&EPA
United States
Environmental Protection
Agency
Office of Enforcement and EPA 300-R-01-004
Compliance Assurance September 2001
The State of Federal
Facilities
An Overview of Environmental
Compliance at Federal Facilities
FY 1999-2000
-------
Federal Facilities Enforcement Office
TABLE OF CONTENTS
Section Page
Acronyms iii
List of Exhibits v
I. Introduction 1
II. Regulated Universe 5
IE. Inspections 17
IV. Compliance Rates 21
V. Enforcement Actions 31
State of Federal Facilities Report
-------
Federal Facilities Enforcement Office
This page intentionally left blank.
11 State of Federal Facilities Report
-------
Federal Facilities Enforcement Office
Acronym
AIRS
CAA
CEI
CFA
CWA
CWS
DOD
DOE
EPCRA
FFCA
FFEO
FFPMs
FIFRA
FUDS
GOCO
IDEA
HAP
JOCO
LQG
NAAQS
NCDB
NESHAPs
NOV
NPDES
NSPS
ACRONYMS
Definition
Aerometric Information Retrieval System
Clean Air Act
Compliance Evaluation Inspection
Civilian Federal Agency
Clean Water Act
Community Water System
Department of Defense
Department of Energy
Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act
Federal Facility Compliance Act (Agreement)
Federal Facilities Enforcement Office
Federal Facilities Program Managers
Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act
Formerly Used Defense Site
Government-Owned Contractor-Operated
Integrated Database for Enforcement Analysis
Hazardous Air Pollutant
Jointly-Owned Contractor-Operated
Large Quantity Generator
National Ambient Air Quality Standards
National Compliance Database
National Emissions Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants
Notice of Violation
National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System
New Source Performance Standards
State of Federal Facilities Report
111
-------
Federal Facilities Enforcement Office
Acronym
NSR
NTNCWS
OECA
PCS
POGO
PWS
PWSS
RCRA
RCRAInfo
SDWA
SDWIS
SEPs
SIC
SNC
SQG
TNCWS
TRI
TRIS
TSCA
TSDF
Definition
New Source Review
Non-Transient Non-Community Water System
Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance
Permit Compliance System
Privately-Owned Government-Operated
Public Water System
Public Water System Supervision
Resource Conservation and Recovery Act
RCRA Information System
Safe Drinking Water Act
Safe Drinking Water Information System
Supplemental Environmental Projects
Standard Industrial Classification
Significant Noncompliance (Noncomplier)
Small Quantity Generator
Transient Non-Community Water System
Toxics Release Inventory
Toxics Release Inventory System
Toxic Substances Control Act
Treatment, Storage, and Disposal Facility
IV
State of Federal Facilities Report
-------
Federal Facilities Enforcement Office
LIST OF EXHIBITS
Exhibit Page
Regulated Universe
1. Federal Facilities by Agency Category 5
2. Distribution of Federal Facilities by EPA Region 6
3. Distribution of CFA Facilities by Agency 7
4. Universe of Federal RCRA Handlers by Agency Category 9
5. Federal RCRA Handler Types 10
6. Major Federal NPDES Facilities by Agency Category 11
7. CAA Major Federal Sources by Agency Category 12
8. Universe of Federally-Owned Public Water Systems 13
9. Universe of Federal Facilities Reporting under TRI 15
10. TRI On-Site and Off-Site Releases at Federal Facilities 15
Inspections
11. EPA and State Inspections at Federal Facilities (FY 1995 - FY 2000) 17
Compliance Rates
12. Federal Facility Compliance Rates for Selected Indicators 22
13. RCRA Compliance Rates by Federal Agency Category 23
14. Percentage of Inspected TSDFs not in SNC (Federal vs. Non-Federal TSDFs) 23
15. NPDES Compliance Rates by Federal Agency Category 24
16. Percentage of Major NPDES Facilities not in SNC (Federal vs. Non-Federal
Majors) 25
17. CAA Compliance Rates by Federal Agency Category 26
18. Percentage of CAA Major Sources in Compliance (Federal vs. Non-Federal
Sources) 26
19. SDWA Compliance Rates at Federally-Owned Systems 27
20. TSCA, FIFRA, and EPCRA §313 Compliance Rates 28
State of Federal Facilities Report V
-------
Federal Facilities Enforcement Office
Enforcement Actions
21. Enforcement Actions at Federal Facilities (FY 1995 - FY 2000) 31
22. Enforcement Actions at Federal Facilities by Federal Agency Category 32
23. RCRA Enforcement Actions at Federal Facilities 33
24. NPDES Enforcement Actions at Federal Facilities 34
25. CAA Enforcement Actions at Federal Facilities 34
26. SDWA Enforcement Actions at Federal Facilities 35
VI State of Federal Facilities Report
-------
Federal Facilities Enforcement Office
I. INTRODUCTION
EPA's Federal Facilities Enforcement Office (FFEO), within the Office of Enforcement
and Compliance Assurance (OECA), periodically assesses federal facility performance with
respect to environmental statutes and programs. The last assessment, The State of Federal
Facilities: An Overview of Environmental Compliance at Federal Facilities, FY1997-98, was
published in January 2000. This State of Federal Facilities report examines federal facility
environmental performance during FY 1999 and FY 2000. Where appropriate and when data are
comparable, this report also examines pre-FY 1999 data.
Federal facilities are generally subject to the same environmental statutes and regulations
as commercial entities. EPA, in conjunction with the states, has oversight responsibility for
federal facility environmental programs. To fulfill its oversight responsibility, FFEO conducts a
broad range of activities, including:
X Compliance oversight and enforcement;
X Training and compliance assistance; and
X Reviews of federal agency environmental plans and programs.
Through its network of Regional Federal Facilities Program Managers (FFPMs) and state
contacts, FFEO works with appropriate facility personnel to ensure that they take the necessary
actions to prevent, control, and abate environmental pollution.
Environmental Requirements
Environmental requirements potentially affecting federal facilities range from federal
statutes and their implementing regulations to state and local laws and ordinances. This report
summarizes federal facility data during FY 1999 and FY 2000 with respect to the following
seven major environmental statutes and programs:
> Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) - RCRA Subtitle C
and its associated amendments regulate the generation, transport, storage,
treatment, and final disposal of hazardous waste.
X Clean Water Act (CWA) - Under the CWA, EPA or approved states issue
National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System (NPDES) permits that
establish effluent limits for all municipal and industrial wastewater
discharges.
X Clean Air Act (CAA) - The C AA authorizes EPA to establish emission
control standards to achieve the air quality goals set forth in the National
Ambient Air Quality Standards.
State of Federal Facilities Report
-------
Federal Facilities Enforcement Office
> Safe Drinking Water Act (SD WA) - The Public Water System
Supervision (PWSS) program authorized by SDWA enables EPA to set
standards to control both man-made and naturally occurring contaminants.
In most cases, states have primary responsibility for oversight and
enforcement under SDWA.
> Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) - Under TSCA, EPA identifies
and controls the manufacture, process, distribution, use, and disposal of
existing and new chemical substances and mixtures.
X Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) - Under
FIFRA, EPA has the authority over the sale, distribution, and use of
pesticide products.
X Toxics Release Inventory (TRI) - Under §313 of the Emergency Planning
and Community Right-to-Know Act (EPCRA), EPA provides information
about toxic chemicals to the public through an annual report of releases of
such chemicals by industrial and other facilities.
The information contained in this report is drawn from many sources within and across
the various EPA environmental program offices. The starting point for the analysis is the
Integrated Database for Enforcement Analysis (IDEA), which is a mainframe information
management system that draws upon several other EPA databases, including:
X RCRAInfo - Replaces the data recording and reporting abilities of the
Resource Conservation and Recovery Act Information System (RCRIS)
and the Biennial Reporting System (BRS). The new system allows cradle-
to-grave waste tracking of many types of information about the regulated
universe of RCRA hazardous waste handlers.
X PCS - The Permit Compliance System tracks EPA Regional and state
compliance and enforcement data for the NPDES program under the
CWA.
X AIRS - The Aerometric Information Retrieval System manages aerometric
compliance data on point sources tracked by EPA, state, and local
governments in accordance with the CAA.
X NCDB - The National Compliance Database is the national repository for
compliance and enforcement data collected by EPA under FIFRA, TSCA,
and EPCRA §313.
State of Federal Facilities Report
-------
Federal Facilities Enforcement Office
In addition, this report also presents data from the following "stand alone" systems:
X SDWIS - The Safe Drinking Water Information System is a national database that
tracks public water supply system compliance and enforcement data collected by
EPA Regions and states under the PWSS program of SDWA.
X TRIS - The Toxics Release Inventory System tracks releases of chemicals
listed in the TRI according to chemical type, quantity, and nature of the
release.
X Enforcement Docket - The Civil Enforcement Docket is a case activity
tracking and management system for civil, judicial, and administrative
federal EPA enforcement cases.
Organization of the Report
This report is organized according to a multi-media approach in which the data are
intended to address the following basic questions:
X What is the universe of federal facilities that are regulated/affected under
each of the environmental programs? (Section n - Regulated Universe)
X What is the level of inspection activity at federal facilities for each of the
environmental programs? (Section HI - Inspections)
X What are the current trends in compliance? (Section IV - Compliance
Rates)
X What actions are taken to address noncompliance? (Section V -
Enforcement Actions)
State of Federal Facilities Report
-------
Federal Facilities Enforcement Office
This page intentionally left blank.
State of Federal Facilities Report
-------
Federal Facilities Enforcement Office
II. REGULATED UNIVERSE
Although all federal facilities are potentially subject to environmental regulations, most
are not involved in activities that would normally trigger compliance requirements. According to
IDEA, there are approximately 11,700 federal facilities that engage in some type of activity
directly affected by environmental requirements under RCRA, CAA, CWA/NPDES, or
TSCA/FIFRA/EPCRA §313.1 These facilities can be grouped into five broad categories -
Department of Defense (DOD), Department of Energy (DOE), Civilian Federal Agencies
(CFAs), Formerly Used Defense Sites (FUDS), and unidentified federal facilities (Exhibit 1).
Exhibit 1
Federal Facilities by Agency Category (FY 2000)
FUDS (12.3%) 1,439
Unidentified (7.5%) 870
DOE (3.0%) 353
DOD (25.8%) 3,016 \ s^/// ^/ / CFAs (51.3%) 5,992
Total = 11,670 facilities
Note: Differences in the universe of federal facilities relative to the FY 1997-98 State of Federal Facilities
report are primarily due to: (1) removal of facilities located in foreign lands, (2) removal of approximately
4,800 outdated "facilities" in the Federal Facilities Information System, and (3) an increase in the number
of RCRA handlers identified during the conversion from RCRIS to RCRAInfo.
DOD and DOE facilities typically include large installations (e.g., military bases, storage
depots), manufacturing/fabrication plants, and laboratories/research facilities. The universe of
CFA facilities is somewhat more diverse and includes organizations such as the Department of
the Interior, General Services Administration, Department of Justice, Tennessee Valley
Authority, Environmental Protection Agency, and many others.
1 IDEA-based facility totals do not include federally-owned public water supply systems in SDWIS.
State of Federal Facilities Report 5
-------
Federal Facilities Enforcement Office
Exhibit 2 presents a regional breakdown of federal facilities. EPA Region 2 possesses
the greatest number of federal facilities (roughly 16 percent of the total), while Region 1 has the
fewest (less than four percent). Regions 4 and 5 each contain approximately 13 percent of the
federal facility universe and Regions 3 and 10 each contribute another 11 to 12 percent.
Exhibit 2
Distribution of Federal Facilities by EPA Region
2000 -r
1500
1000
500-
\ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \ \
Reg 1 Reg 2 Reg 3 Reg 4 Reg 5 Reg 6 Reg 7 Reg 8 Reg 9 Reg 10
State of Federal Facilities Report
-------
Federal Facilities Enforcement Office
Exhibit 3 shows the distribution of CFA facilities according to individual agencies.
Department of Transportation facilities comprise the largest single share (19 percent) of all
CFAs, followed by the Postal Service (18 percent), the Department of Interior (14 percent), the
Department of Agriculture (12 percent), and the Corps of Engineers (11 percent).
Exhibit 3
Distribution of CFA Facilities by Agency
200
400
600
800
1,000
1,200
Note: Differences in the distribution of CFA facilities relative to the FY 1997-98 State of Federal Facilities
report are due to the removal of outdated facility information in the Federal Facilities Information System and
the addition of RCRA handlers identified during the conversion from RCRIS to RCRAInfo.
Missions of the Federal Agencies
DOD is charged with defending the interests of the United States anywhere in the world.
As such, DOD maintains thousands of installations to provide the necessary infrastructure for the
armed services to meet this mission. Installations range in size from a few acres to thousands of
square miles; their missions range from logistics and training to manufacturing and rebuilding
aircraft and ships. Many of these installations are the equivalent of small cities, and thus they
possess all of the infrastructure (e.g., hospitals, sewage treatment plants, roads, airports)
associated with city environments. Much of the support activity associated with DOD's mission
is industrial; therefore, DOD installations face compliance issues relating to air and water
pollution and solid/hazardous waste generation.
State of Federal Facilities Report
-------
Federal Facilities Enforcement Office
DOE is involved in electric power generation and transmission, fuel research, petroleum
storage, and nuclear weapons research and production. Many of DOE's approximately 350
installations are dedicated to laboratory research. DOE laboratories work on a variety of issues
including solar energy, battery development, energy transmission methods, atomic energy, fossil
fuels, and nuclear weapons. Some laboratories are located on large compounds such as
Savannah River, Los Alamos, and Oak Ridge, while others are part of university systems such as
the Fermi Lab in Chicago. Like DOD, the large-scale manufacturing and industrial nature of
many DOE activities presents DOE with a broad range of environmental compliance issues.
CFA facilities range in size and scope from single-purpose buildings to extensive multi-
purpose compounds. Activities include vehicle fleet management, construction, facility
operation, scientific and medical research, materials storage and shipment, and many others. On
an individual facility basis, many CFA facilities have few environmental concerns; however,
because of the diversity of CFA activities, as a group, they face environmental compliance issues
as extensive as those faced by DOD and DOE facilities.
When discussing the entire community of federal facilities, it is important to recognize
that not all federal facilities are owned and/or operated by the federal government. At numerous
federal facilities and on many public lands, a private party or private parties are involved. Thus,
in addition to traditional government-owned government-operated facilities, the federal facility
community includes government-owned contractor-operated (GOCO) facilities, privately-owned
government-operated (POGO) facilities, jointly-owned and contractor-operated (JOCO)
facilities, as well as many other ownership/operating arrangements.
RCRA Universe
At the end of FY 2000, the database that tracked RCRA compliance (RCRIS) was
replaced by a new system (RCRAInfo). As a result of this upgrade, a very large number of new
RCRA ID numbers entered the system. The vast majority of these were maintained at the state
level, but were formerly not included in the national database from which previous State of
Federal Facilities counts were drawn. In FY 2000, of the more than 590,000 IDs in the RCRA
universe - compared to approximately 315,000 in FY 1998 - nearly 209,000 were RCRA
handlers (i.e., treatment, storage and disposal facilities (TSDFs), large and small quantity
generators, transporters, and non-notifiers).2 The number of federal RCRA handlers in FY 2000
was 5,4533 and the number of non-federal RCRA handlers in FY 2000 was 203,238.
As shown in Exhibit 4, in FY 2000, 34 percent of the federal RCRA handlers are DOD
facilities, three percent are DOE facilities, 54 percent are CFA facilities, and approximately nine
percent are unidentifiable by agency category.
2 The other RCRA IDs are assigned to the RCRA permitting, closure, post-closure, and corrective action
universes, or are otherwise not categorized.
3 InFY 1998, the corresponding figure was 3,637.
State of Federal Facilities Report
-------
Federal Facilities Enforcement Office
Exhibit 4
Universe of Federal RCRA Handlers by Agency Category (FY 2000)
CFA (54.2%) 2,958
^^^•^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^^
Unidentified (8.7%) 474
DOD(34.0%) 1,856 ^~ -^ DOE (3.0%) 165
Total = 5,453 Federal RCRA Handlers
RCRA handlers can be divided into three types: generators, transporters, and treatment,
storage, and disposal facilities (TSDFs). Generators of RCRA-regulated waste must obtain an
EPA ID number; prepare hazardous waste for transport; and comply with the accumulation and
storage, record keeping, and reporting requirements. They are also responsible for tracking waste
through a manifest system. The manifest system creates a written record of the chain-of-custody
from the time a waste leaves a generator until it reaches its final disposal site. Transporters must
obtain an EPA ID number, comply with the manifest system, and address any hazardous waste
discharges. TSDFs are subject to record keeping and reporting requirements and technical
standards covering treatment and disposal methods, as well as the location, construction, and
operation of disposal sites. Finally, both generators and TSDFs may be subject to land disposal
restrictions requiring treatment of the waste before it is land-disposed. In addition, a small
number of facilities are classified as non-notifiers. Non-notifiers are RCRA facilities that have
been identified through sources other than regular reporting and are suspected of engaging in
RCRA-regulated activities without proper authority.
State of Federal Facilities Report
-------
Federal Facilities Enforcement Office
As shown in Exhibit 5, large and small quantity generators (LQGs and SQGs) make up
the largest share of federal RCRA handlers (93 percent), followed by TSDFs and transporters
(five percent and two percent respectively). The TSDF universe is used to develop the
compliance indicator for RCRA presented in Section IV of this report.
Exhibit 5
Federal RCRA Handler Types (FY 2000)
TSDFs (5.0%) 274
Transporters (1.7%) 91
LQGs (9.4%) 5H-|X^P*^ / SQGs (83.6%) 4,556
Non-Notifier (0.4%) 21
Total = 5,453 Federal RCRA Handlers
CWA Universe
Under the CWA, all point source
dischargers of wastewater, including federal
facilities, must submit an application for a
NPDES permit. NPDES permits may contain
water quality-based and/or technology-based
standards for effluent discharges, compliance
schedules, and monitoring/reporting
requirements.
Major (versus minor) NPDES facilities
are defined as those that contribute a larger
and/or more environmentally harmful share
of pollutants discharged to surface waters.
At the end of FY 2000, federal facilities comprised approximately 1.6 percent (114) of
the total universe of 6,910 major facilities regulated under the NPDES program. As shown in
Exhibit 6, of these 114 facilities, 66 percent were DOD, 11 percent were DOE, and 21 percent
were CFA facilities. The universe of NPDES majors is used to develop the CWA compliance
indicator presented in Section IV.
10 State of Federal Facilities Report
-------
Federal Facilities Enforcement Office
Exhibit 6
Major Federal NPDES Facilities by Agency Category (FY 2000)
DOD(65.8%) 75
Unidentified (1.7%) 2
CFAs (21.1%) 24
DOE (11.4%) 13
Total =114 Facilities
CAA Universe
To meet EPA's National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS), states typically
require new sources of air pollution to obtain preconstruction permits. The type and level of
control required by the permit depends on the attainment status of the area, which is based upon
air quality with respect to six criteria pollutants (CO, SO2, NOX, volatile organic compounds,
particulate matter, and lead). Areas meeting the NAAQS are considered in "attainment," while
areas not meeting the NAAQS are in "nonattainment." Federal sources wishing to begin
construction in nonattainment areas must go through the construction permit review process
under the New Source Review (NSR), which allows for industrial growth (i.e., new sources) if
stringent requirements are met, including emissions offsets, state-wide compliance for all
sources, public notification, and installation of control equipment to meet the Lowest Achievable
Emission Rate. If the federal source is to be located within an attainment area, the permit review
process falls under Prevention of
Significant Deterioration requirements,
which require installation of the Best
Available Control Technology,
establishment of maximum allowable
emissions increases or increments,
performance of impact analyses by source,
and notification of the public.
Federal sources, depending on the
nature and size of their operations, also may
be subject to technology-based New Source
Performance Standards (NSPS) for new,
Major CAA Sources emit pollutants in such
magnitude as to be subject to operating permit
requirements (see Title V of the CAA). For
purposes of the State of Federal Facilities
report, however, the term "major" refers to all
"federally reportable" sources, which includes
sources subject to operating permit
requirements plus those with emissions just
below permit-requiring thresholds.
State of Federal Facilities Report
11
-------
Federal Facilities Enforcement Office
modified, or reconstructed stationary sources; health-based National Emissions Standards for
Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAPs) for new and existing sources within specific categories;
and/or Title V requirements designed to address all sources of emissions at a facility under a
single permit.
In FY 2000, of the 54,208 major sources (i.e., exceeding federally reportable thresholds)
regulated under all programs within the CAA, 538 (one percent) were federal sources. As shown
in Exhibit 7, 58 percent of these federal sources were DOD, six percent were DOE, 34 percent
were CFAs, and two percent were unidentifiable by agency category. The universe of CAA
major sources is used to develop the CAA compliance indicator presented in Section IV.
Exhibit 7
CAA Major Federal Sources by Agency Category (FY 2000)
Unidentified (2.2%) 12
DOE (6.3%) 34
/ / [< /7s-,
000(58.0%) 312
CFAs (33.5%) 180
Total = 538 Major Sources
SDWA/PWSS Program Universe
Federally-owned public water supply systems comprised approximately 2.6 percent
(4,364 of 168,018) of the total universe of systems regulated under the PWSS program. The vast
majority of these federal systems are owned by CFAs, in particular, the U.S. Forest Service
within the Department of Agriculture.
Under the SDWA/PWSS program, the definition of a public water system is "a water
system providing water for human consumption through constructed conveyances to at least 15
service connections or an average of 25 individuals daily at least 60 days per year." EPA has
interpreted the term human consumption to include drinking, bathing, showering, cooking,
dishwashing, and maintaining oral hygiene. As shown in Exhibit 8, there are three types of
public water systems:
12 State of Federal Facilities Report
-------
Federal Facilities Enforcement Office
X Community Water Systems (CWS) serve at least 15 service connections
used by year-round residents of an area or regularly serves at least 25 year-
round residents for 60 days or more per year. The remaining two types of
systems are considered non-community water systems because they do not
provide water to more than 15 residences year-round.
X Transient Non-Community Water Systems (TNCWS) serve transient or
seasonal customers in locations such as campgrounds, motels, and
gasoline stations.
X Non-Transient Non-Community Water Systems (NTNCWS) regularly
serve at least 25 of the same non-resident people per day for at least six
months of the year. Examples of NTNCWS include schools, factories,
hospitals, and other facilities that have their own water supplies.
The universe of federally-owned public water systems is used to develop the SDWA compliance
indicator presented in Section IV.
Exhibit 8
Universe of Federally-Owned Public Water Systems (FY 2000)
Transient Non-Community (81.3%) 3,547
Community (10.3%) 449
Non-Transient Non-Community (8.4%) 368
Total = 4,364 Systems
State of Federal Facilities Report
13
-------
Federal Facilities Enforcement Office
TSCA and FIFRA Universe
TSCA and FIFRA are not permit-based compliance programs like NPDES. The number
and identity of facilities subject to TSCA or FIFRA may change substantially from year to year.
As a result, there are no readily definable TSCA or FIFRA universes. Federal facilities subject to
TSCA or FIFRA are identified and targeted for inspections through a variety of less formal
means, including self-reporting by entities of their intent to manufacture regulated substances,
third-party requests/complaints, and EPA/state evaluation of publicly available data.
EPCRA/TRI Universe
Established under §313 of the Emergency Planning and Community Right-to-Know Act
of 1986, the TRI is a publicly available database containing specific chemical release and transfer
information from manufacturing facilities throughout the United States. The TRI is intended to
promote planning for chemical emergencies and to provide information to the public regarding
the presence and release of toxic and hazardous chemicals in their communities. In the private
sector, a facility must report to the TRI if it meets the following criteria:
X The facility conducts manufacturing activities within Standard Industrial
Classification (SIC) codes 20-39, and beginning in the 1998 reporting year, if it
falls into one of the following categories: metal mining, coal mining, electric
utilities burning coal and/or oil, chemical wholesale distributors, petroleum
terminals and bulk storage facilities, RCRA Subtitle C TSDFs, and solvent
recovery services;
X The facility has ten or more full-time employees; and
X The facility manufactures and/or processes listed chemicals in excess of 25,000
pounds per year or otherwise uses 10,000 pounds per year of each listed chemical.
Federal facilities have been required to report since the 1994 reporting year, regardless of their
SIC classification, although DOE facilities began reporting a year earlier.
For 19994, the most recent year for which data are available, there were 127 federal
facilities that submitted a total of 507 forms under the TRI program. As shown in Exhibit 9,
most of those reporting were DOD facilities (59 percent). The addition of new industry
categories subject to TRI reporting (see first bullet above) resulted in an increase in both the
number and share of CFA facilities reporting (28 percent). The addition of these facilities also
resulted in a dramatic increase in reported releases (Exhibit 10). The most common CFA agency
affiliations were TVA, Treasury Department, and Department of the Interior. DOE facilities
accounted for slightly less than 13 percent of federal TRI reporters.
TRI data are reported on a calendar year basis.
14 State of Federal Facilities Report
-------
Federal Facilities Enforcement Office
Exhibit 9
Universe of Federal Facilities Reporting under TRI (1999)
DOD(59.1%)75
DOE (12.6%) 16
CFA(28.3%)36
Total =127 Facilities
TRI releases at federal facilities have increased more than ten-fold since the 1997
reporting year. This increase is primarily due to the inclusion of TVA facilities under the new
industry reporting requirements (added in 1998). TVA facilities reported nearly 70 million
pounds of releases in 1999. As shown in Exhibit 10, federal facilities reported on- and off-site
releases of nearly 82 million pounds of TRI chemicals in 1999. The majority of these were
comprised by point source air releases (66 percent). Releases to surface water and land
comprised an additional three percent and 22 percent respectively.
Exhibit 10
TRI On-Site and Off-Site Releases at Federal Facilities (1999)
Point Source Air (65.8%) 53,823,287
Fugitive Air (8.1%) 6,608,696"
Off-Site Releases (0.9%) 749,034'
Surface Water (3.3%) 2,683,606
Land (21.9%) 17,950,809
Total = 81,815,937 pounds
Underground Injection (<0.1%) 505
State of Federal Facilities Report
15
-------
Federal Facilities Enforcement Office
Documentation for Exhibits in this Section
Exhibit Title
Federal Facilities by Agency Category
Distribution of Federal Facilities by EPA
Region
Distribution of CFA Facilities by Agency
Universe of Federal RCRA Handlers by
Agency Category
Federal RCRA Handler Types
Major Federal NPDES Facilities by
Agency Category
CAA Major Federal Sources by Agency
Category
Universe of Federally-Owned Public
Water Systems
Universe of Federal Facilities Reporting
under TRI
TRI On-Site and Off-Site Releases at
Federal Facilities
Information
Source
IDEA
IDEA
IDEA
IDEA
IDEA
IDEA
IDEA
SDWIS
TRIS
TRIS
Date of
Data Pull
Various
Various
Various
2/13/01
2/13/01
11/28/00
11/28/00
12/22/00
5/1/01
6/1/99
Comments
-
~
-
~
~
~
~
~
Data derived from direct download
from TRIS and 1999 TRI Public Data
Release report.
Data derived from direct download
from TRIS and 1999 TRI Public Data
Release report.
16
State of Federal Facilities Report
-------
Federal Facilities Enforcement Office
III. INSPECTIONS
EPA and states monitor activities at federal facilities to determine whether they are in
compliance with environmental laws and regulations. Compliance monitoring also enables EPA
to measure and track performance over time and to identify potential problem areas and
compliance assistance opportunities. Most environmental programs rely on some form of facility
inspection as the principal tool for determining compliance. The level of effort associated with
these inspections varies, depending on the specific requirements addressed, the size and
complexity of the facility's operations, and the type and amount of data required to assess
compliance.
Exhibit 11 shows the total number of EPA and state inspections at federal facilities for
RCRA, NPDES, CAA, and TSCA/FIFRA/EPCRA §313 for FY 1995 thru FY 2000. NPDES
and TSCA/FIFRA/EPCRA inspections have exhibited a fairly steady decline since FY 1995.
RCRA inspections, although having rebounded from their FY 1997 level, also have declined by
more than 15 percent relative to FY 1995. In contrast, CAA inspections increased by more than
50 percent over the same period. The number of SDWA/PWSS inspections is not reported in the
federal SDWIS database and therefore is not presented in this report.
Exhibit 11
EPA and State Inspections at Federal Facilities (FY 1995 - FY 2000)
1000
800
600
400
200
FY 1995 FY 1996 FY 1997 FY 1998 FY 1999 FY 2000
RCRA
NPDES
CAA
TSCA/FIFRA/EPCRA
State of Federal Facilities Report
17
-------
Federal Facilities Enforcement Office
As shown in Exhibit 11, the total number of inspections was virtually unchanged
between FY 1999 (1,527 inspections) and FY 2000 (1,531 inspections). More than 60 percent of
the inspections occurred at DOD facilities. Inspections at CFAs comprised approximately 25 and
21 percent of the total, while DOE facilities received roughly 10 and 15 percent in FY 1999 and
FY 2000, respectively. The following media-specific inspection summaries present inspection
data by type (where appropriate), lead, and agency category.
RCRA Inspections
To assess compliance with RCRA requirements, EPA inspectors conducted 134 and 112
inspections at federal facilities in FY 1999 and FY 2000. The totals for state-led inspections
were 610 and 666, for an overall total of 744 in FY 1999 and 778 in FY 2000. DOD facilities
received 469 RCRA inspections in FY 1999 and 474 in FY 2000, while CFA facilities received
167 and 147. The inspection totals for DOE facilities over the same period were 87 and 128,
respectively. The remaining inspections occurred at federal facilities that were unidentifiable by
agency category.
RCRA inspections range in intensity from comprehensive compliance evaluation
inspections (CEI) to fairly basic record reviews. CEIs remain the most common form of RCRA
inspection, accounting for 63 and 67 percent of inspections at federal facilities during FY 1999
and FY 2000. Record reviews accounted for 11 and nine percent of inspections in FY 1999 and
FY 2000, respectively. The remainder consisted of a variety of other inspection types (e.g.,
corrective action oversight, case development, compliance schedule, operations and maintenance,
multi-media).
CWA/NPDES Inspections
Implementation responsibility for the NPDES program lies primarily with the states. As a
consequence, more than 86 percent of NPDES inspections conducted at major federal facilities
during FY 1999 and FY 2000 were led by states. In FY 1999, states performed 128 inspections
versus 12 by EPA. In FY 2000, states performed 109 inspections versus 17 by EPA. Thus, the
total number of inspections in FY 1999 was 140 and in FY 2000 it was 126. DOD facilities
received 92 and 74 inspections in FY 1999 and FY 2000; CFA facilities received 25 and 22
inspections; and DOE facilities received 23 and 30 inspections over the same period.
CAA Inspections
EPA and state inspectors conducted 607 CAA inspections of major federal sources during
FY 1999 and 600 in FY 2000. States continued to take a lead role on the majority of CAA
inspections (556 state-led inspections versus 51 by EPA in FY 1999 and 562 state-led inspections
versus 38 by EPA in FY 2000). DOD facilities received 390 inspections in FY 1999 and 383 in
FY 2000. CFA facilities received 173 and 150 inspections over the same period, while DOE
facilities received 35 and 61. The remaining inspections occurred at federal facilities that were
unidentifiable by agency category.
18 State of Federal Facilities Report
-------
Federal Facilities Enforcement Office
SDWA/PWSS Inspections
The number of SDWA/PWSS inspections is not reported in the federal SDWIS database
and therefore is not presented in this report.
TSCA. FIFRA. and EPCRA §313 Inspections
The number of TSCA inspections conducted at federal facilities decreased from 30 in FY
1999 to 22 in FY 2000. Most inspections (23 of 30 in FY 1999 and 19 of 22 in FY 2000) were
led by EPA. The number of FIFRA inspections conducted at federal facilities remained very
small; two inspections occurred during both FY 1999 and FY 2000. All FIFRA inspections were
led by EPA.
In addition to the standard chemical use reporting requirements of EPCRA §313 (i.e., the
TRI program), EPA conducts a limited number of EPCRA inspections at reporting federal
facilities. These inspections typically involve record reviews, although the process of verifying
the accuracy of TRI reporting may involve some on-site field evaluations. During FY 1999 and
FY 2000, there were four and three EPCRA §313 inspections, respectively, conducted at federal
facilities. EPA Regions acted as the lead on all EPCRA §313 inspections. The total for TSCA,
FIFRA, and EPCRA §313 inspections was 36 (seven state-led) in FY 1999 and 27 (three state-
led) in FY 2000. DOD facilities received 25 of these inspections in FY 1999 and 10 in FY 2000.
CFA facilities received nine in FY 1999 and 12 in FY 2000, while DOE facilities received two in
FY 1999 and three in FY 2000. During FY 2000, two inspections occurred at federal facilities
that were unidentifiable by agency category.
State of Federal Facilities Report 19
-------
Federal Facilities Enforcement Office
Documentation for Exhibits in this Section
Exhibit Title
EPA and State Inspections at Federal
Facilities (FY 1995 - FY 2000)
Information
Source
IDEA
Date of
Data Pull
Various
Comments
-
20
State of Federal Facilities Report
-------
Federal Facilities Enforcement Office
IV. COMPLIANCE RATES
Federal facility compliance with environmental requirements can be measured in many
ways, ranging from the percentage of facilities cited for any violation, regardless of its severity,
to the percentage of facilities repeatedly cited for significant noncompliance. In other words,
there is no single universally accepted measure of compliance for all environmental programs.
Moreover, variations in how EPA and states define and measure compliance under different
environmental programs make comparisons across programs difficult. However, evaluating
narrowly defined compliance indicators over time can reveal how a sector of federal facilities is
performing with respect to individual environmental programs.
Table 1 provides the definitions of selected compliance indicators used by this State of
Federal Facilities report to calculate compliance rates. Note that these rates only apply to the
universe of facilities within the definitions in Table 1. For example, the RCRA indicator only
applies to inspected TSDFs. It should not be applied as a measure of compliance for uninspected
TSDFs, non-TSDFs (e.g., generators), or other RCRA programs (e.g., underground storage tank
program).
Table 1
Definitions of Compliance Indicators for Federal Facilities
Statute Compliance Indicator
RCRA Percent of inspected federal TSDFs not in significant
noncompliance (SNC)5
CWA Percent of NPDES major federal facilities not in SNC
CAA Percent of major federal sources in compliance
SDWA Percent of federal public water systems not in SNC
TSCA Percent of inspected federal facilities not in SNC
Exhibit 12 presents compliance rates for five statutes based on the definitions of the
indicators taken from Table 1. Pre-1999 rates were calculated in previous State of Federal
Facilities reports. In this section, the rates are calculated for the federal sector as a whole
(Exhibit 12) then calculated by federal agency category (i.e., DOD, DOE, and CFAs) for RCRA,
5 Beginning in FY 1999, programmatic changes to RCRAInfo no longer required tracking of Class I
violations. Because previous State of Federal Facilities reports relied on the percentage of inspected TSDFs not
cited for Class I violations as a the RCRA compliance indicator, a new compliance indicator was developed for this
report - the percent of inspected federal TSDFs not in SNC.
State of Federal Facilities Report 21
-------
Federal Facilities Enforcement Office
CWA, and CAA. Compliance rates for the entire federal sector are also compared with the non-
federal (i.e., private) sector for RCRA, CWA, and CAA.
Exhibit 12 shows that from FY 1993 to FY 2000, RCRA compliance increased while
CWA compliance declined. SDWA compliance fluctuated but remained high (above 90
percent), as did CAA compliance (between 84 and 90 percent). TSCA compliance has remained
at 100 percent for the past six years.
Exhibit 12
Federal Facility Compliance Rates for Selected Indicators
Statute
RCRA
CWA
CAA
SDWA
TSCA
FY 1993
55.4%
94.2%
87.0%
99.2%
93.5%
FY 1994
61.6%
88.5%
87.9%
98.7%
87.5%
FY 1995
73.8%
76.2%
88.8%
93.0%
100%
FY 1996
75.1%
73.0%
87.4%
96.4%
100%
FY 1997
81.2%
70.4%
84.2%
97.1%
100%
FY 1998
88.2%
61.5%
88.9%
98.1%
100%
FY 1999
88.6%
64.9%
90.0%
98.2%
100%
FY 2000
93.6%
67.5%
87.9%
97.7%
100%
RCRA Compliance Rates
In FY 1999 and FY 2000, 211 and 204 federal TSDFs, respectively, were inspected. Of
these, approximately 11 percent (24 of 211) and six percent (13 of 204) were determined to be in
SNC. Therefore, the RCRA compliance rates (percentage of inspected TSDFs not in SNC) for
FY 1999 and FY 2000 were 88.6 and 93.6 percent, respectively (Exhibit 13). Compliance rates
for the non-federal universe of inspected TSDFs were approximately 81 and 79 percent
(Exhibit 14)
22
State of Federal Facilities Report
-------
Federal Facilities Enforcement Office
Exhibit 13
RCRA Compliance Rates by Federal Agency Category
Agency
DOD
CFAs
DOE
Other
Total
FY 1999
Inspected
TSDFs
168
18
24
1
211
TSDFs in
SNC
15
1
7
1
24
TSDFs not
in SNC
153(91.1%)
17 (94.4%)
17 (70.8%)
0 (0.0%)
187 (88.6%)
FY 2000
Inspected
TSDFs
163
16
23
2
204
TSDFs in
SNC
5
0
7
1
13
TSDFs not
in SNC
158 (96.9%)
16 (100.0%)
16 (69.6%)
1(50.0%)
191 (93.6%)
Exhibit 13 presents RCRA compliance rates according to federal agency category.
Compliance rates at DOD facilities were 91 percent in FY 1999 and close to 97 percent in
FY 2000. These rates were higher than the overall compliance rate for federal facilities. In FY
1999 and FY 2000, the CFA compliance rate was close to or at 100 percent. RCRA compliance
rates at DOE facilities were considerably lower (71 and 70 percent) than the overall federal
facility rate for both years. Exhibit 14 shows the federal sector had a greater compliance rate
than the non-federal (i.e., private) sector.
Exhibit 14
Percentage of Inspected TSDFs not in SNC
(Federal vs. Non-Federal TSDFs)
100.0% -i
90.0%
80.0%
70.0%
60.0%
50.0%
Federal TSDFs
Non-Federal TSDFs
FY 1999
FY2000
State of Federal Facilities Report
23
-------
Federal Facilities Enforcement Office
NPDES Compliance Rates
Under the CWA NPDES program, SNC is characterized by a violation of significant
magnitude and/or duration to be considered among the EPA's priorities for review and/or
response. The definition of SNC is EPA policy, which can change or evolve as the NPDES
program changes. Beginning in FY 1998, the definition of SNC was expanded to encompass
more categories of violations.
Exhibit 15 presents NPDES compliance rates by agency category for FY 1999 and FY
2000. Compliance rates at DOD facilities remained relatively constant and, as in previous years,
below the overall compliance rate for federal facilities. Except for the small number of "other"
federal facilities, for both years, CFA facilities had the highest compliance rates compared to
overall rates. DOE facilities continued to have the lowest compliance rates (below 50 percent)
relative to the other agency categories.
Exhibit 15
NPDES Compliance Rates by Federal Agency Category
Agency
DOD
CFAs
DOE
Other
Total
FY 1999
Major
Facilities
74
23
13
1
111
SNC
26
5
8
0
39
Not in
SNC
48 (64.9%)
18 (78.3%)
5 (38.5%)
1 (100.0%)
72 (64.9%)
FY 2000
Major
Facilities
75
24
13
2
114
SNC
27
3
7
0
37
Not in
SNC
48 (64.0%)
21 (87.5%)
6 (46.2%)
2 (100.0%)
77 (67.5%)
24
State of Federal Facilities Report
-------
Federal Facilities Enforcement Office
Exhibit 16 compares the percentage of major federal facilities not in SNC against the
corresponding percentage for the universe of major non-federal NPDES facilities. In FY 1999,
the percentage of major federal facilities not in SNC was almost 65 percent (72 of 111), roughly
seven percent lower than for major non-federal facilities. In FY 2000, compliance rates for
major federal facilities increased by nearly three percent (77 of 114), while major non-federal
facilities experienced a more modest increase from 72 percent to 73 percent.
Exhibit 16
Percentage of Major NPDES Facilities not in SNC
(Federal vs. Non-Federal Majors)
100.0%
90.0% -
80.0%
70.0%
60.0% -
50.0%
Major Federal Facilities
Major Non-Federal Facilities
FY 1999
FY 2000
CAA Compliance Rates
Under the CAA programs, sources that have exceeded emissions standards and/or
violated procedural requirements (e.g., failed to meet a compliance schedule or failed to follow
monitoring, recordkeeping, and reporting protocols) are deemed out of compliance. As shown in
Exhibit 17, compliance rates were fairly consistent across agency categories during FY 1999 and
FY 2000 - only six percent separated the agency category with the highest compliance rate
(Other) from the agency category with the lowest rate (DOD).
State of Federal Facilities Report
25
-------
Federal Facilities Enforcement Office
Exhibit 17
CAA Compliance Rates by Federal Agency Category
Agency
DOD
CFAs
DOE
Other
Total
FY 1999
Major
Sources
296
173
34
16
519
Majors out of
Compliance
32
16
3
1
52
Majors in
Compliance
264 (89.2%)
157 (90.8%)
31(91.2%)
15 (93.8%)
467 (90.0%)
FY 2000
Major
Sources
312
180
34
12
538
Majors out of
Compliance
34
26
4
1
65
Majors in
Compliance
278(89.1%)
154 (85.6%)
30 (88.2%)
11(91.7%)
473 (87.9%)
As shown in Exhibit 18, during FY 1999 and FY 2000, federal sources experienced
lower compliance rates - 90 and nearly 88 percent - than the non-federal regulated community.
CAA compliance rates for the same two years for major non-federal sources were just over 93
and 92 percent, respectively.
Exhibit 18
Percentage of CAA Major Sources in Compliance
(Federal vs. Non-Federal Sources)
100.0%
90.0%
80.0%
70.0%
60.0% -
50.0%
Major Federal Sources
Major Non-Federal Sources
FY 1999
FY2000
26
State of Federal Facilities Report
-------
Federal Facilities Enforcement Office
SDWA/PWSS Compliance Rates
Under the SDWA/PWSS programs, water systems in SNC have more serious, frequent,
or persistent violations. Exhibit 19 shows the number of federally-owned public water systems
cited for violations under SDWA, as well as the number of systems classified as SNC for more
serious violations. The number of systems cited for violations decreased from 992 in FY 1999 to
731 in FY 2000. In contrast, SNC systems increased in both numerical (80 to 99) and percentage
terms, from 1.8 percent in FY 1999 to 2.3 percent in FY 2000. The compliance indicator used
for the SDWA is the percentage of systems not in SNC. Therefore, the compliance rate for
federal systems overall decreased from 98.2 percent in FY 1999 to 97.7 percent in FY 2000. It
was not possible to provide SDWA compliance rates by agency category.
Exhibit 19
SDWA Compliance Rates at Federally-Owned Systems
I | Federally-Owned Systems
I | Systems with Violations [% of total with violations]
H Significant Noncompliers [% of total in SNC]
FY 1999
FY 2000
TSCA. FIFRA. and EPCRA §313 Compliance Rates
EPA and the states did not find any inspected federal facilities to be in SNC with TSCA
during FY 1999 or FY 2000. Therefore, compliance, defined as the percentage of inspected
federal facilities not in SNC, was 100 percent for FY 1999 and FY 2000 (Exhibit 20). In fact,
TSCA compliance at federal facilities has remained at 100 percent since FY 1995. Exhibit 20
also presents compliance rates for inspected federal facilities under FIFRA and EPCRA §313.
For FY 1999 and FY 2000, the compliance rates for federal facilities under both programs were
State of Federal Facilities Report
27
-------
Federal Facilities Enforcement Office
100 percent. However, the number of FIFRA and EPCRA §313 inspections at federal facilities
has historically been low.
Exhibit 20
TSCA, FIFRA, and EPCRA §313 Compliance Rates
Statute
TSCA
FIFRA
EPCRA
Total
FY 1999
Inspections
30
2
4
36
Facilities not
inSNC
30
2
4
36 (100%)
FY 2000
Inspections
22
2
3
27
Facilities not
inSNC
22
2
3
27(100%)
28
State of Federal Facilities Report
-------
Federal Facilities Enforcement Office
Documentation for Exhibits in this Section
Exhibit Title
Federal Facility Compliance Rates for
Selected Indicators
RCRA Compliance Rates by Federal
Agency Category
Percentage of Inspected TSDFs not in
SNC
NPDES Compliance Rates by Federal
Agency Category
Percentage of Major NPDES Facilities
not in SNC
CAA Compliance Rates by Federal
Agency Category
Percentage of CAA Major Sources in
Compliance
SDWA Compliance Rates at
Federally-Owned Systems
TSCA, FIFRA, and EPCRA §313
Compliance Rates
Information
Source
IDEA
IDEA
IDEA
IDEA
IDEA
IDEA
IDEA
SDWIS
IDEA
Date of
Data Pull
Various
12/12/00
4/5/01
12/12/00
4/5/01
3/21/00
11/28/00
3/21/00
11/28/00
3/21/00
11/28/00
3/21/00
11/28/00
12/22/00
3/21/00
11/29/00
Comments
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
-
State of Federal Facilities Report
29
-------
Federal Facilities Enforcement Office
This page intentionally left blank.
3 0 State of Federal Facilities Report
-------
Federal Facilities Enforcement Office
V. ENFORCEMENT ACTIONS
EPA and states issued 415 and 380 formal and informal enforcement actions against
federal facilities in FY 1999 and FY 2000, respectively. RCRA enforcement actions remained
the most common, comprising nearly 60 percent of enforcement actions at federal facilities.
Together, NPDES and CAA actions accounted for more than 30 percent, while SDWA actions
accounted for roughly nine and four percent of actions in FY 1999 and FY 2000, respectively.
TSCA, FIFRA, or EPCRA §313 actions accounted for less than two percent of enforcement at
federal facilities during FY 1999 and FY 2000.
Exhibit 21 shows the total number of EPA and state formal and informal enforcement
actions at federal facilities for RCRA, NPDES, CAA, and SDWA since FY 1995. TSCA,
FIFRA, and EPCRA §313 actions are not shown. RCRA enforcement actions have traditionally
outnumbered actions under all other programs combined by a wide margin; however, this gap has
narrowed recently, especially since FY 1997. At that time, the 303 RCRA enforcement actions
accounted for approximately 76 percent of actions at federal facilities. With RCRA actions
declining by more than 25 percent (303 to 226) and CAA enforcement actions, in particular,
more than doubling (38 to 80) over the same period, the RCRA share of enforcement actions at
federal facilities decreased to 60 percent.
Exhibit 21
Enforcement Actions at Federal Facilities (FY 1995 -FY 2000)
(Formal and Informal Actions)
FY1995 FY1996 FY 1997 FY 1998 FY 1999 FY 2000
• RCRA H NPDES Q CAA \Z1 SDWA
State of Federal Facilities Report
-------
Federal Facilities Enforcement Office
As shown in Exhibit 22, for both FY 1999 and FY 2000, DOD facilities continued to
receive the largest share (approximately 55 percent) of enforcement actions under all statutes
except for SDWA.6 DOE's share of enforcement actions increased from nearly 15 percent to
slightly more than 16 percent, while CFAs' share decreased from 28 percent to 25 percent from
FY 1999 to FY 2000.
Exhibit 22
Enforcement Actions at Federal Facilities by Agency Category
(Formal and Informal Actions by EPA and States)
160
140
120
100
80
60
40
20
0
RCRA'99 RCRA'00 NPDES'99 NPDES'00 CAA'99 CAA'00 SDWA'99 SDWA'00
I I DOD CT CFA I DOE Y~] Other
RCRA Enforcement
For RCRA, the percentage of state-led actions increased from 77 percent (188 of 245) in
FY 1999 to 85 percent (192 of 226) in FY 2000. As shown in Exhibit 23, for FY 1999 and
FY 2000, about 85 percent of enforcement actions taken against federal facilities were informal
(e.g., warning letters, verbal warnings). Formal actions include: civil actions, consent decrees,
federal facility compliance agreements (FFCAs), referrals to other enforcement authorities,
notices of noncompliance, administrative orders, corrective action orders, and imminent hazard
orders. The most commonly used formal enforcement action is the RCRA §3008(a)
administrative penalty order; 71 percent (27 out of 38) and 53 percent (18 out of 34) of formal
It should be noted, however, that DOD's share of all enforcement actions declined by more than 10
percent relative to previous years (see FY 1995 - FY 1998 State of Federal Facilities reports).
32
State of Federal Facilities Report
-------
Federal Facilities Enforcement Office
enforcement actions taken in FY 1999 and FY 2000, respectively, were 3008(a) and 3008(h)
administrative corrective action orders.
Exhibit 23
RCRA Enforcement Actions at Federal Facilities
Type of Action
EPA Informal
State Informal
EPA Formal
State Formal
All Enforcement Actions
Proposed Penalties
Final SEP Cost
Final Penalties Collected (excluding SEP costs)
FY 1999 Total
34 (13.9%)
173 (70.6%)
23 (9.4%)
15(6.1%)
245
$367,078
$2,915,847
$403,522
FY 2000 Total
16(7.1%)
176 (77.9%)
18 (7.9%)
16(7.1%)
226
$199,155
$0
$38,000
Proposed RCRA penalties decreased from slightly more than $367,000 in FY 1999 to
slightly less than $200,000 in FY 2000. Final penalties decreased by more than 90 percent, from
roughly $403,000 to $38,000 over the same period. In addition, final supplemental
environmental project (SEP) costs under RCRA declined from nearly $3 million to zero over the
same period.
NPDES Enforcement Actions
The number of enforcement actions taken to address NPDES noncompliance at federal
facilities decreased from FY 1999 to FY 2000; however, enforcement activity remained above
levels experienced during the previous two-year period (see FY 1997-98 State of Federal
Facilities report). As shown in Exhibit 24, the share of informal enforcement actions (e.g.,
phone calls, warning letters, informal NOVs) increased from FY 1999 to FY 2000, as did the
percentage of formal actions (i.e., FFCAs, administrative orders, and formal NOVs). The
percentage of other state enforcement actions (e.g., unspecified pending actions and referrals)
decreased from nearly 48 percent in FY 1999 to slightly less than 31 percent in FY 2000. State-
led NPDES actions accounted for 90 percent (64 of 71) and 82 percent (45 of 55) for FY 1999
and FY 2000, respectively.
State of Federal Facilities Report
33
-------
Federal Facilities Enforcement Office
Exhibit 24
NPDES Enforcement Actions at Federal Facilities
Type of Enforcement Action
EPA Informal
State Informal
EPA Formal
State Formal
State Other
EPA Other
TOTAL
Number of Actions in
FY 1999
1 (1.4%)
27 (38.0%)
6 (8.5%)
3 (4.2%)
34 (47.9%)
-
71
Number of Actions in
FY 2000
3 (5.5%)
22 (40.0%)
6 (10.9%)
6 (10.9%)
17 (30.9%)
1 (1.8%)
55
CAA Enforcement
Continuing a recent upward trend in CAA enforcement actions, EPA and states issued 56
and 80 NOVs and administrative orders against federal sources during FY 1999 and FY 2000,
respectively, for failure to comply with provisions of the CAA. The majority of these actions
were NOVs (Exhibit 25). States took the lead on 73 percent (41 of 56) and 65 percent (52 of 80)
of these enforcement actions. DOD sources received at least 50 percent, while CFA sources
received more than 40 percent. DOE and other sources each received less than five percent of
actions during FY 1999 and FY 2000.
Exhibit 25
CAA Enforcement Actions at Federal Facilities
Type of Enforcement Action
EPA Orders
State Orders
EPA NOVs
State NOVs
TOTAL
Number of Actions in
FY 1999
10 (17.9%)
9(16.1%)
5 (8.9%)
32(57.1%)
56
Number of Actions in
FY 2000
20 (25.0%)
12 (15.0%)
8 (10.0%)
40 (50.0%)
80
34
State of Federal Facilities Report
-------
Federal Facilities Enforcement Office
SDWA/PWSS Enforcement
Exhibit 26 shows that the total number of federal systems receiving formal enforcement
actions decreased by 50 percent, from 36 in FY 1999 to 18 in FY 2000. EPA took the lead on 50
percent of SDWA actions (18 of 36) during FY 1999 and 56 percent (10 of 18) during FY 2000.
EPA formal actions include administrative orders and §1431 emergency orders, while
state formal actions include administrative orders, bilateral compliance agreements, civil
referrals, and criminal cases filed. Of the 18 formal enforcement actions issued by states in
FY 1999, eight were bilateral compliance agreements and 10 were administrative orders, while
the 18 EPA formal enforcement actions were administrative orders. In FY 2000, of the 18
formal enforcement actions issued, 10 were federal administrative orders. No federally-owned
systems received civil referrals or had criminal cases filed against them during either year.
Exhibit 26
SDWA Enforcement Actions at Federal Facilities
Type of Enforcement Action
EPA Orders
State Orders
State Bilateral Compliance Agreements
TOTAL
Number of Actions in
FY 1999
18 (50.0%)
10 (27.8%)
8 (22.2%)
36
Number of Actions in
FY 2000
10 (55.6%)
7 (38.9%)
1 (5.5%)
18
TSCA. FIFRA. and EPCRA §313 Enforcement
There were seven enforcement actions taken at federal facilities under TSCA, FIFRA, and
EPCRA §313 during FY 1999 and only one enforcement action during FY 2000. All of the
actions were EPA-led and five of eight were issued for TSCA violations.
State of Federal Facilities Report
35
-------
Federal Facilities Enforcement Office
Documentation for Exhibits in this Section
Exhibit Title
EPA and State Enforcement at Federal
Facilities (FY 1995 - FY 2000)
Enforcement Actions at Federal Facilities
by Agency Category
RCRA Enforcement Actions at Federal
Facilities
NPDES Enforcement Actions at Federal
Facilities
CAA Enforcement Actions at Federal
Facilities
SDWA Enforcement Actions at Federal
Facilities
Information
Source
IDEA&
Docket
IDEA&
Docket
IDEA&
Docket
IDEA&
Docket
IDEA&
Docket
SDWIS &
Docket
Date of
Data Pull
Various
Various
3/21/00
4/2/01
3/21/00
1/27/01
3/21/00
1/27/01
12/22/00
Comments
-
-
-
-
-
-
36
State of Federal Facilities Report
------- |