y*"^
D STATES ENVIRONMENTAL P
>&&
OECA FY 2008 Accomplishments Report
}ublic Health and the Environment
OFFICE OF ENFORCEMENT AND COMPLIANCE ASSURANCE
-------
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance (MC2201A)
Washington, DC 20460
December 2008
www.epa.gov/compliance
EPA-300-R-08-004
To obtain additional copies contact:
nscep@bps-lmit.com or phone: 1-800-490-9198
> Recycled/Recyclable—Printed with vegetable oil based inks on 100% post-consumer, process chlorine-free recycled paper.
-------
Contents
Message from the Assistant Administrator 2
OECA's Mission 4
FY 2008 Results at a Glance 6
Getting the Word Out: Effective Compliance Assistance 8
The Environmental Cop is on the Beat: Compliance Monitoring 10
Delivering Environmental Results: Civil Enforcement Breaks Records 11
Environmental Crime Does Not Pay 18
Polluters Pay for Cleanup: Superfund Enforcement 21
Enforcement at Federal Facilities 23
Environmental Justice for All 26
Ensuring Compliance in Indian Country 28
Environmental Reviews Make a Difference: EPA's NEPA Program 29
International Compliance Activities 30
Tips and Complaints 32
Appendices 33
-------
\
Message From the Assistant Administrator
If someone had told me three years ago when I took the helm of
EPA's Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance (OECA) that
we would be protecting our nation's air, water, and land at a pace
never before seen in EPA's history, I would have expressed skepticism.
Today that skepticism is replaced with pride. OECA's accomplishments
for Fiscal Year (FY) 2008 are exceptional—in several instances reaching
record levels and even surpassing the combined historic records of
previous years.
The strength of EPA's enforcement program is illustrated by an
unprecedented run of record results. EPA holds polluters accountable.
In FY 2008, EPA concluded civil and criminal enforcement actions requiring polluters to spend
an estimated $11.8 billion, an agency record, on pollution controls, cleanup and environmental
projects. This exceeds the FY 2007 amount by approximately $800 million.* This means that
each workday OECA was securing agreements from violators to invest an estimated $47 million
to achieve compliance. The combined total for the last five years is an estimated $45 billion
($5.5, $11.3, $5.4, $11.0, and $11.8 billion, respectively-exceeding EPA's total annual budget
over the same period.
After all the complying actions for FY 2008 cases are completed, EPA estimates that 3.9 billion
pounds of pollution will be reduced or removed annually from the environment, the highest
amount since FY 1999. In the last five years EPA's record for estimated pollution reductions
stood at 1.1 billion pounds for FY 2005. The estimated pollutant reductions resulting from FY
2008 enforcement actions exceed FY 2005 by almost four times. The FY 2008 estimate also
exceeds the combined results obtained during FY 2004-2007 by nearly 100 million pounds.
Nearly half of this year's pollution reductions are the result of an enforcement action taken
against American Electric Power, one of the largest environmental settlements of all time. EPA,
along with our partners at the U.S. Department of Justice, and the States of New York,
Connecticut, New Jersey, Vermont, New Hampshire, Maryland, Rhode Island, and the
Commonwealth of Massachusetts, negotiated this historic settlement which will save an
estimated $32 billion in health costs per year.
In addition to achieving substantial pollutant reductions, FY 2008 settlements included significant
penalties for violations of environmental requirements. Penalties assessed by EPA play an impor-
tant role in deterring potential polluters from violating environmental laws and regulations. EPA
assessed approximately $127 million in civil penalties and courts sentenced defendants to pay $64
million in criminal fines.
Note: All prior FY dollar figures in this report are adjusted to reflect the current value in FY 2008 dollars based on the
monthly rate of inflation as determined by the U.S. Department of Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers.
OFFICE OF ENFORCEMENT AND COMPLIANCE ASSURANCE > FY'2008 OECA Accomplishments Report
-------
In January 2008, EPA secured a $20 million civil penalty from Massey Energy, the largest coal
producer in Central Appalachia. This penalty is the largest in EPA's history levied against a
company for wastewater discharge permit violations. The Massey settlement will not only
improve fish habitat, but will also reduce downstream flooding, benefiting a number of poor,
rural communities in Kentucky and West Virginia.
In FY 2008, EPA obtained commitments from responsible parties to invest nearly $1.6 billion
for investigations and cleanup of Superfund sites. This is the highest total in seven years, and
the fifth highest total in the history of the Superfund enforcement program.
Through our compliance assistance activities, EPA reached over 2.5 million entities. EPA's
compliance assistance programs include Web sites and guidance that provide detailed
information to millions of regulated entities, helping them understand and meet their
environmental obligations. Last year, EPA launched a new compliance assistance center
(www.campuserc.org) that provides comprehensive compliance assistance and pollution
prevention information for regulated activities at nearly 4,200 colleges and universities.
Since its inception two years ago, our Tips and Complaints Web site has received over 18,000
tips and resulted in opening 19 criminal cases. Last year, citizen tips resulted in two criminal
convictions.
In FY 2008, OECA's oversight of import and export hazardous waste notices prevented the
environmentally unsound importation of 97,000 tons of hazardous waste. OECA also devel-
oped a framework between the United States and China to establish training and programs on
exported and imported products to protect human health and the environment.
We work together with our partners at the U.S. Department of Justice and state governments
to achieve these results, and are proud of what we have accomplished. The commitment of
our staff and government partners was paramount in achieving our historic results. These
results will have lasting benefits for all people.
Sincerely,
fa
/
EPA ASSISTANT ADMINISTRATOR FOR
ENFORCEMENT AND COMPLIANCE ASSURANCE
MESSAGE FROM THE ASSISTANT ADMINISTRATOR
-------
OECA's Mission
"OECA's mission is to
improve the environment
and protect public health
by ensuring compliance
with the nation's environ-
mental laws."
EPA Strategic Plan
OECA is responsible for monitoring compliance with environmental laws, providing
compliance information and assistance to the regulated community, and taking
civil or criminal enforcement action when needed. OECA's goal is to ensure that
the environmental and public health benefits that are promised by our nation's environmen-
tal laws are realized. The diagram below illustrates how these activities work together to
accomplish that goal.
Enforcement & Compliance Lifecycle
LAWS AND REGULATIONS
I
CD
c
\
Return
to
compliance
ENFORCEMENT
ACTION
Identify violations
Identify potential
areas of
non-compliance
COMPLIANCE
ASSISTANCE
o
^
3
CD
Promote compliance
/IPLIANCE MOI\ 'ORING
(collect, review and analyze
information from monitoring,
tips, complaints, and
voluntary disclosures)
OFFICE OF ENFORCEMENT AND COMPLIANCE ASSURANCE > FY'2008 OECA Accomplishments Report
-------
OECA's responsibilities also include two other vital EPA programs: environmental justice
and National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) reviews. See the organizational chart at
Appendix A.
OECA's Workforce and Partners
In FY 2008, OECA had a workforce of about 3,300 environmental professionals. Two-thirds
of these employees are located in EPA's ten Regional offices, where they work closely with
our state partners to monitor and enforce compliance with the Nation's environmental laws.
OECA also works closely with the U.S. Department of Justice, which represents EPA in feder-
al court enforcement actions, and with other federal agencies on their NEPA decisions.
About This Report
This report highlights the accomplishments of OECA's enforcement, compliance and other
programs in FY 2008. The report explains key priorities and strategies, long-term trends, and
the results that OECA's programs have obtained for the public.
We encourage you to visit our Web site at www.epa.gov/compliance for more information
about OECA and its programs, our enforcement cases and annual results.
OECA's MISSION
-------
FY2008 Results At a Glance
"Strong enforcement is a
key to ensuring that the
promise of our environ-
mental statutes is matched
by the environmental
reality."
—Lynn Buhl,
Regional Administrator
EPA Region 5
In FY 2008, the enforcement actions concluded will reduce pollutant emissions to air,
water and land by an estimated 3.9 billion pounds per year, when the pollution controls
and other measures required by these actions are installed and operational. This is more
than four times the level of pollutant reductions accomplished in FY 2007, and nearly
equals the four prior years combined, as shown by the table below.
Estimated Pollutant Reduction Commitments
4,500
4,000
3,500
_ 3,000
1 2,500
~ 2,000
£
1,500
1,000
500
0
3,900
1,000
FY04
FY05
FY06
FY07
FY08
FY 2008 Data Source: Integrated Compliance Information System (ICIS), October 11, 2008; data source
for previous fiscal years: ICIS.
In addition, EPA obtained enforcement commitments from parties responsible for managing
hazardous waste to treat, minimize or properly dispose of an estimated 6.5 billion pounds
of hazardous waste.
These pollutant reductions will result from legally enforceable commitments by violators
who were not in compliance with the law to invest a total of over $11.8 billion, the highest
amount on record, in pollution controls, cleanup, and environmentally beneficial projects.
(See Appendix B for a detailed summary of our enforcement and compliance results.)
OFFICE OF ENFORCEMENT AND COMPLIANCE ASSURANCE > FY'2008 OECA Accomplishments Report
-------
FY 2008 Other Highlights
Civil Penalties. EPA obtained nearly $127 mil-
lion in civil penalties through civil judicial and
administrative enforcement actions this year.
This represents an increase of $55 million
over FY 2007.
Estimated Investments in Pollution Control and Cleanup plus
Environmentally Beneficial Projects
(Inflation Adjusted to FY 2008 Dollars)
$12
§ $10
% $6
$4
$2
$0
FY04
FY05
FY06
Note: All prior FY dollar figures in this report are adjusted to reflect the current value in FY 2008 dollars j
based on the monthly rate of inflation as determined by the U.S. Department of Labor Consumer Price
Index for All Urban Consumers. FY 2008 Data Source: Integrated Compliance Information System (ICIS), '
October 11, 2008: data source for previous fiscal years: ICIS.
Superfund Enforcement. EPA maintained
very vigorous Superfund enforcement activity
in FY 2008, ensuring that polluters, rather
than the public, pay for cleanups of
Superfund sites. We obtained commitments
from responsible parties to invest approxi-
mately $1.6 billion for investigation and
cleanup of contaminated sites. This will result
in the cleanup of an estimated 100 million
cubic yards of contaminated soil, an all-time
record for the Superfund enforcement pro-
gram, and about 255 million cubic yards of contaminated ground water. We also obtained
reimbursement from responsible parties of $232 million of EPA's past costs for Superfund
site investigations and cleanups.
Criminal Enforcement. EPA's criminal enforcement program obtained sentences totaling 57
years of incarceration, $64 million in fines and restitution, and $12 million in court-ordered
environmental projects. The relief obtained in criminal cases will result in pollutant reduc-
tions totaling 1.6 million pounds.
Compliance Monitoring and Assistance. EPA conducted 20,000 facility inspections and
evaluations in FY 2008, maintaining a strong presence that deters and detects non-compli-
ance with the nation's environmental laws. Many more inspections were conducted by our
state partners across the country, vastly expanding our ability to deter and detect potential
violations. EPA brought compliance assistance to a wide audience of over 2.5 million
through presentations, workshops, onsite visits and responses to inquiries, as well as indirect
outreach via mailings and internet-based assistance. EPA's compliance assistance resources
help small and medium-sized businesses meet their compliance responsibilities.
FY07
FY08
-
"
*',
FY2008 RESULTS AT A GLANCE
-------
4,000
_ 3,500
c
| 3,000
o
-^2,500
T3
FY'2008 OECA Accomplishments Report
-------
Sectors Served by Compliance Assistance Centers
Agriculture • Construction • Printed Wiring Board
• Federal Facilities • Printing
• Healthcare • Transportation
• Local Government
• Metal Finishing
• Paints and Coatings
Auto Recycling
Auto Repair
Border Compliance
Chemical
Colleges/Universities
Tribal Governments
Visit: www.epa.gov/
compliance/assistance/
centers
In FY 2008, EPA launched a new online center, the Campus Environmental Resource Center
(www.campuserc.org), to provide comprehensive environmental compliance assistance and
pollution prevention information. This Web center assists colleges and universities to identi-
fy the campus areas to which environmental requirements apply, e.g., laboratories and haz-
ardous waste disposal, and to ensure that they are in compliance with the law.
This year EPA also enhanced an online center (www.bordercenter.org) to address compliance
issues at our international borders. This Web site provides information on hazardous waste
transport issues across the Mexican border, municipal solid waste transport across the
Canadian border, and requirements applicable to small non-road engines, in response to an
increase in imports of polluting engines from Asia.
In recognition of the success of EPA's efforts, EPA received a special recognition award from
the Small Business Administration for its "extraordinary responsiveness and service to small
businesses regarding compliance and enforcement ;ssues."The 2007 National Small Business
Ombudsman's Report to Congress recognized EPA's Web compliance centers as "practical
tools that assist small businesses by providing comprehensive, easily accessible federal and
state compliance and pollution prevention information,"
GETTING THE WORD OUT
-------
Wf-
"All facilities that produce
hazardous pollutants must
carefully adhere to all
provisions of EPA's
requirements to ensure
that we are taking every
necessary step to protect
human health and our
environment."
-Robert W. Varney,
Regional Administrator
EPA Region 1
'(-'*
The Environmental Cop is on the Beat:
Compliance Monitoring
One of EPA's key responsibilities is to monitor compliance with the nation's envi-
ronmental laws, to deter and detect violations. OECA monitors compliance
through facility inspections by regional, state and tribal inspectors, as well as by
reviewing the self-monitoring reports that are submitted by regulated entities for many
environmental programs. OECA maintains a large national compliance database, which col-
lects the results of inspections and self-monitoring reports. We also make compliance infor-
mation available to the public through our Enforcement and Compliance History Online
(ECHO) Web site at www.epa-echo.gov/echo.
In FY 2008, EPA conducted approximately 20,000 inspections, and 222 civil investigations
(complex, in-depth examinations). In addition, our tribal partners, using federal credentials,
conducted 334 inspections to monitor compliance with environmental laws in Indian
Country. Many more inspections for compliance with national and state environmental
laws were conducted by state inspectors.
Number of Inspections/Evaluations Conducted by EPA
£ 25,000
_g
•M
= 20,000
re
>
LU
§ 15,000
£ 10,000
| 5,000
23,000
21,000 21,000
22,000
20,000
CM
MPRSA
CWA
EPCRA
FIFRA
RCRA
SDWA
TSCA
FY04 FY05 FY06 FY07
FY08
Note: Statutes in legend are presented in same order as in stacked bars on left. FY 2008 Data
Source: Integrated Compliance Information System (ICIS), legacy databases, and manual
reporting, October 11, 2008. Data source for previous fiscal years: ICIS, legacy databases, and
manual reporting.
OFFICE OF ENFORCEMENT AND COMPLIANCE ASSURANCE > FY'2008 OECA Accomplishments Report
-------
Delivering Environmental Results:
Civil Enforcement Breaks Records
i
n FY 2008, EPA's concluded enforcement actions will reduce pollutant emissions to air,
water and land by an estimated 3.9 billion pounds per year when the pollution controls
and other measures required by these actions are installed and operational.
These pollution reductions will result from legally enforceable commitments by violators to invest
an estimated $11.8 billion, the highest amount on record, on installing pollution controls, cleanup
and environmental projects.
Focus on National Enforcement Priorities Brings Results
EPA secured these record commitments by focusing on specific environmental programs and
sectors that were selected as national priorities for enforcement attention. OECA achieved
nearly 82 percent of the FY 2008 pollution reductions and 66 percent of the pollution
control investments in our high-priority areas.
FY 2008 National Priority Contributions
5.6%
0.4%
RCRA Priority
Tribal Priority
Air Priority
Water Priority
Non-Priority
28.0% /
Pounds of Pollutants
to Be Reduced
Pollution Control
Investments
OECA selected the national priority areas by reviewing national data and compliance infor-
mation, and soliciting input from our state partners and the public. This review identified
areas of significant non-compliance with the nation's environmental laws across the coun-
try that resulted in substantial amounts of illegal pollution. OECA conducts this review every
three years. EPA focused on the following national priorities during FY 2008:
DELIVERING ENVIRONMENTAL RESULTS
"Focusing enforcement
resources on priority
environmental problems
yields significant benefits
for the environment and
public health."
-Catherine R. McCabe,
Principal Deputy Assistant
Administrator
OECA
-------
•Clean Air Act Enforcement Priorities
Clean Air Act/Prevention of Significant Deterioration and New Source Review: The
New Source Review (NSR) and Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) requirements of
the Clean Air Act (CAA) require facilities in certain sectors to install state-of-the-art pollu-
tion controls when they are newly constructed or significantly modified. Failure to comply
with these requirements in some sectors has led to illegal emissions of thousands of tons of
pollutants, including sulfur dioxide (S02), nitrogen oxides (NOX), volatile organic compounds
(VOC), and particulate matter (PM). OECA's priority enforcement efforts have focused on
coal-fired power plants, and glass, acid, and cement manufacturers.
Clean Air Act/Air Toxics: This priority focuses on enforcing compliance with the Maximum
Achievable Control Technology (MACT) standards for control of toxic air pollutants from
sources that emit hazardous air pollutants.
— Clean Water Act Enforcement Priorities
OECA ensures compliance with Clean Water Act (CWA) requirements by addressing four
environmental challenges that are exacerbated by wet weather. Wet weather discharges
contain bacteria, pathogens, and other pollutants that can cause illnesses in humans, and
lead to water quality impairment.
4 Combined Sewer Overflows (CSOs): Combined sewer systems are designed to collect
rainwater runoff, domestic sewage, and industrial wastewater in the same pipe. During
periods of rainfall or snow melt, the wastewater volume in a combined sewer system
can exceed the capacity of the system or treatment plant, leading to discharge of pollu-
tants into waterways.
4 Sanitary Sewer Overflows (SSOs): Sanitary sewers are designed to carry sewage only,
but these sewers also can overflow when the system's capacity or operation and mainte-
nance is inadequate. This can lead to the discharge of bacteria, pathogens, nutrients,
untreated industrial wastes, toxic pollutants, such as oil and pesticides, and wastewater
solids and debris into waterways.
4 Stormwater: Stormwater runoff from urban areas, industrial areas, and construction
sites can include a variety of pollutants, such as sediment, bacteria, organic nutrients,
hydrocarbons, metals, oil, and grease. Violations of requirements for control of Stormwa-
ter runoff can lead to discharge of these contaminants into waterways.
4 Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations (CAFOs): CAFOs generate a large volume of
animal waste in concentrated areas. When requirements for control of this waste are
not met, the waste can contaminate surface and ground waters.
12
OFFICE OF ENFORCEMENT AND COMPLIANCE ASSURANCE > FY'2008 OECA Accomplishments Report
-------
Resource Conservation and
Recovery Act Enforcement Priorities
Mineral Processing Facilities: Mineral processing facilities are often extremely large facili-
ties which produce a substantial amount of hazardous waste containing metals and often
water with low pH. Over the past decade, EPA has found that many of the facilities that
manage these wastes have contaminated ground water, surface water and soil either
through failure to comply with state or federal environmental requirements or legally per-
missible waste management practices. Large-scale mineral processing and mining opera-
tions often severely affect water supplies and wildlife and create environmental damage.
Some facilities are located in populated areas, making health risks a significant concern for
EPA. This enforcement priority seeks to ensure that these facilities are complying with
requirements for the handling and disposal of hazardous waste.
Financial Responsibility
Hazardous waste facility operators are required to maintain adequate funding for facility
closure, including ensuring that any spills or leaks are cleaned up. The funds provide for the
ability to clean up hazardous materials so they do not contaminate soils, ground water, sur-
face waters or the air. Having the financial resources to perform closure and cleanup are an
important part of protecting human health and the environment from solvents, dioxins, oils,
heavy metals, polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), and other dangerous pollutants. OECA has
been giving priority attention to assuring that these vital financial protections are in place.
Indian Country Enforcement and Compliance Priority
Federally-recognized Indian tribes are often faced with significant human health and envi-
ronmental problems associated with drinking water supplies, solid waste disposal, and envi-
ronmental risks in Indian schools (e.g., asbestos, lead paint). For the thousands of tribal
members dependent on approximately 800 public drinking water systems in Indian country,
including those providing drinking water to schools, violations of health-based standards
can result in serious illness. Illegal dumping of solid waste and hazardous waste poses sig-
nificant threats to soil and ground water. Uncontrolled dumps may catch on fire releasing
particulate matter and other pollutants into the air and ecosystem, and discarded pesticides
and other chemicals may leach into ground water or run off into surface water. OECA and
the EPA Regions are working to build the tribes' capacity to monitor and address these
problems, as well as taking appropriate enforcement action to correct problems that occur
in Indian Country.
DELIVERING ENVIRONMENTAL RESULTS
13
-------
Public Health Benefits
OECA's focus on air enforcement yields substantial benefits for the environment and public
health. Air pollution threatens human health by causing serious respiratory problems and
exacerbating childhood asthma.
EPA's 10 largest enforcement actions for stationary source Clean Air Act violations obtained
commitments by companies to reduce their emissions of sulfur oxides (SOx), nitrogen oxides
(NOx) and particulate matter (PM). The annual human health benefits from these reductions
in SOX, NOX, and PM are estimated at $35 billion. These health benefits include:
* Approximately 4,000 avoided premature deaths in people with heart or lung disease;
^ Over 2,000 fewer emergency room visits for diseases such as asthma and respiratory failure;
4 About 6,000 fewer cases of chronic bronchitis and acute bronchitis;
^ About 4,000 fewer nonfatal heart attacks;
* Over 30,000 fewer cases of upper aggravated asthma;
^ Over 50,000 fewer cases of upper and lower respiratory symptoms; and
4 Over 200,000 fewer days when people would miss work or school.
Data Source of Pollutant Reduction: Integrated Compliance Information System (ICIS), October 11, 2008. Benefit Estimate: The estimate of
benefits of reducing PIV^ and its precursors (SOX and NOX) was generated by Office of Air Quality Planning and Standards Organization
(OAQPS).
Enforcement Case Highlights
The following examples reflect our FY 2008 enforcement agreements involving coal-fired
electric power utilities, construction sites, mineral processors, and wastewater discharge
permit holders.
Coal-fired Power Plants
Coal-fired power plants release S02, NOX, and PM which cause respiratory problems and
contribute to childhood asthma, acid rain, smog, and haze. In one of the largest cases in
EPA history, American Electric Power will cut an estimated 1.6 billion pounds of air pollution
from its coal-fired power plants. The company will also pay a $15 million penalty and spend
$60 million on projects to mitigate the adverse effects of past emissions.
OFFICE OF ENFORCEMENT AND COMPLIANCE ASSURANCE > FY'2008 OECA Accomplishments Report
-------
Stormwater
Without onsite pollution controls, construction site runoff can flow directly to the nearest
waterway and degrade water quality. Runoff contains pollutants such as concrete washout,
paint, used oil, pesticides, solvents and other debris.
Four of the nation's largest home builders will pay more than $4 million to prevent an
estimated 1.2 billion pounds of sediment from polluting our nation's waterways each year.
The builders—KB Home, Centex, Pulte and Richmond—will implement comprehensive,
company-wide programs to improve compliance. The builders must develop improved
pollution prevention plans, increase site inspections, promptly correct problems, and ensure
construction site staff are properly trained.
Mineral Processing
In FY 2008, EPA issued an order to Agrifos Fertilizer Inc. and ExxonMobil to address waste-
water management and prevent future imminent and substantial endangerment to human
health and the environment. In August 2007, a retaining wall at Agrifos' Pasadena, Texas
mineral processing facility failed, releasing more than 50 million gallons of acidic waste-
water into local waters causing the death of thousands of fish. The companies are required
to take specific steps to properly treat and dispose of 1.75 billion pounds of hazardous
waste per year.
Wastewater Discharge
Massey Energy, the largest coal producer in central Appalachia, will pay a $20 million civil
penalty in a corporate-wide settlement to resolve CWA violations at coal mines in West
Virginia and Kentucky. This is the largest civil penalty in EPA's history levied against a com-
pany for wastewater discharge permit violations. Massey will take measures to prevent an
estimated 380 million pounds of pollutants from entering the water; invest approximately
$10 million to develop a comprehensive system to prevent future violations; and set aside
200 acres of riverfront land in West Virginia for conservation purposes.
DELIVERING ENVIRONMENTAL RESULTS
-------
FY 2007 and 2008 Enforcement and Compliance Annual Results
Priority Air, Water, Land & Financial Assurance Problems
Priority
Estimated Pollutants to be Reduced
(millions of pounds)
Estimated Investments in Pollution Control
(millions of dollars)
Priority Air Pollution Problems
NSR/PSD
Air Toxics
Total Air
FY 2007
426 M
0.8 M
426.8 M
FY 2008
1,654M
0.09 M
1,654M
FY 2007
$2,521 M
$11 M
$ 2,532 M
FY 2008
$4,790 M
$7 M
$4,787 M
Priority Wet Weather Pollution Problems
CSO/SSO
CAFO
Stormwater
Total Wet
Weather
45 M
15M
118 M
178M
173M
32 M
1,329M
1,534M
$3,635 M
$30 M
$9 M
$3,674 M
$2,909 M
$10 M
$68 M
$2,986 M
Priority Land Pollution Problems
Mineral
Processing
Mineral
Processing
NC*
1,751 M
Estimated Pounds of Hazardous
Waste Treated, Minimized, or Properly
Disposed of (millions of pounds)
NC*
1,751M
$59M
$217 M
Estimated Investments in Pollution Control
(millions of dollars)
$60 M
$217 M
Estimated Value of Financial
Assurance Restored (millions of dollars)
Financial
Responsibility
NA*
NA*
NC*
$134M
Note: All prior FY dollar figures in this report are adjusted to reflect the current value in FY 2008 dollars based on the monthly
rate of inflation as determined by the U.S. Department of Labor Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers.
* NA = not applicable; NC = no data collected
Civil penalties play a significant role in deterring potential violators and "leveling the play-
ing field" for those who comply with environmental laws. In FY 2008, EPA assessed about
$127 million in civil penalties against defendants—nearly $50 million more than FY 2007.
Civil Penalties Assessed
(Inflation Adjusted to FY 2008 Dollars)
$200.0
.$150.0
$170
$171
From Administrative Cases
From Civil Judicial Cases
From Default Judgement Cases
$127
$0.0
FY04 FY05 FY 06 FY 07 FY 08
Note: All prior FY dollar figures in this report are adjusted to reflect the current value in FY 2008 dollars based on the monthly
rate of inflation as determined by the U.S. Department of Labor Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers. FY 2008 Data
Source: Integrated Compliance Information System (ICIS), October 11, 2008; data source for previous fiscal years: ICIS.
OFFICE OF ENFORCEMENT AND COMPLIANCE ASSURANCE > FY '2008 OECA Accomplishments Report
-------
Compliance Incentives for Proactive Behavior: EPA's Audit Policy
and eDisclosure System
EPA provides incentives to companies that voluntarily discover, promptly disclose, correct,
and prevent future environmental violations through the Audit Policy. EPA may reduce or
waive penalties for violations if the facility meets the conditions of the policy. EPA will
not waive or reduce penalties for repeat violations, or violations that resulted in serious
actual harm.
The Audit Policy has yielded great results. Since 1995 more than 3,500 companies have
disclosed and resolved violations at nearly 10,000 facilities under the policy. FY 2008 marks
the highest total of facilities that disclosed violations in a single year—2,294 facilities.
Recognizing the success of the program, EPA decided to maximize results by taking the
Audit Policy in some new directions. In FY 2008, EPA launched a new approach that offers
incentives to new owners of facilities who correct environmental violations at recently-
acquired facilities. Under the new approach, new owners may be eligible for reduced penal-
ties. The new approach encourages owners of recently-acquired facilities to come forward,
make a clean start by addressing environmental noncompliance, and promptly make
changes to ensure they stay in compliance.
EPA made additional changes to streamline
the process for everyone. Now, regulated
entities can submit self-disclosures online
through a new Web-based system,
"eDisclosure." The new system allows facili-
ties to submit their information securely on
EPA's Web site, and should reduce transac-
tion costs by ensuring that each disclosure
contains complete information. The
eDisclosure Web site can be found at
www.epa.gov/compliance/incentives/
auditing/edisclosure.html.
EPA Voluntary Disclosure Programs
Voluntary Disclosures Initiated
2,500
2,000
c 1,500
o
o
J 1,000
500
0
Companies
Facilities
2,294
-
1,487
1,223
1,021
627
538
FY04 FY05 FY 06 FY 07 FY 08
FY 2008 Data Source: Integrated Compliance Information System (ICIS), October 1, 2008; data source
for previous fiscal years: ICIS.
DELIVERING ENVIRONMENTAL RESULTS
-------
"Submitting false informa-
tion in order to mislead
authorities is illegal and
will not be tolerated.
The Justice Department
will continue to work
cooperatively with EPA and
other law enforcement
agencies to ensure the
public's safety and protect
our natural resources."
—Ronald J. Tenpas,
Assistant Attorney General
for the U.S. Department of
Justice's Environment and
teal Resources Division
Environmental Crime Does Not Pay
The mission of OECA's Office of Criminal Enforcement, Forensics and Training is to
punish and deter serious environmental offenses. OECA's special agents, supported
by forensic specialists at the National Enforcement Investigations Center, investi-
gate allegations of criminal environmental violations, and work with criminal prosecutors at
the U.S. Department of Justice to prosecute violators. Criminal enforcement actions are
brought to address criminal violations of federal environmental statutes, as well as associ-
ated violations of the U.S. Criminal Code such as conspiracy, making false statements to
investigators, interfering with an investigation, and mail fraud. Most of the environmental
crimes that EPA pursues involve "knowing violations" of the law, which are classified as
felonies.
Criminal enforcement is the federal government's strongest sanction, with the possibility
of incarceration of individuals, as well as significant monetary fines and restitution. The
overall activities and results of EPA's criminal enforcement actions during FY 2008 are
shown below.
FY 2008 Criminal Enforcement Program Results
Cases Initiated
Defendants Charged
Sentences (years)
Fines and Restitution
Judicially Mandated Projects (cost in dollars)
Pollutant Reductions (Ibs)
319
176
57
$64 million
$12 million
1.6 million
FY 2008 data source: Integrated Compliance Information System (ICIS), October 2008.
OFFICE OF ENFORCEMENT AND COMPLIANCE ASSURANCE > FY'2008 OECA Accomplishments Report
-------
EPA's criminal enforcement program addresses all of the
environmental statutes and it uses a strategic approach to
identify cases with significant environmental and human
health impact, cases which enhance deterrence, and cases
which advance EPA's enforcement priorities. Thirty four
national enforcement priority criminal cases were opened
in FY 2008, with six resulting in formal charges being filed
during the year.
A prosecution that advances EPA's water enforcement pri-
ority was brought against Archer Daniels Midland (ADM)
Company's Chattanooga, Tennessee facility, which manu-
factures high-quality paper products from raw cotton. The
company lacked equipment needed to contain spills and
other releases. ADM pled guilty to negligently discharging
pollutants from the plant into Chattanooga Creek, a tribu-
tary of the Tennessee River, and was sentenced to pay a
$100,000 criminal fine and another $100,000 in restitu-
tion to three environmental agencies and associations.
EPA investigators give priority to cases involving actual
and threatened harm to human health or the environ-
ment. In a case against British Petroleum Exploration
(Alaska), Inc., the company pled guilty to a Clean Water
Act violation relating to two pipeline leaks of crude oil,
one of which was the largest spill to ever occur on the
North Slope. The company paid a $12 million criminal
fine, $4 million in community service payments to the
National Fish and Wildlife Foundation, and $4 million in
criminal restitution to the State of Alaska, and will serve
three years probation.
Large Fines for Dumping in Gulf of
Mexico
Rowan Companies, Inc., a major oil and gas drilling compa-
ny, pled guilty and paid a $7 million dollar fine for three
Clean Water Act felonies for discharging pollutants into the
Gulf of Mexico from one of its oil rigs and for failing to
notify the government of the discharges. Rowan also paid
$1 million for preservation and protection projects off the
coasts of Texas and Louisiana. Nine supervisory employees
of Rowan also pled guilty and were fined.
Prison Sentence for Illegal Asbestos
Removal
Cleve Allen George, the owner of the Virgin Islands Asbestos
Removal Company, received 33 months in prison for multi-
ple Clean Air Act convictions for illegal removal of
asbestos-containing material at a low-income housing
project and making false statements to federal agencies
about air quality monitoring at the site. The owner was also
sentenced to three years of supervised release and required
to pay for baseline X-rays for exposed workers.
The prosecution of national corporations deters widespread violations, and encourages sec-
tor-wide compliance. In the largest criminal fine ever for a misdemeanor violation of the
Clean Water Act, CITGO was sentenced to pay a $13 million fine for the negligent discharge
of pollutants into two rivers in Louisiana. CITGO failed to maintain stormwater tanks and
adequate stormwater storage capacity at its petroleum refinery in Sulphur, Louisiana. As a
result of these failures, approximately 53,000 barrels of oil were discharged into the Indian
Marais and Calcasieu Rivers following a heavy rainstorm.
ENVIRONMENTAL CRIME DOES NOT PAY
-------
The sentences for those who repeat environmental crimes are often stiffen Ronald Jagielo,
owner of MRS Plating, Lockport, New York, was sentenced to 21 months incarceration and
was ordered to pay $1 million in restitution and serve three years of supervised release after
pleading guilty to a felony violation for disposal of hazardous wastes without a permit. This
was the second felony conviction for Jagielo, who served a year in prison in 2000 after
pleading guilty to illegally discharging wastes into the Lockport water treatment system
where he had installed a device that hid the discharges from inspectors.
Criminal Enforcement Reaches Across International Boundaries
Some enforcement actions involved international defendants. For instance, the
National Navigation Company (NNC), an Egyptian company with offices and head-
quarters in Cairo, Egypt, operated a fleet of ocean-going vessels that transports
cargo, goods and people. From 2001 through 2007, engineering crews aboard vessels
operated by the NNC regularly discharged oily sludge directly into oceans throughout
the world.
During the investigation, EPA and the Coast Guard discovered six NNC vessels
dumped thousands of gallons of waste oil and sludge in oceans around the world
and falsified records to cover it up. Engineering crews routinely discharged oily
sludge by installing a bypass pipe which allowed crews to pump oily sludge directly
from waste tanks aboard vessels into the ocean. NNC pled guilty and paid a $4.7
million criminal fine and $2.55 million in projects for 15 felony violations of the Act
to Prevent Pollution from Ships and making false statements to federal officials.
OFFICE OF ENFORCEMENT AND COMPLIANCE ASSURANCE > FY2008 OECA Accomplishments Report
-------
J^I
Polluters Pay for Cleanup: Superfund
Enforcement
EPA's Office of Site Remediation Enforcement manages the enforcement of EPA's
national hazardous waste cleanup programs. This includes Superfund cleanups under
the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act and
cleanups at facilities that treat, store, or dispose of hazardous waste under the Resource
Conservation and Recovery Act.
Superfund enforcement and other remediation agreements resulted in an estimated 100
million cubic yards of contaminated soil cleaned up and in the remediation of approximately
255 billion cubic yards of contaminated ground water.
Estimated Volume of Contaminated Soil and Water to be Cleaned Up
Contaminated Soil to be Cleaned
(Cu. Yds.)
120,000
100,000
c 80,000
, 60,000
"5 40,000
20,000
1,800,000
Contaminated Water to be Cleaned
(Cu. Yds.)
1,600,000
FY04 FY05
100,000 1,600,000
11,400,000
1.400,000 I 1,300,000 ^^H
||l,200,000
J 1,000, 000
I 800,000
j ««» III
™: ,111
FY05 FY 06 FY 07 FY 08 FY 04 FY 05 FY 06 FY 07
255,000
FY08
FY 2008 Data Source: Integrated Compliance Information System (ICIS), October 11, 2008; data source for previous fiscal years: ICIS.
Disclaimer: Minor corrections may have been made to previous years' data.
As a result of the Agency's efforts in FY 2008 to maximize liable party participation in per-
forming and paying for cleanups, private parties agreed to invest approximately $1.6 billion
to clean up contamination and to reimburse EPA $308 million for its past response and
oversight costs.
mental responsibilities."
k—Marcia E. Mulkey,
Director
Office of Site Remediation
Enforcement
OECA
POLLUTERS PAY FOR CLEANUP
-------
Private Party Commitments for Superfund Site Study & Cleanup,
Oversight & Cost Recovery
(Inflation Adjusted to FY 2008 Dollars)
$2,000
$1,800
_^$ 1,600
| $1,400
£ $1,200
c
j& $1,000
I $800
^ $600
Cost Recovery
Oversight
Site Study & Cleanup
FY04
FY05
FY06
FY07
FY08
Note: All prior FY dollar figures in this report are adjusted to reflect the current value in FY 2008 dollars
based on the monthly rate of inflation as determined by the U.S. Department of Labor Consumer Price
Index for All Urban Consumers. FY 2008 Data Source for Clean-up and Cost Recovery: Comprehensive
Environmental Response, Compensation & Liability Information System (CERCLIS), October 30, 2008:
FY 2008 Data Source for Oversight: Integrated Financial Management System (IFMS), October 18 2008:
Data source for previous fiscal years: CERCLIS and IFMS.
Bankrupt Polluter Pays
EPA vigorously pursues all liable parties for Superfund cleanup
costs, including bankrupt parties. In FY 2008, W. R. Grace paid
$250 million to clean up asbestos contamination at the Libby
Montana Superfund site. The Libby settlement sets a new
record for the amount of money paid in bankruptcy to clean up
a Superfund site. In addition, W. R. Grace agreed to an allowed
claim in bankruptcy of $34 million for the cleanup of 32
Superfund sites in eighteen states.
OFFICE OF ENFORCEMENT AND COMPLIANCE ASSURANCE > FY'2008 OECA Accomplishments Report
-------
Enforcement at Federal Facilities
E
PA's actions against federal facilities secured commitments to perform cleanup work,
pay penalties, and take steps to improve compliance. These actions will prevent more
than 1.7 million pounds of pollutants from being released into the environment.
Cleanups at federal facilities will address more than 110 million cubic yards of contaminated
soil and ground water. EPA assessed over $1.4 million in penalties and federal facilities com-
mitted to spend more than $23 million to improve facilities and operations to remedy past
violations and prevent future violations.
Underground Storage Tanks
In FY 2008, EPA took nearly three dozen formal enforcement actions against federal facilities
for underground storage tank (LIST) violations. EPA also collected over $400,000 in penalties.
Common violations included the failure to have tank release detection and tank piping.
+ EPA issued a complaint to the Puerto Rico National Guard and the Army and Air Force
Exchange Service, located at Camp Santiago, Puerto Rico, that proposed a penalty of
$209,264 for alleged multiple violations of LIST requirements.
+ The U.S. Air Force, New Jersey National Guard and the Army and Air Force Exchange
Service entered into a settlement with EPA resolving violations of UST requirements at
the McGuire Air Force Base in New Jersey. The agreement required payment of $115,000
in penalties and the installation of proper corrosion protection equipment, overfill protec-
tion and leak detection equipment. It also requires improved annual testing and record-
keeping at the 20 UST systems used to store fuels for vehicles at the base.
+ The U.S. Postal Service's vehicle maintenance facility in Capital Heights, Maryland failed
to install equipment that would prevent spilling and overfilling when material was trans-
ferred to the UST system. The U.S. Postal Service paid a $16,624 penalty.
"The U.S. government, like
every regulated entity, must
comply with all federal
environmental require-
ments. When federal
agencies don't comply, it's
our job to get them back
into compliance."
Dave Kling,
Director
Federal Facilities
Enforcement Office
ENFORCEMENT AT FEDERAL FACILITIES
23
-------
Federal Superfund Sites
More than 150 federal facility cleanup sites are listed on the Superfund National Priorities
List. The Superfund law requires EPA and federal owners or operators of Superfund sites to
enter into enforceable agreements for the cleanup of the sites. EPA has agreements in place
at most sites and continues to negotiate agreements at remaining sites.
+ In FY 2008, EPA, the U.S. Navy, the U.S. Department of the Interior and the
Commonwealth of Puerto Rico finalized an agreement for a former military site on the
Puerto Rican island of Vieques.
+ EPA and the U.S. Coast Guard also completed an agreement governing the cleanup of the
Coast Guard's Curtis Bay facility in Baltimore, Maryland.
+ EPA takes action when federal facilities are not complying with cleanup agreements. In
FY 2008, EPA enforced against the Department of Energy (DOE) for failure to perform
cleanup work at the Hanford site in Washington. DOE agreed to pay a $285,000 penalty,
purchase two emergency response boats (estimated cost $200,000) for the local sheriffs
office to respond to any hazardous material spills, and construct a greenhouse and nurs-
ery (estimated cost over $600,000) at a nearby campus of Washington State University to
grow native vegetation to be used to rehabilitate habitat at the site. DOE also agreed to
pay a $75,000 penalty for missing cleanup deadlines.
+ When the U.S. Navy failed to properly monitor wells at the Brunswick Naval Air Station in
Maine, EPA assessed $153,000 in stipulated penalties.
+ Tyndall Air Force Base in Florida is a Superfund site where EPA found an imminent and
substantial endangerment due to contamination in ground and surface water and in soil
and sediments at the base. The ground water is used for drinking and nearby Shoal Bayou
is used for recreational fishing and wading and has sensitive ecological resources.
Because of this endangerment, EPA issued a RCRA order requiring the Air Force to
investigate contamination at the base and take action to clean it up.
OFFICE OF ENFORCEMENT AND COMPLIANCE ASSURANCE > FY'2008 OECA Accomplishments Report
-------
Under agreements completed prior to FY 2008, federal facilities continue to investigate
and clean up environmental contamination. DOE is currently cleaning up contaminated
ground water and soil at an estimated cost of over $626 million at the Lawrence
Livermore National Laboratory Site 300 in California, a high-explosives test facility.
The U.S. Army will spend over $150 million to clean up almost 45 million cubic yards of
contaminated ground water at Fort Ord, a former base near Monterey Bay in California.
The Army will also dedicate part of the base as a wildlife reserve after munitions in the
soil are addressed.
Criminal Enforcement for Illegal Waste Discharge
A former Chief Warrant Officer in the U.S. Coast Guard was sentenced in U.S. District
Court in Hawaii for making a false statement to federal criminal agents investigating
allegations of potential discharges of oil-contaminated waste from his Coast Guard
cutter. The officer was sentenced to pay a $5,000 fine, serve 200 hours of community
service and serve two years of probation. In the indictment, the officer was cited for
lying to federal criminal investigators about his knowledge of an illegal discharge of
bilge wastes through the ship's deep sink into Honolulu Harbor.
ENFORCEMENT AT FEDERAL FACILITIES
-------
"At EPA, environmental
justice is a program, not
just a slogan. ... No other
federal agency has
attempted to incorporate
environmental justice into
its programs, policies, and
activities as comprehen-
sively as EPA."
— Charles Lee,
Director
Environmental
Justice
OECA
Environmental Justice for All
I
The Environmental Justice (EJ) program continues to assist the Agency in integrating
environmental justice into key agency actions, strategic plans, and guidance. EPA's
efforts support Presidential Executive Order 12898, Federal Actions to Address
Environmental Justice in Minority Populations and Low-Income Populations.
In FY 2008, EPA continued to assist environmental justice communities on proactive, strate-
gic, and visionary approaches to address their environmental issues. EPA collaborated with
community-based organizations to achieve the following results:
+ Implemented a community-led campaign in Bushwick, New York to reduce indoor
exposure to asthma triggers.
+ Developed a beach closure management plan for the State of Washington, and raised the
community's awareness about safe and sustainable methods of harvesting shellfish.
+ Cleaned up and prepared an abandoned lot for redevelopment in the Hawaiian island
of Kauai.
EPA's Environmental Justice Priorities
Reduce asthma attacks
Reduce exposure to air toxics
Reduce incidences of elevated blood lead levels
Ensure that companies meet environmental laws
Ensure that fish and shellfish are safe to eat
Ensure that water is safe to drink
Revitalize brownfields and contaminated sites
Foster collaborative problem-solving
In the last three years, EPA has made significant progress in strengthening its environmental
justice program through the integration of environmental justice considerations into EPA's
core planning and budgeting processes. The Agency's eight national environmental justice
priorities are reflected in the Agency's Strategic Plan and in FY 2008 were a focus in the
annual National Program Manager Guidance documents. By instituting these actions, EPA is
building a stronger foundation to successfully integrate environmental justice into its pro-
grams for the long term.
OFFICE OF ENFORCEMENT AND COMPLIANCE ASSURANCE > FY'2008 OECA Accomplishments Report
-------
Environmental Justice Achievement Awards
In FY 2008, EPA presented its first annual awards to recognize organizations for distin-
guished accomplishments in addressing environmentaljustice issues. Projects included
empowering residents to clean up New Orleans East for a safe return after Hurricane Katrina
and developing a tool to target high-risk homes with lead contamination in Durham, North
Carolina. EPA received dozens of nominations from across the United States. This year's
twelve award recipients, listed below, include community-based organizations, universities,
and state and local governments from nine states.
EPA's Inaugural Environmental Justice Awardees
• Anahola Homesteaders Council (Kauai, Hawaii)
• Center for Environmental and Economic Justice (Biloxi, Mississippi)
• Citizens for Environmental Justice (Savannah, Georgia)
• Communities for a Better Environment (Huntington Park, California)
• Dillard University, Deep South Center for Environmental Justice (New Orleans, Louisiana)
• Duke University, Children's Environmental Health Initiative (Durham, North Carolina)
• Medical University of South Carolina (Charleston, South Carolina)
• Negocio Verde Environmental Justice Task Force (County of San Diego, California)
• New Mexico Environment Department (Santa Fe, New Mexico)
• Safer Pest Control Project (Chicago, Illinois)
• South Carolina Department of Health and Environmental Control (Columbia, South Carolina)
• West End Revitalization Association (Mebane, North Carolina)
EJ Grants Program
In FY 2008, EPA announced the "Environmental Justice Small Grants Program Application
Guidance FY 2008." These grants are designed for projects that address local environmental
and public health issues within an EJ community. In addition, the grants aim to assist recipi-
ents in building collaborative partnerships. EPA will award the 40 small grants totaling
$800,000 early next year. For more information visit our Web site at www.epa.gov/
compliance/environmentaljustice/grants/ej-smgrants.html.
ENVIRONMENTAL JUSTICE FOR ALL
-------
"EPA has a responsibility
to help tribes protect their
resources and provide
basic services like water
and sewer to their
members."
—Wayne Nastri,
Regional Administrator
EPA Region 9
Ensuring Compliance in Indian Country
orking with federally-recognized Indian tribes, EPA uses compliance assistance,
inspections, and enforcement to address significant human health and environ-
mental problems in Indian Country.
As part of our Indian Country priority, OECA continued to focus attention on drinking water
and on solid waste issues in Indian Country in FY 2008. EPA took six enforcement actions to
protect the safety of drinking water in Indian Country. These actions represent the largest
number of formal enforcement actions taken in Indian Country in one year under the Safe
Drinking Water Act. Examples of EPA's enforcement actions are described below.
+ EPA Region 8 enforced against the Fort Belknap Community Council and Prairie
Mountain Utilities for violations found at three public water systems. Another action was
taken against a Northern Cheyenne Tribe for faulty water storage tanks that could poten-
tially contaminate drinking water.
+ EPA enforced against a facility operating on Arizona tribal lands in response to an immi-
nent and substantial endangerment created by ground water contamination. EPA Region
9 issued a unilateral order to the Plymouth Tube company on the Gila River Indian
Community in Chandler after the tribe discovered a contamination plume below the
facility. The plume contained trichloroethylene and other solvents in concentrations
above federal drinking water standards. Ground water is the sole source of drinking water
for the Tribe and the order requires the company to investigate the nature and extent of
the ground water.
OFFICE OF ENFORCEMENT AND COMPLIANCE ASSURANCE > FY'2008 OECA Accomplishments Report
-------
Environmental Reviews Make a
Difference: EPA's NEPA Program
OECA's Office of Federal Activities and its regional counterparts review and
comment on other federal agencies' Environmental Impact Statements (EISs).
Agencies prepare the EISs under the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA)
and EPA reviews the documents in accordance with Section 309 of the Clean Air Act.
EPA's review is intended to help federal agencies identify and ultimately avoid or mitigate
potential adverse impacts from their projects.
In FY 2008, EPA reviewed over 500 EISs involving a wide range of federal projects.
Some of the project reviews included: the establishment of offshore liquid natural gas
ports, alternative energy projects (e.g., wind turbines), major highway projects (e.g., 1-69
the NAFTA Highway), the Red River valley water supply project, and oil and gas
development projects.
Over 75 percent of the significant adverse effects identified through EPA's reviews of
other agencies' EISs were reduced through project modifications and/or mitigation com-
mitments. As one example, EPA's direct involvement in the proposed expansion of the
Pinedale Anticline natural gas well field in Wyoming led to commitments to reduce
greenhouse gas emissions and remediate ground water
contamination.
\\ A
"NEPA remains a valuable
tool for understanding and
mitigating the environ-
mental mpacts of federal
actions
\ \\w
Bromm,
Director
Office of Federal Activites
OECA
\
1
EPA was successful in its first use of a third-party
mediator in an EIS review of a joint U.S. Forest Service
and U.S. Army Corps of Engineers proposal to expand a
reservoir in Colorado. EPA Region 8 raised concerns
over the potential impacts to rare and valuable wet-
lands in the area. The mediator provided assistance in
bringing together the agencies, identifying their inter-
ests, and developing options. Ultimately the agencies
agreed to include new alternatives that would protect
the wetlands.
Project Reviews Identify Environmental
Justice Impacts
EPA's review of EISs on federal projects can help identify
and mitigate the environmental justice concerns associated
with major federal projects. For example, the Port of Los
Angeles signed a resolution to adopt and implement clean
air initiatives and develop a mitigation fund for projects
intended to mitigate air quality impacts to the neighboring
San Pedro and Wilmington communities. The resolution
prevented litigation between the environmental community
and the Port over the TraPac Terminal Expansion Project's
air quality and health impacts to the neighboring
environmental justice community.
ENVIRONMENTAL REVIEWS MAKE A DIFFERENCE
-------
FY'2008 OECA Accomplishments Report
-------
Foreign Manufacturers and U.S. Importers
In FY 2008, EPA enforcement actions addressed many problems with imported products that
did not comply with environmental requirements. Imports included non-road engines and
parts that do not meet U.S. air pollution requirements, products containing unregistered
pesticides that are harmful to children and chemicals that deplete the stratospheric ozone
layer (e.g., confetti string, consumer products manufactured with radioactive scrap metals,
lead in faucets).
EPA is working directly with the Chinese government on import safety issues. In December
2007, EPA and China's General Administration of Quality Supervision, Inspection and
Quarantine signed a Memorandum of Understanding which provides a framework for coop-
eration to protect human health and the environment in the field of imported and exported
products.
Illegal Manufacture and Importation
In FY 2008, EPA reached a landmark settlement with a Taiwanese manufacturer and three
U.S. corporations (MTD) to resolve violations arising from the illegal manufacture and
importation of approximately 200,000 chainsaws that failed to meet federal air pollution
standards. The foreign manufacturers and U.S. importers of these chainsaws agreed to pay a
$2 million civil penalty. The defendants also agreed to spend approximately $5 million on
projects to reduce air pollution.
INTERNATIONAL COMPLIANCE ACTIVITIES
-------
and Complaints
EPA's tips and complaints Web site (www.epa.gov/tips) is an important tool for identifying
potential environmental violations. Established in January 2006, our easy-to-spot icon
enables concerned citizens and employees to report potential violations in their communi-
ties or workplaces.
In FY 2008, EPA received a total of 7,835 tips. Tips are reviewed by EPA's enforcement pro-
grams to determine potential civil or criminal violations. Since the launch of the Web site,
1,300 potentially criminal tips have been referred to field offices and 19 tips resulted in
criminal cases.
Two cases resulted in convictions during FY 2008. The City of Lake Ozark, Missouri, paid a
$50,000 fine after pleading guilty to discharging a pollutant without a permit into the Lake
of the Ozarks. Its Public Works director also pled guilty to one count of failing to report a
sewage discharge.
In the second case, an official of Environmental Staffing Acquisition Corporation, a compa-
ny that provided temporary workers for environmental cleanup projects will serve two years
on federal probation for creating documents that falsely purported to certify that the com-
pany's employees had received medical evaluations required by the U.S. Occupational Health
and Safety Administration.
Environmental
iolation;
OFFICE OF ENFORCEMENT AND COMPLIANCE ASSURANCE > FY'2008 OECA Accomplishments Report
-------
Appendix A: Organizational Chart
Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance (OECA)
rfice of
Environmental Justice
Office of the
Assistant Administrator
Federal Facilities
Enforcement Office
•
P Office of Criminal
Enforcement,
Forensics & Training
Planning, Analysis,
& Communications Staff
Program Integrity &
Quality Assurance Staff
Resources Management
Staff
— Criminal Investigation Division
— Homeland Security Division
National Enforcement
Investigations Center
Office of Civil Enforcement
Special Litigation
& Projects Division
- Water Enforcement Division
Waste & Chemical
Enforcement Division
- Air Enforcement Division
Of
Office of Compliance of Site R
Enfor
- Resource Management Staff ~ Program
[- Enforcement Staff
Planning, Prevention &
Compliance Staff
fice Office
'mediation of
cement Federal Activities
Operations Staff - NEPA Compliance Division
_ National Planning Measures - Policy & Program L International Compliance
& Analysis Staff Evaluation Division Assurance Division
Enforcement Targeting L Regional Support Division
Compliance Assessment &
Media Programs Division
Compliance Assessment &
Sector Programs Division
Agriculture Division
National Enforcement
Training Institute
Office of Administration
& Policy
Administrative
Management Division
Budget & Financial
Management Division
- Information Technology Division
Policy & Legislative
Coordination Division
APPENDIX A: ORGANIZATIONAL CHART
33
-------
m- ..^"^-
Appendix B: Numbers at a Glance
FY 2008
Results Obtained From EPA Civil Enforcement Actions:
4 Estimated Direct Environmental Benefits
• Direct Environmental Benefits
- Pollution Reduced, Treated or Eliminated (Pounds)1 3,900,000,000
- Hazardous Waste Reduced, Treated, or Properly Disposed of (Pounds)12 6,500,000,000
- Contaminated Soil to be Cleaned Up (Cubic Yards) 100,000,000
- Contaminated Water to be Cleaned Up (Cubic Yards) 255,000,000
- Stream Miles Protected (Linear Feet) 53,000
- Wetlands Protected (Acres) 5,200
- People Protected by Safe Drinking Water Act Enforcement (# of People) 1,024,000
- Thermal Pollution Reduced (Water) (MMBTUs)3 40,300,000
Preventative Environmental Benefits
— Hazardous Waste Prevented from Release (Cubic Yards)
— Underground Storage Tank Capacity Prevented from Release (Gallons)
— People Notified of Potential Drinking Water Problems (# of People) Underground
Injection Wells Prevented from Leaking (# of Wells)
- PCB Disposal Corrected (Cubic Yards)
— Lead-Based Paint Contamination Prevented (# of Housing Units, Schools, Buildings)
220,000
1,300,000
115
900
15,000
- Volume of Oil Spills Prevented (Gallons) 194,000,000
— Pesticides or Pesticide Products Prevented from Distribution, sale or Use due to
Mislabeling or Improper Registration (Pounds) 50,000,000
Investments in Pollution Control and Clean-up (Injunctive Relief) $11,700,000,000
Investments in Environmentally Beneficial Projects (SEPs) $39,000,000
Civil Penalties Assessed
- Administrative Penalties Assessed $38,200,000
- Judicial Penalties Assessed $88,400,000
- Stipulated Penalties Assessed $5,500,000
1 Projected reductions to be achieved during the one year period after all actions required to attain full compliance have been
completed.
2 In FY 2008, for the first time, OECA is piloting a new Environmental Benefits outcome reporting category to count pounds of
"Hazardous Waste Treated, Minimized or Properly Disposed Of " from enforcement cases. OECA has determined that none of the
previously established outcome categories are appropriate for counting the environmental benefits obtained from EPA's haz-
ardous waste cases. For FY 2008, this new pilot category includes only results from RCRA cases, but, in the future, similar results
obtained from enforcement actions under other statutes, particularly CERCLA, may also be included.
3 In FY 2008, for the first time, OECA is including a new Environmental Benefit outcome reporting category to count British
Thermal Units (BTUs) of "Thermal Pollution Reduced (Water)" OECA has determined that none of the previously established out-
come categories is appropriate for counting the environmental benefits obtained from enforcement cases that produce reduc-
tions in thermal pollution. An MMBTU equals one million (1,000,000) BTUs.
OFFICE OF ENFORCEMENT AND COMPLIANCE ASSURANCE > FY'2008 OECA Accomplishments Report
-------
+ EPA Civil Enforcement and Compliance Activities
• Referrals of Civil Judicial Enforcement Cases to Department of Justice (DOJ) 280
• Supplemental Referrals of Civil Judicial Enforcement Cases to DOJ 35
• Civil Judicial Complaints Filed with Court 164
• Civil Judicial Enforcement Case Conclusions 192
• Administrative Penalty Order Complaints 2,056
• Final Administrative Penalty Orders 2,084
• Administrative Compliance Orders 1,390
• Cases with SEPs 188
4 EPA Compliance Monitoring Activities
• Inspections/Evaluations 20,000
• Civil Investigations 222
• Number of Regulated Entities Taking Complying Actions during EPA
Inspections/Evaluations 1,100
• Number of Regulated Entities Receiving Compliance Assistance during EPA
Inspections/Evaluations 11,600
• Inspections Conducted by Tribal Inspectors Using Federal Credentials4 334
+ EPA Superfund Cleanup Enforcement
• Percent of non-Federal Superfund Sites with Viable, Liable Parties where an
Enforcement Action was Taken Prior to the Start of the Remedial Action 100%
• Private Party Commitments for Site Study and Cleanup
(including cash outs) $1,575,000,000
• Private Party Commitments for Oversight $76,000,000
• Private Party Commitments for Cost Recovery $232,000,000
• Percent of Cost Recovery Cases Greater Than or Equal to $200,000
that were Addressed before the Statute of Limitations Expired 100%
4 EPA Criminal Enforcement Program
• Years of Incarceration 57
• Fines and Restitution $63,500,000
• Value of Court Ordered Environmental Projects $12,000,000
• Environmental Crime Cases Initiated 319
• Defendants Charged 176
• Estimated Pollution Reduced, Treated or Eliminated Commitments (Pounds)1 1,600,000
+ EPA Voluntary Disclosure Program
• Estimated Pollution Reduction Commitments Obtained as a
Result of Voluntary Disclosures (Pounds) 5,400,000
• Voluntary Disclosures Initiated (Facilities) 2,294
• Voluntary Disclosures Resolved (Facilities) 640
• Voluntary Disclosures Initiated (Companies) 538
• Voluntary Disclosures Resolved (Companies) 451
• Notices of Determination (NODs) 364
4 EPA Compliance Assistance
• Total Entities Reached by Compliance Assistance 361,000
• Number of User Visits to Web-Based Compliance Assistance Centers 2,220,000
The primary source for the data displayed in this document is the Regions' certified FY 2008 end of year workbooks as of
November 5, 2008. The official databases of record are: Integrated Compliance Information System (ICIS), Criminal Case Reporting
System, Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation & Liability Information System (CERCLIS), Resource Conservation
and Recovery Act Information (RCRAInfo), Air Facility System (AFS), and Permit Compliance System (PCS).
4 In FY 2008, for the first time, OECA is creating a separate reporting category to count the number of tribal inspections conduct-
ed by tribal inspections using federal credentials. Inspections conducted by tribal inspectors using federal credentials are done
"on behalf" of the Agency, but are not an EPA activity.
APPENDIX B: NUMBERS AT A GLANCE
-------
Appendix C: Abbreviations & Acronyms
CAA
CAFOs
CERCLA
CWA
EJ
EPA
EPCRA
FIFRA
MPRSA
NSR
OECA
PSD
RCRA
Clean Air Act
Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations
Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and
Liability Act (aka "Superfund")
Clean Water Act
Environmental Justice
Environmental Protection Agency
Emergency Planning & Community Right-to-Know Act
Federal Insecticide, Fungicide and Rodenticide Act
Marine Protection, Research, and Sanctuaries Act
New Source Review
Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance
Prevention of Significant Deterioration
Resource Conservation & Recovery Act
OFFICE OF ENFORCEMENT AND COMPLIANCE ASSURANCE > FY'2008 OECA Accomplishments Report
-------
How to Contact Us
Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance 202-564-2440
Office of Compliance 202-564-2280
Office of Civil Enforcement 202-564-2220
Office of Crimination Enforcement, Forensics and Training 202-564-2480
Office of Environmental Justice 202-564-2515
Office of Federal Activities 202-564-5400
Office of Planning & Analysis 202-564-2530
Office of Site Remediation Enforcement 202-564-5110
Federal Facilities Enforcement Office 202-564-2510
Press Inquiries 202-564-2440
Mailing Address:
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
1200 Pennsylvania Ave, NW (MC 2201)
Washington, DC 20460-0001
Environmental
iolation
Report environmental violations at: www.epa.gov/tips
CONTACT Us
-------
,
i\
------- |