UnitedStates Region 10 Alaska EPA910-R-06-002
Environmental 1200 Sixth Avenue Idaho, Oregon
Protection Agency Seattle, WA 98101 Washington March 2006
Region 10
Compliance Assurance
Achievement Highlights
[excluding Superfund]
Fiscal Year 2005
-------
Compliance and Enforcement Programs — Sustained Environmental Progress
EPA Region 10 continues its important work of ensuring that the environment is protected
through judicious use of compliance assistance, monitoring, incentives, and when needed,
enforcement—whether administrative, civil or criminal.
Environmental highlights for Fiscal Year 2005 (FY05) show sustained progress:
• As the result of EPA Region 10 compliance actions, some 14 million pounds of
pollutants are being reduced or treated; over 834,000 cubic yards of contaminated soil
cleaned up, and another 7,000 cubic yards of hazardous waste being otherwise properly
managed. Also, an estimated 4 million cubic yards of groundwater are being cleaned up.
• As a result of inspections, over 266,000 gallons of underground gasoline and diesel
storage-tank capacity will now have reduced ability to leak into groundwater, soil and
surrounding communities. This is in addition to the more than 500,000-gallon capacity of
above-ground tanks that Region 10 has ensured will have the proper containment to avoid
environmental damage in nearby communities.
• Almost 350 acres of wetlands are being protected or restored.
• The Region conducted 1,221 inspections, about the same number as last year.
• At those inspections, compliance information was provided to more than half of those facilities.
• To further improve understanding of environmental responsibilities by the regulated
community, Region 10 held 41 workshops and training sessions throughout the four states;
visited 69 facilities for compliance assistance rather than inspections; distributed some
30 brochures, websites and similar informative tools; and provided 68,500 facilities with
information about meeting environmental standards.
• Enforcement actions collected nearly $2.5 million in penalties. In addition, facility owners
agreed to make environmental improvements that are estimated at $67.5 million. In a few
cases, as part of settlement, companies agreed to conduct Supplemental Environmental
Projects (SEPs), estimated to cost a little more than $468,000.
• Region 10 uses Expedited Settlements, which allow faster resolution of some kinds of
violations with smaller penalties. These were used in 70% of the penalty actions taken.
Compliance with environmental regulations benefits everyone by maintaining the clean air,
water and land essential to our Northwest and Alaskan life. EPA Region 10 is dedicated to
protecting these essentials for the people and communities. The following highlights are
examples of the environmental or public health problems we have worked on. They illustrate
the variety of compliance assistance and enforcement done this past year.
Michael A. Bussell, Director
Office of Compliance and Enforcement
-------
Compliance Assurance Achievement Highlights
March 2006
PROTECTING OUR WATER RESOURCES
Sustained Storm Water Initiative Results in Continued
Compliance Improvement
Fiscal Year 2005 was Region 10's fifth year of an
integrated storm water compliance strategy for construc-
tion sites in Idaho and Alaska. The first years focused on
extensive outreach and compliance assistance. The last
two focused on compliance and enforcement. Control of
construction site runoff protects nearby streams and
rivers from silt, excess nutrients, oil and grease, and
other harmful pollutants that affect water quality and fish
survival. The regulations require that construction sites
larger than one acre apply for a permit and develop a
storm water pollution prevention plan. During the year, the
Region saw a continual upward trend in compliance rates.
Building on the previous year's accomplishments, EPA
continued its inspection and enforcement effort. In
addition, compliance assistance workshops were provided
to help small business owners understand their responsi-
bilities under storm water regulations. Region 10
conducted 80 inspections at construction sites, leading to
63 enforcement actions: 40 Expedited Settlement Offers;
12 Notices of Violations; the rest were traditional penalty
cases. Notices of Violations are informal enforcement
actions. Formal enforcement actions include the Expedited
Settlement Offer (ESO), which is used where the viola-
tions are minor and the violator can quickly correct the
problems. In administrative penalty cases, where
violations are of greater magnitude, the penalty
amount is larger. It is estimated that as a result of
A sedimentation basin for storm water
control.
enforcement actions, over 9 million pounds of sedi-
ments were prevented from reaching nearby water
bodies.
By FY05, the number of operators in Idaho and
Alaska applying for coverage under a Construction
General Permit more than doubled, an increase of
some 950 permittees. Inspectors in the field note
that even in remote areas, construction site
operators are now aware of the Construction
General Permit and are applying for coverage. In
contrast to the previous year, operators at most
inspected sites had developed some form of storm
water pollution-prevention plan.
These are encouraging signs that EPA's storm water
compliance strategy is having a positive impact.
However, the number of enforcement actions
resulting from inspections indicates that sustained
implementation of the integrated storm water
compliance strategy is still needed.
Efforts Continue to Increase Compliance in Alaska's Seafood Industry
EPA and the Alaska Department of Environmental
Conservation (ADEC) co-sponsored a free workshop
for Alaskan seafood processors in December 2004.
About 100 people attended the continuing education
workshop on compliance with EPA's Seafood General
Permit. The workshop supported the Region's
integrated seafood compliance strategy, which
balances compliance assistance and enforcement
throughout the seafood sector.
Also in FY05, eight Alaskan seafood processors settled
enforcement cases with EPA. The penalties ranged
from $11,000 to $85,000. The enforcement actions
resulted from violations documented during compliance
inspections and information from self-reporting
documents, such as annual reports. Common
violations included failure to grind seafood waste to
one-half inch or less; failure to conduct monitoring;
unauthorized discharges; failure to develop Quality
Assurance/Quality Control plans; and exceeded
effluent limits.
Through Region 10's integrated strategy, the sea-
food industry is paying more attention to its permit
requirements. By protecting water quality, seafood
processors help insure the future of their industry.
-3
-------
Compliance Assurance Achievement Highlights
March 2006
PROTECTING OUR WATER RESOURCES continued
Underground Storage Tank Compliance Assistance Workshop
In September 2005, the Underground Storage Tank (UST) program provided a free workshop in Boise,
Idaho for all UST owners, operators, and service providers. The workshop targeted service providers
to inform them of impending regulatory changes due to the adoption, in August, of the Underground
Storage Tank Compliance Act as part of the Energy Policy Act of 2005. A similar workshop is planned
for the spring of 2006.
UST Enforcement Reaches a New Level
FY05 was an active year for the
Underground Storage Tank program.
Region 10 conducted 205 inspections.
Because Idaho does not have a
state UST program, EPA has
focused its inspection presence in
Idaho for the past two years. With
the help of out-of-region inspectors,
EPA is conducting three times as
many inspections there as were
done prior to 2004. As a result, the
significant operational compliance
rate of facilities in Idaho has
increased from 32% in late 2003 to 52% in late
2005.
EPA thinks that the increasing
compliance rate is a result of
more inspections and a
better informed regulated
community. This is important
to everyone in Idaho since
groundwater is widely used
for drinking water. Ensuring
that underground tanks are
operated properly protects
against leaks, which can
contaminate drinking water.
A Close Look at Shallow Waste-Disposal Wells in Alaska
EPA directly implements the Class V Underground
Injection Control (UIC) Well program in Alaska. A Class
V well is a shallow drainage well used for disposal of
fluids. This type of well can be of concern because
fluids discharged into the ground can contaminate
groundwater that is used for drinking water. Region 10
records show some 1,500 active and closed wells of
this type in Alaska. The Agency inspection focus there
has been motor vehicle repair facilities that use floor
drains for managing fluid run-off. When a drain of this
kind leads to a septic system, leach field, dry well or
other entry point into the subsurface, it is classified as
a "motor vehicle waste-disposal well." Such wells are
banned nationally, and EPA has identified them as a
priority for closure because of the potential for
contamination of groundwater.
During FY05, Region 10 conducted Class V UIC
inspections at 147 facilities throughout Alaska,
including the communities of Anchorage, Eagle
River, Fairbanks, Juneau, Kenai, Ketchikan, Nome,
Palmer, Soldotna, and Wasilla. 237 new UIC wells
were inventoried.
continued
-4
-------
Compliance Assurance Achievement Highlights
March 2006
PROTECTING OUR WATER RESOURCES continued
Shallow Waste-Disposal Wells in Alaska
EPA did many joint inspections with inspectors from
the Alaska Department of Environmental Conservation
(ADEC). In some cases, ADEC specifically requested
our assistance on sites with known DIG problems. In
other cases, we simply tapped into local knowledge to
improve our efficiency, which saved time and effort.
Results for FY05
Number of Class V DIG inspections conducted:147
Number of new Class V DIG wells inventoried: 237
Number of banned DIG wells closed: 8
Number of "permit or close" enforcement actions
initiated: 42
Oregon Rancher Settles Clean Water and Endangered Species Violations
In the late 1990's, George Gabriel, owner of the
Pallette Ranch near Joseph, Oregon, conducted
construction and fill activities along the Imnaha
River without prior authorization from the Army
Corps of Engineers. The violation resulted from
construction of earthen and gravel levees along a
two-mile segment of the upper river. When the
levees were constructed, portions of the river were
channelized, riparian vegetation was removed,
wetlands were filled, and five large, active side-
channels were blocked and dewatered. Following
a series of inspections, Gabriel's fill action was
found to be a Clean Water Act (CWA) violation
resulting in the "unlawful take," under the Endan-
gered Species Act (ESA), of threatened Snake
River salmon and trout.
To resolve these violations, Mr. Gabriel reached a
settlement with the U.S. Department of Justice, EPA
and the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Agency
(NOAA) Fisheries. Mr. Gabriel agreed to pay a
$165,000 penalty and conduct a holistic restoration
project on a stretch of the Imnaha River that
federal officials expect will restore vital endan-
gered species habitat, while accommodating his
needs as a ranching landowner.
In addition to the penalty and restoration project,
Mr. Gabriel agreed to develop two community
projects worth over $50,000: 1) provide funding to
the Nez Perce Tribe for maintenance of the only
hydrologic gauge located on the Imnaha River; and
2) relocate the Crazyman Creek recreational trail to a
safer location, with new public parking at the far end of
the Pallette Ranch.
An interagency technical group—EPA, NOAA
Fisheries, Oregon Division of State Lands, the Nez
Perce Tribe, U.S. Fish and Wildlife Service, and
U.S. Forest Service representatives—has been
working with Mr. Gabriel, his contractors and consult-
ants to develop a suitable habitat restoration pro-
posal. This case marks the first time in NOAA's ESA
enforcement program that NOAA Fisheries has
sought to enforce the ESA "take" prohibition based
almost exclusively on destruction of habitat. This
case is also the first joint CWA/ESA enforcement
case for EPA and NOAA Fisheries.
Pacific Northwest Salmon
-5
-------
Compliance Assurance Achievement Highlights
March 2006
DRINKING WATER
Public Health Results at Scofield Water System
Many small drinking water systems provide water to
communities in Region 10. These small systems
present significant challenges for the system operators
and regulators, due to the regulations that must be
followed to provide clean, safe water. The following
example shows when and how EPA gets involved in
these small but challenging enforcement cases, using
a creative enforcement approach to gain compliance.
In July 2004, the State of Oregon referred the Scofield
Mobile Home Park to EPA for action. Scofield is a
very small community system serving 40 individuals
through 19 connections. It had gone through several
ownership changes in recent years. In 2003, the State
had fined Scofield $108,133 for ongoing discharges of
untreated sewage. These sewage discharges were
affecting the drinking water system. EPA prepared a
draft Administrative Order citing continuous monitoring
and reporting violations for coliform, inorganic
compounds, nitrate, volatile organic compounds,
semi-volatile organic compounds, lead and copper, as
well as failures to undergo a sanitary survey and public
notification. Because of the many violations and recent
State penalties, EPA offered compliance assistance
to the owners, while still reserving the threat of
impending formal federal enforcement if the park
failed to
cooperate.
Since January 2005, EPA has worked directly with the
engineering firm hired by Scofield to correct the
sewage discharge problems.
EPA and Scofield worked together to develop a
compliance plan, and to date, all past violations
have been resolved. Scofield is currently working
with Oregon to complete the Consumer Compliance
Report and to hire a certified operator. As a result of
EPA's direct involvement, people in the community
are now assured of safe drinking water.
State of Washington Consumer Confidence Reports (CCR) Compliance Initiative
As the result of an EPA-Washington State initiative,
compliance with the CCR Rule in the state increased
from about 85 percent to nearly 100 percent. A CCR is
an annual snapshot of drinking water quality. It must be
mailed by a public water system to its users every
summer. CCRs are the centerpiece of public right-
to-know provisions under the Safe Drinking Water
Act (SDWA).
To accomplish this increase in compliance, EPA
worked closely with the Washington Department of
Health (DOH) and sent 96 "push" letters to water
systems that had not sent out their CCRs. About
half of these systems did not initially respond to the
letters, so EPA and DOH contacted them by
phone. Most of the systems subsequently
returned to compliance and prepared the report.
After this outreach, five public water systems still
had not responded. EPA issued an Administrative
Compliance Order to each one to ensure that the
report was completed.
-6
-------
Compliance Assurance Achievement Highlights
March 2006
PESTICIDES AND TOXICS
Auction Houses Warned about Selling Equipment with PCBs
In response to complaints that electrical equipment with
leaking polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs) were being
offered for sale, the Region 10 PCB program undertook
a special compliance assistance project for auction
houses. As a result, the program mailed to some 150
businesses in the Pacific Northwest and Alaska a letter
and the brochure "What Auction Houses Need To
Know about Selling Equipment Containing PCBs."
The mailing included such basic information as: the
risks to human
health posed by
PCB's; what kinds
of equipment are
likely to include
the hazardous
chemical; how
to check for leaks; rules for storage and disposal
under the Toxic Substances Control Act; and how to
properly care for and dispose of leaking equipment.
To measure the effectiveness of the distributed
information, a follow-up survey was done of
businesses that had been sent the information. EPA
found that 43% of the establishments contacted said
they were aware that the sale of leaking PCBs is
illegal; 48% said they were aware of the need to
check for leaking PCBs; and 22% were familiar with
the procedures for handling leaking PCB electrical
equipment. To further assess the project's value in
encouraging environmental stewardship and proper
control of PCBs, EPA will conduct compliance-
monitoring inspections at some of the auction
houses in 2006.
Argent Chemical Pesticides Case Settled
In May of 2005, Region 10 resolved one of the
largest federal pesticide cases ever brought by EPA
in the Northwest. The Agency settled an enforcement
action against Argent Chemical Laboratories in
Redmond, Washington. Argent had been illegally
producing, selling, and distributing several pesticide
products in ways that posed a significant threat to
human health and the environment. They sold unreg-
istered pesticides; sold restricted-use pesticides to
uncertified users; exported pesticides without
appropriate foreign labels; produced pesticides in an
unregistered establishment; and failed to file
annual production reports.
The settlement requires the Company to cease
production of over 150,000 pounds of unregistered
pesticides annually. It severely curtails the
annual sale of more than 100,000 pounds of
pesticides in the U.S. and over 125,000 pounds
annually in other countries. In addition, the
settlement penalized the Company $300,000.
-7
-------
Compliance Assurance Achievement Highlights
March 2006
WORKING EFFECTIVELY WITH TRIBES
Pesticide and Air Compliance Issues on the Yakama Reservation
EPA responded to compliance problems on the
Yakama Reservation last year with increased
oversight of pesticide application and worker-safety
practices. Working closely with a local pesticide
inspector funded through a tribal agreement, the
Region 10 Pesticide Program pursued enforcement
actions for potentially unsafe application practices.
Both tribal and non-tribal pesticide users within the
Reservation were cited. In the case of the tribal
business, Yakama Land Enterprise, that firm was
fined $5,664 for multiple violations. They included
illegal drift of pesticides onto an organic cherry
orchard; failure to post warning signs; allowing drift
onto a person in the orchard area; and violations of
the Worker Protection Standards for inadequate
training and education of farm workers. In addition
to the monetary penalty, Land Enterprise agreed to
work with EPA to develop a Pesticide Compliance
Plan, to better protect and train their farm workers,
and to improve their application methods to avoid
future drift incidents.
EPA also took enforcement action at the non-tribal
businesses. In one case, EPA settled with a company,
JSH Farms, for a penalty of $1,344 for using a
restricted pesticide without proper equipment and
allowing pesticide drift onto adjacent property and
onto the property owner. In the second case, Ag-Air
was assessed a penalty of $3,120 for spraying the
restricted-use pesticide Warrior on grapes, which is
not allowed.
In another action, Region 10'sAir Program had
issued a Notice of Noncompliance in October 2003
to Yakama Forest Products (YFP), a tribally owned
and operated saw mill, for failing to comply with the
Clean Air Act New Source Performance Standards
for its boilers and fuel tanks. The mill also had failed
to pay air emission fees and submitted an incom-
plete air permit application.
EPA actions such as these will help ensure the
protection of people and resources within and
around the Yakama Reservation.
115 Water Quality Monitoring Programs Completed in Indian Country
A great new tool is being used in Region 10 to help
ensure that clean, safe drinking water is provided to
every household. With an EPA Grant to the Small
Utility Service Corporation, 115 Water Quality
Monitoring Programs were completed this year. These
30- to 50-page documents summarize the features,
treatment, source, and characteristics of each EPA-
regulated drinking water system located in Indian
Country. They also include detailed sampling plans
for all monitoring required by the Safe Drinking Water
Act. Once the sampling plan is approved by the Tribe,
laminated enlargements of important features are
developed and delivered to each water system. The
blow-ups help each
system monitor
according to its
sampling plan,
maintain its disin-
fection system, set
other injection
pumps, and related
functions. These laminated summaries can be pinned
to the pump-house wall at each water system to
provide a ready source of important information and
help the water operator properly operate and maintain
the system.
-8
-------
Compliance Assurance Achievement Highlights
March 2006
WORKING EFFECTIVELY WITH TRIBES continued
Compliance Assurance in Indian Country
Region 10's direct actions in Indian Country in FY05
included compliance assistance and assurance
activities in all media programs, with an emphasis on
tribal drinking water systems, solid waste management
facilities, and tribal schools. EPA awarded a
$200,000 grant for a solid waste demonstration
project in Alaska that will improve or enhance waste
practices in Alaskan Native villages, and a $135,000
grant to Region 10's Tribal Solid Waste Advisory
Network. The latter grant funds a circuit rider to help
tribes develop integrated waste-management plans
and implement waste programs.
To enhance environmental health at tribal schools,
the Region's Office of Compliance and Enforcement
(OCE) provided compliance assistance notebooks
to all 11 Bureau of Indian Affairs (BIA) schools
and conducted site visits at two of the schools.
These visits help to ensure a healthy school envi-
ronment for students by assessing a school's
compliance with environmental laws and resolv-
ing all noncompliance issues. Future efforts will
expand the universe of tribal
schools addressed to include
non-BIA schools in Indian
Country and tribal schools in
Alaska.
Tribal Health Clinic Initiative
EPA nationally has identified hospitals and health
care facilities as a priority area. The Healthy Hospi-
tals for the Environment program was instituted to
encourage hospitals and clinics to go beyond simple
compliance and commit to a pollution prevention
approach to environmental management. At the
same time, the Washington State Department of
Ecology has initiated a focus on health care facili-
ties and is coordinating with EPA. Ecology will
conduct inspections and compliance assistance
visits at these facilities outside of Indian Country,
and EPA will conduct visits at facilities inside Indian
Country.
Region 10 identified 55 Indian Health Service and
tribally operated health care facilities in the region.
EPA's goal is to conduct site visits at as many of
these as possible during FY06. In FY05, six facili-
ties were visited: those located on the Colville,
Tulalip, and Yakama reservations. The Agency
inspected the dental clinics, pharmacies, x-ray
departments, labs and maintenance operations.
All of the locations visited were generating relatively
small amounts of regulated waste. The most com-
mon problems occurred in the dental clinics, with
the mismanagement of x-ray photographic fluids
and mercury-bearing dental amalgam. Although the
facilities did have some programs in place, all but
one were not meeting the standards for managing
these wastes. EPA notified those not in compliance
and provided information about proper management
of dental wastes. In FY06 EPA will continue visiting
health care facilities in Indian Country to be sure
that wastes and other environmental issues are
being managed properly.
-9
-------
Compliance Assurance Achievement Highlights
March 2006
ECONOMIC BENEFIT
Emphasis on Eliminating Economic Benefit of Non-compliance
During FY05, Region 10 continued to focus on the
importance of recouping any economic benefit
resulting from non-compliance with state and local
agency programs. Economic benefit has been
defined as a combination of the delayed and/or
avoided costs associated with environmental
compliance, and any illegal competitive advantage
associated with the non-compliance. One of Region
10's goals is to ensure that state and local agency
actions enforcing federal standards meet this
performance expectation. It is equally true for EPA
when directly implementing federal laws.
EPA has applied several different tools to encourage
states to more accurately quantify, assess and
collect economic benefit. Region 10 sponsored
training events that reached an estimated 100 state
and local agency compliance staff members.
Additional training is scheduled for FY06 in Oregon.
Periodic discussions related to grants and perfor-
mance partnership agreements have helped EPA
management reinforce the need to quantify, assess
and recover economic benefit. EPA's oversight
discussions with the state and local agencies have
emphasized evaluating each federally reportable
violation to determine if economic benefit resulted
from significant violations. Based on anecdotal
evidence, the Region believes that several
agencies have achieved marked improvements in
quantifying and collecting economic benefit as a
result of EPA guidance.
A basic element of EPA's administrative and civil
enforcement policies is recouping the economic
benefit of non-compliance in penalty actions.
Specifically, it is "Agency policy that penalties
generally should, at a minimum, remove any
significant economic benefits resulting from failure
to comply with the law." This policy is incorporated
into the various, media-specific penalty policies,
for example, the Clean Air Act (CAA) Stationary
Source Civil Penalty Policy.
Two recent program reviews have included an
evaluation of the recovery of economic benefit.
The CAA program reviews have taken place over
a number of years with one state being reviewed
each year. The most recent compliance program
review was conducted in 2004 for the State of
Alaska. In June 2005, Region 10 released a
review of the RCRA compliance programs in all
four states for fiscal years 2000-2002. For a full
text version of the review, see this Web page:
http://yosemite.epa.gov/R10/OWCM.NSF/
ed6c817875102d2d8825650f00714a59/
cce81107a83d0609882570370069c3c6/$FILE/
Region 10_RCRA_states_program_review_final.pdf.
-10
-------
Compliance Assurance Achievement Highlights
March 2006
CRIMINAL CASE HIGHLIGHTS
Million-dollar Restitution in Japanese Auto Wrecking Case
Flagrant disregard for environmental laws resulted in a
prison sentence and a one million dollar restitution
judgment against Wei Quo Huang (a.k.a. "Larry
Huang"), doing business as Japanese Auto Wrecking
and Japanese Auto Sales in Seattle, Washington. The
case involved multiple violations.
On December 14, 2004, Huang was arrested and
charged with the crimes of Illegal Hazardous Waste
Disposal, Failure to Respond to Release of Used Oil,
Failure to Respond to Spill or Discharge of Hazardous
Waste, Improper Storage of Used Oil, and Wrecking
Motor Vehicles Without a License. After being released
on bail, Huang moved his operation to another location.
Based on interviews and statements, the Seattle Police
Department and EPA Criminal Investigation Division
(CID) executed a second search warrant on April 7,
2005. Huang was again arrested for operating an illegal
wrecking yard and posted a $50,000 bond to secure his
release. Huang, who was already on bail for the earlier
charges, had violated one of his bail conditions when he
engaged in the auto wrecking business.
Portland Lead-Based Paint Case
Violating federal law and making false statements to
federal agents led to five years of conditional probation
for Long Dang Bui ("Bui"). As the lessor of properties
built before 1978, Bui was legally required to give poten-
tial tenants—before they signed a lease—a federally
approved warning about the health risks associated with
lead-based paint. On April 5, 2005, Bui pleaded guilty in
U.S. District Court in Portland, Oregon, to making false
statements to EPA and HUD (Housing and Urban Devel-
opment) agents during their investigation of his failure to
provide that notification to a some of his tenants.
As an owner, lessor and manager of residential proper-
ties, Bui was required to provide notice of known lead-
based paint hazards that might be present. During an
EPA investigation in July 2003, Bui knowingly and
willfully lied to investigators about lead-disclosure
forms.
On June 27, 2005, Bui was sentenced to five years
probation by the U.S, District Court in Portland. During
On April 11, 2005, King County (Washington) Supe-
rior Court Judge Julie Spector accused Huang of
"thumbing your nose at the court" and revoked his
prior bail. An amended 14-count indictment was filed
in the Superior Court of Washington for King County
on October 10, 2005, where Huang was charged with
seven felonies and seven misdemeanors. Huang,
who was still incarcerated, entered into a plea
agreement on October 17. He pleaded guilty to four
felonies and four misdemeanors.
On November 4, 2005, Huang was sentenced to 35
months in prison and five years probation. He will
also pay $300,000 to EPA and $700,000 to the
property owner for cleanup costs. This was the first
instance of charging knowing endangerment to a
person under Washington law.
This case was investigated by the Washington
Department of Ecology, the Washington State Patrol,
the Seattle Police Department, the EPA CID Seattle
Area Office, and EPA Region 10.
his probation, Bui is required to: 1) provide a Lead
Paint Disclosure Form and lead-hazard pamphlet to
all of his current tenants and post both documents in
all the residences he owns, controls or manages; 2)
submit a statement to the U.S. Probation Office
disclosing all rental properties he owns, controls, or
manages; 3) submit a list of tenants to EPA every
year, along with a copy of each tenant's signed
lead-disclosure statement; and 4) provide EPA with
a list of all prior tenants who lived in his buildings
since September 1996, so they can be notified of
their potential exposure to lead-based paint.
This was the first such case prosecuted in the
Northwest. It was investigated by EPA's Criminal
Investigation Division, the Region 10 Oregon
Operations Office and HUD. The Portland Police
Bureau also assisted.
- 11
-------
Compliance Assurance Achievement Highlights
March 2006
OCE IMPROVEMENTS
Better Management of Tips and Complaints
Tips and complaints from the public about potential
environmental problems help EPA fulfill its mission to
protect public health and the environment. To ensure
that each tip or complaint is quickly followed up by
EPA staff or referred to another agency with authority,
Region 10 designed a database to track each one
received. The new system was unveiled late in 2005
and now provides efficient and accurate routing of
each and every complaint for follow-up. Anyone
reporting incidents of concern to the Region 10
office can be assured that
the information will be
directed to the right place
and a response will be
completed. Also, EPA can
use the data to observe
trends.
FEDERAL FACILITIES
Environmental Management System Three-Year Training Effort
In April 2005, EPA completed a three-year effort to
provide training to federal agencies on how to develop
an Environmental Management System (EMS). An
Executive Order called "Greening the Government
through Environmental Leadership" required each
federal agency to implement an EMS at all appropriate
facilities by December 31, 2005.
An EMS is a continual cycle of planning, carrying
out, reviewing and improving the processes that an
organization uses to meet its business and environ-
mental goals. Most EMSs are built on the "Plan, Do,
Check, Act" model. The EMS includes the facility's
EMS Pre/Post-Test Comparisons for
Knowledge of EMS Principles
] Pre-Tcst
1 Post-Test
•<£
00
—
00
30
o
00
5
1
1
p
2003 2004 2005 2003
Seattle Anchorage
commitment to compliance with all federal, state and
local environmental laws, to pollution prevention, and to
continual improvement. As a result of this training,
over 108 federal environmental managers and staff
members from 17 federal agencies were provided
with information and tools to help them create an
EMS to fit their facility.
Before and after survey tests were conducted at each
training session to determine the effectiveness of
the information and resources provided. The chart
below shows the results of this three-year effort in
Region 10. Overall results demonstrate that attendees
improved their understanding considerably.
This increased understanding should improve
the ability of continually well-managed
Federal Facilities to comply with environmental
regulations. This is important both within the
bounds of their facilities and for the surround-
ing communities.
[EPA did not hold another class
in Anchorage after FY03 due to
low registration in FY04.]
-12
------- |