Office of Environmental Stewardship
2004 Year in Review
United States
Environmental Protection
Agency New England
EPA-901-R-05-001
April 2005
-------
A Message from the Director
April 2005
Dear Reader:
I am pleased to present this report, "A Year in Review—2004,"
to highlight the significant achievements of EPA New England's Office
of Environmental Stewardship. It tells the story of how and why we are
tackling the environmental challenges facing us as New Englanders.
I want to thank our dedicated enforcement and compliance assistance
staff, who have worked with great passion and creativity to protect
our environment. I also thank our counterparts in state environmental
programs who have worked closely with us—this job cannot be done
without the cooperation of all levels of government.
While we have produced strong results over the past several years,
we recognize that we must be continually evaluating and adjusting
our program to remain successful in the future. Our priorities and
approaches will change as old problems are solved and new challenges
develop.
We are always open to suggestions, and we welcome your comments
and opinions on this report. Send us an e-mail at: rlwebmail@epa.gov
or call us at 617-918-1831.
For more information about EPA New England's compliance and
enforcement programs, please visit our website:
www.epa.gov/ne/enforcementandassistance .
L
Stephen S. Perkins, Director
Office of Environmental Stewardship
EPA New England
-------
Introduction
The Office of Environmental Stewardship is home to the enforcement,
compliance assistance and innovation programs in EPA's New England
Office. Our mission is to protect the environment and public health. We
work with both the private and public sectors to improve their environ-
mental performance through compliance with environmental require-
ments, preventing pollution and promoting environmental stewardship.
Some of the highlights of our achievements in New England over
the past fiscal year (October, 2003 through September, 2004) include:
> Inspections were up 13% in FY04. This increase in inspec-
tions follows a prior 33% increase in FY03. The number of
inspections has now reached a six-year high.
> Violators paid $15.6 million to settle enforcement cases.
This figure represents a 27% increase from FY03.
> The value of supplemental environmental projects reached
a record-high $11.3 million. These projects are designed to
benefit public health and the environment in communities
where violations have occurred.
> More than one hundred facilities disclosed violations
in accordance with EPA's self-audit policy. Under
this policy, we encourage and provide incentives—in
the form of decreased penalties—for self-auditing
and voluntarily disclosing and correcting violations.
While maintaining a very strong enforcement program, we also
continue to pursue a balanced approach to environmental protection
that includes compliance assistance and outreach to regulated
facilities. We have organized dozens of assistance workshops and sent
thousands of assistance mailings targeted to municipalities, hospitals,
marinas, schools, realtors and many others who could benefit from
Dollar Value of
Enforcement Penalties*
20
15
95 96 97 98 99 00 01 02 03 04
federal fiscal year
Includes penalties and supplemental
environmental projects paid by
settling parties.
Dollar Value of Supplemental
Environmental Project
Enforcement Settlements
12
10
95 96 97 98 99 00 01 02 03 04
federal fiscal year
Source: EPA New England Enforcement Office
-------
help in understanding how to comply with environmental regulations.
In addition, our regional assistance web site received over 296,000
page requests in 2004.
However, numbers alone do nottell the entire story of ouraccomplishments.
In this report, we are highlighting our work in three priority areas that
contributed to substantial public health and environmental benefits. We
discuss how and why we are working to reduce childhood lead poisoning
in New England and striving to create an environment that is safe for our
children. Because storm water runoff continues to negatively impact the
quality of our rivers, lakes, and beaches, we want you to better understand
why it is important to comply with federal storm water regulations and
how we are providing much needed assistance to the regulated community.
Lastly, we want you to know that, through negotiated enforcement
settlements, we are producing tangible environmental and public health
results for the benefit of the impacted communities.
EPA New England's Office of Environmental Stewardship is working
toward a safer environment for our children.
-------
Section
Reducing Childhood Lead Paint Exposure
The problem of childhood lead poisoning is of particular concern to us
here in New England. Much of our housing stock is old and pre-dates the
elimination of lead from paint used in homes. In addition, due to housing
shortages, many low-income families in urban areas often remain in older
housing with deteriorating lead paint or otherwise face homelessness.
Lead is a toxic metal that causes a variety of adverse health effects ranging
from behavioral problems and learning disabilities and in extreme cases,
seizures and death. It places children under the age of six at greatest risk
because their bodies, especially their nervous systems, are developing
rapidly and are very sensitive to lead.
In order to tackle the problem of childhood lead poisoning, EPA New
England set a goal to eliminate medically-confirmed blood lead levels
greater than 10 micrograms per deciliter among children under age six
in New England by 2010. A critical component of the strategy includes
increased compliance assistance and enforcement activity to ensure that
landlords, property owners and contractors are complying with federal
law. The "Disclosure Rule" requires landlords and property owners to
notify prospective tenants and buyers of potential lead paint hazards in
their buildings.
The Disclosure Rule is an important part of our work in creating an
environment that is safe for our children. During the past year, EPA
conducted 72 inspections around New England, covering close to
16,200 housing units. Through outreach efforts such as mailings and
articles, we were able to reach approximately 25,000 individuals. We
also partnered with the Rhode Island Association of Realtors to conduct
two compliance assistance workshops, which attracted more than 100
realtors. Furthermore, we settled 10 enforcement cases in fiscal year
2004 against property owners, management firms, and one construction
firm that failed to notify tenants about lead hazards. Some of these cases
involved properties where children had been poisoned by lead.
In addition to monetary fines totaling more than $340,800, property owners
will be spending close to $4.2 million to conduct testing and abatement
of lead paint hazards in thousands of residential units not just in New
England, but across the country. As part of the second largest Disclosure
Rule case settlement nationwide, Winn Residential Limited Partnership,
a prominent Boston-based real estate company, agreed to test for and
remove any hazardous lead paint from its 10,400 apartments nationwide,
including 7,000 in Massachusetts. The value of this agreement could
reach $3.7 million.
For these brochures and more
information on the Lead Paint
Rules and what you can do to re-
duce the risk of exposure, visit our
website at www.epa.gov/ne/
enforcementandassistance
and click on Lead Paint.
-------
The Lead Disclosure Rule applies to all landlords, including agencies
of the federal government. Three Veterans Administration Hospitals
in Maine and Massachusetts were subject to enforcement action for
allegedly failing to notify VA employees of potential lead paint hazards
in their rental housing units. These medical centers provide a total of 41
units of on-site housing for employees and their families.
In one of the first enforcement actions of its kind, a Portland, Maine lead
abatement contractor, Abatement Professionals Corporation, agreed to
pay $40,000 to settle claims by EPA that it allegedly failed to comply
with various lead management rules at several projects in Portland, Lew-
iston, and Livermore Falls. Because lead poisoning can cause a lifetime
of problems for children, it is important that all contractors follow proce-
dures for lead paint abatement work. In the coming year, we plan to in-
crease the number of inspections at large housing rehabilitation projects
throughout the region.
Lead Enforcement Cases Settled in FY04 (October 2003
Party
Winn Residential Limited Partnership
Boston, MA
Intown West Associates Limited Partnership
Intown Management Corporation
Hartford, CT
94 Cleaves Street Corporation
Biddeford, ME
US Department of Veterans Affairs
Medical Centers in Northampton, Bedford, MA and
Togus, ME
Ceebraid Signal Management Group
Freeport, NY
Nissitissit Group Ltd.
Pepperell, MA
Abatement Professionals Corp.
Portland, ME
Jason Dresser
South Portland, ME
- September 2004)
Fine Paid Value of SEP
$105,000 $3.7 million
$45,000 $195,000
$6,750 $17,797
$10,068 $123,050
$95,000 $120,000
$35,000 none
$40,000 none
$ 4,004 none
2 Office of Environmental Stewardship 2004 Year in Review
-------
Section
Storm Water Compliance: Education and
Enforcement Reap Results
Storm water continues to be a major cause of water quality impairment
nationwide. In New England, approximately one-third of our rivers and
lakes are negatively impacted by storm water. As a result, there are times
when we are unable to use some of these waters for recreational activities
such as swimming and boating. Additionally, 13% of our estuarine and
coastal waters are impacted by storm water, which can limit the use of
these waters for swimming and shellfishing.
Over the past year, we have continued our efforts to bring municipalities
and the construction industry throughout New England into compliance
with Phase 2 federal storm water regulations through a combination of
compliance assistance and enforcement activities.
Improving Municipal Storm Water Compliance
One aspect of the Phase 2 federal storm water regulations requires that
certain municipal "industrial" operations (such as wastewater treatment
plants which discharge over one million gallons of wastewater per day
and recycling facilities) apply for coverage under the NPDES Program,
and develop and implement a storm water pollution prevention plan by
March 10, 2003. These same regulations also required that small munici-
pal separate storm sewer systems apply for permit coverage by March 10,
2003 and develop a program to control and prevent storm water pollution
system-wide by March 10, 2008.
Between October, 2001 and January, 2003, we conducted 32 workshops
and provided additional compliance assistance to this sector. Our assis-
tance activities focused on municipalities in Massachusetts, Maine and
New Hampshire where EPA is the permitting authority.1 As a result of our
outreach activities, we were able to achieve improved compliance rates at
the various municipal industrial facilities in all three states, with Maine
and New Hampshire showing the greatest improvement. Providing EPA-
developed model storm water plans to municipalities also proved to be a
cost-effective means to improve understanding of the regulatory require-
ments and achieve compliance.
Among the small municipal separate storm sewer systems (or MS4s),
approximately 300 communities in Massachusetts and New Hampshire
needed to apply for permit coverage from EPA by March, 2003 and de-
velop storm water programs by March, 2008. By the end of 2003, almost
100% of these MS4s in both Massachusetts and New Hampshire had
applied for the required permit coverage. Once again, through additional
follow-up with the communities by way of phone calls and written com-
munications, we were able to boost compliance rates significantly.
2003 Compliance Rates at
Municipal Industrial Facilities
Before and After Outreach
before outreach
83%
after outreach
93%
57%
53%
Maine New Hampshire
Source: EPA New England Assistance
and Pollution Prevention office
Our outreach activities to municipal
industrial facilities resulted in
improved compliance with Phase 2
Stormwater Regulations.
1 Maine has recently been delegated authority by EPA to administer its own storm water program.
-------
Because storm
water pollution
is caused by so
many different
activities,
education and
outreach are
crucial to any
successful storm
water program.
Building sheds to cover sand/salt mix, roofing refueling operations,
and simply keeping dumpster tops closed are ways municipalities can
insure that storm water runoff is not harming their drinking water wells
or surface water resources.
Poor material storage practices at public works facilities can cause
storm water to become contaminated with chemicals, salt, and other
pollutants.
4 Office of Environmental Stewardship 2004 Year in Review
-------
Balancing Assistance and Enforcement for
Construction Activities
More than two years ago, we initiated a strategy to address storm water
runoff from small construction projects, which were also newly regulated
under Phase 2 of the federal storm water program. Beginning March 10,
2003, the threshold for construction sites needing NPDES permit cover-
age dropped from five acres or more to one acre or more.
Our outreach activities once again focused on Massachusetts and New
Hampshire (because EPA is the permitting authority in these states). With
the reduction in the acreage threshold to one acre, a wide variety of small-
er, less organized and less sophisticated companies and public agencies
needed to be educated. To do this, we partnered with trade associations,
states, regional planning agencies, watershed associations, local public
works departments, professional associations, and others who could help
us reach our intended audiences.
One aim of EPA NE's outreach to the construction industry on storm
water requirements is to make erosion control an integral part of plan-
ning and executing site work, rather than an afterthought, as seen in
this photo.
-------
By September, 2004, we had reached 1,700 people through workshops
and presentations and more than 5,000 readers through various newslet-
ters and magazine articles we wrote. Letters were also sent out to ap-
proximately 3,000 local officials in Massachusetts and New Hampshire
involved in municipal construction or oversight.
At the same time, we also took high-profile enforcement actions against
construction operators at sites being developed for large corporations,
such as Wal-Mart and Lowe's, as well as a variety of residential devel-
opments. Publicizing these cases helped to garner interest within the
industry. As word of EPA's storm water program spread, citizens, local
officials and consultants contacted us to lodge complaints about specific
sites. Small developers referred by local officials also called to find out
more about EPA requirements.
Since 2001, we have conducted over 80 inspections at constructions
sites throughout New England. Over the past fiscal year, we settled sev-
eral cases against developers in Massachusetts and New Hampshire for
fines totaling approximately $146,000 (as listed in the chart below) and
achieved compliance at these sites.
Storm Water Enforcement Cases Settled in FY04 (October 2003-September 2004)
Party Fines Paid
East Street Realty LLC, North Reading, MA $6,175
JW Darrali LLC, Bow, NH $ 6,200
Orchard Hill Park LLC, Leominister, MA & Borggaard $ 3,200
Construction, North Grafton, MA
K&B Development LLC, Pelham, NH & American $60,000
Excavating Corp., Deny, NH
Methuen Group Realty Trust, Hudson, NH & Ashwood $70,000
Development Companies, Hudson, NH & & Park
Construction Corp., Fitzwilliam, NH
Construction Site
(acres)
16
10
40
43
75
6 Office of Environmental Stewardship 2004 Year in Review
-------
Section
Multi-Million Dollar Settlements Yield Significant
Environmental Benefits
With more than $6 million dedicated to supplemental environmental
projects, the Boston area is slated to receive real and lasting improve-
ments to public health and the environment. This past year, we settled
two enforcement cases that will achieve significant clean air and clean
water benefits for residents of greater Boston, in particular for those liv-
ing in environmental justice neighborhoods.
Exelon Mystic LLC, owner of the Mystic Station power plant in Ever-
ett, agreed to pay a $1 million penalty and fund more than $5 million
for supplemental environmental projects in the Boston area as part of a
settlement agreement stemming from air quality violations over a five-
year period. In the second case, the Massachusetts Bay Transit Author-
ity (MBTA) agreed to pay a fine of more than $328,000 and undertake
supplemental environmental projects valued at $1 million for numerous
air and water violations. These violations included excessive idling of
dozens of diesel buses in 2002, unpermitted storm water discharges for
The Mystic Station powerplant is located just over the Boston city line.
EPA's complaint alleged over 6,000 violations of the Clean Air Act's
opacity limits from June 1998 to November 2003. Opacity is a mea-
sure of smoke thickness, and is regulated to prevent visible air pollut-
ants, such as soot and other particulate matter, from polluting the air
we breathe.
-------
A diesel particulate matter filter
collects in the exhaust stream and
breaks the particles into less harm-
ful components. These filters can
be fitted on new and used buses.
many years into the Mystic River and other Boston-area rivers, and fail-
ure to develop oil spill control plans at multiple Boston-area facilities.
The supplemental environmental projects from these two settlements are
aimed specifically at reducing pollutants which are known triggers of
asthma. Asthma is the leading cause of childhood emergency hospitaliza-
tion in Boston, a city with one of the highest asthma rates in the country.
Asthma is particularly prevalent among residents of environmental jus-
tice communities and among sensitive populations, such as children and
the elderly. In Dorchester and Roxbury, two environmental justice com-
munities in Boston, the rate of childhood emergency hospitalizations due
to asthma is 178% higher than the state average.
Environmental Benefits of the Exelon/Mystic
Settlement
The Mystic Station power plant case included one of the largest school
bus pollution control projects in the county. The project provides $3.25
million to retrofit 500 Boston school buses with pollution control equip-
ment and supply them with ultra-low polluting diesel fuel. It will benefit
more than 28,000 school children who ride the bus every day, as well as
the neighborhoods through which the buses travel. Tailpipe emissions
from the buses will be reduced by more than 90 percent, which equates to
a reduction of more than 30 tons a year. This project builds upon a similar
bus retrofit project in an EPA settlement three years ago which retrofit-
ted 100 Boston school buses with pollution control equipment. Together,
these projects will result in Boston being the first major city in the coun-
try to have retrofitted its entire school bus fleet.
Exelon also agreed to provide $1.25 million for pollution control im-
provements to the commuter trains operating out of Boston's North Sta-
tion rail terminal. The trains will be equipped with oxidation catalysts
(to reduce particulate matter) and supplied with low-sulfur fuel for three
years. The result will be cleaner air for the 47,000 passengers that com-
mute by train each day as well as for the residents of the many communi-
ties through which the trains pass.
As a way to further reduce air pollutants from automobile exhaust,
$250,000 will be used to build a commuter bike path over the Amelia
Earhart Dam on the Mystic River linking Everett and Somerville. In addi-
tion, $250,000 will fund restoration of one acre of urban salt marsh along
Mill Creek in Chelsea and approximately $119,000 will be used to fund
an environmental assessment and feasibility study to identify possible
restoration projects along the Maiden River.
8 Office of Environmental Stewardship 2004 Year in Review
-------
Environmental Benefits of the MBTA Settlement
Building on the air quality improvements in the Mystic settlement, the
MBTA will dedicate $1 million to operate its commuter trains from Bos-
ton's South Station train terminal on low sulfur diesel fuel for the next
three years. The combined effect of the North and South Station projects
will remove approximately 687 tons of sulfur dioxide and 76 tons of par-
ticulate matter from the air around Boston over the next three years.
In addition, the MBTA will donate an easement on a one-acre strip of
land so the existing Mystic River bike path can be extended. The ease-
ment provides a critical link in the Boston bike path network.
Conclusion
The preceding stories provide an in-depth look at just three examples
of the work we have undertaken over the past year to protect our
environment and the public's health. We want you to know that our
work also involved numerous enforcement actions and compliance
assistance projects throughout the entire New England area with
a number of industry sectors. For example, we are working with
colleges and universities, K-12 schools, hospitals, marinas, municipal
departments of public works, federal facilities, to name a few. Last
year, we also continued to work closely with local and state emergency
personnel to train them on the latest chemical safety and site security
measures. We invite you to explore the full range of our activities by
visiting our website at www.epa.gov/ne/enforcementandassistance .
Bike paths offer numerous recreational opportunities, especially in
urban neighborhoods.
9
-------
&ERA
EPA-901-R-05-001
United States
Environmental Protection
Agency New England
------- |