One Year Of Enforcement In Region 10 October 1978 To October 1979



United States	Region 10	Alaska	EPA 910/9-80-070
Environmental Protection	1200 Sixth Avenue	Idaho
Agency	Seattle WA 98101	Oregon
Washington
<*EFA One Year of Enforcement
In Region 10
October 1978 to October 1979

-------
This booklet is dedicated to all the business firms, municipal sewage treatment
plants, community drinking water supplies and individual citizens whose names do
not appear on the following pages.
To them, the people of Alaska and the
complying promptly and fully with the
required to administer.
Pacific
Federal
Northwest
environm
eir thanks for
ws that EPA is
Regional Administrator
Environmental Protection Agency
Region 10

-------
ONE YEAR OF ENFORCEMENT IN REGION 10
Table of Contents
Page
I. Air Pollution
A.	Stationary Source 		1
B.	Mobile Source
1.	Unleaded Fuels		15
2.	Tampering		28
II. Pesticides		33
III. Water Pollution
A.	Waste Discharge Permits 		47
B.	Oil Spill Prevention and Enforcement
1.	Oil Spill Prevention		55
2.	Oil Spill Enforcement		60
IV. Safe Drinking Water Enforcement 		69
V. Toxics Substance Control Act 		77
EPA Region 10 Enforcement rases Summary		81

-------
AIR POLLUTION ENFORCEMENT
STATIONARY SOURCE ENFORCEMENT
The Federal Government vastly increased its role in air pollution enforcement with
the passage of the Clean Air Act in 1970. The new Act required the States to
develop plans to meet National clean air quality goals. These plans, (called State
Implementation Plans or SIPs) described the laws, regulations, permit programs,
studies, etc., that would be implemented by the State or local air pollution
control agencies. By the terms of the Clean Air Act, the EPA may enforce state and
local regulations if they request such help or fail to take appropriate enforcement
action themselves.
The term "stationary source" refers to a fixed facility that emits air pollution,
usually through a smoke stack or as fugitive emissions as a consequence of handling
process materials or ducting exhaust gases. Other examples of stationary sources
are open burning garbage dumps. (Stationary sources are distinguished from mobile
sources such as automobiles.) The variety of possible violations is as wide as the
variety of state and local regulations. Typical examples:
-Violations of emission limitation
-Emission of hazardous pollutants
-Failure to meet increments of compliance schedule
-Failure to monitor pollutants
1

-------
Most of EPA's air pollution enforcement is against stationary sources, violations
of emission limitations such as sulfur dioxide (SO2) or particulate matter (dust,
smoke, fumes, mist, etc.). Three enforcement options are available to EPA in such
cases:
-Notice of Violation (must precede any of the actions below)
-Administrative Order
-Referral to the United States Attorney
2

-------
Notice of Violation
This is a notice authorized by Section 113 of the Clean Air Act sent to both the
source and the state indicating that EPA has information that a violation has
occurred. The Notice officially gives the state and the violating source 30 days
to take corrective actions. If the state or local agency with jurisdiction over
the air polluter takes appropriate action, EPA does not pursue the matter. If
action to prevent future violations is not taken, EPA has the authority to proceed
to the next steps in the administrative enforcement process. The Notice of
Violation is nondiscretionary if EPA has knowledge of a violation.
FISCAL YEAR 1979
STATIONARY SOURCE AIR POLLUTION - NOTICE OF VIOLATION
IDAHO:
Source Name City
Date of
Nature of Violation	Type of Action	Enf. Action
yr/mo/day
Bannock Paving Pocatello
Company, Inc.
Violation of emission Notice of Violation 79/07/10
limitation (visible and
fugitive dust)
Diamond
International
Albeni Violation of emission Notice of Violation 79/08/08
Falls	limitation
Diamond
International
Coeur d' Violation of emission Notice of Violation 79/08/08
Alene	limitation
Five Cedars Plummer
Corporation
Violation of opacity Notice of Violation 79/09/06
1 imitation
3

-------
Source Name
George's Auto
Wrecking
Louisiana
Pacific
Corporati on
Louisiana
Pacific
Corporation
Louisiana
Pacific
Corporation
Salmon River
Lumber
Wickes Forest
Industries
Wickes Forest
Industries
City
Lewiston
Chilco
Post Falls
Priest
River
Riggins
Grangeville
Grangeville
Nature of Violation
Violation of open burn
ing regulations
Violation of opacity
1 imitation
Violation of opacity
1 imitation
Violation of opacity
1 imitation
Violation of opacity
1 imitation
Violation of emission
limitation (visible)
Violation of visible
emission limitation
Violation of opacity
1 imitation
4
Date of
Type of Action	Enf. Action
yr/mo/day
Notice of Violation 79/09/17
Notice of Violation 79/09/04
Notice of Violation 79/09/04
Notice of Violation 79/09/04
Notice of Violation 79/09/10
Notice of Violation 79/07/10
Notice of Violation 79/08/13
(2nd case)

-------
OREGON:
Source Name City	Nature of Violation
Bunge	Portland
Corporation
Louis Dreyfus Portland
Corporati on
State of
Oregon
WASHINGTON:
Violation of emission
limitation
Violation of emission
1 imitation
Field burning
Source Name City	Nature of Violation
Associated	Everett Violation of emission
Sand and Gravel limitation
Company, Inc.
Columbia	Bellingham Violation of emission
Cement limitation
Corporation
Columbia	Bellingham Violation of emission
Cement limitation
Corporation
Date of
Type of Action	Enf. Action
yr/mo/day
Notice of Violation 79/05/17
Notice of Violation 79/05/17
Notice of Violation 79/07/19
Date of
Type of Action	Enf. Action
yr/mo/day
Notice of Violation 79/07/30
Notice of Violation 79/08/01
Notice of Violation 79/09/25
5

-------
Source Name Cit.y
Nature of Violation
Crown
Zellerbach
Corporation
Kaiser
Aluminum
Howard S. Lease
Construction
Company and
Associates
Materials
Reclamation
Company, Inc.
Northwest Steel
Rolling Mills,
Inc.
Peshastin
Forest Products
Corporation
Weyerhaeuser
Company
Port	Violation of emission
Townsend limitation
Spokane Violation of DCO
increments
Redmond Violation of emission
1 imitation
Seattle Violation of opacity
limitation
Kent	Violation of opacity
(visual) limitation
Peshastin Violation of emission
1imitati on
Everett Violation of emission
1 imitation
6
Type of Action
Notice of
Notice of
Notice of
Notice of
Notice of
Notice of
Notice of
Violation
Violation
Violation
Violation
Violation
Violation
Violation
Date of
Enf. Action
yr/mo/day
79/08/28
79/07/02
79/06/01
79/05/03
79/05/17
79/03/01
79/05/30

-------
Source Name
City
Nature of Violation
Weyerhaeuser
Company
Weyerhaeuser
Company
Raymond
Snoqualmie
Falls
Exceeded visible emis
sion limitations from
hog fuel boiler
Violation of visible
emission limitation
Date of
Type of Action	Enf. Action
yr/mo/day
Notice of Violation 78/10/26
Notice of Violation 79/08/13
7

-------
Adninistrative Order/Del a.yed Compliance Order
Section 113 of the Clean Air Act authorizes EPA to administratively order violators
to comply with the laws, regulations, or emission limitations as set forth in the
State Implementation Plan. An administrative order may not be issued unless a
Notice of Violation has been in effect for 30 days. If the state or local agency
with jurisdiction takes appropriate action after receiving a Notice of Violation,
EPA will not issue an order. Section 113(d) allows a state for after 30 davs
notice to the state, the Administrator) to issue to any stationary source which is
unable to comply with any requirement of an applicable implementation plan an order
which specifies a date for final compliance with such requirement later than the
date for attainment of any national ambient air quality standard specified in such
plan, if all requirements of this section of the Clean Air Act are met.
FISCAL YEAR 1979
STATIONARY SOURCE AIR POLLUTION - ADMINISTRATIVE ORDER
IDAHO:
Source Name City
Nature of Violation
Date of
Type of Action	Enf. Action
yr/mo/day
Gordon Paving Burley Failure to test
Company
Administrative	79/03/01
Order
8

-------
WASHINGTON:
Source Name City	Nature of Violation
Materials	Seattle
Reclamation
Company, Inc.
Failure to monitor
pollutants as required
Violation of opacity
limitation
Northwest Steel Kent
Rolling Mills
Violation of
1 imitation
emission
Date of
Type of Action	Enf. Action
yr/mo/day
Administrative	79/06/20
Order
Administrative	79/08/06
Order
9

-------
FISCAL YEAR 1979
STATIONARY SOURCE AIR POLLUTION - DELAYED COMPLIANCE ORDER
IDAHO :
Source Name City
Nature of Violation
Type of Action
U & I Sugar
Inc.
Idaho
Falls
#2 Erie Boiler
Date of
Enf. Action
.yr/mo/da,y
FMC Corporation Pocatello Furnace stack scrubbers, Delayed Compliance 78/11/14
the burden level and oil Order
crusher
Delayed Compliance 78/12/28
Order
WASHINGTON:
Source Name
Boise Cascade
Georgia
Pacific Corp.
Kaiser
Aluminum-
Mead Works
Cit£
Kettle
Falls
Nature of Violation
Type of Action
(1)	Hog fuel boiler and Delayed Compliance
veneer drier	Order (2)
(2)	Wigwam burner
Bellingham 3 hog fuel boilers
Spokane Coke Calcining plant
Delayed Compliance
Order
Delayed Compliance
Order
Date of
Enf. Action
yr/mo/day
79/03/15
78/10/31
78/11/07
10

-------
Source Name City
Lone Star	Seattle
Cement
Louisiana	lone
Pacific
Matney	Kettle
Lumber Co.	Falls
Nanome	Valley
Aggregates
Scott Paper Everett
Company
Seattle Steam Seattle
Suntex Veneer Spokane
Vaagen Bros. Colville
Nature of Violation
Clinker storage facility
Wigwam burner
Wigwam burner
Limestone crushing and
sacking
5 hog fuel boilers
particulate matter
Oil fired boiler
2 veneer driers
Wigwam burner
Type of Action
Date of
Enf. Action
yr/mo/da.y
Delayed Compliance
Order
Delayed Compliance
Order
Delayed Compliance
Order
Delayed Compliance
Order
Delayed Compliance
Order
Delayed Compliance
Order
Delayed Compliance
Order
Delayed Compliance
Order
79/04/04
79/06/07
79/03/15
79/03/15
78/10/31
79/01/26
79/01/26
79/03/15

-------
Compliance Order
Section 113(a)(3) of the Clean Air Act, authorizes EPA to order anyone violating Section
111(e) (New Source Performance Standards (NSPS)) and 112(c) (Standards for Hazardous
Emissions (NESHAPS)) to comply with such section or requirements.
FISCAL YEAR 1979
STATIONARY SOURCE AIR POLLUTION - COMPLIANCE ORDER
ALASKA:
Source Name City
Associated Haines
Sand & Gravel
Nature of Violation
Type of Action
Violation of emission Compliance
limitation (NSPS)	Order
Date of
Enf. Action
yr/mo/day
79/08/29
OREGON:
Source Name City
M.B.K.
Company
Klamath
Falls
Nature of Violation
Emission of hazardous
pollutants (NESHAPS)
Type of Action
Compliance
Order
Date of
Enf. Action
yr/mo/da.y
79/09/17
12

-------
WASHINGTON:
Source Name
City
Nature of Violation
M. J. Ness
Construction
Company and
the Energy
Savers
Kenmore
and
Bellevue
Emission of hazardous
pollutants (NESHAPS)
Type of Action
Compliance
Order
Date of
Enf. Action
yr/mo/day
79/03/02
13

-------
Referral to the United States Attorney
For especially serious violations, EPA can refer a case to the U.S. Attorney who
acts as EPA's lawyer in filing suit against the violator. (EPA cannot adminis-
tratively assess a fine or penalty against a stationary source violator, only a
Federal Court can). EPA, through the U.S. Attorney, can ask a court to provide
civil monetary penalties (fines) and/or an injunction (a temporary or permanent
order to do or stop doing something). The U.S. Attorney may also negotiate a
consent decree (a court-approved agreement signed by both parties) instead of going
through a trial. A consent decree must be published in the Federal Register for
public comment before being submitted to the Federal Court for approval.
There were no cases referred to the U.S. Attorney this year.
14

-------
MOBILE SOURCE (AUTOMOBILE) ENFORCEMENT
Unleaded Fuels Program
One of the most serious air pollution problems is caused by automobile emissions.
In high population urban areas the concentrations of these pollutants can be harm-
ful to human health. Congress established progressively more stringent standards
applicable to new cars for carbon monoxide, nitrogen oxides and hydrocarbons coming
out of automobile exhaust pipes. In order to comply with the new standards, the
automobile industry chose to use a device called the "catalytic converter" in most
American cars manufactured since September 1974.
The lead contained in regular and premium gasoline woul'd "poison" the catalytic
converter, making it useless in reducing pollution. Therefore, EPA agreed to use
its regulatory authority to establish regulations to ensure that unleaded gasoline
was widely available, and that leaded gasoline was not pumped into cars designed
for unleaded gasoline.
Violations of the unleaded fuels regulations can include:
-	Failure to offer unleaded gasoline
-	Contamination of unleaded gasoline with lead
-	Putting leaded gasoline into cars designed for
unleaded gasoline
-	Not having the proper pump nozzle*
*Cars designed to use unleaded gasoline have smaller gasoline filler inlets/ intake
openings. Unleaded gasoline pumps must have a smaller nozzle to fit into the car.
This prevents the larger nozzles required on leaded gasoline pumps from entering
unleaded gasoline intake.
15

-------
Effective July 1979, this program was transferred to the EPA Headquarters' Mobile Source
Enforcement Division and its Denver Field Office.
16

-------
Civil Penalty Complaint/Notice of Violation
A Civil Penalty Complaint informs the gasoline station owner or lessee that EPA
believes a violation of the Unleaded Fuels regulations has occurred and proposes a
monetary penalty for the violation. At the same time, the station owner is given
the opportunity to ask for an informal settlement conference to explain the circum-
stances of the violation and what has been done to correct it and to settle on the
penalty amount. If the informal conference does not satisfy both parties, a more
formal hearing is held to decide upon a penalty and corrective action.
When a Notice of Violation is issued, the company is given a chance to take
corrective action without being fined.
FISCAL YEAR 1979
MOBILE SOURCE AIR POLLUTION - CIVIL PENALTY COMPLAINT
ALASKA:
Source Name
Alaska Family
House, Inc.
Big Corner
Texaco
Howard's
Chevron
Cjtjr
Anchorage
Anchorage
Anchorage
Nature of
Violation
Not having pro-
per pump nozzle
Not having pro-
per pump nozzle
Not having pro-
per pump nozzle
Date of
Penalty
Type of Action Enf. Action Collected
Civil Penalty
Complaint
Civil Penalty
Complaint/Con-
sent Agreement
Civil Penalty
Complaint/Con-
sent Agreement
yr/mo/day
78/10/05
79/01/24
78/10/06
78/11/30
78/10/05
78/11/30
$ 300.00
$ 300.00
$ 300.00
17

-------
Source Name City
Peter's Creek Chugiak
Texaco
Rosko's Texaco Anchorage
Service Center
(Col unbus
Distributi ng
Company)
Willow Creek Willow
Union 76
Yel1ow Cab
Dispatch
Al's Quick
Stop
18
Anchorage
IDAHO:
Source Name City
Coeur d'
Alene
Nature of
Vi olation
Date of
Type of Action Enf. Action
Not having proper Civil Penalty
pump nozzle	Complaint/Con-
sent Agreement
Cont ami nation
of unleaded
gasol ine
Not having pro-
per pump nozzle
Putting leaded
gasoline into
cars designed
for unleaded
gasol ine
Not having pro-
per pump nozzle
Nature of
Vi ol ation
Not having pro-
per pump nozzle
Civil Penalty
Compl ai nt/Con-
sent Agreement
Civil Penalty
Compl ai nt/Sti pu-
1ation of Vio-
1 ation
Civil Penalty
Compl ai nt
yr/mo/day
78/10/05
78/11/01
78/10/11
79/09/04
78/10/05
79/02/07
70 /07 /03
Date of
Pen al t.y
r ollected
S 300.00
$1,080
(Parti al
Pa yment)
Case Trans-
ferred to
Denver Field
Offi ce
-0-
Case Trans-
ferred to
Denver Field
Office
Penal tv
Type of Action Enf. Action Collected
Civil Penalty
Compl ai nt/Con-
sent Agreement
yr/mo/day
78/10/05
78/11/30
$ 300.00

-------
Source Name
City of
Mer i di an an d
Police Chief
Gary Green
OREGON:
Source Name
Dave1s Gas
Stop
Franko Oil
Company
Kr ueger's
Auto Service
City
Meri di an
Cit£
Canopy Center Portland
Arco
Portl and
Portl and
Portl and
Speedy Car Wash Portland
and Mobil
Nature of
Vi olation
Not having pro-
per pump nozzle
Date of
Type of Action Enf. Action
Civil Penalty
Compl ai nt/Con-
sent Agreement
yr/mo/day
78/10/05
78/11/15
Penal ty
Collected
$ 200.00
Nature of
Vi ol ation
Not having pro-
per pump nozzle
No unleaded gas-
oline offered
Not having pro-
per pump nozzle
Not having pro-
per pump nozzle
Not having pro-
per pump nozzle
Putting leaded
gasoline into
cars designed
for unleaded
gasoline
Not having proper
pimp nozzle
Date of
Penal tv
Type of Action Enf. Action Collected
Civil Penalty
Compl ai nt/Con-
sent Agreement
yr/mo/day
78/10/20
79/01/10
Civil Penalty 79 /04/13
Complaint/Consent 79/07/09
Agreement and
Final Order
Civil Penalty
Compl ai nt/Con-
sent Agreement
Civil Penalty
Compl ai nt/Con-
sent Agreement
Civil Penalty
Compl ai nt
78/10/05
78/11/27
78/10/05
78/11/21
78/10/30
-0-
S ^00.00
S 600.00
S 300.00
Penalty
Assessed
19

-------
WASHINGTON:
Source Name
Airport Taxi
Serivce, Inc.
and Sea-Tac
Taxi, Inc.
Brink 's
Service,
Inc.
Gelco Courier
Service, Inc.
Nature of
City	Violation
Seattle Putting leaded
gasoline into
cars designed
for unleaded
gasoline
Not having pro-
per pump nozzle
Not having proper
signs or labels on
the pumps
Ferndale Not having pro-
per pump nozzle
Date of
Type of Action Enf. Action
yr/mo/day
79/06/06
Civil Penalty
Complaint
Consent Agreement 79/04/18
Seattle Putting leaded
gasoline into
cars designed
for unleaded
gasoline
Not having pro-
per pump nozzle
Not having pro-
per signs or
labels on the
pumps
Civil Penalty
Complaint
Penalty
Collected
Case Trans-
fered to
Denver Field
Office
-0-
(financial
hardship)
79/08/17 Pending
20

-------
Source Name
Gull
Industries,
Inc.
Hudson Oil
Company
City
Seattle
Seattle
Loomis Courier Seattle
Serivce, Inc.
City of Union
Gap and Union
Gap Chief of
Police
Union Gap
Nature of
Violation
Not having pro-
per pump nozzle
Not having pro-
per pump nozzle
Type of Action
Date of Penalty
Enf. Action Collected
yr/mo/day
Consent Agreement 79/04/09
and Final Order
Civil Penalty
Complaint
Putting leaded
gasoline into
cars designed
for unleaded
gasoline
Not having pro-
per pump nozzle
Not having proper
signs or labels on
the pumps
Putting leaded
gasoline into
cars designed
for unleaded
gasoline
Not having pro-
per pump nozzle
Civil Penalty
Complaint
Civil Penalty
Complaint/Con-
sent Agreement
and Final Order
78/07/12
79/08/17
79/02/28
79/06/08
$2,720.00
Case Trans-
ferred to
Denver Field
Office
pending
$ 200.00
City paid
$1,058.00 to
correct
violation
21

-------
Source Name
Jimmy's Mini
Market
Kwick N Kleen
Mobi 1
Marine Drive
Service
Mercer Island
Texaco
T & M
Equipment
Mobil
U.S.A.
Petroleum
(#193)
Cttjr
Nature of
Violation
Federal Way Not having pro-
per pump nozzle
Date of
Type of Action Enf. Action
Civil Penalty
Complaint/Con-
sent Agreement
yr/mo/day
78/10/05
78/12/15
Penalty
Collected
$ 300.00
Seattle
Contami nation
unleaded gaso-
line
of
Bellingham Not having pro-
per pump nozzle
Mercer
Island
Everett
Not having pro-
per pump nozzle
Not having pro-
per pump nozzle
Civil Penalty
Complaint/Con-
sent Agreement
Civil Penalty
Complaint/Con-
sent Agreement
Civil Penalty
Complaint/Con-
sent Agreement
Consent
Agreement
78/07/10
79/01/26
78/10/05
78/10/30
78/10/06
78/11/15
79/03/05
$ 600.00
$ 300.00
$ 300.00
Tacoma Contamination of Civil Penalty
unleaded gasoline Complaint/Con-
Not having pro- sent Agreement
per signs or
labels on the
pumps
78/09/15
78/10/30
$4,800.00
22

-------
Source Name
City .~
Nature of
Violation.
U-Save	Seattle
Oil Company
(Mt. Vernon
EXXON)
Walla Walla Walla
County Sheriff Walla
and County of
Walla Walla
Yakima County Yakima
Sheriff's
Office and
County of
Yakima
Not having pro-
per pump nozzle
Putting leaded
gasoline into
cars designed
for unleaded
gasoline
Putting leaded
gasoline into
cars designed
for unleaded
gasoline
Date of Penalty
Type of Action Enf. Action Collected
yr/mo/day
Civil Penalty 79/01/04 $ 900.00
Complaint/Con- 79/02/07
sent Agreement
Civil Penalty 79/06/13 $ 200.00
Complaint/Consent 79/07/12
Agreement and
Final Order
Civil Penalty 79/02/28 pending
Complaint
23

-------
FISCAL YEAR 1979
MOBILE SOURCE AIR POLLUTION - NOTICE OF VIOLATION
IDAHO:
Source Name
Dobbs
Texaco
Knolls Mobil
OREGON:
Source Name
ATs Mobil
Service Center
Bertsch Mobil
Nature of
City	Violation
Nampa	Not having proper
pump nozzle
Caldwell Not having proper
pump nozzle
Type of Action
Notice of Viola-
tion/Stipulation
of Violation
Notice of Viola-
tion/Stipulation
of Violation
Date of
Enf. Action
,yr/mo/da,y
78/12/06
79/12/09
78/12/06
78/12/13
Cit£
Portland
Portland
Nature of
Violation
Not having proper
pump nozzle
Not having proper
pump nozzle
Type of Action
Notice of Viola-
tion/Stipulation
of Violation
Notice of Viola-
tion/Stipulation
of Violation
Date of
Enf. Action
yr/mo/day
78/12/11
78/12/23
78/12/11
78/12/15
24

-------
Source Name
Crater Lake
Texaco
Don's Mobil
Gary's Union
Mountain View
Service
Rocket
Portland
Nature of
City	Violation"
Medford Not having proper
pump nozzle
Portland Not having proper
pump nozzle
Portland Not having proper
pump nozzle
White City Not having proper
pump nozzle
Portland Not having proper
pump nozzle
Tigard
Texaco
Tigard Not having proper
pump nozzle
Type of Action
Date of
Enf. Action
yr/mo/day
Notice of Viola- 79/01/04
tion
Notice of Viola- 78/12/11
tion/Stipulation 78/12/26
of Violation
Notice of Viola- 78/12/11
tion/Stipulation 78/12/18
of Violation
Notice of Viola- 79/01/23
tion/Stipulation 79/01/26
of Violation
Notice of Viola- 78/12/11
tion/Stipulation 78/12/20
of Violation
Notice of Viola- 78/12/11
tion/Stipulation 78/12/15
of Violation
25

-------
WASHINGTON:
Source Name
City
Nature of
Violation
Type of Action
Date of
Enf. Action
yr/mo/day
Carl's
AMOCO
Spokane
Not having proper
pump nozzle
Notice of Viola-
tion/Stipulation
of Violation
78/12/11
79/01/02
Hill's
Texaco
Olympia
Not having proper
pump nozzle
Notice of Viola-
tion
78/12/06
Jerry1s
Shell
Olympia
Not having proper
pump nozzle
Notice of Viola-
tion/Stipulation
of Violation
78/12/06
78/12/11
LeRoy's
ARCO
Tukwila
Not having proper
pump nozzle
Notice of Viola-
tion/Stipulation
of Violation
79/01/19
79/01/22
Lincoln Park
Service
Seattle
Not having proper
pump nozzle
Notice of Viola-
tion/Stipulation
of Violation
78/12/06
78/12/07
Maxey's
Texaco
Spokane
Not having proper
pump nozzle
Notice of Viola-
tion/Stipulation
of Violation
78/12/11
78/12/14
26

-------
Source Name
City
Nature of
Violation
Murphy's	Tacoma Not having proper
ARCO pump nozzle
Nelson	Bellevue Not having proper
Union pump nozzle
Park Auto	Seattle Not having proper
Parts pump nozzle
Rainbow	Mt. Vernon Not having proper
Car Wash pump nozzle
Sam & George's Spokane Not having proper
ARCO	pump nozzle
Sorenson's	Graham Not having proper
Graham Garage pump nozzle
Village	Bellevue Not having proper
EXXON pump nozzle

Date of
Type of Action
Enf. Action
yr/mo/day
Notice of Viola-
78/11/24
tion/Stipulation
78/11/28
of Violation

Notice of Viola-
78/12/06
tion/Stipulation
79/03/04
of Violation

Notice of Viola-
79/03/20
tion/Stipulation
79/03/21
of Violation

Notice of Viola-
78/12/11
tion/Stipulation
78/12/23
of Violation

Notice of Viola-
78/12/11
tion/Stipulation
78/12/15
of Violation

Notice of Viola-
78/12/06
tion/Stipulation
78/12/11
of Violation

Notice of Viola-
78/12/06
tion/Stipulation
78/12/07
of Violation

27

-------
Tampering Program
A second aspect of the Mobile Source Enforcement program is the Tampering Program.
A Federal anti-tampering law prohibits automobile manufacturers, new car dealers,
repair shops, leasing agencies, and fleet operators from removing or rendering
inoperative any emission control device or element of design that is installed on a
motor vehicle or motor vehicle engine. New car dealers who violate the tampering
laws are subject to civil penalties up to $10,000 for each car tampered with.
Repair shops, commercial mechanics and fleet operators are subject to a $2,500 fine
for each tampering incident.
Examples of tampering include:
-removing or rendering inoperative such devices as the catalytic
converter, air pump, and EGR valve.
-disconnecting vacuum lines and electrical or mechanical portions of
the pollution control system such as electrical solenoids or
vacuum-activated valves.
-adjusting an element of a car's emission control design out of line
with manufacturer's specification.
-tune-ups by a mechanic which are not in conformance with manufac-
turer's specifications.
-knowingly installing a replacement part that is not equivalent in
design and function to the part that was originally on the car.
(This, however, does not mean that you have to use replacement parts
sold by the motor vehicle manufacturer or its franchised dealers).
28

-------
If EPA is aware of violators of the anti-tampering law, the case is referred to
the Department of Justice. Although several incidents were investigated during
Fiscal Year 1979, no charges were filed.
In July 1979 EPA Headquarters' Mobile Source Enforcement Division and its Denver
Field Office took over all tampering investigations.
29

-------
AIR POLLUTION ENFORCEMENT SUMMARY

Number
of Cases
Penal ti es
Assessed
Notice of Violation
26
N/A
Administrative Order
3
N/A
Delayed Compliance Order
14
N/A
Compliance Order
3
N/A
Civil Penalty Complaint/Consent Agreement)
(Mobile Source)
30
SI 5,458
Notice of Violation/Stipulation of Violation
(Mobile Source)
23
N/A
Subtotal:
99
$15,458
** Cases Still Pending from FY 77 Report
(Mobile Source)
1
N/A
Total:
100
$15,458
30

-------
Total Cases Issued in FY 79 and Not Finalized = 4
Total Cases Sent to Denver Field Office	= 4
** Cases Still Pending From FY 77 Report
V-I Oil Company
Idaho Falls, Idaho
Caldwell, Idaho
Pocatello, Idaho
Civil Penalty
Complaint
Appeal to Cir-
cuit court
pending
(Cases combined)
31

-------
32

-------
PESTICIDES ENFCRCEMEOT
Responsibility for regulation of pesticides was assimed by the Environmental
Protection Agency in 1970. The pesticides program has three main components: pro-
duct registration, manufacturer registration, and misuse enforcement. All pesti-
cides sold in the United States or imported into this country must he registered
with EPA. In order for the product to be registered, the manufacturer must provide
information verifying that the pesticide (1) is effective against the pests listed
on the label, (2) will not injure people, animals, crops, or the environment when
label directions are followed, and (3) will not result in illegal residues on food
or feed. Registered products must meet strict labeling requirements which include
statement of ingredients, name and address of manufacturer and/or distributor,
directions for use and precautionary labeling requirements. Manufacturers of
pesticides must also register their establishment with EPA. Annual reports and
certain records must be submitted to EPA for use in keeping track of the amounts
and types of pesticides produced.
Violation of the pesticide laws and regulations fall into five major categories:
-Failure to register pesticide product or manufacturer
-Failure of manufacturer or pesticide producer to submit required
reports
-Improper label on pesticide product (misbranding)
-Chemical defects in the pesticide product (adulterated!
-Failure of a pesticide applicator to use the product in accordance
with label instructions (misuse)
33

-------
Enforcement actions against violators vary with the severity of the violation.
Minor violations — those which are not likely to influence a product's safe and
effective use -- may be handled with a written Notice of Warning. Other
enforcement actions are:
-Civil penalty warning citation
-Civil penalty complaint
-Criminal complaint
EPA can also take any of the following actions to remove from the market place
products that are unregistered, misbranded, or adulterated:
-Recall (a request that the company voluntarily recall a
defective product from its customers)
-Stop sale, use, or removal order
-Seizure (violative products are seized by a Federal Court
Order)
-Injunction (a court order to prevent a person from continuing
to break the law)
Fortunately, most pesticide manufacturers and users comply voluntarily. In Region
10, there has been a steady increase in the percentage of compliance and a
decrease in violations. Region 10 has issued 237 Notices of Warning for minor
infractions of the pesticide laws since 1973.
34

-------
Civil Penalty Warning Citation
This enforcement action is used against private fas opposed to commercial),
certified applicators, general non-commercial pesticide users, and others not
subject to the General Civil Penalty provisions. It is used to warn the violator
that a second violation will result in a civil penalty. This citation is
considered stronger than the Notice of Warning.
FISCAL YEAR 1979
PESTICIDES ENFORCEMENT ACTIONS - CIVIL PENALTY WARNING CITATION
OREGON:
Source Name City
Nature of Violation
David Bierman Corvallis Pesticide misuse
Joe Casale Aurora
and Son, Inc.
County Weed LaGrande
Control, Union
County
Mary Dunn
Silver
Lake
Pesticide misuse
Pesticide misuse
Failure to register
product
Type of
Action
Civil Penalty
Warning Citation
Civil Penalty
Warning Citation
Civil Penalty
Warning Citation
Civil Penalty
Warning Citation
Date of
Action
yr/mo/day
78/10/31
78/10/25
79/07/02
79/08/24
35

-------
Source Name City
Nature of Violation
Grants Pass
Irrigation
District
Lewis A.
Merz, Sr.
Nature's
Own
Oregon
Department of
Fish and Wild-
Life
Portland
General Elec-
tric Company
Kazuma J.
Tamura
Grants
Pass
Parkdale
Salem
Portland
Oregon
City
Oregon
City
Pesticide misuse
Pesticide misuse
Failure to register
product
Failure to register
product
Pesticide misuse
Pesticide misuse
36
Type of
Action
Date of
Action
yr/mo/da.y
Civil Penalty
Warning Citation
Civil Penalty
Warning Citation
Civil Penalty
Warning Citation
Civil Penalty
Warning Citation
Civil Penalty
Warning Citation
Civil Penalty
Warning Citation
79/08/03
79/06/28
79/08/16
79/09/14
79/07/02
78/11/20

-------
WASHINGTON:
Source Name City
Nature of Violation
B & R Aerial
Crop Care
Dwayne
Blankenship
Bud's Flying
Service
Connell Pesticide misuse
Washtucna Pesticide misuse
Rosalia Pesticide misuse
Keith Carter Hay
Pesticide misuse
Darrell
Claassen
Connell
Aviation, Inc.
John Crouse
Lacrosse Pesticide misuse
Pesticide misuse
Washtucna Pesticide misuse
Walla
Walla
Rexford
Dainty
William H.
Evans
Washtucna Pesticide misuse
Lacrosse Pesticide misuse
Type of
Action
Civil Penalty
Warning Citation
Civil Penalty
Warning Citation
Civil Penalty
Warning Citation
Civil Penalty
Warning Citation
Civil Penalty
Warning Citation
Civil Penalty
Warning Citation
Civil Penalty
Warning Citation
Civil Penalty
Warning Citation
Civil Penalty
Warning Citation
Date of
Action
yr/mo/day
78/12/08
78/12/08
79/07/05
78/12/08
78/12/08
78/12/08
78/12/08
78/12/08
78/12/08

-------
Source Name City
Nature of Violation
Vernon
Gil lis
Willi am
Harder
Ken Hi lie
Washtucna Pesticide misuse
Kahlotus Pesticide misuse
Ritzville Pesticide misuse
Mel Hollenback Washtucna Pesticide misuse
Richard
Hollenback
Joe & Jeff
Huddle
Lund Flying
Service, Inc.
Paul
McKenzie
Leo Peot
Washtucna Pesticide misuse
Washtucna Pesticide misuse
Ritzville Pesticide misuse
Washtucna Pesticide misuse
Washtucna Pesticide misuse
Robert
Pierson
Lacrosse Pesticide misuse
38
Type of
Action
Civil Penalty
Warning Citation
Civil Penalty
Warning Citation
Civil Penalty
Warning Citation
Civil Penalty
Warning Citation
Civil Penalty
Warning Citation
Civil Penalty
Warning Citation
Civil Penalty
Warning Citation
Civil Penalty
Warning Citation
Civil Penalty
Warning Citation
Civil Penalty
Warning Citation
Date of
Action
yr/mo/da.y
78/12/08
78/12/08
78/12/08
78/12/08
78/12/08
78/12/08
78/12/08
78/12/08
78/12/08
78/12/08

-------
Source Name
City
Nature of Violation
Ranch
Aviation, Inc.
Ranch
Aviation, Inc.
Godfrey
Sackman
Vern
Schaffer
Les
Snyder
Dean
Sutherland
Roger
Swan
Dean
Whitman
Lacrosse
Othello
Washtucna
Washtucna
Washtucna
Washtucna
Pullman
Benge
Pesticide misuse
Pesticide misuse
Pesticide misuse
Pesticide misuse
Pesticide misuse
Pesticide misuse
Pesticide misuse
Pesticide misuse
Type of
Action
Civil Penalty
Warning Citation
Civil Penalty
Warning Citation
Civil Penalty
Warning Citation
Civil Penalty
Warning Citation
Civil Penalty
Warning Citation
Civil Penalty
Warning Citation
Civil Penalty
Warning Citation
Civil Penalty
Warning Citation
Date of
Action
yr/mo/day
78/12/08
79/04/09
78/12/08
78/12/08
78/12/08
78/12/08
78/12/08
78/12/08
39

-------
Civil Penalty Complaint
Any pesticide manufacturer, commercial user, wholesaler, dealer, retailer, or other
distributor may be administratively fined up to $5,000 for each offense of the pes-
ticide law. A private pesticide user could not be fined for misuse unless a Notice
of Warning or Civil Penalty Warning Citation had first been issued during Fiscal
Year 1978; however, any applicator not subject to Section 14(a)(1) of the Act, may
be subject to the 1978 amendments to the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide and Rodenti-
cide Act (FIFRA). Fines for applicators not subject to Section 14(a)(1) of the
FIFRA may be assessed a civil penalty by EPA of not more than $500 (FY 79) for the
first offense, nor more than $1,000 (FY 78 & 79) for each subsequent offense. For
commercial applicators, the maximum penalty is $5,000 for each offense. Before a
penalty can be finally assessed, the violator must be offered an opportunity for a
hearing to explain mitigating circumstances. (Even more stringent penalties are
authorized for criminal violations, i.e., knowingly violating the provisions of the
law). No criminal penalties were filed in Fiscal Year 1979 in Region 10.
FISCAL YEAR 1979
PESTICIDE ACTION - CIVIL PENALTY COMPLAINT
IDAHO:
Source Name City
Nature of
Violation
Date of Penalty
Type of Action Enf. Action Collected
yr/mo/day
Custom Services Blackfoot Misbranded
labeling
Deliquent
reporting of
annual production
Complaint/Con- 78/10/30 $20.00
sent Agreement 79/06/15 Combined
with case
that was
pending from
from FY-78
40

-------
Source Name City
Nature of
Violation
Washington Weiser	Pesticide
County Weed	misuse
Control
Type of Action
Complaint
Date of	Penalty
Enf. Action	Collected
yr/mo/day
79/09/17	pending
OREGON:
Source Name
Don Bauer
dba New World
Plastics
City
Rogue River
Nature of
Violation
Failure to reg- Complaint
ister product
labeling
Failure to regis-
ter producing
establishment
Date of
Penalty
Type of Action Enf. Action Collected
yr/mo/day
79/07/06 pending
Hatch Brothers
Chemical
Company
Henderson
Av i at i on
Rockaway
Springfield
Failure to
reg i ster
product
Pesticide
misuse
Complaint/Con-
sent Agreement
and Final Order
Complaint
78/12/15 $ 140.00
79/02/16
79/04/04 pending
M & F
Company
Rockaway
Failure to
reg i ster
product
Complaint
78/12/15 pending
41

-------
Source Name City
Norchem	Eugene
Cor por at i on
Oregon Rodent Eugene
Control
Outfitters
Pacific Supply Ontario
Cooperati ve
Trans Ag,
Inc.
Western Farm
Servi ce
Jefferson
Boarctaan
Nature of
Vi ol ation
Failure to sub-
mit annual pro-
duction reports
Misbranded
labeling
Failure to sub-
mit annual pro-
duction reports
Pesti ci de
mi suse
Date of
Penal ty
Type of Action Enf. Action Collected
Ccmpl ai nt/Con-
sent Agreement
Compl ai nt
Consent Aqree-
C ompl ai nt/Con-
sent Agreement
Failure to sub-
mit annual pro-
duction reports
{vi ol ations on two
pesticide producing
establ ishments ^
Compl ai nt/Final
Order
vr/mo/dav
79/03/16
79/34 M
79/01/n
79/01/15
79/02/01
79 /03/14
79/04/17
S 150.00
79/0 7/13 pending
$ 500.00
$ 200.00
$ 800.00
(2 cases 1
42

-------
WASHINGTON:
Source Name City
D.R.C.	Kent
Company,
dba Kemrite
FMC Corporation Yakima
Agri. Chem.
Div.
Heid Landscape Kirkland
Nursery
Magnoli a
Ferti1Tzer
Company
Moses Lake-
Warden Air
Servi ces
Titan
Cor por at i on
Kirkland
Warden
Seattle
Nature of
Vi olation
Failure to submit
annual produc-
tion reports
Misbranded
labeling
Adulterated (Chem
ical defects in
product)
Pesticide label-
ing not adequate
Pesticide misuse
Failure to
regi ster product
Fail ure to sub-
mit annual pro-
duction reports
Failure to sub-
mit annual pro-
duction reports
Date of Penalt.y
Type of Action Enf. Action Collected
yr/mo/day
Complaint/Con-
sent Agreement
79 /03/16 -0-
79/04/33
Compl ai nt
79/08/?7
pendi ng
Compl ai nt
79/D9/20
penal ty
assessed
Compl ai nt
79/08/27
penalty
assessed
Compl ai nt/Con-
sent Agreement
and Final Order
79/03/16
79/05/14
-0-
Compl ai nt/Con-
sent Agreement
79/03/14
79/04/16
-0-
43

-------
Source Name City
Nature of
Violation
Wesmar Chemical Seattle
Corporation
Western Fanners Othello
Association
Misbranded
labeling
Failure to sub-
mit annual pro-
duction reports
44
Type of Action
Date of Penalty
Enf. Action Collected
yr/mo/day
Complaint/Con-
sent Agreement
Complaint/Con-
sent Agreement
78/10/30 $ 353.00
79/01/04
79/03/14 $1,600.00
79/04/20

-------
PESTICIDES ENFORCEMENT SUMMARY

Number
of Cases
Penalties
Collected
Civil Penalty Warning Citation
37
N/A
Civil Penalty Complaint
20
$3,763
Subtotal:
57
$3,763
~Cases Finalized from FY 78 Report
3
$ 300
Total: (Civil Cases Only)
60
$4,063
(Minor Cases - Notices of
Warning in FY 79)
21
N/A
Complaints Issued in FY 79 and Not Finalized = 8
* Cases Finalized From FY 78 Report
Custom Services	Consent	This case was combined
Blackfoot, Idaho	Agreement	with another one in FY 79.
See page 40.
45

-------
C&R Chemical
Research Company
Portland, Oregon
Tavern Supply
Company
Seattle, Washington
Consent
Agreement
Consent
Agreement
46
$300.00
-0-

-------
WATER POLLUTION ENFORCEMENT
WASTE DISCHARGE PERMITS
In amending the Federal Water Pollution Control Act (now called the Clean Water
Act) in 1972 and 1977, Congress gave the states authority to require industry and
municipalities to obtain a permit to discharge pollutants into the Nation's water-
ways. Where states fail to do so, the EPA must manage the permit program. The
permits require dischargers to meet certain effluent limitations (restrictions on
the amount and composition of discharges) which were set nationally for each
industry by EPA. These restrictions are uniform throughout the country for each
category of industry. As a general rule, industry was to have installed and be
operating the best practicable pollution control technology by July 1, 1977.
Municipalities were to be using secondary (biological) treatment by July 1, 1977,
to clean up their discharges. In short, the National Pollutant Discharge Elimina-
tion System (NPDES) permit program was designed to clean up water pollution from
industries and municipalities by setting tough restrictions in the permits. In the
Northwest, the States of Oregon and Washington issue and enforce NPDES permits.
EPA administers the program in Idaho, Alaska, and for Federal installations.
Permits issued under the NPDES program set specific limitations on certain
pollutants, such as temperature, oxygen depleting materials, and acidity or
alkalinity. The permit usually contains a timetable of dates and events which is
called a compliance schedule. A typical compliance schedule would have dates by
which the permittee must submit a pollution control plan, contract to build the
treatment works, begin construction, complete construction, etc., leading up to
meeting the final pollution limitations. Additionally, the permit generally
requires the permittee to submit periodic reports on the quality of its wastes,
progress on their schedule to attain compliance, or on any permit violations.
47

-------
Permit violations fall into 4 main categories:
-Failure to apply for a permit
-Exceeding the permitted effluent pollution limits
-Failure to meet dates contained in the
compliance schedule
-Failure to submit reports
EPA has 3 formal enforcement actions available to bring violators into compliance.
They are:
-Notice of Violation
-Administrative Order
-Referral to the U. S. Attorney
These enforcement actions are described in greater detail preceeding the various
violator lists. The States of Oregon and Washington have similar enforcement
options under state laws and regulations.
48

-------
Not i ce of V i ol at i on
A written notice to a discharger and a state that EPA has information that a
violation has occurred. This enforcement action is taken only in those states in
Region 10 that have authority to issue and enforce permits - Oregon and Washington.
The Notice of Violation tells that state that EPA feels a violation has occurred
and that the state has not sufficiently acted upon it. If the state does not take
appropriate action within 30 days, EPA can go one step further and issue an order
or take civil action.
FISCAL YEAR 1979
WATER POLLUTION - NOTICE OF VIOLATION
OREGON:
Source Name Cit.y	Nature of Violation
Type of
Action
Date of
Enf. Action
vr/ mo/ day
City of Coos
Bay
Coos
Bay
Failure to meet permit
effluent limits
Notice of
V i ol at i on
79/05/08
City of Hood Hood River Exceeded effluent limits
R iver
Notice of
V i ol at i on
79/05/07
City of
Woodburn Exceeded effluent limits Notice of
Viol ati on
79/05/07
Woodburn
49

-------
Administrative Order
The Clean Water Act authorizes EPA to order discharges	to comply with their
permits. For example, EPA could order a violator to:	apply for a permit, cease
di schargi ng without a permit, comply with a compliance	schedule, meet effluent
limitations or send in a report, etc.
FISCAL YEAR 1979
WATER POLLUTION - ADMINISTRATIVE ORDER
ALASKA:
Source Name
City of
North Pole
City
Nature of
Vi olation
North Pole Exceeded effluent limits
and other misc. require-
ments
Date of
Type of Action Enf. Action
yr/mo/ day
Administrative 79/06/1S
Order
Carl Moses and
Aleuti an
Products Corp.
(MA Theresa
Lee)
Dutch
Harbor
Cease discharge
Adni ni strati ve
Order to Show
Cause Notice
78/10/30
Queen
Inc.
Fisheries Unalaska
Exceeded effluent limits Adni ni strati ve
Cease discharge and report Order
on stoppage and preventive
me as ures
78/10/19
50

-------
Nature of
Source Name City	Violation
Queen Fisheries Dutch
Inc.	Harbor
Wh i tney-
Fidalgo
Seafood Inc.
Whitney-
Fidalgo
Seafood Inc.
Unalaska
Bay
Various
Alaskan
Locations
(6 permits)
Yardarm Knot, Dutch
Inc. and Denton Harbor
Sherry (M/V
Yardarm Knot)
IDAHO:
Install pipeline for
process waste
Proper handling of dis-
charge wastes
Failure
Failure
sample
to submit reports
to monitor and
Cease discharges
Source Name
City
Nature of
Violation
City of Coeur	Coeur
d'Alene	d'Alene
City of Coeur	Coeur
d'Alene	d'Alene
Report on cause of efflu-
ent violations
Exceeded effluent limits
and requiring various
reports
Type of Action
Date of
Enf. Action
.yr/mo/da.y
Administrative 79/09/28
Order
Administrative 79/01/02
Order
Administrative 79/07/10
Order
Administrative 78/10/30
Order
Date of
Type of Action Enf. Action
.yr/mo/day
Administrative 79/03/01
Order
Administrative 79/06/28
Order
51

-------
Source Name
City of
Lewi ston
Northwest
T imber
Company
Hank Vanderwey
Dai ry F arm
Hank Vanderwey
Dai ry F arm
OREGON:
Source Name
City of Hood
R iver
Tongue Point
Job Corps
Center (Dept.
of Labor)
Nature of
Cit.y	Vi ol ation
Lewi ston Conduct study and provide
plan for compliance
Coeur d' Exceeded effluent limits
Alene	Failure to meet compliance
schedule
Failure to submit reports
Caldwell Provide wastetreatment
pi an
Caldwell Exceeded effluent limits
Failure to meet compliance
schedule
Date of
Type of Action Enf. Action
,vr/mo/day
79 /03/05
Admi nistrative
Order
Admi nistrative
Order
Admi nistrative
Order
Admi ni strati ve
Order
79/06A)8
79 /02 m
79/06/08
City
Nature of Viol ation
Type of
Action
Hood River Exceeded effluent limits Administrative
Order
Astoria Exceeded effluent limits/ Administrative
by-passi ng
Order
Failure to submit reports Amended Order
Date of
Enf. Action
yr/mo/ day
79/05/03
78/11/01
79 /03 /I 2
52

-------
WASHINGTON:
Source Name
Blaine
Air Force
Station
Department
of Army
(Ft. Lewis)
D.O.D. A.F.
Fairchild
A.F.B.
City
Blaine
Nature of
Violation
Set limits until new permit Administrative
is issued	Order
Pate of
Type of Action Enf. Action
yr/mo/da.y
78/11/16
Fort Lewis Set final compliance date
Spokane Construction schedule and
related items
Administrative
Order
Administrative
Order
78/12/26
79/04/20
53

-------
Referral to the United States Attorney
For especially serious violations, EPA can refer a case to the U.S. Attorney who
acts as EPA's lawyer in filing suit against violators (EPA cannot adninistratively
assess a fine or penalty against an NPDES Permittee - only a Federal Court can.)
EPA can ask the court to provide civil monetary penalties and/or injunctive relief
(a temporary or permanent order to do or stop doing something). The U.S. Attorney
may negotiate a consent decree fa court approved Agreement signed by both parties)
instead of going through a trial. A consent decree must be published in the
Federal Register for public comment before being submitted to the Federal Court for
approval.
FISCAL YEAR 1979
WATER POLLUTION - REFERRAL TO THE UNITED STATES ATTORNEY
IDAHO:
Source Name City
Nature of Violation
Type of
Action
Date of
Enf. Action
yr/mo/dav
City of Coeur Coeur d' Falsifying DIW records
d'Alene	Alene
Criminal	78/1P/21
Referral to
U. S. Attorney
Section 309(c)
54

-------
OIL SPILL PREVENTION AND Elf OR CEMENT
Oil Spill Prevention
EPA would rather prevent oil spills than clean them up. Congress gave EPA the authority to
establish regulations governing the storage and handling of oily substances in certain
minimim amounts. This program is called Spill Prevention, Control and Countermeasures
(SPCC). Any facility which has storage capacity of more than 600 gallons above ground or
42 , 000 gallons below ground must have a plan describing the methods and operations that will
be used to prevent and clean up spills. This plan must be certified by a registered
professional engineer and be available for EPA inspection and review on request. EPA does
not have authority to take enforcement action for causing an oil spill (defined as causing a
"sheen" on navigable waters). This authority is vested in the Coast Guard. EPA can,
however, take enforcement action if the spill resulted from a failure to possess or
implement an SPCC plan. Typical violations of SPCC regulations include:
-Failure to have an SPCC plan available for inspection
-Failure to implement the plan
-Failure to have the plan certified by a registered professional
engineer
-Failure to submit the plan to EPA after spilling
(a) 1000 gallons of oil or
(b) two smaller spills in one year
When EPA is aware of such violations, a Notice of Violation is issued which
indicates the amount of any proposed civil penalty. The action necessary to
correct the deficiency and mitigating circ instances are considered and a
settlement is usually reached. Violators may appeal the penalty amount at a
special hearing. No hearings were held in Region 10 during the Fiscal Year 1 979.
55

-------
Notice of Violation/Order on Civil Penalty
When EPA is aware of violations of the SPCC regulations, a Notice of Violation is
issued which puts the facil ity manager on notice that corrective action is required
and proposes a civil penalty (fine) for the violation. After the Notice of Viola-
tion is issued, mitigating circunstances are considered and a settlement is usually
reached on corrective measures and a civil penalty. The assessed civil penalty is
set forth in a findings of fact and order on civil penalty to the facility
manager. Fines collected are put into a Coast Guard revolving fund for clean-up of
oil spills from unknown sources or those where the spiller fails to take action.
FISCAL YEAR 1979
SPCC ACTIONS - NOTICE OF VIOLATION/FIN DINGS OF FACT AND ORDER ON CIVIL PENALTY
ALASKA:
Source Name Cit.y
Nature of
Vi ol ation
Date of Penalt.y
Type of Action Enf. Action Collected
yr/mo/day
Alaska Air
Command
Elmendorf	Failure to have Notice of
and Eielson SPCC plan avail- Violation
Air Force	able for inspec-
Bases	tion
78/10/27 pending
IDAHO:
Source Name City
Nature of
Vi ol ation
Date of Penalty
Type of Action Enf. Action Collected
,yr/mo/day
Goodnan Oil Boise
Company
Failure to have Notice of
SPCC plan avail- Violation
able for inspec-
tion
79/06/26 pending
(penal ty
assessed)
56

-------
OREGON:
Source Name
City
Nature of
Vi ol ation
Associ ated
Frui t
Company, dba
Wilcox Orchard
Medf ord
Failure to
SPCC pi an
prepared
have
Crystal Springs Medf ord
Packing Co.
Inc.
D & L Oil
Supply
Inc.
Salem
Failure to have
SPCC plan
avail able for
i nspection
Failure to have
SPCC plan avail-
able for inspec-
tion
Eden Valley
Orchards, Inc.
Phoenix Failure to have
SPCC plan avail-
able for inspec-
tion
Hal ton Tractor
Company, Inc.
J. B. Sod and
Seed
Portl and
S il vert on
Fail ure to have
SPCC plan pre-
pared
Fail ure to have
SPCC pi an pre-
pared
Date of	Penalty
Type of Action Enf. Action	follected
yr/mo/day
Notice of	79/06/05	pending
V i ol at i on
Notice/Order 79/05/0 7 $ 250.00
79/08/23
Order
79/08/13 $ 500.00
Notice of
Vi olation
79/05/07 pending
Not ice /Order
78/12/11 S 450.00
79/08/13
Noti ce of
Viol ation
79/08/30 -0-
57

-------
Source Name
City
Nature of
Vi olation
Jubitz Truck Portland
Stop
Owens-Corning Portland
Fibergl as
Corporati on
Naumes	Phoenix
of Oregon
(Mary Mac
Orchard)
Naumes	Phoenix
of Oregon
(Frink
Orchard)
Failure to have
SPCC plan pre-
pared
Failure to have
SPCC plan avail
able for inspec
tion
Failure to have
SPCC plan avail
able for inspec
tion
Failure to have
plan certified
by registered
professional
engineer
Failure to have
SPCC plan avail
able for inspec-
tion
Fail ure to have
SPCC plan avail
able for inspec-
tion
58
Type of Action
Notice/Order
Date of
Penalty
Enf. Action Collected
yr/mo/day
79/01/22
79/33/19
$ 250.00
Not ice /Order
79/05/07
79/08/13
$ 100.00
Notice of
Violation
79/05/30 pending
Notice of	79A)5/30 pending
Vi ol ation

-------
OREGON:
Nature of
Source Name City	Violation
Widing Trans- Portland
portation, Inc.
Willamette	Portland
Iron and Steel
Company
WASHINGTON:
Source Name City
Petroleum	Tacoma
Reelaimi ng
Service, Inc.
Veterans Adnin. Walla
Medical Center Walla
(E. A. Borrel 1)
Wyckoff	Seattle
Company
Failure to have
SPCC plan pre-
pared
Failure to have
SPCC plan avail
able for inspec
tion
Failure to have
SPCC plan avail
able for inspec
tion
Nature of
Vi olation
Failure to have
plan certified
by registered
professi onal
engineer
Failure to have
SPCC plan avail
able for inspec
tion
Failure to have
SPCC plan avail
abl e for i nspec
tion
Date of Penalt.y
Type of Action Enf. Action Collected
yr/mo/day
Notice of	79/01/22 pending
V i ol at i on
Order
78/11/17
S 250.00
Type of Action
Noti ce/Order
Date of
Penal t.y
Enf. Action Collected
vr/mo/day
79/06 /OF
79/08/13
$ 40.00
Notice of
Vi olation
79/04/25 pending
Order
78/11/13 $2,000.00
59

-------
Oil Spill Enforcement
When oil is spilled onto fresh waters of the United States, EPA has the responsibility to
respond as on-scene coordinators to take charge of clean-up as necessary. (The U.S. Coast
Guard has jurisdiction on marine waters). Whenever EPA can determine who is responsible for
spills, the facts of the case are compiled and sent to the U.S. Coast Guard as the agency
with enforcement penalty authority. These EPA reports are called Referrals to the U.S.
Coast Guard. The Coast Guard then advises EPA of the action they took on the referral.
FISCAL YEAR 1979
OIL SPILL ENFORCEMENT - EPA REFERRALS TO THE U.S. COAST GUARD
ALASKA:
Source Name City
Alaska
Packers
Association
South
Noknek
Nature of
Violation
Oil spill
Type of Action
Referral to U.S.
Coast Guard
Date of
Enf. Action
yr/mo/day
79/02/20
Penalty
Collected
pending
(penalty
assessed)
IDAHO:
Source Name
Chevron
Pipeline
Company
Pendell
Oil Company
Cit£
Buhl
Lake
Chatcolet
Nature of
Violation
Oil spill
Oil spill
5,000 gallons
Type of Action
Referral to U.S.
Coast Guard
Date of
Penalty
Enf. Action Collected
yr/mo/day
79/03/29 $1,000.00
Referral to U.S. 79/04/10 $ 500.00
Coast Guard
60

-------
OREGON:
Source Name City
Nature of
Violation
L.D.
McFarland
Company
Terminal Ice
and Cold
Storage
Valley Oil
Company
West Linn
Inn
WASHINGTON:
Eugene Oil spill
Salem
Salem
West Linn
Oil spill
Oil spill
Oil spill
Source Name Cit.y
Nature of
Violation
Boeing
Commercial
Airplane
Company
Seattle Oil spill
Type of Action
Referral to U.S.
Coast Guard
Date of
Enf. Action
yr/mo/day
79/03/09
Penalty
Collected
$100.00
Referral to U.S. 78/10/26
Coast Guard
-0-
Referral to U.S.
Coast Guard
Referral to U.S.
Coast Guard
79/04/20
79/03/23
$ 50.00
$500.00
Type of Action
Referral to U.S.
Coast Guard
Date of
Enf. Action
,yr/mo/day
79/03/26
Penalty
Collected
$750.00
61

-------
Source Name City
Lynden	Lynden
Transport,
Inc.
Monsanto	Seattle
Company
Pacific Power Portland,
& Light	Oregon
Company
Union Pacific
Railroad
Company
West Fuel
Company
Spill into
Vancouver
Lake
Seattle
Nature of
Violation
Oil spill
Oil spill
Oil spill
(spill in WA)
Oil spill
Oil spill
West Fuel Seattle Oil spill
Company
62
Type of Action
Referral to U.S.
Coast Guard
Date of
Enf. Action
yr/mo/da.y
79/01/25
Pena1ty
Collected
-0-
Referral to U.S. 79/01/05
Coast Guard
Referral to U.S. 79/11/08
Coast Guard
-0-
$400.00
Referral to U.S.
Coast Guard
79/07/02
pending
Referral to U.S.
Coast Guard
79/05/11
Referral to U.S. 79/06/12
Coast Guard
seeking
(8,896.16
in clean-
up costs)
pending
Combined
Fine of
$250.00

-------
WATER POLLUTION ENFORCEMENT SUMMARY
Nimber	Penalties

of Cases
Collected
Notice of Violation
3
N/A
Adni ni strati ve Order
19
N/A
Referral to the United States Attorney
1
N/A
Oil Spill Prevention
17
S 3 , 840.00
Oil Spill Enforcement
I!
$ 12,446.16
Subtotal:
54
$ 16,286.16
~Continued Penalties for Water Dis-
charge Permit Cases for FY 78
Report (See page 65)
1
S 47,880.00
**Continued Penalties for Water Dis-
charge Permit Cases from FY 77 Report
(See page 65)
2
$ 63,798.20
***U.S. Attorney Referrals from previous years
that have been settled and penalties
issued (See page 66)
3
$200,6*0.00
****Cases Finalized from FY 78 Report
(Oil Spill Prevention) (See page 66)
10
$ 2,375.00
Total:
70
$330,979.36

-------
MATER POLLUTION ENFORCEMENT SUMMARY (continued)
Total Oil Spill Prevention Cases (SPCC) Issued in
FY 79 and Not Finalized	= 8
Total Oil Spill Prevention Cases (SPCC) Issued in
FY 78 and Not Finalized	= 2
Kodiak Island Seafood, Inc.
Kodiak, Alaska
Morpac, Inc.
Cordova, Alaska
Total Oil Spill Enforcement Cases Issued in
FY 79 and Not Finalized	= 2
64

-------
MATER POLLUTION ENFORCEIN NT SUMMARY (continued)
*Water Discharge Permit Cases from FY 78 Report (Penalties Still Being Received)
J.R. Simplot	Referral to U.S.	$47,880 . 00
Company	Attorney
Pocatello, Idaho
**Water Discharge Permits Cases from FY 77 Report (Penalties Still Being Received)
Alaska Limber and	Referral to U. S.	$21,098.20
Pulp Company	Attorney
Sitka, Alaska
(This facility is assessed penalties at a rate of $500.00 per day when they
exceed 71,780 daily maximum plus $100.00/1,000 pounds of excess discharge for
each month during which the daily average BODs discharge (monthly basis)
exceeds 47,850.)
Louisiana-Pacific	Referral to U.S.	$42 , 700 . 00
Ketchikan Division	Attorney
Ketchikan, Alaska
(This facility is assessed penalties at a rate of $250.00 per day when
discharging in violation.)
*** U.S. Attorney Referral s Settled and Penalties Issued
Bunker Hill	Referral to U. S.	$114,640.00
Company	Attorney
Kellogg, Idaho
65

-------
MATER POLLUTION ENFORCEMENT SUMMARY (continued)
Golden Valley
Packers
Roberts, Idaho
Boise Cascade
Corporation
Steilacoom, Washington
Referral to U. S.
Attorney
Referral to U.S.
Attorney
**** Oil Spill Prevention (Cases Finalized from FY 78 Report)
Order on Civil Penalty
Columbia Wards Fisheries
Kodiak, Alaska
Port Lions Oil Company
Port Lions, Alaska
St. Eli as Ocean Products
Inc.
Cordova, Alaska
Blair Oil, Inc.
St. Anthony, Idaho
Notice of Dismissal
Order on Civil Penalty
Order on Civil Penalty
$ 20,000.00
$ 66,000.00
$750.00
-0-
$125.00
$250.00
Continental Oil Company
Idaho Falls, Idaho
Cowboy Oil Company
Pocatello, Idaho
Vern E. Herzog Company
Pocatello, Idaho
Notice of Dismissal
Order on Civil Penalty
Order on Civil Penalty
-0-
$150.00
$200.00
66

-------
MATER POLLUTION ENFORCEMENT SUMMARY (continued)
West!and Distributing
Company
Pocatello, Idaho
RMK Construction Company
Bonanza, Oregon
Peterson's Texaco
Concrete, Washington
Order on Civil Penalty
Notice of Dismissal
Order on Civil Penalty
$150.00
-0-
$750.00
67

-------
68

-------
SAFE DRINKING WATER ENFORCEMENT
The National Interim Primary Drinking Water Regulations (NIPDVP), which were
established pursuant to the Safe Drinking Water Act of 1974 (SDWA), set minimum
requirements for drinking water quality in the United States. Under the Act,
Congress mandated EPA to develop and enforce regulations to protect public health
and ground water sources.
During the infancy of the program in 1977, the States in Region 10 were given the
opportunity to assune primary responsibility for their drinking water programs
with the aid of Federal grants. Washington, Idaho, and Alaska have already
assuned this task. In these states, a joint Federal-state system is developed,
EPA's role being to assist and reinforce state programs. In Oregon and on Indian
Reservations, EPA retains primary responsiblity for implementation and enforcement
of the SDWA and the subsequent regulations.
Safe drinking water is assured through proper planning, design, construction,
operation and maintenance of water system facilities. To properly protect the
public health, and to document the quality of water being provided, the NIPDWR's
specify that each public water system is to conduct bacteriological sampling,
turbidity monitoring, and chemical analysis. Where violations of Federal
standards occur, public notice to users is to be given. Monitoring requirements
differ for ground and surface source water systems, as well as community and
non-community water systems. Community water systems, which generally serve a
permanent population of 25 or more persons year-round, have been required to
report to EPA since June 1977. Non-communi ty water systems, which generally
serve a transient population of 25 or more persons at least 60 days a year, have
been required to report to EPA since June 1979.
When a Public Water System (PWS) fails to meet requirements of the SDWA by either
failing to monitor, report, comply with applicable MCL's, or provide adequate
public notice, it is subject to EPA enforcement action and/or citizen suit.
69

-------
Referral of a case to the U. S. Attorney for initiation of court action is the
last step in EPA's strategy of enforcing the SDWA in Oregon. Extra-statutory
procedures which have been developed for use in drinking water enforcement are
described below.
Notice of Violation (NOV)
A written notice to the owner/operator of the public water system notifying
him/her of specific violations of the SDWA and regulations, and indicating
required corrective actions.
OREGON:
Pub! ic Water
System	 City
Nature of Violation
Type of
Action
Date of
Enf. Action
yr/mo/dav
Alder Creek Portland
Water Company
Failure to report
Exceeded microbiological
Notice of
Violation
79 /02/06
Alder Creek Portland
Water Company
Failure to report
Exceeded microbiological
Notice of
Vi olation
79 A) 7/3]
MCL
Failure to notify public
Bar via*/	Rockaway
Watseco Water
Systems
Excess contamination	Notice of	79/03/23
Exceeded microbiological Violation
MCL
Failure to notify public
70

-------
Publ ic Mater
S.ystem	 City	Nature of Violation
City of Helix Helix
Failure to report
Cooper Mountain Beaverton
Water District
Cove Water Cove
Enter pri ses
Failure to report
Exceeded micro-
biological MCL
Failure to report
Glen Villa
Trailer Park
Hoodvi 0fi
Mobile Estates
Hoodvi ew
Moblie Estates
Live Oaks
Trailer Court
Water System
London Water
Coop., Inc.
Mt. Vien Motel
& Trailer Park
Glendal e
Hubbard
Hubbard
I dl eyld
Park
Cottage
Grove
Chemul t
Failure to report
Fai 1 ure to report
Failure to report
Fai 1 ure to report
Failure to report
Failure to report
Type of
Action
Notice of
V	i ol at i on**
Notice of
V	i ol at i on
Notice of
V	i ol at i on
Notice of
Vi olation
Notice of
Vi olation
Reissued Notice
of Violation
Notice of
Vi ol ation*
Notice of
Vi olation**
Notice of
Vi olation
Date of
Enf. Action
yr/mo/day
79/05 /21
79 /03/15
79/39/28
79/05/2J
7Q/D3/15
79/04/16
78/1 2/lQ
78/12/19
79/03/15

-------
Publ ic Water
System	City
Northwoods Tillamook
Water District
Pete's
Mountain Water
Company
Can by
Ryans Outpost Jackson-
ville
Susan Creek
Village
I dl eyl d
Park
Nature of Violation
Failure to notify public
Failure to report
Exceeded maximum microbio-
logical MCL
Fail ure to report
Fail ure to report
Fail ure to report
Type of
Action
Notice of
V i ol at i on
Notice of
Violation
Notice of
Violation
Notice of
Vi olation
Date of
Enf. Action
yr/mo/day
79/07 /02
79/03/15
79/03/15
78/12/19
~System reclassified by letter 1/19/79 - non-community system - no further action at
this time.
**Case closed - EPA will defer further enforcement pending construction of new system.
72

-------
Notice to Show Cause
Written notification to the owner/operator of public water system requesting his/her
appearance at a conference with EPA to show cause why further enforcement measures
should be deferred, modified or terminated.
OREGON:
Pub! ic Water	Type of	Date of Meeting
System		City Nature of Violation Action	Enf. Action Held
yr/mo/day
Mt. View	Chemult Re: NOV issued 79 /03/15 Show Cause 79/04/26 79/05/07
Motel &	Notification
Trailer Park
Alder Creek	Portland Re: NOV issued 79/32/06 Show Cause 79A)2/06 79/32/23
Water Company	Notification
73

-------
Compliance Agreements
A signed Agreement between EPA and the responsible official of the water system which
prescribes a schedule for compliance with the SDWA and procedures to be followed. Often
used where exemptions are not appropriate and when corrective action can be taken within a
short period of time.
OREGON:
Pub! ic Water
System	 City
Nature of Violation
Type of
Action
Date of
Enf. Action
yr/mo/day
City of Long
Creek
Long Creek Failure to meet water
qual ity standards
Compliance 79 /04/26
Agreement
74

-------
Referral to the U.S. Attorney
If a water purveyor fails to adequately respond to EPA's efforts for the systen to
achieve voluntary compliance with the SDWA, EPA may refer the case to the U.S.
Attorney for prosecution under the relevant penalty sections of the SDWA.
Public Water
System	
City
Alder Creek Portland
Water Company
Neskowin	Neskowin
Water District
Nature of Violation
Exceeded microbiological
MCL
Failure to notify public
Failure to report and/or
sample and analyze
Exceeded microbi ol ogical
MCL
Failure to notify public
Failure to report and/or
sample and analyze
Type of
Acti on
Referral to
U.S. Attorney
I njuncti ve
Order
I n„i un ct i ve
Order
Date of
Enf. Act i on
.yr/mo/day
79/07/09
79/11/06
79/05/19
75

-------
SAFE DRINKING WATER
ENFORfEttNT SUMMARY

Nunber
of Cases
Penal ti es
Collected
Notice of Violation
16
N/A
Notice to Show Cause
2
N/A
Compliance Agreenerrt
1
N/A
Referral to the United States Attorney
1
N/A
Injunctive Order
_2_
N/A
Tot al:
22
N/A
76

-------
TOXIC SUBSTANCES CONTROL ACT
The Toxic Substances Control Act was signed into law on October 11, 1976. The Act
authorizes the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to obtain information from
industries on the production, use, health effects, and other matters concerning
chemical substances and mixtures. If necessary, EPA may regulate the manufacture,
processing, distribution in commerce, use and disposal of a chemical substance or
mixture. Chemicals used exclusively in pesticides, food, food additives, drugs,
and cosmetics are exempted from the Act. EPA has the authority to require
manufacturers and processors of chemicals to report and keep records on chemicals;
provide for citizen civil actions and petitions; and call for expanded research
activities. Also, the Act requires EPA to take action to regulate polychlorinated
biphenls (PCBs). PCBs are a group of organic compounds that are highly toxic to
aquatic life. They are used in the manfacture of plastics. Since January 1979,
the Act has prohibited all production of PCBs and since July 1979, all
distribution of PCBs in commerce has been prohibited.
Any person who fails or refuses to comply with any requirement made under the law
may be fined up to $25,000 for each day of violation of the law. Persons who
knowingly or willfully violate the law, in addition to any civil penalties, may be
fined up to $25,000 for each day of violation, imprisoned up to a year, or both.
Possible violations are:
-	Failure to submit notification of a new chemical before
manufacturing
-	Failure to test a chemical
-	Failure to terminate the use of a chemical determined to be a
hazardous substance
77

-------
-	Hazardous chemical substance spill
-	Failure to store and dispose of chemicals as required by
regul ations
Enforcement actions available to EPA are:
-	Notice of Non-Compliance
-	Civil Penalties
-	Criminal Penalties
78

-------
Notice of Non-Compliance
A Notice of Non-Compliance is simply a notification that a party has violated the
law stating the specific violations found, the possible penalties, and usually a
request for correcting the violations where appropriate.
OREGON:
FISCAL YEAR 1979
TOXIC SUBSTANCE - NOTICE OF NON-COMPI.IANCF
Source Name City
C hem-Nuclear
Systems, Inc.
Arlington
Nature of Violation
Failure to store and
dispose of PCB as
required by regulation
Type of Action
Notice of Non-
Ccmpl iance
Date of
Enf. Action
(yr/mo/day)
78/11/08
WASHINGTON:
Date of
Source Name City	Nature of Violation Type of Action Enf. Action
(yr/mo/day)
Weyerhaeuser Longview PCB Spill	Notice of Non- 79/06/12
Company	Compliance
79

-------
TOXIC SUBSTANCES CONTROL ACT SUMMARY
Notice of Non-Compliance
Total:
Nunber
of Cases
Penalties
Collected
N/A
N/A
80

-------
EPA REGION 10 ENFORCEMENT CASES
FISCAL YEAR 1979
SUMMARY
Type of Violation
Air Pollution
Stationary Source
Mobile Source
Pesticides
Civil Cases
Minor Cases (Notice of Warning)
Number
of Cases
46
53
60
21
Total
Penalties
Collected
N/A
S 15,458.00
$ 4,063.00
N/A
Water Pollution
Waste Discharge Permit Violations
Spill Prevention, Control and
Countermeasures
Spill Enforcement
Safe Drinking Water
Toxics Substance Control
Total Number of Enforcement Cases
for Region 10
29
27
14
22
2
274
$312,318.20
$ 6,215.00
$ 12,446.16
N/A
N/A
$350,500.36
81

-------