurred seven years  and
                                                  agreed to a construction schedule  to come  into
                                                  compliance.   The  $10 million  payment   was
                                                  divided, with $7.25  million  to  the   NJDEPE's
                                                  Clean   Water   Enforcement  Fund  for  the
                                                  enforcement  and  implementation of the Water
                                                  Pollution  Control Act,  $2  million to   the
                                                  Environmental  Endowment  for  New  Jersey
                                                  Inc.  for  environmental improvement projects,
                                                  $650,000 to the City of Perth Amboy  for water
                                                  resource or  pollution abatement projects,  and
                                                  $1,000,000 to the  Rarltan  Bay Medical Center,
                                                  located  in Perth  Amboy, for emergency medical
                                                  training.
                                            3-98

-------
                        FF1993 Enforcement Accomplishments Report
Noble Oil Company. Inc.: Noble Oil Company,
located in Tabernacle, N.J, illegally  operated  a
hazardous waste  storage and  treatment facility.
The  facility  recovered waste oil to  be used as
a  fuel.   Since  waste oil  is  regulated as  a
hazardous waste,  the  facility  operations are
subject   to   NJDEPE's   hazardous   waste
regulations.  On January  7, 1993, the Superior
Court   found  Noble  liable  for   numerous
hazardous waste  violations,  and ordered Noble
to cease operations at  its Tabernacle  facility
until it obtained all  necessary  permits,  paid
a   penalty   of  $250,000  and   remediated
petroleum hydrocarbon  contaminated   soil
throughout its site.  The NJDEPE subsequently
revoked   Noble's   interim   authorization  to
operate  a storage  and  treatment facility, and
denied  its  application  for   a permit.   The
facility is currently in Chapter 11 bankruptcy.

Exxon  Company. USA  • Bay-wear  Refinery.
Linden.  N.T.:  On  March  31, 1993, NJDEPE
executed an AGO with  Exxon providing Exxon
time to obtain permit modifications for  its CO
boilers, Wet Gas Scrubber and Sulfur Recovery
Units  and comply  with the N.J. Air Pollution
Control  Act.   The  ACO provides   startup,
shutdown  and  malfunction  allowances for  a
specified percentage of  annual operation  time,
with  stipulated  penalties for  exceedances of
these allowable emissions.  Under  the ACO,
Exxon  will  conduct  modeling  to demonstrate
non-adverse health  effects  from   allowable
particulate emissions, and conduct  stack  tests
every  12 months  to  demonstrate  compliance
with allowable  particulate emissions.   Exxon
also  agreed to pay a penalty of million,  and
stipulated penalties for  subsequent  emission
exceedances.  Final compliance by Exxon is to be
achieved by  August 29,  1995.

Chemical   Waste  Management/SV  Farming
Mining Facility: As a result of continued  clay
mining  operations,  more  than  25  acres of
freshwater  wetlands   had   been  severely
damaged  in  Quinton   Township, Gloucester
County,  in  violation of  the   N.J.  Freshwater
Wetlands  Act    The   NJDEPE initiated  an
enforcement action against   Chemical   Waste
Management, a  recent purchaser  of  the  mining
business.    The   NJDEPE,   through    a
collaborative enforcement  effort with the  U.S.
Army Corps of Engineers,  the U.S.  Fish  and
Wildlife  Service,  and with  the cooperation of
Chemical  Waste   Management, executed  an
ACO  providing  for  the  restoration of  more
than  25  acres of freshwater wetlands.  Under
the  order,  Chemical   Waste  Management
initiated   restoration,   including extensive
grading  and  filling  and the  re-establishment
of  former hydrological conditions and biological
communities.  The ACO also provides  for the
restoration of  the  previously destroyed  swamp
pink (Helonlas Bullata), an endangered species,
and mat is also underway.   In   addition, the
restoration of  the swamp  pink  community will
be monitored and  tracked, contributing  to the
scientific knowledge base  for this endangered
species.

New York

Anitec  Image Corp.:   The   Department of
Environmental Conservation (the Department),
working with the Departments of Law  and
Health,  completed a significant enforcement
action involving Anitec Image Corp., a division
of International Paper.

Under one order, Anitec will  perform a  wide
array  of measures  to clean up all  underground
contamination,  reduce toxic   chemical   air
emissions, conduct an environmental compliance
audit, and develop accident prevention  plans
for its Binghamton plant.  The company paid a
civil penalty  of $1,450,000 for past violations
of the ECL.

According  to  the  terms of the  consent order,
Anitec must:

•  Hire  an independent auditor  to conduct a
comprehensive environmental  audit  of  the
company's compliance  with state and  federal
pollution control laws;

•  Fund  an on-site environmental monitor to
verify compliance with environmental laws and
the remedial measures  required under  the
order;

»  Carry  out   measures   to   identify   and
significantly reduce sources  of air pollution at
the plant;

•  Develop and implement a Best Management
Practices  plan to  correct  past violations  and
ensure future compliance;
                                            3-99

-------
f A \
(m)
FY1993 Enforcement Accomplishments Report
    *  Complete a  comprehensive  Environmental
    Improvement Program to  reduce  significantly
    the  risk of  releases of hazardous wastes  or
    other contaminants to the environment;

    i  Pay  a total of $100,000 to Broome County
    for the purchase of equipment or  other resources
    needed   to  improve the county's  emergency
    response capabilities;
    *  Pay $200,000 to  the  Health Department  to
    offset costs  of future health studies of company
    employees and nearby residents.

    Under a second Order, Anitec is conducting  an
    investigation of  the  nature and extent of  all
    hazardous waste contamination at the site, and
    will   develop   a   comprehensive  remedial
    program  to  cleanup  all  hazardous  waste
    contamination.  This  program has an  estimated
    cost  of  $15 million.

    Bristol-Myers Squibb Comparjy: The Department
    and  Bristol-Myers Squibb Company entered into
    a  multimedia   enforcement  order  and   a
    Memorandum of Understanding which promote
    significant   risk   reduction   and  pollution
    prevention  at its   facility  in  the  Town  of
    Dewitt (Onondaga County).

    The   multimedia  order  provides  that  Bristol
    will:

    »  perform a site  assessment consisting of a site
    characterization  study   and a  groundwater
    monitoring   program. The  site   assessment
    requires the complete  characterization of  site
    contamination  as well  as the implementation
    of appropriate remedial actions;

    »  implement  an  approvable  air   pollution
    control  plan which will  include point  source
    testing,   source  inventory and permitting,  air
    modeling, fugitive emission testing and control
    and  an  odor control program;  and

    »  fund  a compliance audit of its facility by an
    independent consultant  approved  by   the
    Department.
   The  MOU,   which  is  enforceable   as
   administrative order on consent, requires:
              an
                    • an approvable accident prevention  planning
                    program;

                    • an approvable emergency response program
                    which   will   ensure that,  local  emergency
                    response teams are  trained  and  equipped to
                    respond to  incidents  at the facility; and
                    • implementation of  a toxic chemical reduction
                    plan which will achieve a 50%  reduction  of
                    total toxic  chemical releases  at the facility by
                    the  year 2000.
    • an approvable community awareness program,
    to include a community advisory group;
Western New Yfiffc Nuclear Service Center
Valley): The Department signed a Federal and
State  Facility Compliance  Agreement "FSFCA"
and  Addendure  for  the  Western New York
Nuclear Service  Center ("West Valley").   A
FSFCA is the final  negotiated document, that,
under EPA guidance, resolves RCRA compliance
violations  at a  federal facility. Parties  to  the
FSFCA include US DOE, NYSERDA and  EPA
Region II.  The FSFCA  obviates the need  for
literal compliance with RCRA  requirements by
setting forth alternative compliance standards.
This is the  third  document  the  Department
has negotiated for  West Valley.  A correction
action order was finalized in January 1992, and
work  is  underway.    In  February  1993,   a
memorandum of agreement that will provide up
to $250,000 per year to  defray DEC's oversight
costs was finalized.

North Dakota

Estee Lauder:  On  November 2, 1990,  Decom
Resources Inc., transported seven pallets  (13,000
Ibs.) of off-specification Estee Lauder nail polish
from Estee Lauder in Toronto, Canada, to  Health
Care  Incinerators  located in  Fargo,  North
Dakota. The off-specification nail polish was  a
characteristic hazardous waste (D001).  Health
Care Incinerators (HCI) is not and has never been
permitted to receive hazardous waste. EPA,
through oversight, encouraged the State to pursue
enforcement at the facility. North Dakota settled
this major international waste action on March
24, 1993. A $20,000 penalty, of which $15,000 was
stipulated, was agreed to.

Oregon

Fuel  Processors,  Inc.. and   Wilmer  Briggs,
IMuItaomah County Circuit Court, Oregon):  On
December 29, 1992, Oregon DEQ assessed Fuel
                                               3-100

-------
                        FY1993 Enforcement Accomplishments Report
                                        (SB)
                                        ^*tHtt
-------
                            FY1993 Enforcement Accomplishments Report
characterization at the Industrial Solvents and
Chemical Company (ISCC) site.  The ISCC site is
a closed solvent  recycling facility which was
abandoned by its owner in 1990. It is presently the
number one site on the Pennsylvania Priority List
for  Remedial  Response,     The  site has
approximately 189 above-ground storage tanks
containing  various amounts of hazardous
materials in liquid,  sludge and solid form. In
addition, there are approximately 4,266 full or
partially full drums, and approximately 2,400
empty drums left on-site.  Off-site residential
wells  used  for  drinking water have been
contaminated.  The site poses a substantial risk to
public health and the environment.

Pennzoil;  The DER issued Pennzoil Products
Company an order to plug its abandoned oil/gas
wells (approximately 2,000) in  one year. Pennzoil
appealed the  administrative  order   to the
Pennsylvania Environmental Hearing Board. The
case was resolved with the entry of a consent
adjudication before  the Environmental Hearing
Board.  Pursuant to the consent adjudication,
Pennzoil agreed to plug the wells within six years
and to reclaim the well sites.  As a guarantee of
its obligations, Pennzoil posted an enhanced bond
of $75,000 contingent upon compliance with the
requirements of the consent adjudication.  (The
statute limits bond liability to $24,000 and
guarantees only plugging obligations). Another
innovative provision of the consent adjudication
was Pennzoil's agreement to pay a  stipulated
penalty of $8,000 per well for  any wells that are
not plugged according to schedule.

Wheeling-Pittsburgh Steel Co.:  The EPA, The
Pennsylvania Department of Environmental
Resources and the  Natural Resources  Defense
Council  had  originally  filed a  complaint  in
federal court against Wheeling-Pittsburgh Steel
Corporation  for  five years  worth  of NPDES
permit violations  and  spill  events  at  the
Allenport Plant  on the Monongahela  River.
Wheeling-Pittsburgh promised  the Department
that  it could settle  with the  agency  if the
Department would do so outside the Federal suit.
The Department withdrew from the Federal suit
and Wheeling-Pittsburgh failed to settle. The
Department filed a separate complaint before the
Pennsylvania Environmental Hearing Board for
$2.2 million.  Wheeling-Pittsburgh has agreed to
settle for $625,000, to pay stipulated penalties at
the rates in  the federal  settlement which will
only terminate when the federal settlement does,
and to  include  the  DER  in  all  of  the
correspondence surrounding the Federal decree
remediation and improvement programs.
       r
USX;  On June 24, 1993, the USX Corporation
entered a consent decree addressing violations at
USX's Mon Valley  Works  with the U.S., the
Commonwealth of Pennsylvania, AHegeheny
County, and the citizens group, Group  Against
Smog  and  Pollution  (GASP),  as a  limited
intervenor.  The decree  requires  USX to pay a
penalty of $1,800,000 divided equally among the
three governments. Additionally, USX agreed to
reduce its emissions at the Clairton Coke Works
and Edgar Thomson Works basic oxygen process
shop below applicable  limits.  Moreover, the
decree  resolved the status of numerous coke and
steel  processing  units by  declaring  them
shutdown.  The processing units were located at
USX's Clairton Plant, National Works, Duquesne
Works, Homestead Works, and the Saxonburg
Sinter Plant.

US AIR et al.:  The Pennsylvania Department of
Environmental   Resources   issued   two
Administrative Orders  -  one to  all of the
passenger carriers and the landowner, Allegheny
County, and one to all of the cargo carriers, the
United States Air  Force,  the  Pennsylvania
National Guard and the landowner, Allegheny
County to  cease the unpermitted discharge of
spent deicing fluids from the airport.  The two
military organizations voluntarily complied and
all  others  appealed from  the  Orders.   The
Department, the carriers, and Allegheny county
have a settlement whereby the carriers agreed to
pay a civil penalty of approximately $60,000, to
construct remote deicing pads with collection
systems (some are already complete and in use) so
that spent fluids may be hauled and treated, and
agreed to try alternative  materials  on the
runways, ramps,  and  taxiways as anti-skid
materials.  Several exceptions are carved out of
the document for  compliance  with  FAA
regulations for safety and emergencies. According
to the  County and the carriers, this is  the first
airport in the country to take such measures.

South Carolina

Laidlaw   Environmental  Services  of  South
Carolina: An Administrative  Consent   Order
was signed   September  14,  1993, concerning
                                            3-102

-------
                        FY1993 Enforcetnent Accomplishments Report
                                         m
Laidlaw   Environmental   Services     alleged
failure to; properly handle, store, and dispose
of hazardous  wastes;  properly operate  and
maintain a hazardous waste landfill;  properly
operate    an    industrial   waste  landfill;
adequately  control  for  fugitive   particulate
matter emissions  from  the   site;   and fully
comply with previously issued orders.  Laidlaw
was  cited in violation of  the  State's Hazardous
Waste  Management Regulations,  the Industrial
Solid Waste Disposal  Regulations, and  the  Air
Pollution Control Regulations. Laidlaw agreed
to the following: to institute procedures to ensure
compliance with all regulations; to submit a plan
for  state approval to address  management  of
specific  and  unique wastes  handled at  the
facility; and to pay a  penalty in the amount of
$1.825  million

Tennessee

Witherspoon Recycling Site, (Knoxville, Term):
On October 7, 1993, the Tennessee Department of
Environment  &  Conservation,  Division  of
Superfund  filed  a Chancery Order, requesting
injunctive relief, in,the  12th Judicial District of
Davidson County, Tennessee. Respondents named
in the order were David A. Witherspoon, Jr. and
Jane C.  Witherspoon, both  individuals, and
David Witherspoon, Inc. the corporate entity
under  which the  facility and operation existed,
the  individual respondents having been owners
and operators of the facility since 1974.

The  site  is located within the Knoxville City
limits.  Residential areas are located  adjacent to
the  site in all directions. There are six churches
and two schools within one mile of the site. Goose
Creek, which flows through  and off the site
property, also flows through Mary Vestal Park, a
municipal community playground.

The  facility and  site, a  salvage company  in
operation since the 1940's, is  contaminated by
radioactive jU-234,  heavy   metals  (lead,
mercury), mixed wastes and organic compounds
such as polychlorinated biphenyls (PCB). During
the   years  of operation the  facility was not
licensed or permitted to store, treat or dispose of
hazardous waste.

In 1966, the facility came under  the  State
permitting  authority  of  the  Division   of
Radiological Health,  Between 1966 and  1985,
numerous violations were cited leading to the
issuance of a Commissioner Order in 1985. In May
of 1990, following non-compliance, a Final Order
and  an Assessment  of  Penalty was  filed in
Chancery  Court by the Division of Radiological
Health.

In March, 1991, the site was found to "pose or may
reasonably be anticipate to pose  a danger to
public, safety, and  environment" and was
promulgated  to the List of Inactive Hazardous
Substance Sites of Tennessee,  placing  the site
under the  authority of the Division of Superfund.
On April  4,  1991, the State  issued  an  order
requiring  the site be  secured  (fenced) and the
owners to  submit and implement an investigation
plan and  remedial action plan for the  site.  By
April,  1992,  Witherspoon, Inc. declared that it
was unable to clean up the site. Since that time,
over one million  dollars has been  spent by the
State and the  Department of Energy in an effort to
assess and remediate the environmental damage.
During the time this  effort was underway, the
respondents  allowed additional hazardous
wastes to  be released in the environment.  As
recently  as  August,  1993,  the  Witherspoon
respondents  have been  responsible   for the
disposal of contaminated materials on site.

The results of the October 1993 injunctive action
was precedent setting in that  this  was the first
judicial action in which Tennessee has taken legal
possession of property.   In  the  case of the
Witherspoon  Site, this action was taken in order
to eliminate continuing disposal of contaminated
materials  and to maintain  control of  the site
while efforts to investigate and remediate the
site are underway.   The. resulting temporary
restraining order, prevents  the  Witherspoon
respondents from accessing the property.

Utah

State of Utah v. Geneva Steel Corporation: In the
largest out-of- court settlement for violations of
the Utah  Water Pollution Control Act and the
Utah  Pollutant Discharge  Elimination System
Permit  for  its  mill  at  Orem, Geneva Steel
Corporation  paid over $750,000 in stipulated
penalties between December 1989, and September
1993. These stipulated penalties, for discharging
excessive ammonia concentrations, were included
in two settlement agreements, signed  May 31,
1990, and  December 11, 1991. By the end  of FY
                                            3-103

-------
                            FF /99J Enforcement Accomplishments Report
1993,  the  facility  had  finally  achieved
compliance with its permit limits.

Virginia

Stay Enterprises;     Administrative  Penalty
Settlement and Consent Special Order was issued
to Star Enterprises,  et al, on  April 30,  1993, in
response to an oil discharge from storage tanks at
the Fairfax Terminal.  The Order includes an
administrative  penalty  of $2,750,000  and
requirements to provide pollution prevention
measures  at  the  Fairfax  Terminal  site.
Approximately, 172,000 gallons of petroleum
product was discharged from the tank farm over a
period of years and resulted in an  extensive oil
plume, which  significantly  impacted nearby
neighborhoods.

Commonwealth Laboratory!    Commonwealth
Laboratory  is  a  privately-owned laboratory
located in Richmond, VA  that tests water, air,
and soil samples as required by the CWA, CAA,
RCRA, and SARA.  Prior to a grand jury hearing
for 50 potential indictments for falsification, the
Corporation pled guilty as part of a plea bargain
agreement to a violation of the Virginia Consumer
Protection Act and paid $100,000 to the City of
Richmond.  The Corporation was alleged to  have
falsified data by altering test results, reporting
tests not  performed, falsifying records  for  data
preservation,  holding time, and  equipment
calibration. Subsequently,  in  a civil action, the
Commonwealth Laboratory paid $50,000 to the
U.S. Government for allegedly false  submittals.

Lawrence J. Levine; Lawrence J. Levine, who was
the  former  manager   of  Commonwealth
Laboratory located in Richmond, VA, pled guilty
to a Virginia Consumer Protection violation. Mr.
Levine was indicted on 48 counts of submitting
false statements to  the Virginia  Water Control
Board  and the Virginia Department of Waste
Management  and  pled  guilty  to three
misdemeanors in a plea bargain.  The defendant
was  sentenced  to three years in jail and fined
$7300; all but one day in jail was suspended with
five years' probation.

Washington

Washington Water  Power Company. Spokane.
Washington, y Ecology. Pollution Control Hearing
Board (PCHB 93-36): In August 1992, Ecology was
called to investigate an oil sheen visible on the
Spokane  River  in the  downtown Spokane,
Washington area.  The investigation revealed
Washington Water Power Company as the source
of the oil. The  oil sheen was caused when a
diesel hose broke  during a fueling  operation.
Subsequent   investigation  revealed   that
Washington Water Power failed to report the
spill to authorities  as required by  state law. An
effort was made to contain and clean up the spill.
In settlement of the  case,  Washington Water
Power paid $2,000 to Ecology and agreed to spend
an additional  $15,000 for innovative projects,

Klein Bicycle. Inc..  Chehalis, Washington^ v.
EfiOlfigy,,  (PCHB  No.  93-174): In  August  1993,
Klein Bicycle, Inc., a bicycle manufacturer, was
penalized $242,000 under state dangerous waste
and water  quality laws for illegally discharging
wastewater and hazardous waste to the ground.
The company was also cited for 15 hazardous
waste violations.  The violations were observed
during two inspections conducted in April and
May 1992. The inspections revealed Klein had
failed  to voluntarily  comply  with   state
requirements  despite  technical assistance  from
Ecology and repeated efforts by the agency to gain
compliance. The resulting penalty and order were
appealed but later settled.   Included  in the
settlement agreement  is Klein's promise to pay
$50,000 toward programs  or projects  that benefit
water quality locally  of  statewide.   A $50,000
credit for innovative actions is also allowed for
hazardous waste management improvements.
Klein agreed  to pay Ecology $40,000.  Ecology
suspended $50,000  of  the  original  penalty
contingent upon Klein's compliance with  state
hazardous waste and water quality laws during
the next three years.

Wyoming

State  of  Wyoming  v.  Holly Sugar Corp.
(Torrington, WY):   Holly Sugar  exceeded  its
NPDES  permit  limitations for  BOD  and
temperature  for a period  of six months and
nineteen  months respectively.  As  a result, the
Wyoming Department of Environmental Quality
filed action in court to seek civil  penalties and
injunctive relief for these violations.  On July 14,
1992, Holly Sugar Corp. paid $70,000 in civil
penalties and  has agreed to an additional $50,000
in  stipulated penalties should  it  have  a
"significant violation" (40%  over  its  permit
                                           3404

-------
                        FY1993 Enforcement Accomplishments Report
limitation) between then and March 1, 1994. The
Company was able to comply with its permit
limits during the 1993  campaign. This action,
along with the Western Sugar case, is a major step
for  Wyoming  in  aggressively  addressing
noncompliance and  seeking penalties for NPDES
permit violations.

State of Wyoming v.  Western Sugar.  (Lovell,
WY):    Western  Sugar  exceeded the  BOD
limitations established in its NPDES permit for
a period of six months. As a result, the Wyoming
Department of Environmental Quality (WYDEQ)
filed action in court to seek civil penalties and
injunctive relief for these violations. On June 29,
1992, Western  Sugar  paid $35,000  in  civil
penalties and agreed to an additional $100,000 in
stipulated penalties  should it have a "significant
violation" (40% over its permit limitation) before
March 1,1994.

In the Underground Injection Control program, on
August 18,  1993, the Wyoming Oil and Gas
Conservation  Commission  issued  a   final
administrative  order  reflecting an  agreement
reached with DNR Oil and  Gas, Inc. of Denver,
Colorado. The order required DNR to pay an
administrative penalty of $10,000 for numerous
violations including the unauthorized disposal
("injection") of produced water from DNR's oil
field  operations into three Class II injection
wells. These wells are located in the Brush Creek
Field in Converse County, Wyoming.
                                           3-105

-------
                          FY1993 Enforcement Accomplishments Report
IV.   Federal Facilities Enforcement and Federal Activities

Office of Federal Facilities Enforcement

      EPA's   Federal   Facility  Enforcement   and Compliance Program, managed by  the Office  of
Federal Facilities Enforcement (OFFE), promotes protection  of human health and  the environment by
expeditiously  cleaning up and  ensuring compliance at federal hazardous and radioactive waste sites,
OFFE  is  establishing a framework that ensures the federal government is accountable to the public for
its environmental record.  In  recognition of the public's vital interests, OFFE will work to further
engage the public with the federal sector in the decision making process for management and  cleanup
of environmental contamination at federal facilities,

      In  1993, the Office of Federal Facilities Enforcement (OFFE)  continued to ensure  federal
government compliance with all environmental laws. The federal government manages a vast array  of
industrial activities at its 27,000 installations. These activities present unique management problems
from the standpoint of compliance with federal environmental statutes.  Although federal facilities
are only a small percentage of the regulated community, many federal installations  are larger and more
complex  than private facilities and often present a greater number of sources of pollution in all media.
The  federal government is investing significant resources in addressing environmental cleanup and
compliance issues at federal facilities,

Superfund Cleanup

     At  the start of EPA's federal facilities enforcement program, EPA directed its resources largely to
the completion of negotiations for CERCLA § 120 interagency agreements. These agreements made up
the cornerstone of the enforcement program addressing the 123 final and 20 proposed federal facilities
listed on the National Priorities List (NPL). Each agreement contained specific schedules for the study
and cleanup of hazardous substances at these facilities.

      During FY 1993, six additional federal facility CERCLA interagency agreements (lAGs) were
executed. Of the federal facilities listed on the NPL at the end of FY 1993, 110 are now covered by
agreements.  With the  majority of these agreements completed, EPA now concentrates most of its efforts
on the their implementation. The number of accomplishments reported by the regions reflects that work
has proceeded into the implementation phase. For example, the Regions reported 50 RODs signed in FY
1993.  In addition, they have reported 43 remedial design starts, 30 remedial design completions, 23
remedial action starts and 15 remedial action completions.

     EPA anticipates that with more work moving through the study and cleanup phase, more issues
will arise leading to disputes between EPA and federal agencies. In FY 1993, two major disputes arose
under  lAGs at George and Mather Air Force Bases that were  decided by the Administrator,  The
disputes presented difficult issues regarding cleanup standards based on California's non-degradation
policy. The Administrator's decision resolving these disputes stressed that EPA and the Air Force were
to apply  the state's policy, and the interpretation of the policy.

     Three cases were settled in FY 1993 involving violations of the terms of lAGs at Loring Air Force
Base in Maine, Fernald in Ohio, and the West Virginia Ordnance Works Site.  The settlement of these
cases included over $500,000 in penalties and, in one case, as supplemental environmental project worth
$2 million.

     In February, OFFE issued an interim report by the Federal Facilities Environmental Restoration
Dialogue Committee.  The committee is a chartered federal advisory committee and includes forty
                                             4-1

-------
                          FY1993 Enforcement Accomplishments Report
representatives of federal agencies, tribal and state governments and associations, and local and
national environmental, community, and labor organizations. EPA established the committee in 1992 to
develop consensus policy recommendations aimed at improving the federal facilities environmental
restoration decision process to ensure that clean-up decisions reflect the priorities and concerns of all
stakeholders. The interim report contained committee recommendations concerning: improving the
dissemination of federal facility restoration information; improving stakeholder involvement  in key
restoration decisions with special emphasis on the use of site-specific advisory boards; and improving
consultation on federal facility restoration funding  decisions and setting priorities in the event  of
funding shortfalls.

Federal Facility Compliance Act

     The Federal Facility Compliance Act (FFCA), amending RCRA, became effective in FY 1993. The
law greatly enhances state and EPA enforcement authorities against federal facilities. For example,
states and EPA can now assess and collect penalties for violations of RCRA requirements.  In addition,
EPA now has authority to  issue administrative orders against federal facilities for enforcement  of
RCRA.

     During FY 1993, EPA took several significant  steps in implementing the FFCA and exercising  its
new grants of authority. For example,  EPA issued hearing procedures for adjudication and appeals to
the Administrator for EPA-issued orders against federal agencies. In May, Region IX issued the first
RCRA § 3008 complaint and compliance order with penalties to a federal facility following passage of
the FFCA. The complaint sought $257,580 in penalties for 27 violations at the U.S. Navy's El Centre,
California Naval Air Facility. In June, Region VI negotiated and issued  the first RCRA § 7003 order for
cleanup response ever issued against a federal agency. The order, involving Reese Air Force Base, near
Lubbock, Texas, also included the first RCRA settlement with stipulated  penalties since passage of the
FFCA.

     In FY 1993, EPA took 12 RCRA §3008(a) enforcement actions using the new authority granted  by
the FFCA. Two cases have been resolved, and the remainder are either being negotiated or invoking
the hearing process.

     Under the RCRA illegal operator enforcement  initiative,  EPA charged several federal facilities
with a combined  total penalty of over $2 million for RCRA violations. Two Department of Defense
bases located near San Antonio, Texas, were charged with posing a threat to the city's only source of
drinking water. The initiative was an effort  to stop operation of hazardous waste activities without
required RCRA permits.

Base Closure and Reuse

   Pursuant to Congressional mandate, numerous military bases are undergoing realignment or complete
closure with the potential for severe economic impacts on the affected local communities. The timely
reutilization of these installations is essential if the economic consequences to the community of losing
military and civilian jobs is to be minimized.  EPA is currently involved at over seventy of these
installations.

     A plan to mitigate economic dislocation and speed the economic recovery of communities near
military bases scheduled for realignment or closure was announced by the Clinton Administration on
July 2, 1993.  Rapid redevelopment and job creation are top goals of the new initiative.  A primary
element of the President's plan is a Fast Track Cleanup Program at bases with a high probability of
early reuse by the host  communities. EPA, DOD, and the states are charged with creating a working

                                             4-2

-------
                          FY1993 Enforcement Accomplishments Report
partnership to implement the Fast Track Cleanup Program with the objectives of "quickly identifying
clean parcels for early reuse, selecting appropriate leasing parcels where cleanup is underway, and
hastening cleanup."

    In order for EPA to implement the President's Fast Track Cleanup Program, OFFE developed the
Model Accelerated Cleanup Program (MAC) and guidance to execute the MAC. The MAC establishes
environmental teams to provide EPA's technical expertise to streamline and accelerate the cleanup of
closing and realigning bases. The MAC will be led by a senior project manager who will be empowered
to make decisions locally  and will rely on EPA expertise,  breaking from traditional reliance on
contractors for technical assistance. Although the MAC process will result in a more efficient process,
EPA's work will be more intense. This intensity, however, will be offset in time savings and ultimately
more efficient use of EPA and DOD resources.

   Under a very tight time frame, OFFE worked with DOD to develop a BRAC Cleanup Plan 
-------
                         FY1993 En/orcement Accomplishments Report
Multimedia Initiative

     Federal facilities are a highly visible sector of the regulated community. Their compliance rates
in all media have traditionally been lower than those of the private sector. Based on the need to
address the environmental problems in the federal sector, EPA endorsed the Federal Facilities Multi-
Media Enforcement Initiative for FY 1993/1994.

     The goal of the initiative is to improve federal agency compliance and reduce environmental
risks from federal facilities through increased use of multi-media inspections; efficient utilization of
all available enforcement authorities; and enhanced use of innovative pollution prevention (P2)
approaches to solving compliance problems.

     Many federal agencies currently use a multi-media approach in their internal  auditing and
compliance evaluations.  Multi-media enforcement provides an opportunity for a comprehensive
evaluation  of a facility by identifying threats to the  environment where  pollutants cross through
various media.  Also, multi-media  activities provide for an in-depth opportunity for identifying
pollution prevention projects that can be implemented as supplemental or beneficial environmental
projects at the facility or throughout similar government branches, agencies, departments, and even the
private  sector. The emphasis is on projects which take pollution prevention approaches to resolving
identified violations.

     Federal agencies will benefit from this initiative by  clearly defining their environmental
compliance status and the risks the facility  poses to human health and the environment.  It will
provide greater efficiencies for installations by eliminating the resource burden of numerous single-
media inspections and will serve as an excellent training ground through enhanced EPA technical
assistance to federal  agency environmental staffs.  It  will increase  the level of environmental
awareness of installation employees at all levels, and will help improve federal facilities compliance
by providing a comprehensive view of compliance problems and creative opportunities to protect human
health and the environment.

     In FY 1993, EPA and the states conducted 34  multi-media inspections of federal facilities,
exceeding by 33% the minimum number of required inspections under the initiative. EPA and the states
project a similar level of effort of multi-media investigations at federal facilities in FY 1994.

Education and Outreach

       EPA continued to host the EPA/Federal  Agency Environmental Roundtable, where
representatives of approximately 50  federal agencies meet monthly to exchange information.  At the
Roundtable, EPA media experts discuss existing or proposed regulatory approaches affecting compliance
by the other federal agencies.  The Roundtable also provides a forum for an exchange of technological
information between agencies.

     In January 1993, to address the specific environmental compliance needs and concerns of civilian
federal agencies, which have smaller and .generally more nascent environmental programs than the
Departments of Energy and Defense, EPA organized the Civilian Federal Agency Task Force.  The task
force is addressing problems consistently cited by these civilian agencies, including; inadequate training
programs; deficient information resources; outdated compliance tracking and recordkeeping system;
shortage of trained professionals  with sufficient knowledge and expertise in environmental
management  and compliance; insufficient assistance from EPA on specific agency issues having a
national impact; and inadequate communication and  coordination and communication among EPA
headquarters, EPA regions and other federal  agencies.  The task force has made recommendations to
address these problem areas and will work, during FY 1994, to implement these recommendations.
                                             4-4

-------
                          FY1993 Enforcement Accomplishments Report
 Office of Federal Activities

      The Office of Federal Activities (OFA) is  responsible  for ensuring federal compliance with the
National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA), ensuring that federal agencies  conduct  their  activities
in an environmentally sound manner by reviewing environmental impact  statements  (EISs) under the
Environmental Review Program (ERP), and, in  regard  to  Indian  lands,  developing environmental
control  capacity  through implementation of the Indian multi-media grants program.

      The following summarizes key accomplishments by EPA's  Office of Federal Activities  (OFA)
during FY 1993.   It is organized  according to five major activities for which OFA is  the  National
Program Manager,  These include;

      Environmental Review Program. OFA reviews environmental impacts of proposed major federal
actions as required by the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) and §309 of the Clean Air Act,
OFA  aids in pollution prevention by anticipating environmental problems  with federal agency
programs.

      EPA Compliance with Cross-Cutting^Staiutes. OFA ensures that EPA's actions comply with the
intent of NEPA and other non-EPA administered environmental laws such as the Endangered Species
Act and the National Historic Preservation Act.

      National  Filing ..System.  OFA is the designated agent for the Environmental Impact Statement
(EIS) filing requirements of NEPA.  OFA ensures proper documentation and public review.  Additionally,
OFA is the manager for EPA Memoranda of Understanding (MOU), serving as reviewer and recorder on
77 active MOUs.

      International Program Activities.   OFA  provides technical  assistance  for the Agency's
international activities.    Assistance includes Environmental Impact Assessment (EIA) expertise;
environmental  infrastructure development for  developing countries; and  coordination with  the
Department of State, Agency for International Development, and relevant agencies.

      Indian Program.  OFA  acts as the national program manager for the  Multi-Media/Grants
Assistance Program for Tribes (P.L. 102-497); and for providing oversight and guidance of EPA's efforts to
extend the national system of environmental protection to Indian lands.

Environmental Review Program

      Over the  past year OFA has experienced significant progress and precedent setting actions. A
partial listing includes:

      Report on NEPA at EPA.  OFA chaired a workgroup which examined  EPA programs and the
National Environmental Policy Act. For the first time in more  than two decades, a comprehensive
study was made of EPA activities  in respect to the key criteria  of NEPA — environmental  analysis,
consideration of alternatives, and public participation. OFA also considered how the program offices
comply with other  environmental requirements,  such as the Endangered Species  Act.   The
Administrator committed the Agency to this review following Senate hearings on the EPA cabinet bill.

      Mid-West Floods. OFA assumed a leadership role in Midwest flood recovery. Serving as EPA's
representative to the White House Task Force on levee repair and long-term recovery, OFA promoted a
comprehensive approach to floodplain management practices in the region.  The principle established
by OFA was to learn from past practices to prevent future disasters through long-term floodplain

                                            4-5

-------
                         FY 1993 Enforcement Accomplishments Report
management. Because of OFA's efforts, the White House is pursuing a strategic assessment of federal
activities in floodplains.

     Everglades. OFA represented EPA at the final negotiations  and signing of the multi-agency
agreement on restoration of the Everglades. OFA continue to coordinate with Region IV, the Office of
Wetlands, Oceans and Watersheds, and other EPA offices  to secure a team of experts to participate in
the technical and scientific studies of this complex ecosystem necessary  to arrive at a solution for
environmentally sustainable development in the region.

     USQS - BuRec Coordination. As part of its interagency coordination and issue resolution function,
OFA continued as Co-  Chairs of the US Geological Survey (USGS) and the Bureau of Reclamation
Committees to exchange information on key issues of joint interest. The meetings of the EPA/USGS
Coordinating Committee held this year were successful in coordinating many programs and research
efforts.   The Bureau of Reclarnation/IPA Interagency Coordinating Committee focused on the new
directions of the Bureau's water resource  management programs  with particular emphasis on the
Central California project. The Animus LaPlata project in S. W. Colorado,  and the San Francisco Bay
Delta Water project.

     Forest Conference. In April 1993, President Clinton  convened  the Forest Conference which was
designed to break the impasse that had developed over use and protection of the Northwest forest
resources. From the beginning, OFA has been an active member of  the President's Forest Team with
particular input in ecosystem protection and watershed management. OFA staff have been involved in
both the review and preparation of the Draft Forest Conference Supplemental EIS.

     Environmental Tustice.  OFA provided its expertise  on the National Environmental Policy Act
(NEPA) and its potential to further environmental justice awareness by assisting with the development
of an Executive Order on Environmental Justice.  Independent of that effort, OFA pursued with the
Council on  Environmental Quality, a  pilot study evaluating  the thoroughness of analysis  of
environmental justice issues and socioeconomic impacts under NEPA.

     Pollution Prevention. OFA developed and issued final guidance to EPA, which was coordinated
with all  federal agencies, on how pollution prevention can be  incorporated into the National
Environmental Policy. Act (NEPA) and the Clean Air Act § 309 environmental review processes.  The
guidance provides specific examples of pollution prevention and mitigation measures that distinguish
between source reduction and treatment technologies.

     Noise Issues. This year began with  the completion of an aircraft noise study by the Federal
Interagency Committee on Noise.  The Report by the committee (OFA was the EPA representative) was
part of the resolution of an Federal Aviation Administration project at the Toledo Express Airport  One
of the recommendations of this report was to establish a  standing Federal interagency committee to
coordinate aircraft noise issues.  The Federal Interagency Committee on Aircraft Noise has been
established and OFA will represent EPA on this committee.  OFA's review of DOD and FAA airport
EISs is the driving point for their involvement in this issue.

     Clean Air Act Conformity Rulemakings.  Under the amended Clean Air Act (CAA) EPA was
instructed to develop rules for the conformance for federal  actions to the CAA. The rules were divided
into transportation-related rules and general conformity rules for federal actions which were not
FHWA or FTA related. OFA played two critical roles; The first was to craft rales which were not
dependent upon NEPA  but were complementary to NEPA.  The second was to provide continuous
feedback on how the rules, throughout their many iterations, might affect the other agencies.


                                             4-6

-------
                          FY1993 Enforcement Accomplishments Report                            \53S2
     Federal Highways Administration Issues. In the past year, OFA has continued to work with the
DOT designated EPA liaison, to resolve several controversial highway projects.  The Appalachian
Corridor H project, a proposed 120 mile highway through West Virginia, which would foster economic
development for the state was a case in-point.  The tiered corridor level approach used by FHWA
required an EPA stance to select the environmentally preferable alternative and encourage FHWA to
utilize the tiered corridor approach in future projects.  The Route 86 project in Riverside County,
California required considerable Headquarters attention  in order to bridge the pressure to build a 20
year old project with the need for current environmental analysis.

     Federal Energy Regulatory Commission. In an effort to help the Federal Regulatory Commission
(FERC) improve the environmental soundness of hydropower licensing and relicensing decisions, OFA
coordinated with federal resource agencies to formulate a unified series of recommendations geared to
process improvement.  Once a consistent view was expressed by federal agencies with an interest in
hydropower, FERC became convinced of the need for change.  OFA continues to provide advice and
assistance in the course of FERC's current relicensing improvement efforts.
     Outer Continental gfoelf Ajftiyjjjes. OFA has provided for coordination between EPA's Regions
IV and VI and the regional and headquarters components of the Minerals Management Service (MMS)
in the preparation of two Supplemental Environmental Impact Statements (SEIS) to address new source
general permit issuance for Outer Continental Shelf oil and gas activities. OFA helped the regions and
MMS to overcome jurisdictional and technical disputes to ensure the timely issuance of the documents.
EPA could not issue general National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permits for
effluent discharges from oil and gas operations in the western, central and eastern Gulf of Mexico until
the required NEPA reviews were completed.

NEPA Compliance

     Endangered Species Activities.  As a part of their role to ensure compliance with cross-cutting
environmental laws, OFA has been coordinating endangered species issues within the Agency.  At the
heart of  their activities, OFA has been a lead for the Endangered Species Coordinating Committee
that was established  to  describe  current activities  and  obligations, set  priorities, establish
appropriate training, support and liaison functions with the Fish and Wildlife Service and National
Marine Fisheries Service.  '

     Environmental  Assessment Guidance & Training.  OFA  developed guidance  materials on
environmental assessment to assist both preparers and reviewers of environmental impact assessments.
This included a "Sourcebook" on the EA process and a related computer program developed by EPA
Region V that was designed  for self instruction. OFA also began revision of technical guidelines for
environmental assessment on proposed fossil fueled steam electric generating  stations and coal
gasification/petroleum refineries. Work was carried out on EISs for industrial facilities in Texas and
Louisiana, power plants in Maine and Florida, off-shore oil and gas NPDES permitting in Regions IV
and VI.

     Historic Preservation.  OFA, with the lead on ensuring compliance  with the National Historic
Preservation Act,  has  been  consulting with  the Advisory  Council on Historic Preservation in
implementing the 1992 Amendments affecting Agency programs delegated  to states.  Heretofore, these
programs were not subject to  the Act's provisions. OFA has established an agency-wide workgroup to
evaluate  the implications for these requirements on states.  OFA has also developed training for
headquarters and regional staff in the requirements of the law with the cooperation of the Council.
                                             4-7

-------
                          FK ^$#3 Enforcement Accomplishments Report
National Filing Systems

     Environmental Review: - In FY 1993, 469 environmental impact statements {EISs) were filed with
OFA under OFA's delegation from CEQ (286 draft and 183 final). During FY 1993, EPA commented on 259
draft EISs and 171 final EISs.  Of these, 44 draft EISs were rated EO (environmental objections) with
the remaining either EC (environmental concerns) or LO (lack of objections).

International Program Activities

     NAFTA Report.  OFA was actively involved  in support to the Administrator and the U.S. Trade
Representative (USTR) on environmental issues concerning NAFTA.  OFA  took the EPA lead in
preparation of an environmental report which Ambassador Kantor committed  to prepare for the
November 1 submittal of NAFTA to Congress.  •

     Environmental Assessment Training. OFA has responded to requests to brief a number of foreign
visitors on the environmental assessment process. 'Formal training on the environmental assessment
process was provided to Mexico, Turkey, Bulgaria, and World Bank and U;S. Exim Bank staff. Other EA
technical assistance included participation on a technical taskforce to  Russia.

Indian Program

     Development of Tribal General Assistance Grant Regulation.  The Indian Environmental General
Assistance Program Act of 1992, enacted October 24,1992, directed EPA to "establish an Indian General
Assistance Program that provides grants to eligible Indian tribal governments or intertribal consortia to
cover the costs of planning, developing and establishing environmental protection programs on Indian
lands"  within one year of enactment.

     As part of the regulation  development process, public information meetings were conducted to
solicit informal comment from tribes and other interested parties. With this tribal input further policy
and implementation issues were resolved.  OMB  concurred .in the rule and it was published in the
Federal Register on December 2, 1993.   The General Assistance Program replaces the Multi-Media
Assistance Program (summarized below).

     Treatment as a State Regulations.  OFA was requested to lead  the effort to revise the Agency's
"treatment as state" (TAS) procedures by which Indian tribes become eligible for grants and program
authorization.  An interagency workgroup chaired by OFA has written regulations which simplify the
procedure and make it less burdensome and offensive to tribes.

     Indian Program Administration. OFA began the Multi-Media Assistance Program in FY 1990
with $151,000 for two pilot projects.  During FY 1991, $1.7M of Agency funds were provided to 29 grants
to 47 tribes. In FY 1992, 60 new and continuation grants were funded from $5.2M appropriated by
Congress including Congressional add-ons for two projects: $1.5m to  the 26 Washington tribes for the
Washington State Tribal Initiative,  and  $500K to  the Inter-Tribal Council of Arizona (ITCA).  During
FY 1993,100 new and continuation grants were funded from $7.5M appropriated including $3SM to the
two Congressionally-mandated  projects ($2.5M for  the Washington tribes; $1.0M for the ITCA).  For FY
1994, $8.5 million is available for  award to tribal  governments and inter-tribal governments and
consortia. To date, nearly  half the  tribes and a quarter of the Alaska Native Villages are receiving
capacity  building activities.  Additionally, OFA held interagency Indian workgroup meetings between
EPA and nine Federal agencies.  OFA has actively assisted most of the 500+ tribes and  Alaskan Native
villages who are preparing  to bring environmental management to their lands.


                                            4-8

-------
                         FK / 995 Enforcement Accomplishments Report
V   Building and Maintaining a Strong National Enforcement Program

Program Development

                   National Enforcement Training Institute (NETI)

     During FY 1993 NETI made major strides  in its continuing effort to develop and offer a
comprehensive, integrated approach to enforcement training for federal, state and local environmental
enforcement personnel, as mandated by the Pollution Prosecution Act of 1990 (Public Law 101-592).
NETTs success for the year is reflected in the impressive training statistics;  course offerings increased
fourfold over the previous year as NETI offered 200 course sessions, and attendance at NETI-sponsored
courses increased by over 120 percent, with 8375 professionals being trained in FY 1993. Of this number,
4,509 (54%) were state and local employees, and 3866 (46%) were federal employees.

     NETI provided training in all ten EPA Regional Offices and Headquarters during the year.  NETI
courses were also taught in 20 States:  Arizona, California, Florida {3 courses), Georgia, Indiana (2
courses), Kentucky, Louisiana,  Michigan, Mississippi, Nevada, New Jersey, New Mexico, North
Carolina, Rhode Island, South Carolina, Tennessee (2 courses), Texas, Vermont (2 courses), Virginia, and
Wisconsin,

     During FY 1993, NETI significantly  expanded its  training opportunities that were  made
available to the international environmental community.  NETI offered courses in Malaysia, Mexico,
Thailand, Turkey, and Ukraine.

     These significant increases were made possible by the cooperative partnerships and alliances
that NETI has established and fostered within the  environmental enforcement community. Training
presented under the auspices of NETI in FY 1993 was carried out by the EPA Headquarters and regions,
the National Enforcement Investigations  Center (NE1C), the criminal program at the Federal Law
Enforcement Training  Center (FLETC), the  EPA  program offices, the Northeast Environmental
Enforcement  Project (NEEP), the  Midwest Environmental Enforcement Association (MEEA),  the
Southern Environmental Enforcement Network (SEEN) and the Western States Project (WSP).

     In FY 1993 NETI firmly established its organizational structure and network. This network
includes the NETI Council—a body of 39 high level representatives from within EPA, the U.S.
Department of Justice (DOJ), state and local governments and academia. It also encompasses  seven
subcommittees of the Council and six independent, standing committees on curriculum development.

     During  the year, NETI launched an extensive effort to revise its prototype two-week Basic
Environmental Enforcement Course and produce an operational version.  The second session of the
prototype was presented in FY 1993 in Washington, D.C., where the focus was upon Region IV. Half of
the 36 trainees were from Region IV, EPA Headquarters and DOJ, with the remaining half being from
the State and local environmental enforcement agencies in the Region IV area.

     Following that second presentation,  NETI began an effort to condense the Basic Environmental
Enforcement Course into a one-week time frame featuring both classroom instruction and clinical
exercise, which would  be suitable for delivery by NETI training providers. This effort began in June
1993 with a meeting of a subcommittee of the NETI Curriculum Committee.  This subcommittee is
composed of State  and Federal expert training professionals, who will  be involved throughout the
development of the Course. It is anticipated that this Course, which will be offered beginning in June
1994, will become the  "basic training" for all new environmental enforcement professionals in  the
United States.

                                           5-1

-------
                        FYl9^3 Enforcement Accomplishments Report
      NETI also revised its BEN and ABEL training in FY 1993 to reflect the changes made within the
BEN model's discount rate assumptions, as well as to incorporate a series of improvements to make the
training more effective. NETI delivered 14 sessions of the BEN and ABEL Course, training a  total of 331
enforcement personnel in EPA Headquarters, 9 Regional Offices,  the States of Indiana and Florida, and
the Northeast Environmental  Enforcement Project.  In addition, NETI delivered the Cashout and
Superfund ABEL Course, which is essentially the Superfund version of the BEN and ABEL Course, to
120 enforcement personnel at four locations.

      The Integrated  Data for Enforcement Analysis (IDEA)  is a showcase tool in the  arsenal of
environmental enforcers.  IDEA is an interactive, high-speed data retrieval and  integration capability
to retrieve data for performing multi-media analyses of regulated facilities for inspection targeting,
case screening, case development, litigation support, and settlement negotiations. Fourteen  sessions of
the IDEA Training Course were offered nationally in FY 1993 to an audience of 235 environmental
professionals.

      As a follow-on to NETI's international training provided to  Mexican environmental inspectors
last  year, in FY  1993 NETI  trained an additional 180 Mexican inspectors  in Mexico City and
Guadalajara. The  five-day Training Course for Mexican  Inspectors was especially designed to meet the
needs of the Mexican audience at each specific location. The inspectors benefited from site visits to
manufacturing  facilities within Mexico.  Classroom instruction included in-depth presentations on
Mexico's environmental laws and regulations, health and safety techniques for field activities, and the
fundamentals of compliance inspections. In addition, detailed reviews of selected industrial processes
(e.g., electroplating, printed circuit board manufacturing, furniture finishing, and injection molding)
were  included in the classroom discussion, which served to reinforce the information  that the trainees
gleaned from the site visits.

      The Principles of Environmental Enforcement Course  was presented to a total  audience of 107
environmental officials in Kuala Lumpur, Malaysia; Laem Chabang, Thailand; Ankara, Turkey; and
Kiev, Ukraine.  This intensive, three-day training presented fundamental principles for designing and
implementing environmental enforcement programs.  Developed in 1991 by EPA,  with participation
from  the Netherlands, Poland, and other countries, this Course is designed for  delivery in a  wide
variety of cultural settings.

      NETI made significant progress in reaching out to its domestic and international audiences during
FY 1993, as well as in making meaningful progress to refine the Institute's internal planning and
management functions. Among other things, the Institute developed a vision for NETI's long-term goals
by producing the NETI Strategic Plan. NETI also made important strides in becoming a nationally
recognized leader  in  the use of emerging, innovative  technologies as vehicles for  reaching larger
audiences.

      The NETI Strategic Plan constitutes a comprehensive, detailed blueprint or design that will
guide NETI's planning functions in the forthcoming three fiscal years.  The Strategic Plan will serve as
the basis for the development of yearly Operating Plans that will  translate the  Strategic Plan's
imperatives  into attainable actions for each applicable year.

      NETI  aggressively  moved forward in FY 1993 into the  electronic age of distance  education.
Distance education utilizes emerging technologies for reaching larger, more widely dispersed audiences.
Interactive videos,  CD-ROM, and closed-circuit, satellite television  transmission  are examples of these
emerging technologies. During FY 1993, NETI was able to reach simultaneously an audience of 1,000
trainees  in 50 States  with the Administrative Hearings and  Trials Course, by using closed-circuit,
satellite transmission with only one instructor for a single day.  Also offered via satellite transmission,
the Environmental Law for Local Law Enforcement Officers Course reached an audience of 2,000.

                                             5-2

-------
                       FY 1993 Enforcement Accomplishments Report
     NETI developed and implemented a Clearinghouse in FY 1993 for keeping constituent groups
informed  about NETI-sponsored training.  The user-friendly NETI Clearinghouse is accessible
nationally through a non-toll telephone number: 1-800 EPA-NETI. It is a major means for disseminating
information about the availability of environmental enforcement training.  In particular, State, local,
and tribal environmental enforcers, who may not have ready access to computer networks, are only a
telephone call away from up-to-the-minute information about NETI.

     Finally, NETI  took major steps during the year  to design and  complete the  new  NETI
Headquarters Training Center, which is scheduled for its official opening during the summer of 1994.
The Center will be a model state-of-the-art training facility located in midtown Washington, D.C. (For
further information contact NETI)

Intergovernmental/International Enforcement Activities

       Environmental  Side Agreement to the North American Free Trade
                                 Agreement (NAFTA)

     OE helped develop the North American Agreement on Environmental Cooperation (also known as
the NAFTA environmental side agreement), which was signed by President Clinton and the heads of
state of Mexico and  Canada  on September 14, 1993. The final language contains several strong
enforcement provisions, including a mandatory annual report of enforcement activity by each country, a
duty to effectively enforce domestic environmental laws, and a system for resolving allegations of lax
enforcement by any of  the three countries.  (For further information contact the OE-International
Enforcement Program)

             North American Free Trade Agreement Legislative Support

     OE contributed substantially to the Administrator's efforts to respond to Congressional concerns
about environmental impacts of the North American  Free Trade Agreement.  OE activities included
commenting on testimony for several Congressional hearings, responding to Congressional inquiries, and
participating in EPA's review of the NAFTA legislation and accompanying legislative materials.  OE
also participated in a review of Mexico's environmental laws, and drafted the portion of the resulting
report pertaining to  Mexico's environmental inspection and enforcement program.  (For further
information contact the OE-International Enforcement Program)

                                 Antarctica Legislation

     OE worked to promote enforcement provisions in the Administration bill  to implement the
environmental protocol to the Antarctic Treaty. This effort involved drafting of legislative language,
review of Congressional testimony and numerous meetings of the interagency group writing the bill.
Issues addressed included judicial review of  permits, standing, waiver of sovereign immunity, and
citizen enforcement suits, including scope of the violations covered.  The bill was completed on
November 15,1993. (For further information contact the OE-International Enforcement Program)

            U.S./Mexko Cooperative Enforcement Strategy Work Group

     EPA's Deputy Assistant Administrator  for Enforcement served as U.S. co-chairperson of the
U.S./Mexico Cooperative  Enforcement Strategy Work Group.   OE worked to develop cooperative

                                           5-3

-------
                         FY1993 Enforcement Accomplishments Report
enforcement activities with Mexico's environmental agency, SEDESOL, while SEDESOL put into place
a new enforcement program which resulted in more than 16,000 inspections nationwide^ OE's National
Enforcement Training Institute provided training in Multimedia Inspection techniques to 380 SEDESOL
inspectors. EPA and SEDESOL increased cooperation in the investigation of specific cases, particularly
involving illegal hazardous waste movements,  OE supported efforts  to expand cooperation with
Customs and State environmental agencies to detect illegal hazardous waste shipments, and developed
a bilingual  video to train U,S. and Mexican Customs officials in detecting and responding to illegal
waste shipments.  OE assisted efforts to develop a  binational database to track  transboundary
hazardous waste shipments, and the filing of the first four administrative enforcement cases in June,
1993 which  were developed using the database. OE worked with Regional and Mexican counterparts to
prepare a Progress Report on Work Group activities, and to develop a list of Work Group priorities for
the coming  year. (For further information contact the OE-International Enforcement Program)

              Enhancing Cooperative Enforcement Activity with Canada

     OE met with officials of Environment Canada and the Ontario Ministry of the Environment and
Energy to discuss ways to augment cooperative enforcement activity between the two countries.  The
participants exchanged information on enforcement statistics and methods of setting priorities. Future
activity is likely to be bilateral, especially  for case-specific matters, and also trilateral, with Mexico,
under the auspices of the new North American Commission on Environmental Cooperation. (For further
information contact the OE-International Enforcement Program)

            Technical Assistance to Russia, Eastern Europe, and Indonesia

     OE participated in missions to Poland and Russia, and assisted in a Polish mission to the United
States, which included components related to improving enforcement of environmental laws.  These
missions are multi-year efforts. Similar projects are likely in other emerging democracies in the region,
especially  Slovakia.   OE also met  with visiting officials from  Indonesia to  provide  technical
assistance on environmental enforcement issues. (For further information contact the OE-International
Enforcement Program)

                                  Customs Cooperation

     OE led efforts to increase cooperation between EPA and the U.S. Customs Service in monitoring
compliance and enforcing environmental laws pertaining to import and export.  OE's work stimulated
dialogue on possible development of computer interfaces with Customs to improve the efficiency of
interagency cooperation in compliance monitoring and enforcement. (For further information contact the
OE-International Enforcement Program)

                    Transboundary Movement of Hazardous  Waste

     OE participated in a number of EPA initiatives regarding the transboundary movement of waste,
including drafting of a regulation to implement the OECD Decision on Transboundary Movement of
Wastes Destined  for Recovery, and efforts to support Congressional consideration of legislation to
implement  the Basel Convention on Transboundary Movement of Hazardous Wastes and Their Disposal.
(For further information contact the OE-International Enforcement Program)
                                            5-4

-------
                         FY1993 Enforcement Accomplishments Report
National Reports on FY 1992 EPA and State Performance

                    Timely and Appropriate Enforcement Response

     The Timely and Appropriate Enforcement Response concept seeks to establish predictable
enforcement responses by both EPA  and the States, with each media program defining  target
timeframes for the timely escalation of enforcement responses. Tracking of timeframes commences on
the date the violation is detected through to the date when formal enforcement action is initiated.
The programs have also defined what constitutes an appropriate formal enforcement response based on
the nature of the violation, including defining when the imposition of penalties or other sanctions is
appropriate. Each year, OE compiles an end-of-year report which summarizes the performance by each
of the media programs. (For further information contact OCAPO)

                                National Penalty Report

     Each year, EPA produces a comprehensive analysis of the financial penalties EPA obtained from
violators of environmental laws. The report contains an Agency-wide overview for each program and
compares current year performance with historical trends.   (For further information contact OCAPO)

     Summary of State-by-State Enforcement Activity for EPA and the States

     Each year, EPA assembles an end-of-year report which summarizes quantitative indicators of
EPA and  State enforcement activities on a state-by-state basis. The FY 1993  report is scheduled for
publication in May 1994. (For further information contact OCAPO)

                         Enforcement Four- Year Strategic Plan

     As part of EPA's Agency-wide strategic planning process, the Office of Enforcement developed a
comprehensive enforcement plan with both media-specific and cross-media components. The
Enforcement Four-Year Strategic  Plan outlines  the  capabilities which will be needed to enhance
enforcement efforts for the future.  Several of these efforts are now being implemented on a pilot basis,
while others will be fully developed over the next several years. The Strategic Plan is a sound guide
for the Agency's future enforcement efforts. (For further information contact OCAPO)

                               Enforcement in the 1990's

     The decade of the 1990's represents a new era in environmental enforcement as the Federal, State
and local governments and citizen's groups better combine their resources to vigorously enforce the
nation's environmental laws.  The strategic planning reflected in the Enforcement Four-Year Strategic
Plan set themes and directions for the Agency's enforcement program.  In FY 1991,  the Office of
Enforcement, other EPA personnel in Headquarters and the Regions, and, in some instances, non-EPA
personnel, produced reports, collected in the Enforcement in the 1990's Project, which complement the
earlier  Strategic Plan.  These final reports provide recommendations for action in six discrete areas:
measures of  success,  the State/Federal relationship, environmental rulemaking, innovative
enforcement techniques, compliance incentives, and the role of local governments.
         1990's Project reports establish an agenda that points in new directions and identify numerous
action steps for EPA staff at Headquarters, the Regions, the States, the local governments, and citizens.
EPA has begun to implement many of these, and more will be undertaken in the near future. The
Enforcement in the 1990's Project provided valuable, practical ideas whose implementation will
strengthen significantly the Agency's enforcement program. (For further information contact OCAPO)
                                          5-5

-------
                         FY1993 Enforcement Accomplishments Report
                      General Enforcement Policy Compendium

     An essential tool in multi-media enforcement, the General Enforcement Policy Compendium,
which contains 90 documents issued throughout EPA's history, was the subject of a comprehensive
review to determine whether specific policies require updating and revision. The review was conducted
by a Workgroup comprised of representatives from all offices of the Office of Enforcement and several
Regional Counsel offices.  The workgroup has prepared a new master index for the Compendium which
groups policies by subject matter area and provides a summary of each policy, and has developed
recommendations for the performance of editorial work which will ensure that the Compendium is up-
to-date and is more useful as a reference, and for improvements  in distribution, electronic access and
training which will promote its availability and use. (For further information contact OCAPO)

Clean Air Act


Clean Air Act - Stationary Source Compliance Division

                           Administrative Penalty Program

     The administrative penalty order (APO) authority for the air program  was established in the
1990 CAAA. In FY 1993, the second year of APO authority implementation, regional enforcement staff
continued to aggressively use the administrative penalty authority to bring enforcement actions for
violations of State Implementation Plans (SIP's), New Source Performance Standards (NSPS), and
National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAP), as well  as for violations of the
Stratospheric Ozone Protection requirements of the CAA,  Settlement of these cases during FY  1993
yielded  almost two million dollars in penalties.  Additionally, Supplemental Enforcement Projects
(SEFs) are a part of eight settlements which require the respondents to spend over one million dollars
on pollution reduction projects.  (For further information contact SSCD)

                 Stratospheric Ozone Protection Compliance Program

     Three new CFC  regulations became effective in FY 1993 that implemented §§ 608, 610, and 611 of
the 1990 CAAA.  These regulations will enhance the enforcement  of the stratospheric ozone provisions
of the Act.

     The § 608 regulations, effective in June of  1993, prohibit the  release of  ozone depleting
refrigerants when servicing air  conditioning and refrigeration  equipment.   The Stationary Source
Compliance Division (SSCD) prepared training manuals  to  train Regional inspectors. The § 610
regulations, effective in February of 1993, prohibit the sale of certain nonessential products that contain
or are manufactured with ozone depleting substances.  SSCD prepared a compliance guidance for these
regulations and one case has been filed against a violator.  The % 611 regulations, effective in May of
1993, require warning labels on products containing ozone depleting substances. (For further information
contact SSCD)

                                 Wood Heater Program

     The wood heater program requires certification of wood heaters manufactured and sold in the
US. in order to reduce the emissions of particulate matter. In Fiscal Year 1993, SSCD granted 49 wood
heater certifications and 20 recertifications.  Recertifications are required every five years. Other
enforcement activities included 75 inspections of wood heater retailers and manufacturing facilities

                                           5-6

-------
                          FF1993 Enforcement Accomplishments Report
(using five senior environmental employees) and granting 75 design change requests,  (For further
information contact SSCD)

                    Missouri Voluntary Compliance Pilot Program

     The Stationary Source Compliance Division and Air Enforcement Division (AED) assisted Region
VII develop  the  Missouri Voluntary Compliance Pilot Program (MVCPP)  for the New Source
Performance Standards (NSPS) subpart COO, nonmetallic mineral processing plants.  The MVCPP was
established to handle a large number of sources in Missouri that were discovered to be in probable
violation of the subpart OOO requirements for  notification and testing.  Under the MVCPP, for a
limited period of time, EPA Region VII provided a window of opportunity for the Missouri nonmetallic
mineral processing industry to disclose information on present and past compliance and noncompliance.
In return, for voluntarily providing information, sources will receive reduced penalties. Due to the
large number of potential violators, and the nature of the violations, the program will address the
majority  of cases through the administrative process, rather than through judicial actions.  The vast
majority of the violations addressed by the MVCPP were more than 12 months old and EPA obtained
the concurrence of the  Attorney General  to waive the  time  limit  on the administrative penalty
authority. (For further information contact SSCD)

                                    Technical Agenda

     In FY 1993, SSCD conducted a series of studies and projects under its Technical Agenda.  These
projects were designed to provide technical assistance to EPA personnel throughout the agency.  In FY
1993, projects were conducted to assist in the control of Volatile Organic Compounds (VOC) emissions,
air toxics emissions, and pollution prevention.

     VQC Projects - Three VOC projects  were released.  They are:   1. "Summary Matrix of Air
Regulations From Other  Pollution Media;" 2. "Development of Engineering and Cost Information and
Data Pertaining to the Use of Permanent Total Enclosure;" and 3. "Inspection Manual for Enforcement of
Proposed NESHAP for SOCMI."  One additional study,  "Correlation of Reference Method 24 Test
Results and Manufacturers Formulation Data," was initiated and will be continued as a cooperative
project among SSCD, regional, state, and industrial partners.

     Air Toxics Projects — The three  air toxics projects completed are:  1. "Revisions to Inspection
Manual for Benzene NESHAP for Coke By-Product Recovery Plants, Subpart L;" 2. "Inspection Manual
for Benzene NESHAP for Waste Operations, Subpart FF;" and 3. "Development of Dry Cleaning Data
Base."

     Pollution Prevention Projects  -- The five  pollution prevention projects  completed are:
1."Agricultural-Based  Ink Usage;" 2. "Basic Pollution Prevention for Engineers and Scientists;" 3.
"Organic Chemical P2 Opportunities;" 4.   "Pollution Prevention Case Study Data Base;" and 5.
"Satellite-Based Pollution Prevention training for Air Regulatory Programs." (For further information
contact SSCD)

                                    Acid Rain Program

     Unlike other traditional enforcement programs, the Acid Rain Program is designed as a market
driven program that creates economic incentives for its participants to comply.  Initially, utilities
receive emissions allowances from EPA that represent  their allowable levels of sulfur dioxide
emissions.  These allowances can be bought and sold among the utilities. The SSCD in cooperation with
the Acid Rain Division,  Air Enforcement Division, and the Regions, developed a draft enforcement
                                            5-7

-------
                         FY1993 Enforcement Accomplishments Report
guidance document for the acid rainexcess emissions, CEMS, and permit rules. This guidance document
will be used by EPA and the States to address violations and bring violators into compliance. (For
further information contact SSCD)

                   NSPS Subpart J - Oil Refinery Industry - Initiative

     SSCD coordinated a two year national initiative to implement the NSPS Subpart J (oil refinery
industry) requirements to install, certify, and operate continuous emission monitoring systems (CEMS).
The initiative offered a unique opportunity to emphasize and implement the CEMS program and
document the program's benefits in reducing emissions produced from the oil refinery industry.

     The Subpart J initiative consisted of two phases and ended in FY 1993. The initiative resulted in
an 80 percent compliance rate, 48 enforcement actions (including 37 APOs) with over three million
dollars in penalties pled, a number of civil judicial cases  (some still under preparation)  with multi-
million dollar penalties, and numerous State enforcement actions with penalties of over $310,000.  This
initiative has led to the identification of additional violations in other air programs and other media,
as well as to multi-media enforcement actions. (For further information contact SSCD)

                                    Rule Effectiveness

     Rule effectiveness is a method for determining how  effective an environmental regulation is in
reducing source  pollution.  Rule effectiveness studies are  intended  to identify and  quantify
implementation problems which effect attainment  of the National Ambient Air Quality Standards.
The SSCD believes that these studies can greatly assist the states to achieve the 15 percent reasonable
further progress (RFP) requirements.

     In FY 1993, SSCD issued the revised Rule Effectiveness Protocol Guidance and completed the Rule
Effectiveness Study Index. At the regional and state level, 12 rule effectiveness studies were completed
during the year. These were mainly studies of rules regulating volatile organic compounds (VOC).
These studies focused on such issues as: miscellaneous metal parts coatings; stage I and  stage II gas
recovery; transfer of organic compounds into mobile transport tanks; operations, motor  vehicle and
mobile equipment coating operations;  steam generators; and process heaters. (For further  information
contact SSCD)

                                    Lead Enforcement

     'The Lead National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) Attainment Strategy is part of
the Agency-wide Lead (Pb) Strategy to reduce human exposure to lead. In support of the strategy, the
SSCD implemented  a technical guidance document entitled "Compliance  Inspection and Assistance
Document: Primary and Secondary Lead Smelters and Lead Acid Battery Plants." This  technical
guidance is designed to provide guidance to regional and state regulators on minimizing fugitive and
point emissions from lead sources. Several regions use the technical guidance document to address some
of the lead NAAQS compliance deficiencies. (For further information contact SSCD)

               National Case Initiative — Louisiana-Pacific Corporation

     In FY 1993, EPA concluded a major multi-Regional and  multi-State case initiative against
Louisiana-Pacific. This case was nationally managed and developed in cooperation with eight EPA
regional offices.  The case was developed because  Louisiana-Pacific routinely failed to comply with
prevention of significant deterioration (PSD) and operating permits requirements.

                                            5-8

-------
                                                                                           y«om,%

                          FY 1993 Enforcement Accomplishments Report                            ( Sffig v
       The settlement resulted in Louisiana-Pacific agreeing to pay a civil penalty of $11.1 million,
the highest penalty collected under the CAA; install state-of-the-art pollution control equipment in a
total of fourteen facilities; employ an environmental manager at each facility; employ a corporate
environmental manager; and conduct a comprehensive audit of its management structure and of all the
practices and procedures at all of its wood panel building products facilities.

      This initiative was instrumental in establishing several national precedents. They are: 1) multi-
regional and multi-state approach to locate noncompliance;  2) Consideration of existing technology
applied in other industries as Best Available Control Technology; and 3) State-of-the art technology
for this industry with limited supplemental energy requirements.  Moreover,  this National initiative
proved to be an outstanding example of coordinated effort among DOJ, EPA Headquarters and regional
offices and  the respective state agencies. (For further information contact SSCD)

                                   Compliance Tracking

      The air compliance tracking systems, used by federal, state, and local agencies, continued to be
revised and enhanced in FY 1993. AIRS Facility Subsystem (AFS) is an integral component of the air
compliance tracking system and is now used routinely for reporting  to the Integrated Data for
Enforcement Analysis  (IDEA) system  and to the Strategic Tracking and  Accountability System
(STARS),  In FY  1993, AFS became the system for tracking significant violators by  the regions.
Additionally,  AFS data is available to  assist  states using the Inspection Targeting Model (ITM) in
planning yearly inspection priorities.

      The  National Asbestos Registry  System (NARS), used to track asbestos demolition and
reconstruction violators, is an information system that continues to fulfill two major functions: program
reporting and evaluation, and inspection targeting and evaluation.  The most important improvements
to NARS, in FY  1993, are on-line availability through the COMPLI Bulletin  Board and a major
upgrade of the local tracking system that serves NARS. (For further information contact SSCD)

                             COMPLI Bulletin Board  System

      In FY 1993, SSCD initiated the Compliance Information Bulletin Board System (COMPLI - BBS).
COMPLI is part of the OAQPS Technology Transfer Network Bulletin Board System (TTN BBS) and is
available free to any interested party.

      There are three major areas of the COMPLI BBS.  They are:     1. Databases including the
National Asbestos Register System which lists all asbestos contractors and their compliance history,
and a woodstove database  which  lists  all  certified woodstoves  and their manufacturers;  2.
Determinations which includes EPA rulings on regulation applicability for stationary sources of air
pollution; and 3. Files which contains documents and reports on training and other technical areas. (For
further information contact SSCD)

                            Compliance Monitoring Strategy

      The Compliance Monitoring Strategy (CMS) provides  a flexible and systematic approach for
determining state inspection commitments.   The strategy recommends the development of a
comprehensive inspection plan that identifies all sources committed to be inspected by the State agency
during its fiscal year.

      The SSCD provided continued support of the Inspection Targeting System (ITS) during FY 1993.
This model (formerly called the Inspection Targeting Model) is used to assist states in developing their
                                            5-9

-------
                             1993 Enforcement Accomplishments Report
comprehensive inspection plans. It takes into consideration quantitative factors, qualitative factors,
emissions, and past compliance history when ranking sources for inspection. In addition, states input
their available inspection resources in ITS in order to finalize the list of sources to be targeted for
inspections.

     During FY 1993, new features were added to this system and the Inspection Targeting System
version III was released. Major new features include:  The ability to download key identification,
emissions, and compliance data from AFS; to upload inspection data to AFS; and to enter inspection
commitment flags into APS. Additionally, a number of new State agencies were trained in the use of the
system and used it to establish their inspection commitments.

     The CMS is in the process of being revised to accommodate the requirements of the 1990 CAAA. A
greater universe of sources will be covered by the strategy due to the decreased  size cut-offs for major
sources.  In addition, titles V and VII require sources to keep and submit self-monitoring reports. The
revised CMS will describe how the review of these self-monitoring reports shall be included in an
overall inspection plan developed by a state. (For further information contact SSCD)

                                    Rule Development

     Enhanced Monitoring (40 CFR Fart 641 - The Enhanced Monitoring (EM) program proposal was
signed by the EPA Administrator on September 30,1993.  This action is intended  to satisfy the statutory
requirement found in § 114(a)(3) of the Clean Air Act  that the Administrator promulgate rules to
provide guidance and to implement enhanced monitoring and compliance certifications for major
stationary sources.  The EPA intends to require each source subject to Part 64 to submit an annual
compliance certification and monitoring reports each quarter detailing any deviations from applicable
requirements in the source's permit.  The EM program requires continuous compliance with underlying
regulations and establishes a direct  link between monitoring data and enforceability.

     Citizen Notice Rule (40  CFR Part 54) - The Citizen Suit Notice Rule, proposed on February 10,
1993, sets forth the manner in which notice of citizen suits is to be provided as required by § 304 of the
1990 CAAA.  The proposed rule replaces the existing CAA citizen suit regulation at 40 CFR Part 54.
This rule clarifies the notice requirements for the various types of citizen suits. Moreover, it brings the
CAA citizen  suit notice practice into conformity with  the notice practice under other, more recent
environmental statutes.  The regulatory changes made pursuant to the 1990 CAAA include provisions
governing citizen suits against EPA for actions that are alleged to be unreasonably delayed. (For further
information contact SSCD)

                   Inspection Training and Delivery Demonstrations

     Training is an important  component of the air compliance program. The following are the
highlights of the FY 1993 training accomplishments;              \

     The EPA-funded Air Pollution Compliance Training Demonstration Center at Rutgers University
completed its second year in FY 1993. This is a three-year demonstration project for 15 State and local
agencies and EPA Regions I, II, and III  that features a 24 week per year inspector training curriculum,
offsite training in Region I, and industry training.  The quarterly training is organized into three levels:
basic and safety; inspection and monitoring; and program specific courses.  To  date, more than  2,000
students have been trained.

     Compliance Program Development Projects are multi-year  cooperative  agreements among
OAR/SSCD, the  regional offices,  and  state and local  agencies.  The program was established to
                                            5-10

-------
                         FY1993 Enforcement Accomplishments Report
develop, demonstrate, and deliver quality training to the EPA regional offices, state and local agencies,
and the major providers, i.e., APTI and CARB. Two week training projects have been completed in
California, Ohio, and Michigan,

     The EPA-sponsored National Air Compliance Delivery Project (CARB 1) utilized the expertise of
California Air Resources Board (CARB)  staff and retired personnel to conduct on-site compliance
training with basic course videos. Fourteen state and local agencies in EPA Regions VIII, IX, and X
completed training for more than 2800 students. (For further information contact SSCD)

                         Paperwork  Reduction Act Compliance

     SSCD obtained OMB reapproval for more than 20 information collection requests in FY 1993.
Additionally, SSCD, in conjunction with EPA's Office of General Counsel, the Office of Enforcement, and
the Office of Policy, Planning, and Evaluation, published a display table listing information collection
request approval  numbers in the  Code of Federal Regulations,  As a result of these efforts, SSCD
information collection requests meet the requirements for information collections under the Paperwork
Reduction Act. (For further information contact SSCD)

dean Air Act - Mobile Sources

                                Cross Border Sales Policy

     With New York's adoption of California's motor vehicle emission standards and requirements,
the Manufacturers Operations Division  (MOD) revised its  policy governing the sale of vehicles
manufactured to meet California standards in bordering states that must comply with Federal motor
vehicle emission standards. This policy is a major achievement in EPA's attempt to create cooperative
policies with the states to maximize overall emissions reductions while minimizing  any adverse
affects on the U.S. motor vehicle sales market.  (For further information contact  MOD)

                              Nonroad Engine Regulations

     To ensure enforceability, MOD participated in the promulgation of proposed emission regulations
governing nonroad large compression-ignition  engines (the NPRM was published on May 17, 1993).
MOD is also participating heavily in developing phase 1 regulations for non-road small spark-ignited
engines.  The phase 1 regulations are expected  to be promulgated sometime in FY 1994. (For further
information contact MOD)                                                             -^  :

                                      Penalty Policy

     In FY 1993, MOD promulgated a revised penalty policy pursuant to §§ 203, 205, and 208 of the
Clean Air Act. These sections of the Act require manufacturers and/or importers of new motor vehicles
and new motor vehicle engines  to comply with all federal emission standards and requirements.  The
new policy incorporates the 1990 Clean Air Act Amendments which adjusted maximum penalty amounts
available for violations and added new administrative hearing procedures for pursuing penalties. (For
further information contact  MOD)

                            Volatility Enforcement Program

     The  volatility  regulations,  which were  promulgated  on  March 22,  1989,  require  that
gasoline sold, offered for sale, dispensed, supplied, offered for  supply, transported or introduced

                                            5-11

-------
                          FY1993 Enforcement Accomplishments Report
into  commerce, during volatility control periods, not exceed  the applicable Reid vapor pressure
("RVP")  standard.  Since  1990, the  volatility control  period  has been  from  May  1, through
September  15.  The purpose of the  regulations  is to reduce evaporative  hydrocarbon emissions
which contribute  to ozone pollution levels.

     During  the 1992  volatility  control  season,  the  volatility standards  were  made more
stringent. Two hundred forty-one  NOVs were issued for violations detected that season.  As a
result of these NOVs, subsequent  settlement activities and  a strong enforcement presence in  the
field during the  1993  control  period, FOSD  saw a significant reduction  in  volatility  violations in
FY 1993. Despite  inspecting approximately the same  number of parties in FY 1993 as in FY  1992,
as of November  9, 1993,  only  17  NOVs had been issued for volatility violations detected during
the 1993 volatility control  season, and approximately 50 more NOVs  were expected to  be issued.
It appears  that the compliance rate of regulated  parties was over 98% for  the 1993  season.  This
reduction in violations indicates that the volatility enforcement program  has been a  great success.
(For  further information contact the Field Operations and Support Division (FOSD))

                                  Diesel Desulfurization

     During FY  1993, FOSD prepared for the implementation and enforcement of the new diesel
sulfur regulations which became effective on  October 1, 1993.  The purpose of the regulations is to
substantially reduce the sulfur content in diesel  fuel which contributes to  the  harmful  particulate
emissions from diesel motor vehicles.

     As part of  EPA's public outreach  efforts, FOSD received approximately 2,000 telephone and
written inquiries concerning EPA's interpretation and intended enforcement of the  regulations. These
efforts culminated in the issuance of a thirty-three page Question and Answer document  on August
5,  1993.  FOSD managers, attorneys and inspectors spoke at twelve industry meetings in order to
disseminate information regarding  the regulations. During this same time,  FOSD was developing
its enforcement plan, which included procurement of field  test equipment, training of EPA and
contractor personnel, formulation of an enforcement strategy, and  development of a  civil  penalty
policy.

     In  the  first weeks after  implementation of the rule  on October 1,  FOSD  received  over a
thousand additional inquiries regarding  further interpretation of the regulations.   FOSD responded
to several  crises, including  supply outages, significant price increases and  most recently,  alleged
fuel/engine materials  incompatibility problems.

     FOSD is  participating in an IRS task force, providing input to the IRS in  order  to prevent
any  conflicts between EPA's  diesel sulfur regulations and  the  soon to be promulgated  IRS highway
tax collection regulations.   FOSD  continues  to work with  the industry, other  federal and  state
agencies, and  the public to ensure smooth implementation of an aggressive nationwide enforcement
program. (For further information contact FOSD)

                         Reformulated Fuels and Anti-Dumping

     The reformulated gasoline and anti-dumping program  rule is  scheduled  to be published
during December  1993. The rule will provide  for the  program to commence on January 1, 1995. The
reformulated gasoline regulations will result in the reduction of VOC,  and  toxic emissions  by 15%
in 1995, with even greater reductions beginning in 2000.  These regulations apply  to the  nine worst
ozone nonattainment areas in the country, while all other ozone nonattainment areas will allowed
                                             5-12

-------
                                                   •   .                                         \
                         FY1993 Enforcement Accomplishments Report                            5SS *
to "opt in" to  the program.  The anti-dumping regulations will ensure that the quality of gasoline
in the remainder of the country does not degrade from its 1990 levels.

     EPA continues to  work  on program issues including: the role of ethanol in reformulated
gasoline;  whether EPA  will  publish test tolerances  for fuel parameters; treatment  of foreign
refiners in establishing  baselines;  and the use of  markers or dyes to distinguish conventional
gasoline from  reformulated gasoline. (For further information contact  FOSD)

                             Detergent Additized Gasoline

     In FY 1993,  EPA  drafted  and submitted to OMB its proposed  detergent regulations and
Federal Register preamble.  The regulations were  drafted pursuant to the mandate of the Clean
Air Act Amendments of 1990 which require that, by 1995, all gasoline contain detergent additives
to prevent the formation of  engine and fuel system deposits. These  deposits have been shown to
cause increases in  hydrocarbon emissions which are major contributors to urban smog.  The
detergent  Notice  of  Proposed  Rulemaking was expected to be signed by the Administrator and
published in  the  Federal  Register by  the  end of  1993.  The Final Rule  was expected to be
promulgated by the end of 1994. (For further information contact FOSD)

Clean Water Act

              Litigation Consideration Guidance for CWA Penalty Policy

     Guidance was developed in FY 1993, setting forth general procedures, rules of thumb and lists on
how litigation considerations may be used  in establishing or revising bottom-line settlement penalties
in CWA cases.  The guidance was issued on October 10, 1993 and will facilitate Agency closure on
acceptable settlement positions in connection with NPDES cases.  (For further information contact OE-
Water)

                      Supplemental Guidance on CWA §309(g)(6)

     In March 1993, supplemental guidance on EPA policy interpreting § 309(g)(6) was issued.  The
guidance specifies the circumstances under which federal civil action is limited by prior state or
federal administrative action. (For further  information contact OE-Watcr)

                         CWA §504 Emergency Action Guidance

     Guidance concerning CWA § 504 was issued in July 1993. The guidance provides instructions and
encouragement on the use of the emergency powers provision of the Clean Water Act in appropriate
circumstances.  Clarity on this issue should facilitate Agency decisions regarding use of CWA emergency
provisions.

                              Water Enforcement Bulletin

     A new issue of the highly acclaimed  Water Enforcement Bulletin  was released in February 1993.
Twenty-four administrative and  judicial water decisions  were summarized and the Bulletin was
distributed to the Regions, States  and interested members of the citizen suit community. (For further
information contact OE-Water)
                                            5-13

-------
                         FY1993 Enforcement Accomplishments Report
                                   CWA Citizen Suits

     The Office of Enforcement continues to review all water enforcement cases filed by citizens. In FY
1993, the Office of Enforcement reviewed approximately 190 60-day notice letters filed informing the
Agency and the violator that citizens were going to file suit. The Office of Enforcement also reviewed
approximately 50 consent decrees from citizens bringing suits for violations of the Clean Water Act,
Safe Drinking Water Act, or Ocean Dumping Act. The Office of Enforcement review of citizen suit
settlements is conducted to determine whether the penalties, supplemental environmental projects and
injunctive relief achieve Agency goals, promote compliance, follow regulatory requirements, and avoid
problematic judicial precedents. Where a citizen suit settlement is considered deficient in any of these
respects,  and the parties fail to negotiate a better result, EPA and the Department of Justice may file
comments or objections with the court or an amicus brief, setting forth the position of the United States.
(For further information contact OE-Water)

              Sewage Sludge Record Keeping and Reporting Guidance

     The Office of Wastewater Enforcement and Compliance completed and  distributed the first in
a three document series of the  Part  503  Domestic Sewage Sludge guidance which explains the
record  keeping and reporting  requirement  for Sewage  Sludge generations/processors.  Additional
Guidance for Land Application and Surface Disposal will be completed by  the end of December
1993.  (For further information  contact the Office  of  Wastewater Enforcement and Compliance
(OWEC))

                                  Inspection Training

     Four  inspector training videos  were  completed and distributed  to EPA regions and states
covering  the topics of NPDES records  review,  wastewater  sampling, flow  measurement with a
Parshall Flume, and Sludge Sampling.  In August a two part televideo conference which addressed
inspection training and training resources was linked to EPA/State participants in  all  ten regions.
The first draft  of  the update to  the NPDES Compliance Inspection Manual  was completed.
Twenty contract  inspections were  conducted involving on-the-job training of  EPA/state inspectors.
(For further information contact OWEO

             Sludge Compliance  Monitoring and Enforcement Strategy

     The Enforcement  Division completed a  national  Strategy  for compliance monitoring and
enforcement of the sludge regulations promulgated on February 19, 1993.  The Strategy sets national
priorities  for  the universe of facilities  in the  following  areas:  inspections,  reporting,  data
tracking,  and compliance evaluation. The  Strategy also establishes minimum  target enforcement
levels  for various violations of the regulations.  The Strategy balances  the  need  for an effective
presence  on the part  of  the EPA with the resource constraints facing  the  program.  (For further
information contact OWEC)

                                         Feedlots

     OWEC  produced and published  a background report covering:  1) the magnitude of the
pollution caused  by animal waste, 2}  permitting,  3) verification  of compliance, and 4) education
and outreach. OWEC also developed  a guidance manual  which interprets and clarifies  NPDES
regulations for operations concentrated animal feeding


                                            5-14

-------
                         FY1993 Enforcement Accomplishments Report
     Finally, OWEC developed a strategy for improving control of pollution from animal waste.
The  strategy  incorporates permitting, enforcement, and education and outreach activities;  can be
easily  integrated  into  other  EPA initiatives  and  strategies; and  requires  few  resources.
Expectations  are  to  begin implementation  of the strategy during  FY 1994, and  finalize the
guidance in January 1994, (For further information contact OWEC)

Safe Drinking Water Act


PWS   '

                                   PWS Penalty Policy

     The Public Water Supply Penalty Policy was issued for interim use on May 3, 1993- The policy
contains detailed guidance on litigation considerations and how such considerations may reduce the
Agency's bottom line settlement demands. The policy will facilitate regional decisions on acceptable
settlement positions in connection with PWS drinking water cases. {For further information contact OE-
Water)

               Guidance on Enforeeability of Filtration Determinations

     Final guidance on the enforceability of filtration determinations was issued November 30,1992.
This guidance resolved a number of issues that had stood in the way of effective enforcement of this
drinking water rule. (For further information contact OE-Water)

uic

                            Second Round Class  V Initiative

     There was a second round UIC enforcement initiative against eleven national oil companies for
unauthorized injection in Class V (shallow) wells.  The relief sought included proper plugging of the
wells as well as  payment of significant penalties. (For further information contact OE-Water)

Oil Pollution Act

                EPA/Coast Guard Oil Pollution Act Enforcement MOU

     A memorandum of understanding (MOU) by EPA, the Coast Guard and the Department of Justice,
concerning enforcement of the Oil Pollution Act, was signed in March 1993 and published in the Federal
Register in April 1993. The MOU clarifies the roles of each of the Federal parties with respect to Oil
Pollution Act enforcement. (For further information contact OE-Water)

             SPCC/Spill (Oil Pollution Act) Administrative Penalty Policy

     The Oil Pollution Act Administrative Penalty Policy was issued for interim use on September 13,
1993. The policy contains detailed guidance on litigation considerations that may affect the settlement
position of EPA in particular cases.  The policy facilitates Agency closure on acceptable settlement
positions in connection with the Oil Pollution Act cases. (For further information contact OE-Water)
                                           5-15

-------
                         FF1993 Enforcement Accomplishments Report
Resource Conservation and Recovery Act

                     1993 Hazardous Waste Combustion Initiative

     The ECRA enforcement program announced a National Enforcement Initiative focusing on
violators of the hazardous waste combustion laws.  The Regions issued 28 administrative complaints
against violators of the boiler and industrial furnace regulations, and two administrative complaints
involving violations of the hazardous waste incinerator requirements.  In addition, the State of Illinois
announced an action seeking a $3 million penalty from one incinerator operator.  Penalties assessed in
federal administrative complaints exceeded $19.8 million. (For further information contact the Office
of Waste Programs Enforcement /RCRA Enforcement Division (OWPE/RED))

                               Illegal Operators Initiative

     Continuing the emphasis on RCRA waste handlers attempting to avoid the regulatory system,
the RCRA enforcement program announced a two-phase initiative against RCRA non-notifiers.  The
Initiative included Regional and State enforcement actions against hazardous waste generators,
transporters, treatment, storage and  disposal facilities that had failed to notify EPA or State
authorities of hazardous waste activities. The Illegal Operators Initiative included 4 civil judicial
complaints; 26 federal administrative complaints; 12 federal criminal actions.  Total penalties assessed
in cases for the initiative exceeded $10 million. (For further information contact OWPE/RED)

                                       Off-site Rule

     The "Procedures for Planning and Implementing Off-site Response Actions" were promulgated on
September 22,1993.  This rule was written by OWPE and it codifies the current "Off-site Policy".  The
rule establishes criteria that must be met for waste  from a Superfund clean-up to be sent off-site for
treatment or disposal. The rule is effective October 22,  1993. (For further information contact
OWPE/RED)

       Conclusion of DuPont/Chambers Works Waste  Minimization Project

     OWPE and Region II concluded the two year waste minimization project conducted at the DuPont
Chambers Work facility in  Deepwater, New Jersey. This project was mandated as part of a $1.85
million dollar  settlement for violations of the Land Disposal Restrictions and began in May 1991.
Pollution prevention  assessments were performed on fifteen chemical processes to accomplish three
primary goals:

     * to identify methods for the actual reduction or prevention of pollution for specific
       chemprocesses at Chambers Works,

     • to generate useful technical information about methodologies and technologies for reducing
       pollution which may help assist companies implementing pollution prevention.programs, and

     • to evaluate and identify potentially useful refinements to the EPA and DuPont methodologies
       for analyzing and reducing pollution and/or waste generating activities.

       The project involved about 150 people at the site who devoted more than 12,000 person-hours to
the project. For the fifteen processes investigated, the potential exists to reduce the hazardous wastes
by 48% and to save $14.9 million each year. DuPont submitted the final report on May 22,1993 and it
has been published by ORD for public distribution. (For further information contact OWPE/RED)
                                           5-16

-------
                         FF ^99J Enforcement Accomplishments Report
                         Advanced RCRA Inspector Institute

     OWPE has developed  an advanced RCRA Inspector Institute to  train state and regional
inspection personnel. The RCRA Enforcement Division (RED) presented the Advanced RCRA Inspector
Institute in San Francisco in June 1993 and in Boston in December 1993.  (For further information contact
OWPE/RED)

                                     Penalty Policy

     OWPE/RED and OE-RCRA held the RCRA Civil Penalty Policy Workshop and Roundtable.
RCRA Program personnel and the Regional Counsel staff from all ten Regions attended this Workshop.
Part of the  Workshop was devoted to discussing "Train the Trainer" materials which had  been
prepared for the Regions.  With these materials, the Regions can conduct their own RCRA  Civil
Penalty Policy training for Regional personnel and the States.

     Final penalties assessed in FY 1993 remained high, surpassing  final penalties assessed in FY 1991
and FY 1992. Total penalties assessed in §3008 final Consent Orders equaled $8,556,000. The average
penalty assessed was $79,000. (For further information contact OWPE/RED)

                            Alternative  Dispute Resolution

     OWPE/RED and OE/Superfund conducted training in all regions on the use of Alternative Dispute
Resolution (ADR) in enforcement negotiations.  The training included an exercise on the differences
between arbitration and mediation as well as a mediation of a Superfund and RCRA corrective action
dispute.

     OWPE/RED provided assistance to Region VI to support the use of mediation in an access dispute.
This represents one of the first uses of ADR in  the RCRA program. (For further information contact
OWPE/RED)

                  Boiler and Industrial  Furnace Inspection Workshop

     OWPE developed and conducted a one-and-a-half day workshop in six Regions on how to conduct
inspections at boiler and industrial furnace (BIF) facilities that burn hazardous waste.  The workshop
was attended by approximately 264 state and regional RCRA inspectors and compliance personnel.
(For further information contact OWPE/RED)


Superfimd

                 Supplemental Guidance on Federal Superfund Liens

     On July 30, 1993,  EPA  released  national guidance for providing owners of contaminated
property with notice  and an opportunity to meet with EPA before a Superfund lien  is perfected on
their property.  Under the guidance, EPA will notify property owners  by registered mail prior to
perfecting a lien on their property. Property owners  will have the opportunity to either make
written submissions to the Agency (for example,  make available documents indicating  that they
are not the owner) or meet with EPA staff before a neutral EPA  official.   Under the guidance, the
neutral  official  will  hear the property owner's presentation,  and   then, based on a record of
relevant documents, decide whether or not EPA has a reasonable  basis to  perfect the lien.

                                           5-17

-------
                          FY 1993 Enforcement Accomplishments Report
     The guidance provides property owners an opportunity to give EPA information  that might
change the Agency's proposed determination to perfect a Superfund  lien.  EPA's issuance of this
guidance is one of the  first examples of its larger effort to make administrative improvements to
Superfund. (For further information contact OE-Superfund)

                                 De Micromis Guidance

     On July 30,  1993,  The Office of Enforcement and the Office of  Waste Programs Enforcement
issued  a  memorandum entitled "Guidance  on CERCLA  Settlements With  De  Micromis Waste
Contributors."  The purpose of the memorandum is to provide guidance on  using CERCLA's
settlement authorities  to resolve the CERCLA  liability  of parties who have  contributed even less
hazardous substances  to a site than the traditional de minimis settlors  the Agency pursues.  The
memorandum describes the  types of situations in which a  Region  may  find  that  it is in  the
Agency's  interest  to  exercise enforcement  discretion  by offering de micromis  settlements  and
explains how to use EPA's existing settlement  authority in an  expeditious  manner  to  resolve the
liability of these de micromis parties and to grant them the fullest contribution protection available
under the statute.

     The Agency plans to issue a supplemental memorandum that will include a model CERCLA  §
122(g)  administrative agreement,  a model CERCLA  § 122(g) consent  decree, a model § 122(g)
Federal Register  notice, a questionnaire, a certification,  and  examples  of notification letters  to
send to potential de micromis settlors. (For further information contact OE-Superfund)

                             Alternative Dispute  Resolution

     FY  1993  was a watershed  year for efforts  toward meeting the  Agency's  stated policy  of
utilizing  alternative dispute resolution  (ADR) mechanisms  in all Agency  enforcement actions
where a more prompt and fair resolution of a dispute could potentially  result ("Final Guidance on
Use of Alternative Dispute Resolution Techniques in Enforcement Actions")  and to implement the
Administrative Dispute Resolution Act and  the  Executive Order on Civil  Justice  Reform.
Significant strides were made in every aspect of our ADR program including case use of ADR, case
support systems, training and internal ADR services, and outreach to the regulated community.

     ADR mechanisms, primarily mediation  and convening  services, were initiated in eighteen
enforcement actions during FY 1993, almost double the number for FY 1992.  Regional support for
the use of ADR grew substantially, with all but one region using ADR to assist settlement efforts.
FY 1993  also heralded an  increased awareness of  ADR as a tool for increasing  the efficiency of
future disputes with mediation included in  the dispute resolution provisions of eight judicial and
administrative settlement documents.

     Region  I  took the lead during 1993 in developing  the consideration and appropriate use of
ADR as standard  procedure for civil actions.  Region I initiated an expansive ADR program with
regional  training and the use of ADR in cost recovery and  RD/RA  actions.  The region  also
initiated   an  innovative  use of mediation to facilitate public deliberations regarding  the
implementation of Agency Superfund remedial  decisions.

     The  scope of ADR use was expanded during FY  1993, with the first significant uses of ADR to
assist disputes beyond Superfund cost recovery  and RD/RA cases. Mediation was  used  for the first
time to resolve a  Clean Water Act NPDES violation action  and  to facilitate  public deliberations
regarding the issuance of  an NPDES permit.  In  the Superfund program, ADR  was used for  the
first  time  to facilitate  the  settlement  of  a   large removal  action  and  to  assist  negotiations

                                            5-18

-------
                          FY1993 Enforcement Accomplishments Report
     ,
? A
(sa
X-
involving federal" PRPs. Progress was also  made  toward developing  the  use of ADR in ECRA
enforcement actions through a pilot program initiated during FY 1993.

     Another area  of  expansion for  the ADR program  during FY  1993 was  the use  of ADR to
facilitate the resolution of  PRP allocation disputes.  Two major initiatives to provide ADR support
to PRP allocation efforts were included in  the Deputy Administrator's Superfund Administrative
Improvements Project. Regional offices have  begun a major effort to identify appropriate sites and
offer ADR assistance to PRPs.

     Training in the  effective use  of mediation and other ADR techniques was provided  to all
regional  offices and Headquarters during FY  1993.  The intensive one-day training was  designed
for legal and  program staff who participate in enforcement settlement activities.  The  ADR  Users
Training, taught jointly by  EPA  ADR staff and  ADR  professionals who have served as mediators
in Superfund cases,  concentrates on the inherent difficulties in Agency negotiations and  how use of
ADR can facilitate prompt  resolution  of such disputes. In addition,  training support was provided
to several state environmental  agencies including presentation of the ADR  Users Training for staff
of the Vermont Department of Natural Resources.  An executive ADR training was also  designed
and developed during 1993  for presentation to senior Agency andDOJ enforcement staff  next year.

     Several efforts were  also  completed during FY 1993 to  expand the institutionalization of
ADR into the Agency's enforcement program.  Under  the auspices of the ADR Liaison, a national
network of  ADR contacts and ADR experienced staff in each region was organized.  The network
holds monthly conferences  calls to exchange information  and serves as consultants to  Agency staff
on the effective use  of  ADR.  In response to regional requests, a cost benefit analysis of the use of
mediation in support of Superfund actions was undertaken based on results of a Region V pilot project
The study indicates that  substantial savings  in  terms of regional  staff  resources  is  obtained
through  the use of ADR, with savings of 30%-50% per case documented.  In  addition, work was
begun  on an ADR Users Manual  to provide  a  desk reference in the effective use of ADR.

     Substantial progress was also  made during FY 1993 in educating the regulated community of
the Superfund ADR program and the potential for  use of ADR  techniques  to reduce PRP and
government  transaction  costs.   The ADR Liaison,  several  regional ADR  Contacts, and  EPA
management made  presentations and  provided training  programs on effective  ADR  use  for
numerous  professional and  PRP organizations and  several  federal  agencies.  In  addition, a
workshop exploring opportunities to use ADR to increase the effectiveness  and fairness of  the
Superfund program was scheduled for November 1993. (For further information contact OE-Superfund)

                                CERCLA Reauthorization

     During FY  1993, EPA prepared  for the debate over reauthorization of CERCLA.   The Agency
considered reauthorization proposals spanning  a great variety of issues.  Among the most prominent
of these issues was the statute's  liability scheme,

     The Office  of Enforcement played a  leading role in the conception and articulation of  a
variety of  potential  liability scheme related  legislative changes  to  CERCLA,  all intended  to
improve the fairness  of  the  liability  scheme and  reduce the transaction costs associated  with it.
Areas  of fqcus included the liability of  small contributors of hazardous substances, contributors of
Municipal  Solid  Waste,  and  prospective purchasers of  contaminated property, as well as  the
allocation of cleanup cost  shares and the finality  of  settlements, among other areas. (For further
information contact OE-Superfund)


                                             5-19

-------
                         FY1993 Enforcement Accomplishments Report
                  Final Off-Site  Rule Published  in Federal Register

     The  Final Off-Site Rule was published in the  Federal Register on September 22,  1993  (58
Fed, Req-  49200).  The rule will become effective October 22, 1993. The Off-Site Rule supersedes
the directive entitled "Revised  Procedures for Implementing  Off-Site  Response Actions" (Porter,
Nov.  13,  1987), (OSWF. R Directive -9834.11,  Nov.  13,  1987.)  The  Off-Site Rule implements
C1RCLA  Section  121(d)(3) requirements to insure thatCERCLA  wastes are  transferred  only to
environmentally-sound facilities, and that they do  not  add to environmental problems. The rule
applies  to  any action, either  removal or  remedial,  taken pursuant  to CERCLA  authorities  (or
with  Fund  money)  that involves the  off-site  transfer of any hazardous  substance, pollutant  or
contaminant. (For further information contact OE-Superfund)


       Foster More Settlements with Small Volume Waste Contributors

     In July 1993, EPA released the "Streamlined Approach for Settlements with De Minimis Waste
Contributors." The guidance establishes the minimum level of information required before EPA can
make a de minimis finding. The guidance states that it is no longer necessary to prepare a waste-in list
or volumetric ranking before considering a party's eligibility for a de minimis settlement.

     In July 1993, EPA released the "Guidance on CERCLA Settlements with  De Micromis Waste
Contributors." The guidance establishes the use of CERCLA settlement authorities to resolve the
CERCLA liability of parties who have contributed even  less hazardous substances to a site than the de
minimis parries the Agency traditionally pursues.

     In October 1993, EPA released "The First 125 De Minimis Settlements: Statistics from EPA's De
Minimis Database." This report profiles the 125 settlements to date, providing  insight into average
volumetric contributions, payment amounts, etc.

     A communication strategy was also issued for assisting de minimis and "de micromis" parties.
(For further information contact OWPE-Superfund Enforcement)

                                Mixed Funding Activities

     In September 1993, EPA released the "Mixed Funding Evaluation Report: The Potential Costs.of
Orphan Shares."  This report analyzes the implications to the Trust Fund if EPA routinely paid for the
orphan share of cleanup costs to implement the remedial design/remedial action (RD/RA). (For further
information contact OWPE-Superfund Enforcement)

                  SPCOSpill OPA Draft Administrative Penalty Policy

     The Oil Pollution Act Administrative Penalty Policy was issued in draft form on September 13,
1993.  The proposed policy contains detailed draft guidance on litigation considerations that may affect
the settlement position of EPA in particular cases.  The proposed policy will facilitate Agency closure
on acceptable settlement positions in connection with OPA cases.

     EPA issued an "enforcement authorities and elements of violations/evidentiary requirements
under the Clean Water Act §311."   This will be used to train and assist Agency personnel in the
development of OPA enforcement cases. (For further information contact OWPE-Superfund Enforcement)

                                            5-20

-------
                                                                                           ~'f* •*
                         FY1993 Enforcement Accomplistments Report                           f S^Z I
   "»*»

,BJ
%p*<^
Toxic Substances Control Act

           TSCA Sections 5 & 8 Initiatives Focus on Data and Data Quality

     In FY 1993, EPA launched and  ended the year with two TSCA new chemical and reporting
initiatives designed to heighten awareness of the need to file quality data on time. On December 17,
1992, EPA announced a TSCA sections 5 & 8 initiative seeking more than $9 million in administrative
civil penalties from 22 companies.  EPA Headquarters and nine regional offices filed the cases, with
eight companies self-disclosing violations and the remaining fourteen companies inspected by EPA.
Many of the cases are still pending.

     On September 30, 1993, EPA closed the fiscal year by announcing another TSCA sections 5 & 8
initiative, this time seeking nearly $25 million in administrative civil penalties from 23 companies.
EPA Headquarters and eight regional offices filed the cases, with thirteen companies self-disclosing
violations and the remaining ten companies inspected by EPA.   (For further information contact OE-
TLD)
                             National TSCA IUR Initiative

     During the week ending July 23,1993, administrative civil penalty complaints were filed by EPA
Headquarters and four regional  offices (Regions II,  III,  V,  and VI) against  27  U.S. chemical
manufacturers which failed to report in a timely and accurate manner, data required by the Inventory
Update Rule (IUR) regulations, promulgated pursuant to § 8{a) of TSCA. Approximately $3.1 million
in penalties were proposed in these complaints.  The complaints issued were the  result ot violations
detected during Agency record audit reviews and regional inspections.

   The IUR is a regulatory reporting  requirement in which facilities report the quantity and site of
manufacture or importation of chemicals on the Agency's  TSCA Inventory List. The IUR provides
information essential to regulatory and non-regulatory activities, including hazard  and risk screening,
chemical assessment, risk  management, pollution prevention, regulatory priority setting and  the
regulatory development process. (For further information contact OE-TLD)

                      Case Development  Training,  and  Manual

     During FY 1993, Case Development Training  was conducted in  Kansas City, Missouri and San
Francisco California. The course covered topics such  as; evidence collection, evidence evaluation,
the civil  administrative process, and  other types of enforcement actions.  Approximately  59 state
and federal case officers, attorneys  and  inspectors attended. Each attendee received  a  manual
covering  pertinent TSCA, FIFRA and EPCRA law as well as a TSCA  case study  in connection with
a  mock settlement conference. (For further information contact the Office of Compliance Monitoring
(OCM))

                          OPPT Inspection Training Strategy

     In  March  1993, OCM and  Region  IV  jointly  released the  first national  OPPTS inspector
training  strategy.   The  strategy was developed over a six month period  by a group  of 24
regional,  state, and  HQ representatives, it addresses  pesticides, asbestos,  PCBs, core TSCA and
EPCRA § 313 inspector training needs.  The strategy, which is now  being implemented, details  the
content of each  training course, timeframes  and  delivery  mechanisms for a three year period, (For
further information contact OCM)


                                            5-21

-------
                         FY1993 Enforcement Accomplishments Report
Federal Insecticide. Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act

                                     FIFRA  § 19

     The FIFRA § 19(f)(2)  final  policy was published  on August 18, 1993, This policy provides
an Interim Process for state enforcement programs to be approved as required by the statute  in
order to  prevent loss  of state  authority  to certify applicators and primary use enforcement
responsibility.

     The FIFRA § 19  Procedural Rule (Phase 1) proposed  rule was published on  May 5,1993.  This
rule  addresses the following requirements related to suspended and canceled pesticides; Mandatory
Recalls,   Voluntary  Recalls,  Indemnification,   Storage Plans and Acceptance  for Disposal. (For
further information contact OCM)

                                        Exports

     The  final  Pesticide  Export Policy  Statement/Rule  was published February 18, 1993.  This
policy  revised  the  1980  pesticide  export policy; changes  in  the  policy  incorporated many
recommendations from GAO's  report on pesticide  exports and those  recommended by the EPA's
review of its policy at a time of  growing public concern over residues  in imported foods. An
Interpretive  Workgroup  on the Pesticide Policy  was established to answer questions regarding the
interpretation of the  new Export Policy, {For further information contact OCM)

Emergency Planning and Community Right to Know Art (EPCRA) § 313

            Worker Protection Inspection Guidance, Pocket Guide  and
                              Inspector Training Course

     During FY 1993, EPA developed the pesticides worker protection  inspection guidance, pocket
guide for inspectors,  and the  draft  worker protection  inspector training course, which  will  be
delivered in  FY  1994.  All  of these products will be tools used  nationally  to  help  ensure
compliance  with  the revised worker protection standards. (For further information contact OCM)

              Interim  Final EPCRA Section 313 Inspection Guidance

     At  the  beginning of FY 1993 EPA released  the  Interim  Final EPCRA § 313  Inspection
Guidance which  addressed conducting nonreporter and  data quality  inspections.  The Guidance
addressed the EPCRA § 313 compliance priorities. (For further information contact OCM)
                                          5-22

-------
                        FY1993 Enforcement Accomplishments Report
VL  Media Specific Enforcement Performance and
     Regional Accomplishments

A. Media Specific Enforcement  Performance

Super fund Enforcement

     FY 1993 was a respectable year for the Superfund Enforcement Program. The program reached a
total of 200 settlements (NPL & Non-NPL) with estimated values greater than $950 million  with
potential responsible parties (PRPs).  Of this total amount, approximately $810 million was for § 106
or § 106/107 remedial design/action (RD/RA) settlements. The estimated RD/RA settlement values
were broken down into three categories. The first category was composed of 36 §106 or § 106/107 consent
decrees for RD/RA referred by the Agency  to the Department of Justice (DOJ), for PRP remedial work
estimated at $366.3 million.  The second category was made up of 42 unilateral administrative orders
(UAOs) issued under § 106(a) authority, and for which PRPs notified the Agency of their intent to
comply.  The estimated value of RD/RA work to be performed under these UAOs was put at $420.6
million.  The final category of remedial settlement consisted of eight administrative orders on consent
(AOCs) for remedial design only, reached through the SACM initiative. The estimated value of .design
work under these AOCs was estimated to value over $24 million.

     In FY 1993 the Agency issued a total of 126 unilateral administrative orders (UAOs), versus 107 in
FY 1992, and  108 AOCs (versus 128 in FY 1992) were signed with PRPs. Of a total of 126 UAOs issued, 50
were for RD/RA (42 in compliance), with the balance for other response work at NPL and Non-NPL
sites. Under § 107 and § 106/107 settlements, the Agency referred 41 cases (36 referrals in FY 1992) to
DOJ seeking and achieving $155 million for past costs incurred  by  the program (compared to $137.4
million referred in  FY 1992).   Since the inception  of the Superfund Program in 1980, PRPs have
committed to response actions estimated at over $8 billion, and the program has achieved settlements
for over $1 billion in past costs. The percentages of PRP lead at NPL sites in FY 1993  for remedial
design and remedial action responses were 65% for RD and 79%  for  RA respectively (Federal Facilities
excluded). In FY 1992, the percentage of PRP leads at NPL sites was 73% for remedial designs, and 72%
for remedial actions.
     *  200 T    Total RI/FS
       180 . .
                          Superfund Program Accomplishments
                                       (All Actions)
Total ROD
Total RD
Total RA
                                                    1

                            1
                       I
         I
           FY90 FY91  FY92 FY93 FY90 FY91  FY92  FY93 FY9Q  FY9I FW2 FY93 FY90 FY91  FY92 FY93
H PRP- Lead Response
O Fund-Lead Response
• EPA Selected Remedy
                                          6-1

-------
                          FY1993 Enforcement Accomplishments Report
Clean Air Act - Stationary Sources

Significant Violators/Timely and Appropriate Guidance

     The Significant Violators program is central to the air enforcement and compliance program
because it establishes a structure to identify and correct the most important noncompliance situations.

     FY 1993 was the first full year of implementation of the  revised Significant Violators/Timely
and Appropriate (SV/T&A) Guidance, which revised  the definition of a significant violator, thus
expanding the universe of potential violators. Consequently, significant violator activity has greatly
increased. By the end of FY 1993, there was a 150 percent increase in the number of significant violators
identified over FY 1992; the number of significant violators that  were addressed (i.e., by issuing Civil
Referral, Administrative Penalty Order, Consent Decree, etc.) increased by 80 percent; and the universe
of significant violators at the end of FY 1993 doubled. The increase in the number of significant
violators is an indication of the successful implementation of  the SV/T&A Guidance. (For  further
information contact SSCD)

Significant Violators Data

     The census of significant violators (SV's) at the end of FY 1993 is 805, which is double the census
at the end of FY 1992.  In FY 1993, 1590 SV's  were added and 1520 SV's were addressed, which are
increases of 150 percent and 80 percent respectively over FY 1992.  Regarding the timeliness of
enforcement response to identification of significant violators, issue, 63 percent of SV's were addressed
within the 150 day time frame set by the  SV/Timely  and Appropriate Guidance, which is  an
improvement from the previous year.

Enforcement Activities

     During FY 1993, the regional offices referred 72 civil enforcement cases to the Department of
Justice, which is slightly lower than in the  previous year, and filed 140 administrative penalty orders
(APOs). Moreover, approximately 61 final settlements of APOs were filed in FY 1993.

Stratospheric Ozone Protection Compliance Activities

     Over 2000 inspections under the title VI CFC regulations were conducted in FY 1993. Thirty-four
percent of all the APOs in FY 1993 were issued for CFC violations.

Clean Air Act - Mobile Sources

Manufacturers Operations Division

     The Manufacturers Operations Division (MOD) in the Office of Mobile Sources (OMS) enforces
the provisions of Title II of the Clean Air Act related to the manufacture and importation of new motor
vehicles and motor vehicle engines. Specifically, MOD ensures that new motor vehicle manufacturers
and importers comply with all Federal emission standards and requirements.  MOD enforcement and
compliance is conducted by the program office at headquarters.  The Division conducts investigations,
inspections, and testing of new and in-use motor vehicles and motor vehicle engines.
                                             6-2

-------
                          Fr*1993 Enforcement Accomplishments Report
Motor Vehicle Emissions Recalls

      MOD's recall testing program continued to implement Federal emission requirements efficiently
and effectively in FY 1993. Since the beginning of the recall program, a total of 46 million vehicles
have  been recalled.  Thirty-four million of those vehicles were recalled as a direct result of EPA
investigations.

      In FY 1993, the motor vehicle emission recall program continued to play an important role in
MOD's efforts. During FY 1993, MOD investigations resulted in eight influenced recalls involving
three  manufacturers and a total of 370,00 recalled  vehicles.  In addition, 94,000 vehicles were recalled
voluntarily by manufacturers without specific EPA action.

      In addition, MOD continued motor vehicle testing in a high altitude area (Denver, Colorado).
This high altitude program conducted in coordination with the Colorado Department of Health
(CDH), was initiated to ensure vehicles operated in high altitude areas comply with Federal emission
standards. Under MOD's direction, CDH  tested seven engine families representing over one million
vehicles.  MOD expects this testing to result in two influenced recalls.  One of these recalls involves
1989  4.0 liter Jeeps which are part  of a larger investigation  involving defective Chrysler oxygen
sensors. This investigation will result in more than 700,000 and being recalled.

Selective Enforcement AuditingXBanking and Trading Emission Credits

      MOD's Selective Enforcement Auditing (SEA) program continued to be a successful and highly
leveraged program. The program consists of production-line emission testing of new light-duty motor
vehicles and heavy-duty motor vehicle engines. The less than 170 individual tests ordered by MOD
induced over 22,000 additional voluntary emission tests conducted by manufacturers.

      MOD routinely audits the program that allows  manufacturers to average, bank and trade
(A,B&T) particulate matter and oxides of nitrogen emission credits for heavy-duty engines.  The
program authorizes manufacturers who reduce emissions below regulatory requirements for a particular
engine to raise emissions from another engine in the current model year or offset these reductions against
emissions in a later model year or to trade credits for these reductions to other manufacturers of similar
engines.

      In FY 1993, MOD audited four manufacturers representing approximately fifty percent of
manufacturers  using the A,B&T program.  Pursuant  to these audits, MOD met with manufacturer
representatives to clarify certain program requirements and reviewed A,B&T records.  MOD  also
initiated a rulemaking to clarify certain accounting requirements in the A,B&T program.

      MOD's heavy-duty SEA audits focused on engines that manufacturers selected to participate in
the A,B&T program.  SEA audits targeted engines which had family emission limits (FELs) either
below the Federal standards or close to the engines certification level. In FY 1993, SEA conducted ten
heavy-duty engine audits and seven light-duty engine audits. As a result of an SEA, one manufacturer
raised its FEL  for an engine family to avoid an audit failure.  Another manufacturer  suspended
production for one engine family rather than submit to an audit.

Manufacturers Investigations

      In addition to the recall and SEA efforts, MOD.continued to ensure that motor vehicle and motor
vehicle engine manufacturers are in compliance with Title II of the Clean Air Act.  MOD investigations
focused on manufacturers that introduced vehicles into commerce without obtaining an EPA certificate

                                             6-3

-------
                          ^ ^93 Enforcement Accomplishments Report
of conformity demonstrating compliance with Federal emission requirements. FY 1993 efforts yielded
several full-scale investigations resulting in substantial settlement payments to EPA. In addition to
these enforcement actions, MOD is continuing eight manufacturer investigations.

Nonconformance Penalties

     MOD also enforces the nonconformanee penalty (NCP) program. Pursuant to § 206(g) of the Act,
the NCP program was established to facilitate the implementation of technology-forcing emission
standards.  Specifically, NCPs allow a manufacturer of engines or vehicles that do not meet applicable
emission standards, but are below a designated upper limit, to be issued a certificate of conformity upon
payment of a monetary penalty. In FY 1993, General Motors paid a NCP for one engine family totaling
$3,123.

Imports Program                                                         ,

     In FY 1993, MOD continued its implementation and enforcement of the Imports program under
Title II of the Clean Air Act. This program, permits independent commercial importers (ICIs) that
possess an appropriate certificate of conformity from EPA to import vehicles that do not comply with
Federal emission  standards and requirements (nonconforming motor vehicles). The program also
permits designated Canadian importers (DCIs) to import Canadian motor vehicles determined by EPA
to be identical in all material respects  to certified U.S. version vehicles.  The  ICI or DCI  is solely
responsible for meeting all Federal emission standards and requirements for all nonconforming motor
vehicles it imports.

     To determine compliance with the Imports program in FY 1993, MOD conducted in-offlce document
audits of all operating ICIs and all shipping company CCPs.  In addition, MOD conducted two on-site
ICI inspections, one on-site DCI inspection, and one port-of-call inspection. Pursuant to these audits,
MOD discovered numerous imports regulation violations. In addition, to pursuing enforcement actions
for  these violations, MOD is continuing to  investigate  two other cases involving imports regulations
violations.

     MOD also continued to approve and monitor catalyst control programs (CCP). These programs are
managed by other federal agencies, manufacturers, and shipping companies, to ensure the presence and
proper functioning of emission control equipment on U.S. version vehicles driven overseas that are being
returned to the U.S..

Field Operations and Support Division

     The  Field Operations and  Support Division  ("FOSD") in the Office  of  Mobile  Sources
("OMS") enforces provisions of the Clean Air Act relating to  the composition and  use of motor
vehicle fuels and  tampering  with vehicle  emission control  devices.   FOSD also  develops
enforcement  policy  for  OMS in  these  areas.   FOSD's enforcement program  includes:  field
investigations, augmented  by state and  local  efforts  and by contractor inspections; issuance of
Notices of Violations ("NOVs");  negotiation of settlements; preparation  for trials,  either by
referral to  the  United  States Department of Justice or  by the  filing  of an  administrative
complaint;  and litigation  if  necessary. This enforcement program has been extremely successful in
achieving environmental compliance over the  years.

     FOSD's aggressive enforcement program led  to  major enforcement achievements during FY
1993. Included among  these achievements was a  significant reduction in  volatility violations in

                                             6-4

-------
                          FY1993 Enforcement Accomplishments Report
FY  1993 as compared  to  FY 1992, and a continued increase  in compliance with EPA's policy on
installation  of  aftermarket catalytic converters.  FOSD also worked  hard  to  prepare for the
implementation and enforcement of the new diesel sulfur regulation  which  became effective on
October  1,  1993,  and continued  working  on  development  of enforcement provisions  for the
reformulated gasoline/anti-dumping regulations and detergent regulation.

     In  FY  1993, FOSD  and its  contractors conducted a total of 12,878  inspections  of  vehicle
repair shops, vehicle fleet owners, auto  parts stores and parties  in the fuel  distribution system. As
a result of these inspections and information gathered  from other sources, FOSD issued 311  NOVs
representing  proposed penalties of $4,297,560. The  largest  number of  NOVs  were issued for fuel
violations with 221 NOVs issued and total proposed penalties of  $3,666,010.  Of these,  210  NOVs
were  issued for violations  of EPA's   volatility regulations  with  total  proposed  penalties of
$2313,010, two were issued for violation of the Clean  Air Act's substantially similar requirement
with total proposed penalties  of $1,308,000,  and nine were  issued  for other fuel violations with
total proposed  penalties of $45,000.  A total  of 90 NOVs were  issued for violations  of the Clean
Air Act's tampering prohibition with  penalties totaling $631,550, Of these,  51 NOVs were  issued
for  violations of FOSD's  aftermarket catalytic converter policy  with total  proposed penalties of
$287350 and 39 NOVs were issued for other forms of tampering with total proposed penalties of
$343,700.

     FOSD settled 220 cases  in FY 1993 with cash civil penalties totaling  $2,257,585.  Additional
payments totaling $93,000 went to alternative payment projects. The largest civil  penalty  was
generated  from the  settlement of  one  outstanding  lead phasedown case  with  a penalty of
$571,000.  In addition, consent decrees were entered  in five FOSD cases  during FY  1993 with
penalties totaling $831,596.

     During FY  1993,  there was a  significant  decrease  ,in violations  with  respect  to the
installation of aftermarket catalytic converters, as compared to  FY 1992.  In FY  1992,  EPA issued
73  NOVs for violations  of FOSD's aftermarket catalytic converter enforcement  policy ("AMCC
Policy").  In  FY 1993, only 51 NOVs  were  issued for violations of the  AMCC  Policy.   FOSD
attributes this  increase in  compliance to  its aggressive enforcement  program,  which includes
investigation of  repair  shops to determine compliance,  the  review  of aftermarket catalytic
converter warranty  cards, the issuance  of NOVs, and  education of both  the  public and the
regulated  community.

     EPA tampering  survey data  from past years indicates  that the need  for catalytic converter
replacement is  as  high  as 4% of the national fleet.  Because of  this substantial  need for catalytic
converters, the demand for new aftermarket catalytic  converters has steadily increased in  recent
years.

Clean  Water Act Enforcement - NPDES

Timely and Appropriate Enforcement and the NPDES Exceptions Report

     The NPDES  enforcement program has defined Significant Noncompliance (SNC  to include
violations of effluent limits, reporting requirements, and/or violations of formal enforcement actions.
The NPDES program does not track SNC against a "fixed base"  of   SNC that is established at the
beginning of the year, rather, the program tracks SNCs on a quarterly basis.  During FY 1992, 90% of all
NPDES SNCs were resolved in a "timely and appropriate " manner.


                                             6-5

-------
                         ^ ^^ Enforcement A ccomplishments Report
     Those facilities that have been in SNC for two or more quarters without returning to compliance
or being addressed by a formal enforcement action are identified on an "exceptions list".  During FY1993
287 facilities were reported on the SNC exceptions list including 40 facilities that were unaddressed
from the previous year and 247 facilities that appeared on the list for the first time during the year.
Of the 287 facilities on the exceptions list, 144 returned to compliance by the end of the year, 87 were
subject to formal enforcement action, and 56 facilities remained to be addressed during the upcoming
year.  The number of facilities unaddressed in FY 1993 increased by 10.  However, the number of
facilities appearing as SNC decreased by 16%  (2362 to 1,978). This resulted in a decrease in T&A from
90% in FY 1992 to 87% in FY 1993.       .            .

     During FY 1993, the regional offices filed 256 administrative penalty orders (APOs). Moreover,
178 final settlements of APOs were filed in FY 1993.

Toxic Substances Control Act Enforcement (TSCA)

     Over 125 companies have registered for the TSCA §8(e) Compliance Audit Program, which offers
participating companies the opportunity to  voluntarily  submit late heath and safety reports from
chemicals.  Stipulated penalties averaging $5,000 per  late report will be collected.  The stipulated
penalties are much less that the statutory maximums that could have been imposed. This program has
been well received by  the regulated  community an has raised the profile  of this  important data
reporting requirement, The CAP has generated a large volume of useful health and safety data.  To
date, more than  10.000 late reports have been received by the Agency.
B.  Regional Office Accomplishments

                                    Region I - Boston
     (Connecticut, Maine, Massachusetts, New Hampshire, Rhode Island, Vermont)

     During FY 1993, Region I maintained an active enforcement program and continued to refine its
management of the enforcement process.  In the past year, the Region built on its previous efforts to
incorporate a multi-media focus into the enforcement program, advanced an important dialogue with
New England state enforcement officials to better coordinate enforcement efforts, and heightened its
attention to resolving cases promptly and through innovative mechanisms.

     Region I's Enforcement Workgroup, which includes representatives of all the Region's media
enforcement programs and the Office of Regional Counsel, continued to play a lead role in developing
and overseeing multi-media enforcement.  As in recent years, the Workgroup held  a roundtable
discussion early in the year at which each of the programs discussed their inspection and enforcement
plans for the year.  During this discussion, opportunities for coordinated and consolidated inspections
were identified and the possibilities for participation in the various regional and national initiatives
were surfaced. The workgroup also took up numerous other important multi-media issues including
refinement of the Region's multi-media inspection checklist, data collection efforts and inspection and
enforcement targeting.

     The clearest example of the Region's commitment to a multi-media approach is in the federal
facilities area.  In FY 1993, Region I  conducted six multi-media inspections at federal facilities  in
connection with the February, 1993 national Federal Facilities Multi-media Enforcement/Compliance
Initiative and in furtherance of the Region's federal facilities multi-media inspection program, begun
in 1990.  The inspections were conducted by EPA and state inspectors, and resulted in several notices of


                                            6-6

-------
                          FY1993 Enforcement 'Accomplishments Report
non-compliance (federal or state) and one RCRA administrative enforcement penalty action under the
Federal Facility Compliance Act of 1992. Since 1990, the Region has conducted fifteen federal facility
multi-media inspections.

     Also to advance a multi-media approach (and with the endorsement of the Region's leadership
and the Enforcement Workgroup), training was conducted in the spring of 1993 for all of the Region's
field inspectors on a number of important topics. All inspectors attended a course devoted exclusively to
the subject of multi-media inspections at which experts from each  of the enforcement programs
discussed the major requirements of their programs so that inspectors would be better able to identify
problems in areas beyond their individual programs.  A separate course was held for all the inspectors
which  discussed ways in which they could promote pollution prevention during  their inspections.
Finally, a course was held for inspectors and others in the Region which covered the litigation process
and was intended to help them understand how the process works and how they would fit  in it.

     FY 1993 was the first full year  of operation of the  New England State/EPA Environmental
Enforcement Committee.  This  committee, which was organized and sponsored by Region I, includes
high level representatives from the enforcement offices of  all the state environmental agencies and
from the environmental divisions of the state attorneys general offices in Region I. The Committee
meets approximately once every four months and addresses topics of mutual interest such as the
coordination of  enforcement  efforts,  participation  in national  initiatives,  administrative penalty
programs and training needs.

     The Region also worked on a number of fronts to ensure the prompt and successful resolution of its
enforcement cases and to explore the use of innovative settlement tools.  A particular emphasis was
placed on the resolution of the older judicial and administrative cases in the Region. Guidance was
developed setting out various  tools which could be used by regional staff to move negotiations to a
prompt and successful outcome or, alternatively, to put them on a track towards litigation.

     During FY 1993, Region I also worked on several fronts to promote the use of alternative dispute
resolution (ADR) to settle cases and to enhance community involvement in controversial environmental
decisions. These efforts have taken the form of educating regional management and staff about ADR
techniques and their possible applications; educating the private bar about EPA's receptivity to ADR;
representing EPA on an American Arbitration Association task  force on environmental  mediation;
actively participating  in a national  workgroup on ADR to share information and ideas with other
regions; and continuing to nominate cases for ADR in a broadening range of circumstances. The success of
these efforts has been evident in increased general inquiries  by both EPA case lawyers and members of
the private bar about the appropriateness of mediating specific cases, as well as by  the success of the
region's convening efforts in 4 complex superfund cases (Savage Well, Nyanza, Iron Horse Park and Pine
Street), each with a distinct set of challenges. Building on this experience, the Region is currently
working with local, state, and congressional representatives to set up a process, with  the assistance of a
neutral facilitator, to address community concerns about the New Bedford Harbor superfund remedy.

                                  Region II - New York
                  (New Jersey, New York, Puerto Rico, Virgin Islands)

     Region II enjoyed a very strong year in virtually all categories of traditional measurement. For
example, the Region's regulatory (non-Superfund) enforcement programs generated over $8.5 million in
penalties, their second highest annual total.   This figure included almost $1.6 million  in stipulated
penalty collections for violations of earlier judicial consent decrees, a  demonstration of the Region's
long-standing commitment to insuring compliance with settlement instruments.


                                             6-7

-------
                                 Enforcement Accomplishments Report
      Region H's Superfund enforcement program was again very successful, with enforcement case
resolutions yielding nearly $340 million in value of work to be performed, cost recovery agreements, and
penalties assessed. This is the Region's second highest year in terms of both the value of work secured
from responsible parties ($253.8 million) and penalties assessed ($1.7 million); the $83.3 million in
past costs which were recovered is three times higher than Region's best previous year.         :

      In the non-CERCLA arena, judicial penalty assessments resulting from settled and adjudicated
cases totaled over $5.2 million in FY 1993, the Region's second highest ever.  Penalties proposed in FY
1993 administrative complaints totaled $11.1 million; proposed administrative penalties in  four
separate programs exceeded $1 million (EPCRA, RCRA, TSCA and CWA).  Administrative penalty
assessments (in settlements and adjudicated decisions) totaled nearly $3.2 million.  Total judicial and
administrative penalty assessments were thus about $8.6 million.  The value of injunctive relief secured
through  Region II non-CERCLA judicial settlements entered in FY 1993 exceeded $12 million.
Supplemental Enforcement Projects (SEPs) were included in more than ten settlements, under the
EPCRA, TSCA, RCRA and CWA programs. The total dollar value of these SEPs was about $1 million.

      In FY 1993, Region II had one of its highest annual outputs in the number of referrals to the U.S.
Department of Justice for litigation activities. The Region generated some 60 such civil referrals,
including consent decree enforcement referrals, collection actions, bankruptcy referrals, and pre-referral
negotiation (PRN) packages.  Of these, 29 were in the Superfund arena.

      During FY 1993, Region II continued to closely monitor the status of compliance among judicial
defendants and administrative Respondents with the terms of settlements and orders.  Of the 60
referrals initiated, six were consent decree enforcement referrals and seven were collection actions for
non-payment of penalties. This output demonstrates the importance that Region II assigns to ensuring
compliance by former violators; the Region is persuaded that follow-through of this sort is essential to
the overall success of an enforcement program.

      Region II continued its aggressive implementation of the Administrator's goals for multi-media
enforcement.  Under the auspices of our Regional Multi-Program Enforcement Steering Committee, major,
consolidated inspections including nearly every Regional program  office were  carried out at 13
facilities,  including three federal facilities. A number of these yielded evidence of violations in one or
more program areas — although the Region states that fewer very serious violations were detected
than in past years.

      In addition, Region II has carried out a large number of other consolidated and coordinated multi-
media inspections involving a smaller number of  Regional program offices (usually two or three). In
fact, based on the Agency's data, through the third quarter of FY 1993  Region II accounted for 39% of
the nation's consolidated multi-media inspections; over 20% of its coordinated multi-media inspections;
and nearly 88% of single media inspections performed utilizing the multi-media checklist.

      In addition to major multi-media enforcement inspections, and the enforcement activities arising
from them, the Region has actively pursued a number of other multi-media initiatives, including
several Regional geographic enforcement initiatives.  The  Region also pursued geographic initiatives
in the Cortland and Corning Aquifer regions of New York as well as the Niagara Frontier region of New
York.
                                             6-8

-------
                                                                                           «~ J*'
                          FY 1993 Enforcement Accomplishments Report
                                 Region III - Philadelphia
(Delaware, District of Columbia, Maryland, Pennsylvania, Virginia, West Virginia)

     FY 1993 was a milestone year for enforcement in Region HI, Region III had a recordbreaking
enforcement year as measured by enforcement activity numbers with 54 civil referrals, 16 criminal
referrals, 11 PRNs, 237 administrative orders, and 102 administrative complaints. This represents a
35%, 6,6%, and 12% growth over last year's numbers in civil referrals, criminal referrals, and
administrative complaints, respectively. The criminal enforcement program set a new record in FY 1993
for Region III, Furthermore, FY 1993 established a record for the number of civil referrals, when one
excludes FY 1978.  (The civil referral numbers for FY 1978 were artificially high because a number of
civil referrals were fragmented  into their parts and referred separately).  Programs that witnessed
impressive growth in  the number of  civil  referrals over last year's numbers were  NPDES and
CAA/Asbestos, which had over  a 300% and 500% rate-of-growth, respectively.

     In addition to these record breaking numbers, Region HI also embarked on several significant
Special Enforcement Initiatives  to focus on specific sites, geographic areas, pollutants,  or industrial
sectors with noteworthy environmental or compliance problems. The goal of these initiatives are to
gain maximum deterrence through publicity and facility-specific impact. Continuing its leadership
role. Region III actively developed and pursued regional and national enforcement initiatives in FY
1993.

     In FY 1993, Region III embarked on a strategic planning exercise. As a necessary prerequisite for
this project, the Region conducted a detailed study of Region III environmental data.  The  study's
findings were an important resource in the establishment of the Region's Strategic planning goals. The
goals are Regional Management, Reliance on Data, State Relations, Acid Pollution, and  Ozone. They
were targeted because they:  require special Region-wide focus to succeed; take advantage of unique
Region III leadership opportunities; have a high potential for risk reduction, and provide a forum for
creative leadership.  The goals do not define all  of the Region's important work. Instead, they are
areas where the Region feels  that it can focus some of its efforts and make important improvements in
addition to pursuing national  priorities.  Currently, the Region  is actively engaged in devising
enforcement strategies and objectives to accomplish these goals and to establish measures to measure
their success.

     Headquarters and Region  HI have placed increasing importance on the role enforcement should
play in attaining non-traditional enforcement goals, such as protection of human health, preservation
and restoration of ecosystems, and ensuring a high quality of public welfare. These are goals that are
neither media nor program-specific, and to achieve them requires that they be addressed in a holistic
manner.  Multi-media enforcement permits addressing the environmental status of a facility in an
integrated fashion which recognizes the interconnected relationship between the media and facility
processes have the potential  to be an important tool in this effort.  Region III has recognized this and
has placed increased importance on the use of multi-media enforcement as an instrument  to achieve its
goals.

     Over the past three years,  the Region has engaged in numerous multi-media  enforcement
initiatives arising from  both  the Headquarters' level and the Regional level. While there were some
successes, there was the perception in this Region that multi-media enforcement had not yet lived up to
its potential.  In trying  to maximize its effectiveness, the Region's Senior Managers formed a Quality
Action Team with representatives from the various enforcement programs and offices.  After almost a
year of work by the Enforcement Branch Chiefs, the Region finished development and  started
implementation of a fully integrated case-screening and multi-media enforcement process in FY 1993.

                                            6-9

-------
                         FY1993 Enforcement Accomplishments Report
     In FY 1993, Region III and its States have made significant efforts to strengthen their enforcement
partnership.  This year marked the beginning of an effort between Region HI and  its States to
strengthen the Federal/State enforcement relationship. On August 10,1993, representatives from both
the Region III and the State/Local enforcement programs met in Region Ill's Philadelphia office to
discuss enforcement planning for Fiscal Year 1994.  While  it is common for each of the Regions'
enforcement programs to meet with their State counterparts to discuss their specific program goals, this
meeting marked the first Region III meeting with its States dedicated to cross-program enforcement
issues. This meeting was viewed as a success by all the participants and has lead to the initiation of
biannually State/EPA Enforcement Meetings to build upon the State/EPA partnership.

                                   Region IV - Atlanta
                   (Alabama, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, Mississippi,
                      North Carolina, South  Carolina, Tennessee)

     Region IV continued to emphasize multi-media enforcement during FY 1993 through two high-
level management teams known as the Enforcement Decision Team (EDT)  and the Multi-media
Enforcement Team (MET), and  using the expertise of the Enforcement Planning and Analysis Staff (EP
& A). The EDT is chaired by  the Assistant Regional Administrator and comprised of Associate and
Deputy Division Directors, the Policy, Planning and  Evaluation  Branch  Chief,  and the  MET
chairperson. The EDT reports directly to the Deputy Regional Administrator to assist him in setting
multi-media policies and priorities.  The MET is chaired by a member of the EDT. and comprised
primarily of Section Chiefs, one from each division, and the Enforcement Planning and Analysis Staff
Chief.  The MET reports directly to the  EDT  and  provides support to the EDT by managing and
conducting multi-media inspections and enforcement activities. In FY 1993 Region IV conducted 34
multiTmedia consolidated inspections and initiated three multi-media enforcement cases, including one
civil referral.  A multi-media enforcement initiative in Chattanooga has resulted in a clean-up
program under Super!und for Chattanooga Creek.

     The EP & A staff supports the RA/DRA's role as principal manager for Region IV's enforcement
programs. The EP &: A staff also supports the EDT and is an active participant in the MET.  Activities
include developing policies and agreements, analyzing data to target activities and evaluate results,
providing agenda/work products, coordinating and developing multi-media enforcement activities,
serving as primary multi-media contact  with Headquarters and states, and  serving as regional
spokesperson at national meetings and conferences on enforcement.

     Region IV became the first region to initiate multi-year enforcement agreements with its eight
states to reduce the time and effort expended in negotiating yearly enforcement agreements. The multi-
media agreements cover the period from October 1,1993 through September 30,1996, and document
general enforcement policies, issues and directions regarding enforcement roles, oversight, penalties,
data, training, targeting efforts, enforcement initiatives, and communications.  Each media will
address specific  items as necessary through MOAs and  grant workplans that will continue to  be
developed on a yearly basis by each program.

     Region IV continued its strong commitment to multi-media activities at federally-owned sites
through its Federal Facilities Coordination (FFC) program.  The FFC program conducted  two OFFE
federal facilities multi-media compliance inspections at Air Force Plant #6 and Redstone Arsenal, ten
regional federal  facilities multi-media inspections, and five Indian  tribal  multi-media compliance
inspections.  The FFC program also held a  Regional Multi-media Federal Facilities Environmental
Compliance Conference that was attended by over 300 persons.
                                            6-10

-------
FY 1993 Enforcement Accomplishments Report
                                                                                            C SB *
                                                                                            \,«X
     All Region IV divisions participated in the successful first year of the Tampa Bay Enforcement
Initiative, which resulted in 103 inspections, 11 permit reviews, five § 308 letters, 19 NOVs, three AOs,
and one civil referral.

     Region IV approved twenty-six Supplemental Environmental Projects (SEPs)  in FY 1993. The
projected costs range .from $10,000 to $4,000,000 with the total projected costs exceeding $14.4 million.
Thirteen of the SEPs are classified as pollution prevention projects and account for $6.2 million of the
total projected costs.

     Region IV's RCRA program continued to produce high enforcement outputs by issuing 15 new
complaints and settling 25 administrative cases, with penalties in final administrative orders
increasing from $900,000 in FY 1992 to $2,446,000 in FY 1993. Emphasis was placed on settling older
cases.  Final Consent Decrees were entered for Sanders Lead with a penalty of $2 million and for
Grumman with a penalty of $2.5 million which included a $1 million pollution prevention project.
Region IV referred two new judicial cases to Headquarters in FY 1993.

     In FY 1993, Region IV accounted for approximately 20 per cent of all Superfund removal starts
nationally, including a solid 25 per cent of all EPA funded clean-ups. Region IV obligated nearly $24
million in clean-up monies to contractors. Major projects completed in FY 1993 included ILCO, Aqua-
Tech, Basket Creek, Cherokee Oil, and Escambia Wood (Pensacola).

     Enforcement actions under the NPDES program included eight civil referrals, 54 Administrative
Penalty Orders (APOs) and 117 Administrative Orders (AOs), all of which exceeded FY 1992  totals.
For FY 1993 six judicial consent decrees were signed with cash penalties totaling $4.4 million. The
largest one of these, CSXT, contained $3.0 million  in cash penalties and $4,1 million in Supplemental
Environmental Projects (SEPs). NPDES settled 30 APOs for a total of $569,000, with an additional $5.6
million  in SEPs being agreed to in APO settlements.  Region IV became the first region to take an
NPDES civil judicial action under the emergency powers authority granted in § 504 of the Clean Water
Act with its action against Dade County, Florida.

     Region IV's UIC program met or exceeded all their workplan goals for FY 1993.  The program
completed nine AOs and referred two civil and three criminal cases to DOJ. Region P/ continued to lead
the nation in UIC enforcement activity throughout FY 1993.

     Region IV's UST program participated in many of Region Ws multi-media activities for FY 1993,
one of which was the first civil referral case in the nation taken against a company for UST release
detection violations. In FY 1993 Region IV also took its first administrative action against a hazardous
substance tank owner for failure to comply with UST release detection requirements.

     Under the Clean Air Act, Region IV filed 14 APOs with total penalty amounts of $658,790 under
Section 113(d), which represents a 400% increase in use of this enforcement tool over  the initial year of
availability, FY 1992, and an increase of 289% in the amount of penalties sought.  Three civil referrals
were issued in FY 1993 with penalties totaling $2,492,840. In conjunction with ORC and Headquarters,
Region IV settled 12 outstanding cases for $4,799,000, including the following;  Crown Cork and Seal,
$343,000; Louisiana Pacific,  Clayton, Alabama and Commerce, Georgia; and Olin Corporation,
$1,000,000.  Region IV issued the first immediate compliance AO under § 113(d)(3) to require the
removal of asbestos containing material (ACM).  This precedent setting order was issued  at the
uncontrolled release of ACM at Louisville Forge and Gear.
                                             6-11

-------
                          ^i" J993 Enforcement Accomplishments Report
                                    Region V - Chicago
               (Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, Minnesota, Ohio, Wisconsin)

      In FY 1993, Region V achieved a record number (98) and record national share of judicial consent
decrees and orders after trial. This compares to 54 judicial consent decrees and orders for FY 1992.
Highlighting the Region's success was a precedential, multi-media consent decree with Inland Steel,
which included a  $55 million package ($26.5 million for supplemental environmental'projects, $25
•million in injunctive relief, and $3.5 million in civil penalties).  Other highlights include a $6 million
penalty judgment after trial against Bethlehem Steel, located in Burns Harbor, Indiana, and the entry
of a CWA §309 Order requiring Wayne County, Michigan, to implement plans for a sewer collection
system a cost of over $180 million dollars.

      Last year. The Geographic Initiative process reached a certain level of maturity. The Region
currently is operating five initiative areas: Gateway (East St. Louis, IL), Tri-State (Ironton, OH area),
SEMI (Detroit, MI  area), Northwest Indiana, and Southeast Chicago. During the year, the Northwest
Indiana/Southeast Chicago Geographic Initiative area  was split into two separately functioning units
along the state line.  The reason for this division was to make each of the initiatives more manageable
since the work being done in the area had grown quite substantially in the years since the creation of
the original Region V geographic enforcement initiative area.

      Another positive development of the geographic initiatives was the expansion of interaction
with state and local governments and local community groups. For example, toward the end of the year
the Region and the State of Indiana took steps to move  from periodic meetings held to describe actions
that have been taken, to much more frequent, specific and detailed meetings to jointly plan, conduct and
coordinate enforcement actions according to a comprehensive enforcement action plan. Another example
is the creation of the position of Enforcement Ombudsman to work with local community groups in the
Southeast Chicago area.

      During FY 1993, multi-media enforcement became less of an experiment and more of a standard
and very useful tool in the Region V enforcement arsenal. The creation one year ago of the Multi-Media
Branch in the Office of Regional Counsel has significantly helped the coordination of such enforcement
strategies and actions.  During the year, a number of important multi-media actions were concluded and
others initiated.  These specific cases, such as Inland Steel, are described  in detail previously in this
report. The cross divisional Multi-Media Litigation Screening Committee met on a monthly basis
throughout the year and coordinated the development of the multi-media enforcement actions.  In
addition, a list of 23 facilities in priority order were targeted for  multi-media inspection  during FY
1994.  All of these facilities are located in the five geographic initiative  areas. It is most unlikely
that resources will  allow for all of these inspections to be conducted, but it is a good sign of the general
acceptance of the value of the multi-media approach that this many actions would be selected.

      Region V's wetlands program was very successful in FY 1993, The first criminal indictment for a
wetland violation in Region V was handed down by a grand jury in June 1993. In addition, through the
permit process and Superfund  coordination,  thousands of acres of mitigation were proposed in an
attempt to comply with the zero net loss of wetland objective.

     Region V continued to encourage innovative forms of relief in negotiating settlements. In FY 1993,
the Region used Supplemental Environmental  Projects (SEPs) in settlement  of 52 cases.  The  total value
for fiscal  year 1993 SEPs was  nearly 15  times  greater than the  value of FY 1992 SEPs, reaching
approximately $42 million dollars.  Many of the SEPs focused on pollution prevention, responding to
EPA's increasing concern with fighting pollution at its source.

                                              6-12

-------
                          FY1993 Enforcement Accomplishments Report
     Region V participated in all of the National Enforcement Initiatives organized by the Office of
Compliance Monitoring in OPPTS. In two of the three TSCA enforcement initiatives, and in the EPCRA
Section §313 enforcement initiative, Region V lead all other EPA regions in the number of complaints
issued and in the total proposed penalties.

     During FY 1993, the Region continued high levels of activity in the Boiler Industrial Furnace
(BIF) Initiative.  EPA conducted  inspections at over twenty BIF facilities which had become subject to
the new hazardous waste combustion regulations promulgated in August of 1991. The Region's efforts
culminated in  ten administrative enforcement actions being filed as part of EPA's highly successful
Combustion Initiative.. Total penalties sought in these actions amounted to over $8 million.

     The RCRA Illegal Operators Initiative got underway this year.  This Initiative is a cooperative
effort between  EPA Headquarters, EPA Regional Offices and State Environmental Agencies,  As part of
this effort, States  focused their  inspection activities towards identifying entities engaged in the
illegal storage  or disposal of hazardous wastes. Judicial,  administrative and criminal enforcement
cases seeking injunctive relief and monetary penalties were filed to address the violations detected as
part of these inspections. Most of the cases, filed as part of the Initiative in June and July of 1993, are in
preliminary stages of litigation or negotiation.

     Finally, Region Vs criminal enforcement program had a record year.  The number of referrals (28),
indictments (15) and defendants charged (24) exceeded any previous year's totals.

                                    Region VI - Dallas
                 (Arkansas, Louisiana, New Mexico, Oklahoma, Texas)

     Region VI maintained an active enforcement program in FY 1993.  The RCRA program had an
exceptional year in 1993 by commencing 33 new enforcement actions with total proposed penalties of
over $12 million. Final orders were issued for 12 cases. In addition, four enforcement corrective action
orders were finalized and two imminent and substantial endangerment orders were issued, including the
first such  order nationwide to  a federal  facility.  The  Region also commenced two  of the first
administrative penalty  cases against federal facilities under the authority given in the Federal
Facility Compliance Act.  Regional RCRA enforcement initiatives included commencing eight
enforcement actions against boilers and industrial furnaces, four enforcement actions against facilities in
the area of  the U.S./Mexico Border, and two enforcement actions against foundries.

     Another  Region VI RCRA enforcement initiative involved the improper handling of shipments of
hazardous waste into the United States. A binational Hazardous Waste Tracking System (HWTS) has
been developed by EPA RegionVI and the Mexican government to verify compliance with U.S. and
Mexican laws of transboundary shipments of hazardous waste. The HWTS is capable of merging and
comparing Mexican hazardous waste shipment data with U.S. manifests to  confirm movement of
hazardous waste from maquiladoras in Mexico to treatment,  storage and disposal (TSD) facilities or
recycling facilities  in the United  States. The system tracks volumes  of wastes, waste types, foreign
generator, and ultimate disposition of the waste.  Discrepancy reports generated by  the  HWTS
identified U.S. import violations  which resulted in three Administrative Complaints.  This initiative
has received considerable positive national media coverage (e.g. Wall Street Journal and Journal of
Commerce).

       During this fiscal year, the Region VI Office of Underground Storage Tanks (OUST) was very
active in assisting other Regions  in developing and implementing the federal field citation program.
OUST provided assistance to RegionVI in their federal field citation program by providing on-the-job

                                             6-13

-------
                          ^ ^^ Enforcement Accomplishments Report
training for State UST inspectors in Arizona and California, and conducted classroom training for
California UST State/County/Local regulators at the University of California.  Because of OUSTs
field initiative, all but two Regions have now begun to implement their own federal field citation
program. The field citation program developed and implemented by Region VI OUST continues to be an
effective and efficient enforcement tool. Joint EPA/State inspections, using field citations, were
conducted in Texas, Arkansas and Louisiana. During FY1993,50 inspections were conducted and 38 field
citations were issued. Total penalties collected were $17,850 (field citation penalties ranged from $50-
$1,500 per  facility).

       The New Mexico Environment Department (NMED) will be acting as  EPA's oversight
representative during the Remedial Investigation and Feasibility Study (RI/FS) at the Atchison,
Topeka, and Santa Fe (Albuquerque) Superfund Site.  Over the past several years, NMED has been
overseeing  the Responsible Party's activities at the site and has provided comments to the Responsible
Party throughout the initial stages of the investigation. In order to reduce the possibility of

duplication of efforts and, more importantly, to provide the state with an opportunity to build its
Superfund  capability, EPA has requested NMED act as EPA's oversight representative during the Rl/FS
and perform the human health and ecological risk assessments. NMED will be  conducting the human
health and  ecological risk assessments in-house.

      On May 14, 1993,  EPA  issued a Unilateral Administrative Order under the Comprehensive
Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act to ARCO and El Paso Natural Gas (EPNG)
for the performance of the remedial design and remedial action for the Prewitt Abandoned Refinery
Superfund Site in New Mexico. As a result of unresolved differences between ARCO and EPNG, and in
order for both parties to continue to be in compliance with the Administrative Order, both parties took
it upon themselves to submit  separate work plans for the performance of the  remedial design (RD).
Thus, EPA, the New Mexico Environment Department (NMED) and the Navajo Nation Superfund
Program (NSP) have been conducting dual reviews of the RD work plans.  As during the remedial
investigation and feasibility study and the record of decision writing process,  both NMED and NSP
have provided technical support to EPA during the RD work plan review. Both NMED and NSP have
cooperated  with EPA in providing comments on all of the revisions and have been willing to participate
in conference calls and meetings when their assistance was needed.

       The Clean Water Act National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) enforcement
program was very successful  in FY 1993. The  commencement  of 81 administrative penalty actions
represented approximately one-third of the national total, and the issuance  of 735 administrative
orders (non-penalty) represented over one-half of all such orders issued by EPA nationwide. The Region
was  also very  successful in resolving  judicial and  administrative penalty cases,  resulting in the
payment of over $4.6 million in civil penalties.

      The NPDES program was  also successful in maintaining the integrity of the self-reporting
program and in protecting water quality.  Specifically, the Region participated in a national initiative
to ensure accurate reporting and analysis, by initiating enforcement actions for failure to submit accurate
discharge monitoring reports,  for failure to properly collect and  analyze wastewater  samples, and for
failure to re-apply for NPDES permits in a timely manner.

      To address water quality concerns, the Region laid the groundwork for future enforcement actions
by identifying facilities with serious sanitary sewer overflows and bypasses. A number of enforcement
actions were commenced to eliminate raw sewage overflows from sanitary sewers.
                                            6-14

-------
                         FY1993 Enforcement Accomplishments Report
                                Region VII - Kansas City
                           (Iowa, Kansas, Missouri, Nebraska)

     Region VII emphasized its Multi-Media Enforcement Committee as the focus of its enforcement
targeting and coordination efforts, for case selection for reducing risk and implementing enforcement
initiatives and  the Administrator's  priorities. The Region targeted three multi-media inspection
candidates using TRI data, compliance histories,  and geographic location. All three have resulted in
referrals for enforcement. Multi-media enforcement cases are most successfully developed from initial
targeting for multi-media inspections in a small Region like Region VII.

     The Region's efforts and emphasis on state enforcement activities continued in FY 1993. However,
the severe flooding in the Midwest resulted in  lower numbers  of state cases  than in prior years.
Nonetheless, Region VII states completed a number of cases and began utilizing press releases to
announce the successful conclusion to case filings. The Office of Regional Counsel has done significant
outreach to publicize the pollution prevention/supplemental environmental projects alternative to a
portion of the assessed penalty.  Region VII states are beginning to accept alternative environmental
projects to offset a portion of the penalties.

     Region VII is committed to maintaining a strong federal/state enforcement program. Recognizing
that most of the programs which can be delegated to the states have been in the region, they have
invested time and resources in helping their states develop and utilize their enforcement capacity. The
result of this effort has been an improved relationship between  EPA and  the states, and better
leveraging of the increasingly scarce state and federal resources.

                                   Region VIII - Denver
       (Colorado, Montana, North Dakota, South  Dakota, Utah, Wyoming)

     In FY 1993, Region VIII referred 23 cases to the Department of Justice and took 308 administrative
actions. Activities in FY 1993 were somewhat lower than FY 1992.  FY 1993 numbers appear lower in
comparison to FY 1992 because  FY 1992 activities were higher than is  the norm for most programs.
Other reasons for the somewhat lower numbers  were program specific.  For example, in the HFRA
program the delayed  revision of a required form caused the lowered  numbers.  The UST program
decrease was due to states receiving increased authority. In other cases,  programs with administrative
authority equal  to their civil authority chose to use the former.

       The Region VIII Multi-Media Program  continued to grow, gain momentum, and  become
institutionalized.  This year, the Regional Enforcement Officer (REO) also acted as the Multi-media
Enforcement Branch Chief of ESD and worked directly with the multi-media  inspection teams.  The
Region participated in eight targeted multi-media inspections and focused on including states in the
site selection and inspection process.  Additionally,  in FY 1993, the  Region developed increased
environmental justice capacity by including census data evaluation and the three "lifestyle clusters"
suggested by the Office of Enforcement (OE) into both targeting and screening activities.

     In the early stages of its existence, the Enforcement Standing Committee (ESC) addressed both
enforcement policy and  management and facility or case-specific matters.  As  the Region began to
institute  the multi-media approach and the number of multi-media actions increased, the Region
realized that a mechanism was needed to discuss and manage facility or case-specific issues.  Thus the
Regional Enforcement Forum (REF) was created to deal with facility and case-specific enforcement
related activities (see above).   The creation of the REF has left the ESC as the Regional body
responsible for discussing and addressing Regional enforcement policy.


                                            6-15

-------
                          FY1993 Enforcement Accomplishments Report
     The Regional Enforcement Forum serves as the primary mechanism for regularly needed cross-
program and region-wide enforcement communications and coordination.  The REF serves as a standing
committee representing all enforcement programs and coordinates the review and implementation of
regional, cross-program and multi-media inspection and enforcement activities including inspection
coordination and review of selected enforcement actions.  It is the REF that evaluates cases, forms
multi-media teams and develops initial strategies and directions for these. It is the REF that works at
the nuts-and-bolts level of multi-media case work. For example, the REF determines whether or not an
activity should be addressed regionally and, if so, what program division is the lead.  The REF
prioritizes targeted and untargeted multi-media inspections and  establishes multi-media inspection
teams. Another important  function of the REF is to resolve case  of inspection specific conflicts and,
where appropriate, elevating all unresolved conflicts to the ESC. The REF also recommends decisions
regarding inspections and enforcement policies & operations to the ESC.

     During FY 1993, the Region improved its multi-media inspection targeting process by adding new
factors to the "base" process. The base process included all facilities having RCRA IDs and reporting to
Toxics Release Inventory (TRI), all federal facilities permitted in at least two different media, and
NEICs CCRIP report-facilities listed are added to  above list if not already there.  Throughout the
process state and program input/feedback on lists (20 facilities per state).  IDEA analysis on  each site -
scores are determined for each site by considering compliance history, multi-media potential, status of
facility on NPL, FY  1993 National/Regional/State initiatives (e.g., Environmental Justice, NPDES
heap-leach mining sites, RCRA non-notifiers, pulp & paper facilities,  ND tribal lands initiatives,
etc.)  for the coming year.  Scores  from above factors lead to list of top five facilities in each  state;
consensus is then reached between the Region and each State to do two multi-media inspections in the
next fiscal year in each state. Prior to the inspections, the objective of each multi-media inspection is
discussed and agreed upon with each state.

     Originating  the multi-media concept,  the Sand  Creek Pilot Project  was  designed to
institutionalize the holistic  approach to compliance and  enforcement into environmental protection.
Region  VIII,  the Colorado Department of  Health,  and the Tri-County Health Department
participated jointly in the Pilot Project.  Targeted inspections  at  two large facilities in the area
resulted in coordinated multi-media State and EPA enforcement actions to address seepage into Sand
Creek. Following compliance inspections, using data and information gathered during the Project, the
three agencies hosted a  series of pollution prevention workshops for companies in the area. These
workshops,  consisting of three different half-day pollution prevention workshops, were designed
around the types of violations found in the area as well as the primary types of industry.

     During FY 1993, Region VIII has incorporated environmental equity activities into the following
Regional processes: Building an Environmental Equity Database, Targeting Multi-Media Inspections,
and Case Screening. Future environmental equity accomplishments include developing a user-friendly
equity database that can be used by everyone with a connection to the LAN, so that equity factors can be
used in everyone's daily work processes.

     Region Vin has had success in integrating pollution prevention into enforcement.  Some of the
activities include: Nephi Rubber Products, Huish Detergent, Denver Metal Finishing Company, City of
Rock Springs, the Trona Mine Initiative, and projects such as the Sand Creek Pilot Project and Wyoming
Outreach. The unique aspect of the Nephi Rubber  Products case  is  that a pollution prevention pilot
project has been proposed and has been agreed upon by the facility, the EPA Regional office, and the
State agency.  Huish Detergent, Salt Lake City, Utah, which was  required to put in a safety chlorine
cleaning system which would clean any spills and set up  an isolation system.  Denver Metal Finishing
Company, Denver, Colorado, which was installed a sand filter for use in their production process.


                                             6-16

-------
                                                                                           **
                          FY1993 Enforcement Accomplishments Report
                                                                                            *>i •**•*'
     Eegion VIII continues to be a leader in developing tribal capacity.  For example, the FIFRA
program supported efforts conducted/hosted two training sessions: National Tribal Workshop and
Advanced Inspector Training (states/tribes).  Also two tribal inspectors were also brought into the
Regional Office for one-on-one training by  regional staff.  The Oglala Sioux (Pine Ridge) Tribal
Enforcement Program submitted a draft Revised Pesticide Code and Certification Plan to Region VIII
for approval. This Code and Plan are now being reviewed by Regional and Headquarters staff. Also
the Cheyenne River Sioux Enforcement Program received approval for an Endangered Species Protection
Program, the first Tribal Program in Region VIII to.conduct endangered species protection activities.
Additionally, during FY 1993 the Region reviewed a program assumption proposal for the CWA § 404
program submitted by the Confederated Salish and Kooteriai Tribes of the Flathead Reservation in
Montana.

     The Region also continues  to develop state capacity. For example, the Underground Infection
Control (SDWA/UIC) program has an annual  meeting between all the States, interested Tribes and EPA
in which information/technical exchange occurs  regarding better/different ways to implement the
program. In FY 1993 the Region provided grant funds for over $1 million in State program development
efforts and related wetlands activities.  To standardize the Region's approach to the RCRA program
oversight of State enforcement programs, EPA negotiated, created  and will now implement the
Appropriate State Oversight Program (ASOP) with its States, the ASOP effort emphasizes a base
line & differential (incremental)  approach to oversight in order to focus on  states where program
enhancement is needed as well as disinvest where it is not. In the RCRA program, states are encouraged
to participate in RCRA enforcement cases as a partner. In some cases, EPA RCRA turns significant
actions over to the States for capacity and partnership building experiences. For example, in the State
of Utah, EPA allowed the State laboratory personnel conduct a RCRA Lab audit at Nephi Rubber for
the purposes of identifying compliance concerns and pollution prevention opportunities.

                                Region IX - San Francisco
                (Arizona, California, Hawaii, Nevada, Trust Territories  )

     Region IX's enforcement accomplishments  during FY 1993 were highlighted by multi-media
compliance activities, implementation of a field citation program, continuing success with significant
settlements and criminal prosecutions.

     The Region's multi-media compliance effort focused on Federal  Facilities, areas of geographical
significance  and petroleum refineries.  The majority of the Federal Facility activity was conducted in
cooperation  with the State of California. The geographical focus was provided by the San Francisco
Bay Delta as a priority estuary  as well as Santa Monica Bay. The refinery interest, intersects the
geographic focus and was performed in cooperation with state and local environmental agencies.

     The Underground Storage Tank field citation program was initiated in Region IX during FY 1993.
This approach enables inspectors to issue citations and gain signed consent agreement- final orders with
an efficient expenditure of resources.  The inducement to the facility is a lower penalty than might be
the result if a formal CC/CAFO process was pursued subsequent to the inspection.  These on-the-spot
citations are issued for clear cut violations that are easily identified at the time of the inspection.
Begun during the fourth quarter, results are positive. Of 28 inspections conducted, 24 citations with
penalties were issued and 21 were settled before the quarter's end. Penalties ranged from $50 to $800
with an average between$30Q to  $400,  The citations have achieved expedited compliance from the
regulated community, with efficient enforcement resource use.
                                             6-17

-------
                          FY1993 Enforcement Accomplishments Report
     In U.S.v. Mobil Oil Corporation. (E.D. Cal) a consent decree was entered on February 4, 1993.
Under the decree Mobil will pay a civil penalty of $950,000 for violations of the Clean Air Act.  The
complaint alleged that Mobil's polystyrene foam manufacturing facility emitted more isopentane, a
volatile organic compound that is a precursor to ground level ozone pollution, than was permitted by
the applicable State Implementation Plan.  The fine is the second largest penalty levied by EPA for
Clean Air Act violations in California,

     Region IX continues to aggressively enforce  pretreatment requirements.  In U.S. v McDonnell
Douglas Corp (C.D. Cal) a consent decree was entered on September 17,1993 in which the company
agreed to pay $505,000 in settlement of the action brought  to address violations at its aerospace
manufacturing facility in Huntington Beach, California. The company discharged approximately 7,000
gallons of metal finishing waste from its printed circuit  board manufacturing operations in violations of
the pretreatment  standards. The wastewater was discharged to the County Sanitation Districts of
Orange County wastewater system.

                                    Region X - Seattle
                          (Alaska, Idaho, Oregon, Washington)

     In FY 1993, Region X undertook a comprehensive look inward at the enforcement processes and
outcomes currently associated with their enforcement/compliance activities. This activity is on-going
and will help shape enforcement and compliance activities in the future.

     Continuing its effort to build an integrated multi-media enforcement program, in FY 1993 Region X
emphasized the refinement of its risk-driven targeting process. A Targeting Workgroup was set up to
create a systematic targeting procedure which will  be  used and improved upon, based on this year's
success, in future  years to ensure a list of multi-media inspection sites which meets the criteria that it
be  risk-based, consider regional  and national enforcement  initiatives,  and incorporate  program
priorities and best professional judgment of state and EPA inspectors. Integrating information from
several databases was a key element of the process.  The Workgroup was aided by a facilitator in
developing its targeting protocol.

     Consistent with improving its targeting procedures, Region X refined and emphasized its multi-
media  program by performing ten coordinated multi-media inspections in FY 1993.  Setting new
precedent in State/EPA cooperation and partnership opportunities, was the cross-media inspection at
the FMC Corporation in Pocatello, Idaho.  This inspection involved ten media programs, and was
performed by inspectors from EPA Region X in Seattle and Operations Office in Boise, Idaho, EPA
National Enforcement Investigation  Center (NEIC),  State of Idaho Department of Environmental
Quality (DEQ), and inspectors from the Shoshone Bannock tribe.  In addition, Region X was a full
participant in the National  Federal Facilities Multi-Media Enforcement Initiative,  and performed
multi-media  inspections at  the Puget Sound Naval  Shipyard  at Bremerton, Washington, and Ft.
Richardson Army Base at Ft. Richardson, Alaska.

     In FY 1993, Region X continued its active program for innovative enforcement settlements,
emphasizing Pollution Reduction, Pollution Prevention, Waste Minimization  and  Environmental
Restoration Supplemental Environmental Projects (SEPs). In FY 1993 Region X had a total of 20 SEPS,
mostly in TSCA and EPCRA cases, and will continue to do more. Region X's FY 1993 SEPs also included
five administrative Clean Air Act Cases that will result in  a significant reduction of particulate
emissions. Of particular note in Region X are the settlements  in two judicial cases involving the Oil
Pollution Act.  These cases were settled for approximately $970,000 and included the company's
commitment to install and operate state of the art oil spill prevention and leak detection programs at
an estimated cost of $1,600,000.

                                            6-18

-------
                          FY1993 Enforcement Accomplishments Report
     Region X Water Division has pioneered the watershed approach in environmental protection.
This approach is built on three main principles.  First, target watersheds should be those where
pollution poses the greatest risk to human health, ecological resources, desirable uses of the water, or a
combination of these.  Second, all parties with a stake in the specific local situation should participate
in the analysis of problems and the creation of solutions. Third, the actions undertaken should draw on
the full range of methods and tools available, integrating them into a coordinated, multiorganization
attack on the problems.  Using these criteria, the National Pollution Discharge Elimination System
(MPDES) Compliance Program conducted inspections in priority  watersheds, clustered enforcement
actions, and offered technical assistance/outreach in priority areas.

     In March 1993, eight EPA and four state inspectors inspected 33 concentrated animal feeding
operations (CAFOs) in  the mid-Snake River area of south-central Idaho.   These inspections were
planned to occur during the snow-melt and  rainfall period of early spring. From these inspections
twelve administrative penalty complaints were issued in mid-June.  These cases were part of a regional
enforcement initiative in which dischargers to this water quality limited waterbody were targeted.

     Suspension and Debarment are administrative processes  which exist for the protection of the
Government in its business dealings.  Even though Suspension and Debarment are not traditionally
viewed as enforcement  tools, they provide an important adjunct to EPA's regulatory programs by
creating incentives for compliance with EPA's civil and criminal environmental laws.

     In FY 1993 the EPA Office of Grants and Debarment  placed the position of Northwest District
Debarment Counsel in Region X.  This position covers both Region X and Region VIII, and currently
maintains an open caseload of over 125 cases. In FY 1993, formal notices of suspension and/or proposed
debarment were issued in 21 cases, and formal settlements or closures occurred in 13 cases. Region X
emphasizes the use of suspension and debarment in order to protect the public's interest in the integrity
of EPA contracting and assistance benefits programs.
                                             6-19

-------
                    •,.,,,    •
          FY1993 Enforcement Accomplishments Report
                 Appendix



          Historical Enforcement Data

            List of Penalties by Media

    List of Headquarters Enforcement Contacts

List of Regional Enforcement Information Contacts

-------
                       EPA CIVIL REFERRALS TO THE DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
                                       FY1972 TO FY1993

AIR
WATER
SUPERFUND
RCRA
TOXICS/PESTICIDES
TOTALS

AIR
WATER
SUPERFUND
RCRA
TOXICS/PESTICIDES
TOTALS
FY72
0
1
0
0
0
1
FY83
69
56
28
5
7
165
FY73
4
0
0
0
0
4
FY84
82
95
41
19
14
251
FY74
3
0
0
0
0
3
FY85
116
93
35
13
19
276
FY75
. 5
20
0
0
0
25
FY86
115
119
41
43
24
342
FY76
15
67
0
0
0
82
FY87
122
92
54
23
13
304
FY77
50
93
0
0
0
143
FY88
86
123
114
29
20
372
FY78
123
137
2
0
0
262
FY89
92
94
153
16
9
364
FY79
149
81
•5
4
3
242
FY90
102
87
157
18
11
375
FY80
100
56
10
43
1
210
FY91
86
94
164
34
15
393
FY81
66
37
2
12
1
118
FY92
92
77
137
40
15
361
FY82
36
45
20
9
2
112
FY93
80
84
129
30
15
338
8-
1
I

-------
                        EPA ADMINISTRATIVE ACTIONS INITIATED (BY ACT)
                                       FY1972 TO FY1993

CAA
CWA/SDWA
RCRA
CERCLA
FIFRA
TSCA
TOTALS

CAA
CWA/ SDWA
RCRA
CERCLA
FIFRA
TSCA
EPCRA
TOTALS
FY72
0
0
0
0
860
0
860
FY83
41
781
436
0
296
294

1848
FY73
0
0
0
0
1274
0
1274
FY84
141
1644
554
137
272
376

3124
FY74
0
0
0
0
1387
0
1387,
FY85
122
1031
327
160
236
733

2609
FY75
0
738
0
0
1614
0
2352
FY86
143
990
235
139
338
781

2626
FY76
210
915
0
0
2488
0
3613
FY87
191
1214
243
135
360
1051

3194
FY77
297
1128
0
0
1219
0
2644
FY88
224
1345
309
224
376
607

3085
FY78
129
730
0
0
762
1
1622
FY89
336
2146
453
220
443
538

4136
FY79
404
506
0
0
253
22
1185
FY90
249
1780
366
270
402
531
206
3804
FY80
86
569
0
0
176
70
901
FY91
214
2177
364
269
300
422
179
3925
FY81
112
562
159
0
154
120
1107
FY92
354
1977
291
245
311
355
134
3667
FY82
21
329
237
0
176
101
864
FY93
279
2216
282
260
233
319
219
3808
1


-------
EPA CRIMINAL ENFORCEMENT
     FY1982 TO FY1993

Referrals to DOJ
Cases successfully prosecute'
Defendants charged .
Defendants convicted
o Months sentenced
o Months served . „„": ..
• o Months probation
FY82
20
7 ;
14/
11



FY83
26
12
34
28


534
FX84
31
14
36
26
6
6
552
FY85
40
15
40 .
40
78
-44.
882,
FY86
41
26
.98
66
279
• -203
828
FY87
41
27
66
58
456
100
1,410
FY88
59
24
97"
50
278
^185 '
1,284.
FY89
60
43
.'> 95
72
325
- 208
1,045
FY90
65
32
100
55
745
222
1,176
FY91
81
48
104
82
963
610 .
1,713
FY92
^107
61
,,150
99
1,135
744
2,478
FY93
140
76
161
135
892
876
3,240

-------
                               STATE ENVIRONMENTAL AGENCIES
                      JUDICIAL REFERRALS AND ADMINISTRATIVE ACTIONS
                                       FY1986 TO FY1993
ADMINISTRATIVE ACTIONS

FIFRA
WATER
AIR
RCRA
TOTAL
FY86
6,055
2327
760
519
10,161
FY87
5,922
1,663
907
613
9,105
FY88
5,078
2^87
655
743
9363
FY89
6,698
3,100
1,139
1,189
12,126
FY90
4,145
3,298
U12
1350
10,105
FY91
3,245
3,180
1,687
1,495
9,607
FY92
3,095
2,748
1,411
1389
8,643
FY93
4,172
3,960
2,005
1,744
11381
JUDICIAL REFERRALS

WATER
AIR
RCRA
TOTAL
FY86
221
162
25
408
FY87
286
351
86
723
FY88
687
171
46
904
FY89
489
96
129
714
FY90
429
156
64
649
FY91
297
190
57
544
FY92
204
258
112
574
FY93
383
174
133
690
c
1
ft!
1
I
§
        Prior to FY 1990, the State HFRA Administrative Action total included warning letters.

-------
                      FY1993 Enforcement Accomplishments Report
       Total Amount of Civil Tudicial and Administrative Penalties in FY 1993
            Clean Water Act
               Judicial
               Administrative

            Safe Drinking Water Act
               Judicial
               Administrative

            Stationary Source Air
               Judicial
               Administrative

            Mobile Source Air
               Judicial
               Administrative

            RCRA
               Judicial
               Administrative

            EPCRA § 304-312 - Administrative

            CHRCLA § 103 - Administrative

            CERCLA § 104,106,107
               Judicial
               Administrative

            Toxics Release Inventory - Administrative

            TSCA - Administrative

            FIFRA - Administrative
Total dollars

 $ 27,834,375
   23,169,948
    4,664,427

 $  5,567,203
    5,398,500
     168,703

 $ 20384,422
   18384,422
    2,000,000

 $  2^28,785
     850,596
    1,678,189

 $ 22,766,695
   14,211,000
    8355,695

 $  1,128,560

 $   489,272

 $ 24352324
   23,899,052
     453,272

 $  2,556,507

 $  6,892,697

 $   632,574
            TOTAL
$ 115,133,414
* Clean Water Act includes Sections 311 and 404.

-------
                        FF1993 Enforcement Accomplishments Report
             U.S. Environmental Protection Agency Regional Offices
                        Enforcement Information Contacts
Region I - Boston

Connecticut, Maine, Massachussetts,
New Hampshire, Rhode Island, Vermont

Region II - New York

New Jersey, New York, Puerto Rico,
Virgin Islands
Region III - Philadelphia

Delaware, District of Columbia, Maryland,
Pennsylvania, Virginia, West Virginia

Region IV - Atlanta

Alabama, Florida, Georgia, Kentucky, Mississippi,
North Carolina, South Carolina, Tennessee

Region V- Chicago

Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, Minnesota
Ohio, Wisconsin

Region VI - Dallas

Arkansas, Louisiana, New Mexico,
Oklahoma, Texas
Region VII - Kansas City

Iowa, Kansas, Missouri, Nebraska


Region VIII- Denver

Colorado, Montana, North Dakota,
South Dakota, Utah, Wyoming

Region IX - San Francisco

Arizona, California, Hawaii, Nevada,
Trust Territories

Region X - Seattle

Alaska, Idaho, Oregon, Washington
Office of Public Affairs
JFK Federal Building - One Congress Street
Boston, MA  02203
617-565-2713

External Programs Division
Jacob K. Javitz Federal Building
26 Federal Plaza
New York, NY   10278
212-264-2515

Office of External Affairs
841 Chestnut Building
Philadelphia, PA  19107
215-597-6938

Office of Public Affairs
345 Courtland Street, N.E.
Atlanta, GA   30365
404-347-3004

Office of Public Affairs
77 West Jackson Boulevard
Chicago, IL  60604-3507
312-353-2072

Office of External Affairs
First Interstate Bank Tower at Fountain Place
1445 Ross Ave.   12th Floor  Suite 1200
Dallas TX    75202-2733
214-655-2200

Office of Public Affairs
726 Minnesota Avenue
Kansas City, KS   66101
913-551-7003

Office of External Affairs
999 18th Street  Suite 500
Denver, CO  80202-2405
303-294-1120

Office of External Affairs
75 Hawthorne Street
San Francisco, CA  94105
415-744-1585

Public Information Center
1200 Sixth Avenue
Seattle, WA  98101
206-553-1465

-------
                     FY1993 Enforcement Accomplishments Report
                   EPA Headquarters Enforcement Offices
Office of Enforcement (OE)

Assistant Administrator
Deputy Assistant Administrator
Director of Civil Enforcement
Air Enforcement Division
Water Enforcement Division
Superfund  Enforcement  Division
RCRA Enforcement Division
Pesticides and Toxic Substances Enforcement Division
International Enforcement Program
Office of Criminal Enforcement
Office of Compliance Analysis and Program Operations (OCAPO)
Office of Federal Activities (OEA)
Office of Federal Facilities Enforcement (OFFE)
National Enforcement Investigations Center (NEIC - Denver)

Office of Air and Radiation (OAR)

Stationary Source Compliance Division (SSCD)
Field Operations and Support Division (FOSD)
Manufacturers Operations Division (MOD)

Office of Water (OW)

Office of Wastewater Enforcement and Compliance (OWEC)
Office of Groundwater and Drinking Water (ODW)
Office of Wetlands, Oceans and Watersheds

Office of Solid Waste and Emergency Response (OSWER)

Office of Waste Programs Enforcement (OWPE - CERCLA)
Office of Waste Programs Enforcement (OWPE - RCRA)

Office of Prevention, Pesticides and Toxic Substances (OPPTS)

Office of Compliance Monitoring (OCM)
202-260-5145
202-260-4137
202-260-4540
202-260-2820
202-260-8180
202-260-3050
202-260-4326
202-260-8690
202-260-2879
202-260-5439
202-260-4140
202-260-5053
202-260-9801
303-236-5100
703-308-8600
202-233-9000
202-233-9240
202-260-8304
202-260-5522
202-260-7166
703-603-8900
202-260-4808
202-260-3807
                                                •us, on
                                                       MPlMfngOHOK 1QM — Sn-38QfB11S1

-------