UNITED STATES EPA REGION I EPA 901/1-89-001
ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION JFK FEDERAL BUILDING APRIL 1989
AGENCY BOSTON, MA 02203
FY88 ENFORCEMENT
ACCOMPLISHMENTS
REPORT
-------
TABLE OF CONTENTS
INTRODUCTION ii
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT iii
WATER 1
DRINKING WATER 6
SUPERFUND 7
HAZARDOUS WASTE 12
AIR 16
PESTICIDES 21
TOXIC SUBSTANCES 23
CRIMINAL ACTIONS 25
-i-
-------
INTRODUCTION
One of the key measures of the Environmental Protection Agency's success as a regulatory
agency is our ability to bring about compliance with our nation's environmental laws. To ensure
that compliance levels remain high in New England, we in EPA Region I are committed to a
vigorous enforcement program. Under each of the major environmental statutes that we
administer, we devote substantial resources to taking timely and appropriate enforcement actions
to address violations of the law.
These efforts produced many notable accomplishments last year. For several of the most
important measures of success in our enforcement programs we achieved record numbers in
1988. For example, Region I referred 37 cases for civil litigation and ten cases for criminal
enforcement action in FY 88, both the highest annual totals in the Region's history. We also had
several cases which established national program and legal precedents.
This report highlights Region I's enforcement efforts in the six New England states during fiscal
year 1988 (October 1,1987 through September 30,1988). It contains separate sections focusing
on each of our major enforcement programs. The report provides statistical indicators of
enforcement activity in each area and compares the level of enforcement activity in fiscal year
1988 (FY 88) with the levels in earlier years. The report also includes narrative summaries of some
of our most significant enforcement cases. In addition, in the report we recognize that the New
England states are our partners in running effective environmental enforcement programs. In
many instances, we present data reflecting the states' enforcement efforts as well as our own.
We are proud of our accomplishments last year. To those dedicated persons in our regional office
and in the states who worked so hard to make 1988 such a successful year for enforcement we
offer our gratitude. Forthe future we will continue ourfirm commitment to an enforcement program
that concentrates on EPA's mission of protecting public health and improving the quality of our
environment.
We look forward to another successful enforcement year in 1989.
Micnael R. Deland —-Paul G. Keough
Regional Administrator Deputy Regional Administrator
April, 1989
-M-
-------
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
The Office of Regional Counsel's Enforcement Branch wrote this report and
coordinated the data gathering from Region I's various program offices. Special
thanks to EPA Information Center staff members Judy Lau, Dina Cohen, Robin
Fletcher and Kit Ringrose, for their invaluable assistance in publication layout and
support.
-IK-
-------
WATER
Under the Clean Water Act in FY 88 the Region referred ten new cases for civil actions in federal
district court and three actions to enforce through contempt actions or stipulated penalties
settlements achieved in earlier years. This number of water referrals is the highest in Region I's
history.
REFERRALS FOR CIVIL LITIGATION
NUMBER
1985
1986
1987
1988
FISCAL YEAR
In the ongoing water cases in litigation, the Region in FY 88 obtained $980,000 in penalties and
$2,000,000 in lieu of penalties to be devoted to environmentally beneficial projects in the Boston
Harbor litigation. The $980,000 figure is the largest in Region I's history also.
-1-
-------
PENALTIES ASSESSED IN JUDICIAL CONSENT DECREES
DOLLAR AMOUNT
(Millions) .
I -
09 -
08 -
07-
06-
0.5 -
04-
03 -
02 -
0 1 -
0
1980,000
$570.500
$231.000
$175.000
1985
1986
1987
1988
FISCAL YEAR
A principal focus of enforcement under the Clean Water Act has been to bring POTW's (Publicly
Owned Sewage Treatment Works) into compliance with deadlines under the Agency's National
Municipal Policy. As a result of high levels of federal and state activity, Region I and the New
England states have brought court actions against virtually all major municipalities which did not
complete construction of their POTW's by the July 1,1988 deadline. During FY 88, in addition to
the Boston Harbor penalty settlement, the Region finalized settlements with Lynn, MA ($95,000
in total penalties); New Bedford, MA ($150,000 in total penalties); and MDC - Clinton, MA ($60,000
penalty). The Region also reached settlements with Webster and Dudley, MA ($63,000 in total
penalties) and Lowell, MA ($180,000 in total penalties).
-2-
-------
HIGHLIGHT: BOSTON HARBOR CLEANUP
The Region's biggest ongoing water enforcement case concerns the cleanup of
Boston Harbor. In FY 88 Region I focused on overcoming obstacles to compliance
with court-ordered schedules in three key areas: acquisition of staging areas for
use during the upcoming construction of the new treatment plant, the program
for management of sludge, and relocation of the prison on the site chosen for the
new treatment plant. During FY88 the Massachusetts Water Resources Author-
ity (AfWRA) reached an agreement allowing use of the Quincy Shipyard as a
staging area on the South Shore and leased a staging area site on the North
Shore. The MWRA also reached agreement with the City of Quincy on processing
sludge at the Shipyard from 1991-1995, a key breakthrough for the sludge
management program. In addition, the Region successfully negotiated a sche-
dule of interim steps to ensure meeting the December, 1991 deadline for termina-
ting sludge discharges. With respect to prison relocation, the District Court
issued an order requiring the relocation by December, 1991. Lastly, the Region
resolved the issue of past penalties. The MDC and Commonwealth of Massachu-
setts agreed to pay a cash penalty of $425,000 and place $2,000,000 in a Boston
Harbor trust fund for mitigation projects.
Another major focus of the Water Program is enforcement against industrial noncompliers. Two
of the more significant court cases during FY 88 involved violations of the pretreatment program.
In the Parker Metal case, the District Court of Massachusetts entered a consent decree which
included provision for payment of a $250,000 civil penalty. Because the company, which is located
in Worcester, MA, subsequently did not comply with the decree, the United States filed a motion
seeking pavment of both the overdue civil penalty and over $1,000,000 in stipulated penalties. In
the RIBCO case, a consent decree was lodged with the District Court of Rhode Island which
provides for a total penalty payment of $125,000.
A critical component of EPA's efforts to ensure high levels of compliance with water standards in
New England is maintaining a strong field presence. Often the Agency first gathers evidence of
violations during inspections. In FY 88 Region I conducted water inspections at 159 facilities
throughout New England. Reflecting the high priority that the six Region I states also give to
inspections, the states conducted a total of 744 water inspections.
During FY 88 Region I continued an aggressive administrative enforcement program. EPA issued
administrative compliance orders to 27 violators of NPDES (National Pollutant Discharge
Elimination System) permits. In addition, in the new program, which began in September, 1987,
of assessing penalties against violators, Region I during FY 88 issued a total of 18 administrative
penalty orders. Proposed penalties in these cases ranged from $10,000 to $125,000, for a total
of $733,000. Six cases were settled during the year; the total to be collected under these
settlements is $162,500.
-------
Also during FY88, wetlands enforcement matured into an established program. The Region
balanced its activities in FY 88 between administrative and judicial enforcement. Four admini-
strative orders were issued requiring removal of unpermitted fill and restoration of the affected
wetlands. These four cases involved an individual home owner in Wells, ME; a cranberry bog
operator in Rochester, MA; a concrete products facility in Wareham, MA; and a sod farm operation
in Suffield, CT. The Region also resolved nine administrative cases begun during the previous
fiscal year. The Region issued its first two wetlands administrative penalty complaints in FY 88,
one for $10,000 against a cranberry bog operator in Duxbury, MA, and one for $18,000 against
a condominium developer in York, ME.
Further, Region I referred four cases to the Department of Justice for civil prosecution. These
referrals involved a construction equipment firm in Revere, MA; an individual land owner in
Colebrook,NH;the Town of Manchester, CT; and a construction firm/land developer in Salem, NH.
To maximize limited resources and avoid duplicative efforts, the Region reached agreement with
the New England Division of the Army Corps of Engineers to coordinate informally all wetlands
enforcement activities. In addition, in the separate enforcement program which addresses oil
spills, the Region, working with the U.S. Coast Guard, assessed administrative penalties in eleven
cases in FY 88.
The New England states, too, had an active year in their water enforcement programs. During FY
88 the six states issued a total of 90 administrative orders and referred 75 cases to their Attorneys
General for civil litigation, both records for enforcement actions.
STATE ORDERS ISSUED IN FY 88
ME(0)
Rl (13)
CT (50)
-4-
-------
STATE CIVIL REFERRALS IN FY 88
ME (4)
NH
VI (8)
MA (5)
CT (52)
STATE ENFORCEMENT TOTALS
TYPE OF ACTION
FISCAL YEAR
Civil Referrals
Administrative Orders
85
9
37
86
29
76
87
33
74
88
75
90
-------
DRINKING WATER
The past two years has seen Region I implement an enforcement program under the Safe Drinking
Water Act Amendments of 1986. The primary focus for enforcement continues to reside with the
states. The Region supplements the states' activities. In FY 88 the Region issued twelve Notices
of Violation and five proposed administrative orders to violating public drinking water systems.
These numbers compared to five NOV's and no proposed administrative orders in FY 87. The
Region also made its first two drinking water civil referrals in FY 88.
The states in Region I both conduct sanitary surveys of public drinking water systems and take
enforcement actions against systems violating drinking water standards. In FY 88 the six states
together conducted 944 sanitary surveys, issued 30 administrative orders, assessed penalties in
nine cases, and referred one new case for litigation.
STATE ENFORCEMENT TOTALS
FISCAL YEAR
TYPE OF ACTION
REFERRALS TO ATTORNEY
GENERAL
CIVIL CASES FILED
ADMINISTRATIVE ORDERS
ISSUED
CASES WITH PENALTIES
ASSESSED
85
27
16
0
0
86
6
2
0
0
87
2
0
1
0
88
1
0
•
30
9
-6-
-------
SUPERFUND
During FY 88 Region I produced a record level of actions in the enforcement program under the
Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA), more
commonly known as Superfund. This program addresses the threats to public health and the
environment posed by hazardous substances at abandoned or uncontrolled sites. In 1988 there
were significant clean-up settlements reached in the Region's judicial and administrative Super-
fund enforcement efforts.
The Region in FY 88 made fourteen Superfund referrals for civil litigation, double the total in FY
87. These referrals included several cases, such as those involving the Cannons and Picillo sites,
in which settlements had already been reached with responsible parties, so that consent decrees
were also included with the referrals.
REFERRALS FOR CIVIL LITIGATION
NUMBER
1985
1986 1987
FISCAL YEAR
1988
-7-
-------
From the cases which Region I referred in 1988 with pre-negotiated settlements, the Agency will
recover more than $23,450,000 in past government costs spent at the sites, and the settling
responsible parties will perform work at the sites valued in excess of $24,000,000. In the cases
referred for litigation without prior settlements, the Agency is seeking to recover more than
$13,750,00 in past government costs at the sites.
HIGHLIGHT: CANNONS ENGINEERING SETTLEMENT
Region I achieved in FY 88 a $49.2 million comprehensive settlement with the
major PRPs (Potentially Responsible Parties) involved in the Cannons Engineer-
ing Superfund case. This "mega-settlement" concludes a series of settlements,
including three de minimis settlements, which cumulatively total 84 percent of
the total cleanup costs at the four Cannons sites. The mega-settlement will
recover $17 million in past cleanup costs spent by the government at the sites, the
largest Superfund cost recovery achieved to date. The settling parties also agreed
to clean up three of the four sites, a total of$16.1 million of cleanup work. Cleanup
is already under way at the fourth site.
EPA also reached settlements with 313 de minimis PRPs. PRPs have done $1.5
million of the cleanup work at the sites under previous agreements. The total of
361 parties who have entered settlements in the Cannons case is the largest
number of parties settling in any Superfund case.
Suit was filed on August 3,1988, simultaneously with the lodging of the mega-
settlement consent decree, against 25 recalcitrant parties seeking any costs
outstanding after the recoveries from the respective settlements.
The Cannons case sites include Cannons Engineering facilities in Bridgewater
and Plymouth, Massachusetts, the Tinkham's Garage site in Londonderry, New
Hampshire and the Gilson Road site in Nashua, New Hampshire.
Another important component of the Superfund program is administrative enforcement. Region
I issues administrative orders both on consent, that is, after successful negotiations with the PRPs,
and unilaterally, that is, without consenting PRPs. In FY 88 the Region negotiated eleven
administrative settlements. The Agency will recover from the administrative settlements $14,896,000
in past costs. The settling responsible parties will perform work valued at more than $3,379,000
under these consent orders. In addition, during FY 88 the Region issued two unilateral Superfund
orders.
-8-
-------
ADMINISTRATIVE ORDERS ON CONSENT
1985
1986
1987
1988
FISCAL YEAR
HIGHLIGHT: RE-SOLVE SETTLEMENT
On March 4,1988, the Region proposed a Nonbinding Preliminary Allocation of
Responsibility (NEAR) under CERCLA for use in the Remedial Design/Reme-
dial Action special notice negotiations for the Re-Solve site in North Dartmouth,
MA. This was the first NBAR in the country. The NBAR was prepared because
the issue of how to allocate the cleanup costs for PCBs, which were disproportion-
ate to cleanup costs of the other wastes at the site, had caused a division among
the approximately 320 PRPs. Negotiations based on the NBAR produced an
agreement in principle in mid-September, 1988. Under the settlement, the
government is expected to recover $9.2 million in past costs spent at the site and
receive $23.3 million toward the cleanup of the Re-Solve site. This settlement was
finalized in February, 1989.
-9-
-------
UNILATERAL ADMINISTRATIVE ORDERS
NUMBER
1985
1986
1987
1988
FISCAL YEAR
HIGHLIGHT: INDUSTRI-PLEX SITE SETTLEMENT
In September, 1988 Region I issued a unilateral administrative order to 27
owners and operators of the Industri-Plex site in Woburn, MA. The order required
the parties to perform the remedy selected in the site Record of Decision. The
Region issued the order to bring to a close settlement negotiations with two of the
principal PRPs, ICI Americas, Inc. and Monsanto Company, concerning per-
formance of the site remedy and reimbursement of past response costs. This order
prompted final settlement among all the parties early in FY89.
-10-
-------
HIGHLIGHT: REMOVAL SITE ENFORCEMENT
On June 3, 1988, EPA initiated a cost recovery action, United States v. Bour-
deaudhui et al.. in District Court against seven parties involved in the contami-
nation of two related sites in Willington, CT at which Region I had taken
emergency removal actions. The contamination resulted from the improper
handling of waste dental amalgam. This case is the first to allege that such
dental wastes are hazardous substances. The defendants are the owners and
operators of the waste sites and the five dental supply companies known to have
sent waste amalgam to the sites. In addition, prior to filing the judicial
complaint, EPA reached administrative settlements for a total recovery of
$69,812 with 58 individual dentists who had sent waste amalgam to the sites.
Under Title III of the 1986 Super-fund Amendments, formally called the Emergency Planning and
Community Right-to-Know Act, Region I issued the first civil complaint in the nation on September
30,1988. EPA alleged that All Regions Chemical Lab, Inc. of Springfield, MA violated CERCLA
by failing to notify the National Response Center of a major chlorine release and Title III by failing
to provide written follow-up emergency notice to the local community emergency coordinator. The
Region assessed a civil penalty in the amount of $25,000 forthe violation of CERCLA. The Region
also assessed a penalty in the amount of $25,000 for the first day of the Title III violation and $500
per day for each day thereafter until the required notice is filed.
-11-
-------
HAZARDOUS WASTE
Under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA), Region I runs an enforcement
program which focuses on the issuance of administrative complaints assessing penalties against
violators of the Agency's hazardous waste management regulations. In FY 88, the Region issued
eight such complaints which proposed to assess a total of $425,768.
ADMINISTRATIVE COMPLAINTS ISSUED
16 -
NUMBER
1985
1986 1987
FISCAL YEAR
1988
During FY 88 Region I achieved settlements in the largest number of RCRA cases in its history,
with twelve consent agreements and final orders issued. Under the terms of these twelve consent
agreements, the Agency will collect $456,177 in penalties, a record amount for the RCRA
administrative penalty program.
-12-
-------
CONSENT AGREEMENTS AND FINAL ORDERS ISSUED
1988
PENALTIES ASSESSED IN CONSENT AGREEMENTS
DOLLAR AMOUNT
(Thousands)
500
+50 -
400 -
350 -
300 -
250 -
• 200
150
100
50
0
$456.177
174.750
1985
-------
HIGHLIGHT: WATERTOWN, CT LANDFILL
In FY1988 Region I issued a RCRA administrative complaint to the Watertown
Landfill based on several violations found during an inspection earlier in the
year. The Region subsequently issued a consent agreement in which the town was
ordered to correct the violations and pay a $30,000 penalty.
The special significance of the action was the innovative way the penalty was
imposed. Ten thousand dollars was to be paid in cash. The town would pay the
remaining $20,000 by earning "environmental credit." Instead of going into the
General Treasury these resources were to be put to use improving the environ-
ment.
The project involves the town holding a household hazardous waste collection
day, under the supervision of the Connecticut Department of Environmental
Protection. Watertown had not previously participated in this voluntary pro-
gram which is being actively promoted by the state. Because of this active
involvement by the state, the project is easy to monitor and supervise.
A significant development in the RCRA program during FY 88 was that the Land Disposal
Restrictions Rule (commonly known as the land ban) became effective. Under its terms, certain
categories of hazardous waste are precluded from disposal on the land unless they meet specific
treatment levels, effectively rendering them non-hazardous. During the fiscal year, Region I staff
conducted 58 land ban inspections. An equal number were conducted by the states. Twenty
notices of violation and three administrative complaints were issued by EPA in response to
violations found as a result of these field efforts.
Also in FY 88, Region I stepped up the pace of corrective action activity through issuance of
corrective action orders and corrective action permits. Under these permits and orders, facilities
were required to undertake comprehensive facility investigations and corrective measure studies
based on a detailed model order/permit developed in the Region. Six new facilities were
addressed during the year. In September, 1988 Region I issued its first unilateral corrective action
order based on the hearing procedures established by the Agency in April, 1988 to the Hamilton
Standard Division of United Technologies, Inc. in Windsor Locks, CT.
As part of the judicial enforcement program under RCRA, during FY 88 final settlements were
reached in the Region's three loss of interim status (LOIS) judicial actions in Connecticut. These
cases were brought against three companies which continued to operate hazardous waste
lagoons after losing their authority to do so. The penalties collected in these cases were among
the highest achieved nationally in the LOIS enforcement program. In the Susan Bates. Inc. case,
the company agreed to a $190,000 penalty, and in both the Plainville Electro Plating Co.. Inc. and
-14-
-------
Stanley Plating Co.. Inc. cases, each company agreed to a $230,000 penalty. These facilities lost
their interim status because they were unable to certify to EPA that they were in compliance with
RCRA's groundwater monitoring and financial responsibility requirements.
In addition, the New England states, under their hazardous waste enforcement programs in FY
88, brought a large number of administrative and judicial actions.
STATE ENFORCEMENT TOTALS
TYPE OF ACTION
FISCAL YEAR
NOTICES OF VIOLATION
INITIAL ORDERS
FINAL ORDERS
CIVIL ACTIONS
CRIMINAL ACTIONS
85
706
0
124
32
6
86
605
1
145
21
2
87
519
30
104
17
1
88
457
22
78
10
2
-15-
-------
AIR
Region I in FY 88 maintained a high level of enforcement activity under the Clean Air Act. EPA
issued 29 administrative orders, the highest total ever. Twenty-two ordered contractors to comply
with the asbestos NESHAPs (National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants) reporting
and/or work practice requirements and seven ordered sources subject to NSPS (New Source
Performance Standards) to test air emissions to determine compliance.
ADMINISTRATIVE ORDERS ISSUED
1985
1986
1987
1988
FISCAL YEAR
Under its administrative penalty program, last year the Air Program issued a Notice of Noncom-
pliance to Coating Science of Concord, NH, a source of volatile organic compounds (VOC's). The
penalties associated with this type of action are limited by statute to the financial savings which
accrued to the source for not purchasing and operating air pollution control equipment on time.
The Region also issued thirteen Notices of Violation in FY 88. This type of Notice does not assess
a penalty. Five went to sources emitting VOC's, six went to sources violating permit requirements,
and two went to sources violating paniculate matter standards.
-16-
-------
NOTICES OF VIOLATION
I9B5
1986
1987
1988
FISCAL YFAR
In FY 88 the Air Program began issuing Notices of Deficiency (NOD's) to address notifications of
asbestos demolition or renovation operations which lack all the required information. The Region
issued 50 such NOD's. Owners or operators responsible for the notifications who receive multiple
NOD's become likely candidates for receipt of administrative orders.
In its fieldwork in 1988, the Air Program conducted 187 inspections.
INSPECTIONS CONDUCTED
221
NUMBER
1985
1986
1987
1988
FISCAL YEAR
-17-
-------
In addition, FY 88 saw the Region prepare seven new referrals for civil litigation. Three referrals
were for asbestos NESHAPs work practice violations, one was for VOC emission violations, one
was for PSD (Prevention of Significant Deterioration) violations, one was for NSPS violations, and
one was for violation of a paniculate matter emission standard. This distribution represents a
balance of activity in the major areas of concern in Region I.
REFERRALS FOR CIVIL LITIGATION
NUMBER
1988
HIGHLIGHT: ONGOING VOC LITIGATION
In two of Region I's major VOC enforcement cases, the issue ofEPA's ability
to enforce an existing SIP provision more than four months after the state has
submitted a SIP revision to EPA proved central in FY 88. In United States
v. Arkwriffht and OCE. the Rhode Island District Court on June 10, 1988,
became the only court so far to uphold the Agency's ability to enforce the Clean
Air Act and the existing SIP in this situation of a long-pending SIP revision.
Conversely, in United States v. General Motors Corp.. the Massachusetts
District Court dismissed EPA's action seeking to enforce the existing SIP
because the Agency had not acted on a pending SIP revision for well over four
months. The government has filed a notice of appeal to the Fir.*t Circuit in
the GM case.
-18-
-------
Region I settled several air cases already in litigation in FY 88. Underthese settlements, EPA will
collect $485,000, the highest total for one year in the Region's history.
PENALTIES ASSESSED IN JUDICIAL CONSENT DECREES
600
DOLLAR AMOUNT
(Thousands)
500 -
400 -
300 -
200 -
100 -
1985
1986
1987
1988
FISCAL YEAR
HIGHLIGHT: ASBESTOS NESHAPS SETTLEMENTS
On May 19, 1988, a consent decree was entered in United States v. Big Apple
Wrecking Corporation etal.. in which the defendants agreed to pay a total penalty
of $260,000, the largest penalty in one of Region I's asbestos NESHAPs cases to
date. This case involved multiple and repeated violations of the asbestos
NESHAPs standard during the demolition of 39 buildings in Naugatuck, CT.
As part of Region I's very active asbestos NESHAPs program, settlements in
principle were achieved in three other major judicial actions this year. In two of
the cases, the negotiated penalties are well over $100,000.
-19-
-------
In an innovative development last year, the Region piloted a new initiative in its mobile source
enforcement program. The Air Program began to issue "traffic ticket" type notices of violation to
first-time, single-instance violators where undersized nozzles were used to allow leaded gasoline
to be pumped into cars designed for unleaded fuel only. The "traffic ticket" notice serves as a
settlement agreement between EPA and the gasoline retailer. Under the agreement, the retailer
can avoid court action and a statutory penalty of up to $10,000 per day of violation by agreeing
to install a proper size nozzle and remitting the $200 penalty that the settlement agreement calls
for. A total of 31 "traffic ticket" NOVs were issued during FY 88 with a typical settlement time of
about two weeks.
The New England states also had a very productive year in their air enforcement programs. Most
notable was the record number of Notice of Violations issued, a total of 298.
STATE ENFORCEMENT TOTALS
TYPE OF ACTION
FISCAL YEAR
CIVIL REFERRALS
ADMINISTRATIVE ORDERS
NOTICES OF VIOLATION
(NON - ASBESTOS)
INSPECTIONS
85
0
52
163
1103
86
2
68
194
2026
87
0
31
148
901
88
3
42
298
1862
-20-
-------
PESTICIDES
Pesticides enforcement under the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA)
has been delegated in large measure to the states and supported by EPA through Cooperative
Enforcement Grant Agreements and technical assistance. In addition to actions under FIFRA, the
states also conduct enforcement activities undertheir own statutes, related to applicator licensing,
pesticide registration and distribution, and additional use investigations. The chart below lists
state accomplishments under FIFRA only.
STATE ENFORCEMENT TOTALS
TYPE OF ACTION
FISCAL YEAR
Civil Complaints
Criminal
Administrative Hearings
Warning Letters
Inspections
85
5
8
10
319
1398
86
116*
8
10
346
1921
87
9
1
14
328
2468
88
19
8
14
636
2248
"Includes 108 civil complaints issued by the State of Maine for use of an unregistered pesticide
(Fusilade).
-21-
-------
EPA can also issue enforcement actions under FIFRA. The Region handles two types of cases.
One is for failure of pesticide producing establishments to meet the annual reporting requirements
to EPA on their pesticide production. In the past three years, Region I has revitalized its efforts
to assure compliance with these reporting requirements. In FY 88 there were only five significant
violations for which Region I issued civil complaints with total proposed penalties of $16,000.
compared to atotal of 16 inthe previous two years. The lower violation rate reflects an increasing
compliance rate and the effectiveness of the initiative.
The second type of action is for cases referred to EPA by the states for FIFRA violations relating
to the registration of pesticide products and establishments, and the labeling of such products.
Region I also revitalized its efforts in this area in FY 88, resulting in four administrative complaints
being issued with total proposed penalties of $39,250. Two of these cases were settled during
the year, for $15,400 and $4,200. These complaints represent the first FIFRA cases brought by
Region I in several years for these types of violations. While penalties collected may seem small,
they are nevertheless significant in that FIFRA does not allow for the larger penalties that other
environmental statutes provide. In addition, the Region issued 25 Notices of Warning for lesser
FIFRA violations in FY 88, four more than in FY 87.
-22-
-------
TOXIC SUBSTANCES
Of particular note in FY 88 in the enforcement program under the Toxic Substances Control Act
(TSCA) is that Region I made its first ever civil judicial referral. This case, Boliden-Metech. is
important for two reasons. First, it involves the recently recognized problem of PCB contamination
in metal shredding operations. Second, the District Court of Rhode Island issued the first district
court decision since the enactment of TSCA in 1976 to address the use of a TSCA administrative
search warrant. The opinion and order support EPA's authority to obtain administrative search
warrants to conduct inspections under TSCA, and by inference other environmental statutes.
In addition, in FY 88 Region I continued an active and varied administrative enforcement program
under TSCA. EPA issues administrative complaints assessing penalties under three separate
TSCA programs, one regulating PCB's (polychlorinated biphenyls), one regulating asbestos
found in public schools, and another regulating imports of chemical substances into the country.
In the PCB penalty program alone, the Region collected more tha'n $500,000 in penalties in FY
88, a record amount.
% i
s
The asbestos program was in atransition year to the hew Asbestos Hazard Emergency Response
Act (AHERA). As a result, enforcement activities for asbestos in schools were curtailed in FY 88
as the Region concentrated on technical assistance and outreach to inform schools of the new
AHERA requirements.
ADMINISTRATIVE COMPLAINTS ISSUED
TYPE OF CASE
FISCAL YEAR
KB
ASBESTOS
IMPORTS OF
CHEMICAL SUBSTANCES
85
20
30
0
86
15
16
0
87
31
18
1
88
20
4
3
-23-
-------
PENALTIES IN ADMINISTRATIVE ACTIONS
DOLLAR AMOUNTS
FISCAL YEAR
Imports of
Chemical
' Substances
^X Assessed in Complaint
^^ Collected
^s Assessed in Complaint
Collected
of ^* Assessed in Complaint
i
-------
CRIMINAL ACTIONS
Criminal sanctions are EPA's strongest enforcement tool. Region I maintains a firm commitment
to taking criminal enforcement actions to redress the most serious violations of environmental law.
During FY 88 Region I referred ten new cases for criminal action, by far the largest total in the
Region's history.
REFERRALS FOR CRIMINAL ACTION
12
NUMBER
11 -
10 -
9 -
8 -
7 -
6 -
5 -
4 -
1985
10
1986 1987
FISCAL YEAR
1988
In FY 88 Region I also saw three corporations and 17 individuals charged in its criminal cases and
obtained guilty pleas from or verdicts against two corporations and two individuals.
Developments in five of the Region's criminal cases during FY 88 merit special mention.
-25-
-------
CASE HIGHLIGHTS
1. United States v. W. R. Grace & Company (D. Mass.)
On May 31,1988, W. R. Grace & Company pleaded guilty to making a false statement to the
government and was sentenced to a $10,000 fine. The case arose from EPA's investigation of
the contamination of two municipal drinking water wells in Woburn, MA. The 1987
indictment had charged the company with failing to disclose in a February 5,1982, response
to EPA that solvents had been dumped on numerous occasions behind its plant in Woburn. The
indictment had also charged W. R. Grace with knowing that its letter to EPA contained false
statements and entries regarding the types and quantities of solvents used at the plant.
2. United States v. Marathon Development Corp. et al. (D. Mass.)
On March 10, 1988, Marathon Development Corporation of Providence, R.I. and one of its
senior vice presidents, Terrence Geoghegan, entered guilty pleas in this first criminal
prosecution of wetlands violations under the Clean Water Act in the country. The 1987
indictment had alleged that, without acquiring a Corps of Engineers permit, Marathon
scraped, leveled, and piled debris in wetlands in Seekonk, MA in order to allow the
construction of a ISO-store mall and cinema. At the sentencing on May 4, 1988, Marathon
received a $100,000 fine and Geoghegan received a $10,000 fine, a one year suspended prison
term, and one year probation.
3. United States v. Ocean Sprav Cranberries. Inc. (D. Mass.)
Ocean Spray Cranberries, Inc. was indicted on January 28,1988, on 78 counts of violating the
Clean Water Act. The indictment charged Ocean Spray with pretreatment and direct
discharge violations at its Middleborough, MA facility. On December 20,1988, Ocean Spray
entered a guilty plea in the case.
4. United States v. MacDonald & Watson Waste Oil Co.. Inc. et al. (D. R.I.)
On April 26,1988, MacDonald & Watson Waste Oil Co., Inc. of Johnston, R.I., Narragansett
Improvement Co. of Providence, R.I., and five individuals were named in a 53 count indictment
charging violations of the RICO statute (Racketeer Influenced and Corrupt Organizations
Act), RCRA, and CERCLA, false statements and mail fraud. This was the first RICO
indictment in an environmental case in the country.
5. United States v. Arcanselo et al. (D. Conn.)
On June 24, 1988, a 15 count RICO indictment was unsealed. Two of the counts charged
Charles and James Arcangelo with a RCRA disposal violation and a notification violation
under CERCLA in connection with the disposal of mercury in North Haven, CT. This case
represents the first EPA joint investigation with the Department of Justice Organized Crime
Strike Force.
-26-
-------
REGION I ADMINISTRATIVE ENFORCEMENT ACTIONS INITIATED
FY 1985 TO FY 1988
CLEAN AIR ACT
CLEAN WATER ACT
SAFE DRINKING WATER ACT
RESOURCE CONSERVATION AND RECOVERY ACT
COMPREHENSIVE ENVIRONMENTAL RESPONSE,
COMPENSATION, AND LIABILITY ACT
TOXIC SUBSTANCES CONTROL ACT
FEDERAL INSECTICIDE, FUNGICIDE, AND
RODENTICIDE ACT
EMERGENCY PLANNING AND COMMUNITY
RIGHT-TO-KNOW ACT
TOTALS
FY1985
22
42
0
14
6
50
0
0
134
FY1986
24
30
0
9
6
31
7
0
107
FY1987
23
53
0
17
15
50
9
0
167
FY1988
29
47
5
9
13
27
9
1
140
-27-
-------
RECiON I CIVIL REFERRALS TO THE DEPARTMENT
FY 1985 TO FY 1988
CLEAN AIR ACT
CLEAN WATER ACT
SAFE DRINKING WATER ACT
RESOURCE CONSERVATION AND RECOVERY ACT
COMPREHENSIVE ENVIRONMENTAL RESPONSE,
COMPENSATION, AND LIABILITY ACT
TOXIC SUBSTANCES CONTROL ACT
FEDERAL INSECTICIDE, FUNGICIDE, AND
RODENTICIDE ACT
TOTALS
FY1985
8
5
0
0
3
0
0
16
FY1986
8
6
0
3
2
0
0
19
FY1987
8
6
0
1
7
0
0
22
FY1988
7
13
2
0
14
1
0
37
-28-
-------
REGION I CRIMINAL REFERRALS TO THE
DEPARTMENT OF JUSTICE
FY1985 TO FY1988
FY85
3
FY86
1
FY87
3
FY88
10
-29-
------- |