-------
Opening Remarks
Mission, Vision, Values
Organizational Chart
National Priorities
Priorities, Measures & Results
Key Management Measures
Referrals to DOJ
Civil Judicial Case Conclusions
National Priorities vs. Core
State by State - Numbers at a Glance
Compliance and Enforcement Results
Supplemental Environmental Projects
Air Enforcement
Year in Review
Texas Air Permitting
CAA Innovative Enforcement - 112r CAFOs
Air Significant Accomplishments
Incidents (Explosions & Fires)
The CAED Incident Process
Hazardous Waste Enforcement
RCRA 3013 Administrative Orders
Mineral Processing
Surface Impoundments
Vapor Intrusion
Kiowa Herbicide Spill
Multi-media Referral to DOJ
Inspections with States
Water Enforcement
Real-Time Enforcement
Sanitary Sewer Overflows
Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations
Enforcement Actions Involving CAFOs
Cease and Desist Orders
Global Environmental Methods
Compliance Assistance
Storm Water Outreach
TEXO Agreement
3 Enforcement in Other Divisions 26
4 FIFRA Enforcement 26
5 Underground Storage Tank Enforcement 27
EPCRA 313 Enforcement 28
6 Wetlands Enforcement 29
Superfund Enforcement (Oil Pollution Act) 29
7
7 Strategic Planning and Analyses 30
8 Houston Initiative 30
9 Centralized Waste Treatment Facilities 31
10 CAFOs 31
11
12 Collaborative Solutions/Partnerships 32
14 Pollution Prevention/Source Reduction Grants 33
Environmental Management System Training 33
15 Lean and Clean 33
15 P2 Grants Results 33
16 Sustainability Partnerships 34
16 NetDMR 35
17 National Environmental Policy Act 35
18 Mississippi River Hydrokinetic Project 35
19 NEPAssist &TxDOT 35
Eco-Logical Interagency Agreement 35
20 NEPA Workload 35
20 BECC/COCEF Projects on the Border 36
21
22 Associate Directors' Visions
22 Air Enforcement 37
23 Hazardous Waste Enforcement 38
23 Water Enforcement 39
23 Office of Strategic Planning and Analyses 40
24
24
24
24
25
25
25
25
25
26
Compliance Assurance and Enforcement Division 2009 Annual Report
-------
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
Region 6
Compliance Assurance and Enforcement Division
2009 End of Year Report
Greetings,
We had another outstanding year in the enforcement are-
na, as exhibited in the 2009 end of year report. First and
foremost, I want to thank every one in the Division for
your exceptional work and I hope that you are all collec-
tively and individually proud of your work. I am.
While the majority of the Region's enforcement work re-
sides in the Compliance Assurance and Enforcement Divi-
sion, enforcement and, more importantly, compliance as-
sistance work is done in the Superfund Division, Water
Division, and Multimedia Division. This year we have tried
to capture their important work in our end of year report.
It goes without saying that my Division's work could not
occur without the outstanding support and working rela-
tionship we have with the Office of Regional Counsel, in
general, and specifically with the staff lawyers in the En-
forcement group. As I have said many times, "we are
joined together" and our successes are their successes.
Additionally, the Division could not do our day to day work
without the valuable support from the Management Divi-
sion. We could not tell our story without the exceptional
support from the Office of External Affairs, and we cannot
ensure that we are effectively utilizing our enforcement
tools to serve our environmental justice and tribal com-
munities without critical support from the Office of Envi-
ronmental Justice and Tribal Affairs.
Last, but not least, we would not have a significant amount
of our accomplishments without support from our partners
in the Region 6 States, the Department of Justice, and
OECA.
Heartfelt thanks to everyone for making us successful this
year and we look forward to growing our partnership with
all parties in 2010.
As we leave 2009 and move into 2010, here are a couple
of thoughts for consideration:
In 2008, we adopted the tag line "we are surrounded by
opportunities." What a fortuitous thought. What was a
tag line has become a reality. Each and every day, the
Division is confronted with new opportunities related to
the deployment of our resources and, more importantly, to
make a difference in protecting the environment.
In 2009, we adopted the tag line "collaborative solutions,"
another fortuitous selection of a focusing statement.
Nothing is more critical to our success in our enforcement
endeavors. With the ever decreasing resource base and
increasing "opportunity" base, working in collaboration to
achieve new and innovative solutions with our partners
mentioned above is paramount.
As I said last year, the Division will not leave these two
phrases behind but will continue to build upon them in
2010.
For 2010, we adopt the phrase "True It Up!" In its simplest
form, this phrase epitomizes the Agency's enforcement ef-
forts. If you see something that is not being done in the
proper (legal, regulatory, in compliance with an agreement
or a principal) way, identify it, and correct it (true it up).
We will use this phrase to guide us as we undertake our
critical compliance and enforcement work in 2010.
We have a challenging year ahead of us.
With the new administration and new senior management
in the Region and at OECA, we have embarked on new and
exciting enforcement related paths. We are in the process
of: determining new National Priorities for the Enforce-
ment Program, nationally; revamping our CWA enforce-
ment program, revamping our drinking water enforcement
program, increasing the quality and transparency of data
available to the public; and working with the Air Program
to address issues with the TX permitting and SIP approved
program to name a few of the new "opportunities".
Over the past four years, the Division has done an outstand-
ing job in adapting the new paradigms thrust upon us and
we have done an amazing job in being creative and devel-
oping new "tools" and "processes" to allow us to be efficient
and effective. These range from "real time enforcement" to
new ways of conducting inspections in the RCRA Branch to
tracking systems to help us manage our workload to "rec-
reating" our important inspector training workshop to de-
velop new screening tools to help us increase the efficiency
of our inspections. All of these things plus many, many
more have made us successful and I am confident that
we will continue our evolution as an efficient organization.
In closing, I am proud of the Division's work. Every per-
son within the Division is critical to our success. I firmly
believe that the Division, as a whole, and all staff within
the Division exhibit the Region's WE CARE values on a daily-
basis. We will continue to use the WE CARE values as our
compass as we operate in 2010,
I look forward to our "opportunities" in 2010 and I firmly
believe we will embrace "True It Up!" and once again bring
home exceptional results in 2010.
Compliance Assurance and Enforcement Division 2009 Annual Report
-------
The Compliance
Enforcement
Mission
To promote compliance with
Federal environmental regulations in
partnership with our States and Tribes
Vision
To make environmental compliance
commonplace and establish a culture that
promotes going beyond compliance through
collaboration, innovation and partnership
Values
Teamwork
Open Communication
Professionalism
Integrity
Creativity
Fairness
Compliance Assurance and Enforcement Division 2009 Annual Report
-------
Richard Gigger
Team Leader
Houston Team
\3-2105 (6EN-ASH)/'
* Retired as of 1/1/10
Mark Potts
Associate Director
5-2723 (6EN)
Robert Murphy
Associate Director
5-7203 (6EN)
Paulette Johnsey, Chief
NPDES Compliance Sec.
5-7521 (6EN-WC)
Cathy Gilmore, Chief
Planning & Coordination
Section
5-6766 (6EN-XP)
Steve Thompson, Chief
Air Enforcement Section
5-2769 (6EN-AA)
Carol P-Wagnon, Chief
NPDES Industrial &
Municipal Section
5-3145 (6EN-WM)
vacant, Chief
Water Resources Section
5-6470 (6EN-WR)
Stacey B-Dwyer, Chief
Surveillance Section
5-6729 (6EN-AS)
Troy Stuckey, Chief
Multimedia Enforcement Sec.
5-6432 (6EN-HM)
Esteban Herrera, Chief
Toxics Enforcement
Section
5-7348 (6EN-AT)
Rhonda Smith, Chief
Compliance Enforcement
Section
5-8006 (6EN-HE)
Sunita Singhvi, Chief
Corrective Action &
Compliance Inspection Sec.
5-7290 (6EN-HC)
Debra Griffin
Associate Director
Office of Strategic Planning
& Analyses
5-8150 (6EN-X)
Michael Michaud*
Jerry Saunders
Associate Director
Water Enforcement Branch
5-6468 (6EN-W)
Ragan Broyles
Associate Director
Hazardous Waste Enf. Branch
5-3166 (6EN-H)
David Garcia
Associate Director
Air/Toxics Inspection
& Coordination Branch
5-7220 (6EN-A)
John Blevins
Director
Steve Gilrein, Deputy
5-2210 (6EN)
Compliance Assurance and Enforcement Division 2009 Annual Report
-------
FY 2009 National Priorities
Clean Air Act
Air Toxics
Reduce public exposure to toxic air emissions by en-
suring compliance through directed monitoring and
enforcement of the Maximum Achievable Control
Technology (MACT) standards.
Prevention of Significant Deterioration and
New Source Review
Ensure that New Source Review (NSR) and Preven-
tion of Significant Deterioration (PSD) requirements
of the Clean Air Act (CAA) are implemented. Failure
to comply with NSR/PSD requirements may lead to
the inadequate control of emissions resulting in the
release of thousands of tons of pollution to the air
each year, particularly of nitrogen oxides, volatile or-
ganic compounds, and particulate matter.
Clean Water Act
Wet Weather
Ensure compliance with Clean Water Act require-
ments by addressing four (listed below) environmen-
tal challenges that are exacerbated by wet weather.
Wet weather discharges contain bacteria, pathogens
and other pollutants that can cause illnesses in hu-
mans, lead to water quality impairment, including
beach and shellfish bed closures and harm our na-
tion's water resources.
Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations
The major environmental problem associ-
ated with CAFOs is the large volume of ani-
mal waste generated in concentrated areas.
Combined Sewer Overflows
Combined sewer systems are designed to collect
rainwater runoff, domestic sewage and industrial
wastewater in the same pipe. During periods of rain-
fall or snow melt, the wastewater volume in a com-
bined sewer system can exceed the capacity of the
system or treatment plant.
Sanitary Sewer Overflows
The main pollutants in raw sewage from SSOs are
bacteria, pathogens, nutrients, untreated industrial
wastes, toxic pollutants, such as oil and pesticides,
and wastewater solids and debris.
Storm Water
Storm water runoff from urban areas can include
a variety of pollutants, such as sediment, bacteria,
organic nutrients, hydrocarbons, metals, oil and
grease.
Resource Conservation and Re-
covery Act
Financial Responsibility
Ensure an operator has adequate funds to address
the closure of facilities that handle hazardous wastes,
hazardous substances, toxic materials, or other pol-
lutants. The funds provide for the ability to clean up
those materials so they do not contaminate soils,
groundwater, surface waters or the air. Having the fi-
nancial 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 that contaminate soils, ground-
water, surface waters, and sediments. This priority
seeks to prevent improper handling and release of
hazardous materials and wastes and defaults that
would shift the costs from the responsible parties to
others, including state and federal taxpayers.
Mineral Processing
Reducing risk to health and the environment by
achieving increased compliance rates throughout the
mineral processing and mining sectors and by en-
suring that harm is being appropriately addressed
through compliance assistance and enforcement.
Indian Country
Work with federally-recognized Indian tribes to ad-
dress significant human health and environmental
problems associated with drinking water, solid waste,
and environmental risks in tribal schools (e.g., lead-
paint) through capacity building and compliance
monitoring.
Compliance Assurance and Enforcement Division 2009 Annual Report
-------
PRIORITIES, MEASURES AND RESULTS
Key Management Measures
The Quarterly Management Report's Key Management 2. as a result of enforcement of the environmental laws
Measures are a limited set of outputs and outcomes that
the agency uses to measure the effectiveness of the pro-
gram and its management team. Below are the 6 mea-
sures utilized by the Office of Enforcement and Compliance
Assurance (OECA). These measures show:
1. facilities are implementing improved environ-
mental practices based on compliance assis-
tance provided to the regulated community,
3.
and regulations, facilities are making investments to
bring facilities back into compliance, and
pollution is being reduced, decreasing exposure to
communities.
Through these compliance assistance and enforcement ef-
forts, the Region is making great strides in meeting EPA's
mission.
OECA Quarterly Management Report
Key Management Measures
FY09 Results
i
% Compliance assistance recipients with improved EMP
100%
2
Number of Civil Referrals to DOJ
26 Total
22 Regulatory, 4 Superfund
3
Number of large concluded cases with more than 1M lbs. Pollution
reduced, $5M injunctive reliefer $1M penalty
23 Total
21 Regulatory, 2 Superfund
4
Dollars invested in environmental performance or improved EMP as a re-
sult of concluded enforcement (Injunctive Relief + SEPs)
$406 million
5
Pounds of pollution reduced by audit agreement or concluded enforce-
ment
94 million lbs
6
Volume of contaminated media addressed
61K cubic yards
The Big Case List is a planning and
analysis tool utilized by EPA to track
enforcement actions that will result
in at least a $1 million penalty, $5
million in complying action costs, or
1 million pounds of pollutant reduc-
tions. The Big Case List is important
because, typically, approximately
1 percent of the cases produce 90
percent of the results. In FY 09, Re-
gion 6 concluded 707 administrative
and judicial actions, for which 23 of
those actions produced the majority
of the results. Over $20 million of the $23 million in Penal-
ties assessed in FY 09, and $392 million of the $406 mil-
lion in complying actions and supplemental environmental
projects (SEPs) were the result of Big Cases. Injunctive
23 Big Cases
Judicia : R6
Superfund
Judicial: Non-
Lead Participant
relief or complying actions are com-
mitments facilities make to install pol-
lution controls or other measures to
make improvements at the facilities to
come into compliance. SEPs are envi-
ronmentally beneficial projects that a
violator voluntarily agrees to under-
take during settlement of an enforce-
ment action to secure significant envi-
ronmental or public health protection
improvements beyond those achieved
by bringing the violator into compli-
ance. Closely tracking these cases
throughout the enforcement process allows the agency to
forecast end-of-year results and provides a mechanism to
ensure that we are focusing our resources on cases that
will produce the greatest outcomes.
Administrative
Results from Big Cases
$ Value of Penalties
$20 Million
$ Value of Injunctive Relief & SEPs
$392 Million
Direct Pollutant Reductions
68 Million Pounds
Direct Hazardous Waste Reductions
711 Million Pounds
Compliance Assurance and Enforcement Division 2009 Annual Report
-------
Referrals to the Department of Justice
30
25
20
15
10
Many of EPA's
larger cases are
handled through
referrals to the De-
partment of Justice
(DOJ). The decision
on when to refer a
case to DOJ is de-
pendant on several
factors. For some
programs, the
proposed penalty
amount triggers a
referral if it hits a
certain threshold.
Referrals are also
a great tool to ap-
proach companies with compliance issues at fa-
cilities located in several Regions. National Priority
cases are many times handled through the judicial
process because the priorities focus on significant
environmental risks and noncompliance patterns.
Region 6 Judicial Referrals Trends
(not including Superfund)
14 14
III
FY 03
FY 04
FY 05
Starting in
FY06, Region
6 began fo-
cusing more of
our resources
towards judi-
cial referrals
because these
types of cases
tend to gen-
erate more
significant en-
vironmental
outcomes and
results. The
current num-
ber of refer-
rals is a good balance of judicial and administra-
tive enforcement and shows that we are putting
our resources toward significant environmental
issues, while maintaining coverage of the regu-
lated universe.
22 ^ 22
21 J=L "
mm
FY 06
FY 07
FY 08
FY 09
Another way the Region has made progress in better utilizing our resources
is by smoothing out the referral pipeline. Several years ago, there tended to
be a big spike towards the end of the year on the number of referrals. This
is problematic in that the resources needed to prepare and process these
referrals were extensive and created workload issues for both EPA and the
Department of Justice. Through better planning, Region 6 has been able
to adjust our processes in-house, creating a more even flow of referrals
throughout the year.
FY09 Region 6 Referrals Monthly Progress
(Not including Superfund or Supplemental Referrals)
19
22
17
_19_19--"
10
12
14"
r/
0
r2
r~i
Oct Nov Dec Jan Feb Mar Apr May Jun Jul Aug Sep
By Month ^^^Cummulative
8
Compliance Assurance and Enforcement Division 2009 Annual Report
-------
Civil Judicial Case Conclusions
A consent decree resolves alleged Clean Air Act
violations at a refinery in Tyler, Texas, currently
owned and operated by Delek Refining, Ltd.
(Delek). The violations were discovered during
inspections and record reviews conducted in
2003, when Tyler Holding Company, Inc. (Tyler
Holding) owned and operated the refinery.
Pursuant to the consent decree, Tyler Holding
will pay a $624,000 civil penalty, and Delek will
conduct enhanced monitoring to address flaring
and leak-detection-and-repair issues at the
refinery. The projects conducted by Delek will
cost approximately $25 million.
15 Judicial Conclusions in FY09
¦
mm
rp/
Region 6 Non-Lead Superfund SF Non-Lead
Lead Participant Participant
Shintech, Inc. to spend $4.8 million to comply
with the Clean Air Act (CAA) and the
Resource Conservation and Recovery Act
(RCRA) at their manufacturing facilities in
Freeport, Texas. This action will reduce
harmful chlorofluorocarbon emissions and
improve hazardous waste management at
these facilities beyond the requirements
imposed by environmental laws. Shintech has
also agreed to pay a $2,585 million civil
penalty to resolve environmental violations
under the CAA, RCRA, and the Clean Water
Act, and to perform $4.7 million worth of
supplemental environmental projects.
Civil Judicial cases are enforcement
actions that had been referred to the
Department of Justice and a consent
decree has been issued. In total, Region
6 issued or participated in National cases
for 15 consent decrees in FY09, which fall
into the following categories: 1) Region 6
led cases represent non-Superfund
judicial cases that either addressed
facilities located solely within the Region
6 boundaries (Arkansas, Louisiana, New
_o Mexico, Oklahoma, or Texas), or National Cases that included
facilities located within Region 6 as well as other Regions, and
Region 6 served as the lead for developing and coordinating the
consent decree; 2) Non-lead participant cases are National
cases where another Region served as the lead, but Region 6
played a role in the case and had facilities covered in the
consent decree; 3) Superfund are
cases issued under the Comprehensive
Environmental Response, Compensation,
and Liability Act (CERCLA); and 4)
National Superfund cases where Region 6
is not the lead.
Invista will pay a $1.7 million civil penalty and
spend up to an estimated $500 million to correct
self-reported environmental violations discovered
at facilities in seven states, including facilities in
Region 6. The company disclosed more than 680
violations of water, air, hazardous waste,
emergency planning and preparedness, and
pesticide regulations to EPA after auditing 12
facilities it acauired from DuPont in 2004.
Three manufacturers of sulfuric acid have agreed
to spend at least $12 million on air pollution
controls that are expected to eliminate more than
3,000 tons of harmful emissions annually from six
production plants in Louisiana, Ohio, Oklahoma,
Texas, and the Wind River Reservation in
Wyoming. Chemtrade Logistics, Chemtrade
Refinery Services, and Marsulex also will pay a
civil penalty of $700,000 under the Clean Air Act
settlement.
The Explorer Pipeline Company paid a
$3.3 million civil penalty to resolve
violation of the Clean Water Act, as
amended by the Oil Pollution Act of 1990,
stemming from a July 14, 2007, spill of
over 6,500 barrels (approximately 275,000
gallons) of jet fuel from its interstate
pipeline at a location near Huntsville,
Texas. Explorer's 28-inch interstate refined
petroleum products pipeline ruptured near
Huntsville and jet fuel spilled onto the
surrounding area and into nearby Turkey
Creek, which flows to the Trinity River at
the upper reaches of Lake Livingston.
Compliance Assurance and Enforcement Division 2009 Annual Report
-------
National Priorities vs. Core
Administrative Orders
APO Complaints
APO Conclusions
Referrals
Judicial Conclusions
(includes Nat'I Cases)
The national program is organized into two major
components:
~ National Program Priorities, which focus on significant
environmental risks and noncompliance patterns
~ Core Program activities that implement the
requirements of all environmental laws and programs
National Priorities (FY08-10)
Clean Air Act: Air Toxics
Clean Air Act: New Source Review
Clean Water Act: Wet Weather
o Combined Animal Feeding Operations
o Combined Sewer Overflows
o Sanitary Sewer Overflows
o Storm Water
Financial Responsibility
Resource Conservation and Recovery Act: Mineral
Processing
Indian Country: Schools, Drinking Water, Solid Waste
The Region maintains a strong Core program with an
increasing emphasis on work in the National Priority
areas. This can be seen in the Referral percentages,
cases that typically will result in larger environmental
benefits, penalties, injunctive relief, and pollutant
reductions. The results from these cases will not be
realized until the cases are concluded in future years.
The Region currently has over 30 National Priority cases
in the pipeline awaiting settlement.
$ Value Penalties
Core
$22,803,902——
99%
1
I
mM
Nat'l Priority
— $274,945
1%
Pounds of Pollutant Reductions
$ Value Injunctive Relief
Core
$390,478,945
99%
Core,
64,476,756,
72%
Nat'l Priority,
24,719,393,
28%
Nat'l Priority
$4,532,600
1%
10
Compliance Assurance and Enforcement Division 2009 Annual Report
-------
State by State - Numbers at a Glance
# Administrative Conclusions
LA, 306, 44%- NM, 48, 7%
AR, 38,
OK, 134, 20%
GM, 5, 1%
TX, 152, 22%
# Judicial Conclusions
(not including Superfund)
(Nat'l Cases: Each State involved is counted)
NM, 0, 0% OK, 1,8%
LA, 4, 33%-
AR, 1,
IX, 6, 51%
Penalties
OK,
$383,000,
2%
NM,
$836,000,--^" / 1 ~ \ GM, $44,000.
4% LA, / AR, 0oA
$1,600,000,-J $121,000.
7% 1%
IX,
$20,300,000,
86%
TX
$11,125,000
95%
SEPs
$431,000
$165,000
Many factors go into the Region 6 targeting strategy, with
risk, environmental impact, and population being key to
our decision making process on how to utilize our
resources. Texas and Louisiana are Region 6's two most
populated states, with a combined 28 million people, with
a large industry base located within their borders.
Highlights of enforcement actions taken in our states
include:
~ Arkansas Egg Co. was issued administrative orders for
three facilities for violations of the Clean Water Act.
Combined, these orders require the facilities to
implement over $75,000 in complying actions with an
estimated 375,000 lbs in pollutant reductions.
~ Calcasieu Refining Company was issued a Consent
Decree resolving violations of the Clean Air Act at the
company's Lake Charles, Louisiana refinery, with a
$612,500 penalty to be shared with the State. The
facility is also required to implement complying
actions at a cost of $1.8 million, which will reduce
emissions of nitrogen oxides and volatile organic
compounds by approximately 45,000 lbs.
~ Western Refining was issued a Consent Agreement
and Final Order, in a joint effort with the New Mexico
Environment Department, to resolve violations of
federal hazardous waste rules, resulting in a
$734,008 penalty, complying actions at a cost of $7.7
million, and will result in over 171 million pounds of
Hazardous Waste being properly treated.
~ Cantrell Energy Corporation, of Ada, Oklahoma,
was issued a cease and desist order for violations of
the federal Clean Water Act for unauthorized
discharge of oil field brine generated by production
activities. Cantrell Energy was ordered to cease all
discharges of pollutants from the facility, and to
remove all brine and contaminated soils from the
flow path located between the facility and the
tributary of Spring Branch Creek. This results in over
370 thousand pounds in pollutant reductions.
~ BP Products North America Inc. will spend more than
$161 million on pollution controls, enhanced
maintenance and monitoring, and improved internal
management practices to resolve Clean Air Act violations
at its Texas City, Texas refinery. The company will also
pay a $12 million civil penalty and spend $6 million on a
supplemental project to reduce air pollution in Texas City.
These actions will reduce emissions of benzene and other
volatile organic compounds by approximately 240,000
pounds annually.
tx,
$372,800,000.
93%
AR, $413,000,
0%
GM, $19,000
LA,
$14,400,000,
$8,200,000, 4%
2%
Injunctive Relief
Compliance Assurance and Enforcement Division 2009 Annual Report
-------
Compliance and Enforcement Annual Results
Region 6 Numbers at a Glance
Civil Enforcement
Estimated Environmental Benefits - Commitments to Reduce
Pollution & Protect the Environment:
Direct Environmental Benefits
Pollution Reduced, Treated or Eliminated (Pounds) (1±
89,000,000
Hazardous Waste Treated, Minimized, or Properly
Disposed of (Pounds) (1± (2}
711,000,000
Contaminated Soil to be Cleaned Up (Cubic Yards)
40,000
Contaminated Water to be Cleaned Up (Cubic Yards)
21,000
Stream Miles Protected or Restored (Linear Feet)
240
Wetlands Protected or Restored (Acres)
265
People Protected by Safe Drinking Water Act
Enforcement (# of People)
280,000
Investments in Actions & Equipment to Reduce Pollution & Protect
the Environment (Injunctive Relief)
$395,000,000
Investments in Projects that Benefit the Environment & Public Health
(Supplemental Environmental Projects)
$11,700,000
Civil Penalties Assessed
Administrative Penalties Assessed
$2,900,000
Judicial Penalties Assessed
$20,200,000
State/Local Judicial Penalties Assessed From Joint Federal-
State/Local Enforcement Actions (3}
$426,000
Stipulated Penalties Paid
$6,500,000
Civil Enforcement and Compliance Activities
Referrals of Civil Judicial Enforcement Cases to Department of
Justice (DOJ)
26
Supplemental Referrals of Civil Judicial Enforcement Cases to DOJ
5
Civil Judicial Complaints Filed with Court
10
Civil Judicial Enforcement Case Conclusions
11
Administrative Penalty Order Complaints
342
Final Administrative Penalty Orders
349
Administrative Compliance Orders
347
Cases with Supplemental Environmental Projects
12
Compliance Assurance and Enforcement Division 2009 Annual Report
-------
EPA Compliance Monitoring Activities
Inspections/Evaluations
1542
Civil Investigations
66
Number of Regulated Entities Taking Complying Actions during EPA
Inspections/Evaluations
66
Superfund Cleanup Enforcement
Amount Committed by Liable Parties to Clean up Superfund Sites
$ 9,700,000
Amount Committed by Liable Parties to Pay for Government
Oversight of Superfund Cleanups
$ 3,800,000
Amount Committed by Liable Parties to Reimburse the Government
for Money Spent Cleaning up Superfund Sites
$ 17,000,000
Voluntary Disclosures
Commitments to Reduce, Treat or Eliminate Pollution as a Result of
Voluntary Disclosures (pounds)
5,000,000
Voluntary Disclosures Initiated (Facilities)
29
Voluntary Disclosures Resolved (Facilities)
42
Voluntary Disclosures Initiated (Companies)
27
Voluntary Disclosures Resolved (Companies)
36
EPA Compliance Assistance
Entities Provided with EPA Compliance Assistance (4)
24,000
Sources for Data displayed in this document: Integrated Compliance Information System
(ICIS), Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation & Liability Information System
(CERCLIS), Resource Conservation and Recovery Act Information (RCRAInfo), Air Facility
System (AFS), and Permit Compliance System (PCS) October 13, 2009
Footnotes:
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 initiated 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 hazardous waste cases. 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. This measure, generated by a recommendation from the General Accounting Office,
requires that EPA now report on penalties assessed in judicial enforcement cases that
are awarded to a state/co-plaintiff.
4. EPA provides assistance using a variety of tools, including workshops, facility visits,
posting web-based information, responding to specific calls about regulations, etc.
Compliance Assurance and Enforcement Division 2009 Annual Report
-------
Supplemental Environmental Projects
Enforcement Action
Name
Final Order
Issue/Enter
Date
SEP Description
SEP Category
Cost of SEP
State
Primary Law
BP NORTH
AMERICA
09/18/2009
To retrofit 100 City of Texas City vehicles with liquid natural gas
(LNG) and build 4 refueling stations for LNG.
Pollution Reduction
$6,000,000
TX
Clean Air Act
TARGA NORTH
TEXAS LP (CHICO
GAS PLANT)
08/31/2009
To reduce potential emissions of VOCs, Targa proposes to
replace at each of the six (6) natural gas processing plants, the
thief hatch pressure and vacuum gaskets at each of its storage
tanks in VOC service with a capacity of 210 barrels or more.
Pollution
Prevention/Equipment-
Technology Modification
$8,400
TX
Clean Air Act
HUNT OIL
COMPANY
08/26/2009
Respondent shall conduct annual supplemental emission
inspections using FLIR Infrared Camera Technology at the
Fairway Gas Plant, Central Tank Battery, and Headers and will
repair and eliminate leaks for a period of five years. Respondent
shall submit a SEP completion report to EPA within 60 days after
final completion of the SEP.
Pollution
Prevention/Process-
Procedure Modification
$52,250
TX
Clean Air Act
CITY OF
NATCHITOCHES
07/01/2009
Respondent is to remove from service and send for proper
disposal of the 4 PCB transformers.
Pollution Reduction
$381,280
TX
Toxic Substances
Control Act
TERRAPIN ENERGY
04/14/2009
The SEP consisted of burying approximately 40,000 feet of flow
line at the facility.
Pollution
Prevention/Equipment-
Technology Modification
$48,916
OK
Clean Water Act
SPESS OIL
COMPANY
04/14/2009
The SEP is requiring the Respondent to construct an alternate
gathering facility, which will gather and store produced fluids.
The SEP will involve the following: install approximately 5,800
feet of 2 inch polyethylene pipeline; install a 200 barrel steel
stock tank; and install an oil-water separator device.
Pollution
Prevention/Equipment-
Technology Modification
$26,661
OK
Clean Water Act
Green Buffer - Donate approximately 300 acres of wetlands to
the U.S. Fish and Wild Life Service to be held in perpetuity for
the protection of wild life habitats.
Environmental
Restoration and
Protection
$1,000,000
TX
Resource
Conservation and
Recovery Act
SHINTECH, INC.
03/06/2009
PVC Slurry Stripper SEP: Reduce vinyl chloride monomer
emissions and change facility permits to reduce the emissions
limit from 35 ppmw to 10 ppmw (parts per million weight)
Pollution Reduction
$2,700,000
TX
Resource
Conservation and
Recovery Act
Refrigerant/Appliance Recycling Program SEP: implement a
community refrigerant/appliance recycling program to collect,
recycle, and dispose of at least 6,400 residential appliances
containing ozone-depleting substances in the city of Houston,
the largest city in the U.S. which does not have funding for this
type of program
Pollution Prevention/
In-Process Recycling
$1,000,000
TX
Resource
Conservation and
Recovery Act
BP PRODUCTS
NORTH AMERICA,
INC., TXCITY, TX
03/05/2009
The company will provide ambulance, at least 3 repeaters,
computers, optigon system, materials and equipment for
remodeling emergency ops center and a light tower to the City of
TX City, Texas within18 months.
Emergency Planning
and Preparedness
$365,000
TX
Emergency
Planning &
Community Right-
To-Know Act
LAFOURCHE
PARISH
03/02/2009
This SEP Project is designed to create or enhance
approximately 175 acres of new wetlands at Catfish Lake.
Environmental
Restoration and
Protection
$50,000
LA
Clean Water Act
CRM ENERGY
PARTNERS
12/08/2008
The Respondent has agreed to implement a SEP in the form of
"Environmental Restoration and Protection," which both parties
agree is intended to secure significant environmental or public
health protection and improvement. Specifically, the SEP
requires the Respondent to perform extensive soil remediation to
soils contaminated from brine discharges. The soil remediation
involved applying soil amendments such as lime, hay, and
manure to these contaminated areas.
Environmental
Restoration and
Protection
$35,399
OK
Clean Water Act
KOBY OIL
COMPANY, LLC
10/28/2008
The SEP consisted of the following at the facility previously in
violation of the Clean Water Act: The SEP will include: closing
out a pit; rebuilding secondary containment with a galvanized
retaining structure; installing a sump pump; performing
remediation and restoration to the soils located adjacent to the
facility.
Environmental
Restoration and
Protection
$17,586
OK
Clean Water Act
LUNAR
INVESTMENTS INC.
10/09/2008
The SEP consisted of the following at the facility previously in
violation of the Clean Water Act: Move the facility away from the
tributary of Okemah Lake; close out pits at the facility; once the
facility has been moved rebuild the secondary containment;
install a sump pump at the facility; and perform remediation and
restoration to the contaminated soils at the old facility location.
Environmental
Restoration and
Protection
$36,540
OK
Clean Water Act
Compliance Assurance and Enforcement Division 2009 Annual Report
-------
AIR / TOXICS & INSPECTIONS
3 for 3 over 3 Years
Protecting human health and the environment is one of
the agency's goals. Looking at the last 3 years, we have
settled enforcement cases that have made significant con-
tributions to:
• air emission reductions,
• dollars dedicated to injunctive relief, and
• penalties paid for noncompliance
We also utilized strategic targeting over the last 3 years to
prioritize national and regional enforcement priorities. The
targeting strategy criteria has included:
• toxic risk to the environment,
• location such as non-attainment areas, and
• the potential for add on emission controls
Over the last 3 years, we have changed the way we con-
duct investigations and case development. Due to facility
size and complexity, we have:
and the amount of penalties for non-compliance in-
creased.
Penalty in Dollar Amounts
20,000,000
15,000,000
10,000,000
5,000,000
1 1
I 2007
4,027,441
I 2008
4,909,641
] 2009,
16,383,583
2007 - 2009
Year in Review
The CAED Air / Toxics Inspection and Coordination program
had a successful and exciting fiscal year. The majority of
the resources focused in two fundamental enforcement ar-
eas. The first was to develop and refer environmentally
significant enforcement cases to the Department of Justice
(DOJ) and second, to provide support to the Multi-media
Planning and Permitting Division as they move to take ac-
tion on permitting regulations.
decreased the number of full compliance evaluations
(fence line to fence line inspection)
increased partial compliance evaluations (a focused
regulatory standard or specific facility process inspec-
tion)
increased the number of Clean Air Act Section 114,
information request reviews
As a result of the 3 for 3 over 3 years, the number of air
emission reductions increased,
80,000,000
70,000,000
60,000,000
50,000,000
40,000,000
30,000,000
20,000,000
10,000,000
7
J
J X
~ 2007
46,958,000
~ 2008
25,088,000
~ 2009
73,650,879
Emissions Reductions Pounds peryear
... the number of dollars dedicated to injunctive relief
increased,
300,000,000
250,000,000
200,000,000
150,000,000
100,000,000
50,000,000
Injunctive Relief In Dollar Amounts
2007 - 2009
/
1 2007,
209,346,975
] 2008,
253,534,930
1 2009,
270,299,602
Compliance Assurance and Enforcement Division 2009 Annual Report
15
Nine cases were referred to the DOJ, most of which were
generated from National
priorities including New
Source Review (NSR) per-
mit investigation and Air
Toxics flaring evaluations
and leak detection and re-
pair work practice evalua-
tions. The focus of a NSR
investigation is to identify
facility projects where a
physical change or change
in the method of operation warjuw"P
results in an emission in- HH r w .J ,1 /fJTPL Hlf8|111
crease. In many cases we8, . II ij ¦ Til ri 55
find projects that should.'; * f (/ Bi SBl| *j jj/H
have triggered a more'*,, ll1} /r ;i
stringent permit (i.e., ^
Prevention of Significant
Deterioration or non-at- I ' 1 ''' | jf|'¦>
tainment permitting) that
would require more costly and more stringent air emission
controls. The focus of the air toxics flaring evaluations is to
evaluate the flare's destruction removal efficiency. EPA has
found that some facilities operate their flares in a range of
40 to 60% destruction removal efficiency as opposed to
a 99% destruction removal efficiency as identified in the
flare's manufacturer's specifications. The focus of the air
toxics leak detection and repair (LDAR) evaluation is to
evaluate the facility's ability to minimize hazardous air pol-
lutant emissions from equipment such as pumps, valves
and flanges. In many cases EPA determines a facility does
not have an effective LDAR program.
-------
In FY09, we spent resources providing support to Region 6
Air Permitting and Planning to address long standing per-
mitting issues that adversely affect Federal enforceability
in the states of Texas and Loui-
siana.
Specifically, in Louisiana's five
parish Baton Rouge area, the
Louisiana Department of Envi-
ronmental Quality is required
to have the stricter "severe"
ozone nonattainment NSR re-
quirements. This would include
more stringent emission controls and air emission offset
of 1.3 to 1. The current Louisiana State Implementation
Plan requires serious area NSR offsets and thresholds (50
tons per year and offsets of 1.2 to 1) for the Baton Rouge
1-hour ozone nonattainment area.
As a result, we issued fair notice letters to 237 regulated
entities notifying them, that as an owner or operator of a
stationary source located in an ozone nonattainment area,
they are obligated to comply with federal requirements
applicable to their facility, including non-attainment new
source review (NNSR) requirements. This letter is to pro-
vide notice that permits issued inconsistent with the Court
decision will not protect sources from potential EPA enforce-
ment action to ensure application of the applicable federal
regulations, including the severe area NNSR requirements.
Texas Air Permitting
Program
of their responsibility to comply with applicable federal re-
quirements, including those in the Texas state implemen-
tation plan (SIP). This includes ali terms and conditions of
permits approved under the Texas SIP.
In FY 2010, we will move to take final action. In addition,
we will continue to coordinate with the Office of Environ-
mental Quality to "true up" permit requirements, as neces-
sary, with each Flexible Permit holder.
CAA Innovative Enforcement Effort
Clean Air Act Section 112(r)
Complaint and Consent
Agreement and Final Orders
(CAFOs)
" Risk Management Plan require-
ments (40 CFR Part 68 and CAA
USEPA 112 (r)) were promulgated by EPA
office of inspector General to ensure that Industries (Chemi-
cal Plants and Refineries) would
prevent, detect, and respond to
accidental releases of regulated
substances. These regulations re-
quire Industries to develop a risk
management plan (RMP) that is
available to government officials
and the public.
Audit Report
Risk Management Plan Reports
Flexible Permits have been issued to over 135 of the most
complex and largest facilities in the Nation. Such facili-
ties include refineries and petro-chemical plants located
along the Gulf Coast near Houston, Port Arthur, Beaumont,
and Corpus Christi. Until the Region approves the State's
program, permits issued under these flexible permit rules
reflect Texas state requirements and not necessarily the
federally-applicable requirements. We previously issued
Fair Notice letters to each facility owner informing them
The Office of Inspector General issued a report on February
2009, in which Region 6 was cited for failure to implement
a process to identify facilities who did not file RMPs by the
1999 regulatory deadline. On May 13, 2009, EPA Head-
quarters provided a list based on the Toxic Release Inven-
tory indicating that potentially 250 industries appeared to
be out of compliance with the requirements under Section
112 (r) and Part 68.
CAED utilized an innovative approach to prioritize the
250 + list. This innovative approach utilized internal EPA
databases to identify the facilities which had never submit-
ted an RMP, but have reported quantities of chemicals that
exceed the RMP thresholds based on TRI information. 78
Industries were identified within a period of 3.5 months
after receiving the Headquarters list.
As a result of this screening process, EPA Region 6 issued
78 CAFOs in which the companies were given the opportu-
nity to sign the CAFO and pay a reduced penalty or provide
documentation that they were not subject to RMP require-
ments. At the end of the fiscal year,
Region 6 received documentation
from the companies and was able
to make a compliance determina-
tion that 77 of the facilities were not
subject to the RMP requirements.
One facility is subject to the RMP
requirements and meetings with the
facility are scheduled. Region 6's ex-
pedited process is being adapted by
EPA Headquarters for use in other
Regions.
16
Compliance Assurance and Enforcement Division 2009 Annual Report
The Region proposed
disapproval of the
Texas Commission on
Environmental Qual-
ity's Flexible Permit and
Qualified Facilities pro-
gram. "Texas' air per-
mitting program should
be transparent and
understandable to the
communities we serve,
protective of air qual-
ity, and establish clear
and consistent require-
ments," said Lawrence
Starfield. While the Texas permit programs lack transpar-
ency, the program also lacks the necessary monitoring,
recordkeeping, and reporting requirements to ensure ac-
countability and provide a means to determine compliance
with plant wide emission caps.
-------
l,OOD?YE\H
Administrative actions were issued to Hunt Oil Co and
Targa Resources. The settlements continue the Region's
focus on providing compliance assurance and enforcement
presence in the vast upstream oil and gas exploration and
production sectors. The administrative actions resolved
violations of the permit conditions for maintaining all pol-
lution control equipment in good working order. The issued
penalty for both totaled $39,737 and included two Sup-
plemental Environmental Projects (SEP) worth $60,650.
Air Significant Accomplishments
We had five judicial conclusions, including settlements for
Interstate Brands (Monroe, LA) Honeywell (Baton Rouge,
LA), Calcasieu Refining Company (Lake Charles, LA), IN-
VISTA (Orange, Victoria, and Laporte, TX), and BP Corpo-
ration (Texas City, TX). Highlighted items within the five
include:
The BP Corporation agreement includes a cash pen-
alty of $12 million and approximately $180 million in
injunctive relief. The penalty is the 4th largest Clean
Air Act penalty secured in a settlement. Addition-
ally, BP has agreed to implement a Supplemental En-
vironmental Project to convert diesei vehicles owned
by the City of Texas City and the Texas City Indepen-
dent School District to compressed natural gas or liqui-
fied natural gas at a cost of no less than $6 million.
The IN VISTA case was a global settlement that in-
cluded three facilities in the Region. The settlement
included injunctive relief at all facilities that will cost
approximately $500 million, and require all three facili-
ties in the Region to comply with an enhanced benzene
program. INVISTA will pay a $1.7 million penalty. The
violations stemmed from INVISTA's interna! audits per-
formed over 20 months, which found extensive areas
of concern, 329 of which were at the Region 6 facilities.
Compliance Assurance and Enforcement Division 2009 Annual Report
17
The Calcasieu judicial conclusion provides for a $612,500
cash penalty and requires injunctive relief addressing
PSD/NSR, NSPS J, excess flaring, Leak Detection and Re-
pair, and benzene in wastewater. When completed, the
enhanced controls and work practices under the agree-
ment will reduce emissions of nitrogen oxides, sulfur di-
oxide, benzene, and volatile organic compounds.
Four administrative ac-
tions were issued, which
included Goodyear Tire
and Rubber Company
(Houston, TX), Calumet
(Shreveport, LA), Hunt
Oil (Poynor, TX) and Tar-
ga Resources (Chico, TX).
Highlighted items within
the four include:
As a result of an off- ' / \ // /
site partial compli- /4 ) I " i
ance evaluation, an | ** |1
administrative action
was issued to Goodyear
Tire and Rubber Company for failing to pass a perfor-
mance test. The issued penalty totaled $45,133. The
injunctive relief related to the violation was captured
in 2008 under an administrative order that required
the facility to conduct and pass a performance test.
• One SEP stipulates that Hunt conduct Leak De-
tection and Repair (LDAR) at its Fairway Gas
Plant and seven surrounding natural gas field
facilities (tank batteries and field pipeline head-
ers) using a third party infrared camera LDAR
technician on a contract basis for five years.
The second SEP stipulates that Targa replace, at
each of its six natural gas processing plants owned
by the com-
pany, the thief
hatch pres-
sure and vac-
uum gaskets
at each of its
storage tanks
in VOC service
with a capacity
of 210 barrels
or more. The
SEP involves
pollution prevention and control measures that are
presently not required under any state or federal
regulations but that address VOC and HAP emis-
sions.
-------
Incidents
(Explosions & Fires)
ALON Oil
Big Springs, TX
Calumet Refinery
Shreveport, LA
Delek
Tyler, TX
BP Amoco
Texas City, TX
-------
The CAED
Incident Process
Just
imagine living
in a community where
your peaceful sleep is interrupt-
ed with a boom that makes everything
shake and rumble. Eventually, you find out that
a facility, near you, had an incident that resulted in a
huge fire. You hear fire trucks, ambulance sirens, people run-
ning and screaming - some buried, some burned, and some are even
dead. Our phones are ringing because the community people want to find out
what EPA is doing about these facility incidents.
BP Amaco - 03/05; ALON - 02/08; Calumet - 10/08; Delek - 11/08; Flint Hills - 05/09
There has been an increase of facility incidents that cause harm to the environment and human health. We needed to
develop an enforcement process that adequately addressed the incidents in a more timely manner.
In a matter of months, the Incident Process was developed by Esteban Herrera and Stacey Dwyer, Air Sections Chiefs;
David Garcia, Associate Director for Air/Toxics and Inspection Coordination Branch and Patricia Welton and Jan Gerro
from the Office of Regional Counsel.
incident Process
Identify
Response/
Enf. Team
Brief
Management
Deploy
Team
Complete
Inspection
Decide
on Appropriate
Action
The Process in Action
Since inception of the process, we have a story to tell! On April 6, 2009, a Complaint
and Consent Agreement and Final Order (CCAFO) was issued against Calumet Lubricants,
LLC (Calumet) located in Caddo Parish, Louisiana. The CCAFO was ordered due to an
explosion and fire on October 30, 2008. Investigations revealed violations of Section
112(r) of the Clean Air Act and Part 68 of the Code of Federal Regulations at the re-
finery and chemical manufacturing facility. These regulations require risk management
programs - prevent the accidental release and to minimize the consequences of any such
release of any substance listed pursuant to paragraph (3) or any other extremely haz-
ardous substance. The owners and operators of stationary sources producing, process-
ing, handling or storing such substances have a general duty in the same manner and
to the same extent as section 654, title 29 of the United States Code, to identify haz-
ards which may result from such releases using appropriate hazard assessment tech-
niques, to design and maintain a safe facility taking such steps as are necessary to pre-
vent releases, and to minimize the consequences of accidental releases which do occur.
Calumet agreed to pay a civil penalty of $230K, address findings, and comply with recom-
mendations of November 24, 2004, and January 16, 2008, audit reports prepared for the
facility by Process Safety & Reliability Group, Inc. Calumet shall certify, by October 30,
2009, that all audit recommendations have been addressed and completed.
Compliance Assurance and Enforcement Division 2009 Annual Report
19
-------
HAZARDOUS WASTE ENFORCEMENT
CAED Hazardous Waste Enforcement referred five
cases to the Department of Justice (DOJ). The vi-
olations associated with the cases are improper
disposal, operating without a permit, failure to
make a hazardous waste determination, and stor-
ing hazardous waste more than 90 days, etc.
Two supplemental referrals to the DOJ were complet-
ed for additional counts to the previously referred
cases. The violations associated with the cases are
operating without a permit, failure to make a hazard-
ous waste determination, and others.
Two Consent Agreement and Final Orders for West-
ern Refining and Langs Environmental were complet-
ed. The violations associated with these cases are
storing hazardous waste for greater than 90 days
without a RCRA permit, land disposing prohibited
hazardous waste, operating without a permit, stor-
ing waste without a permit, operating a waste pile,
and others. The order requires Langs Environmental
to pay a penalty of $5,000 and dispose 6,000 gallons
of hazardous wastewater. Western Refining will pay
a penalty of $734,000 and close surface impound-
ments and install tanks and other equipment.
Three RCRA Administrative Compliance Order for
Taylor Foundry, Armotex, and CCS/Arkla were com-
pleted. The orders instructed the respective facilities
to properly dispose of hazardous wastewater, label
containers, make hazardous waste determinations,
dispose of waste properly, and provide documenta-
tion of compliance.
Fifteen "Warning Letters"
were issued to facilities
for a variety of alleged
and minor violations. The
companies were instruct-
ed to respond with docu-
mentation describing how
they came into compli-
ance. The letters were is-
sued to CTS Wireless, Lion
CoPolymer, Bayer Envi-
ronmental, Texas Petro-
chemical, Honeywell Inter-
national, Intel Corporation, Dragon Products, Gulf
Coast Waste Disposal, General Electric, PCS In-
dustrial Outsourcing, Material Support Resources,
Inc., Corpus Christi Naval Air Station, William Ole-
fins, Danaher Tool Group, and Central Maloney.
RCRA 3013
Administrative Orders
Over the past year, the Corrective Action and Com-
pliance Inspection Section issued four Administrative
Orders to companies in Region 6, requiring the facili-
ties to conduct sampling and analysis to assess con-
tamination at their facilities. These are facilities which
EPA believes have soil and/or groundwater contami-
nation associated with hazardous wastes, managed
at these sites. The facilities include two foundries,
a mineral processor, an oil field waste disposal site,
and a chemical manufacturer. The potential contami-
nation includes heavy metals, radiation, and vola-
tile organic compounds in soil and groundwater. The
investigations will result in a determination of the
nature and extent of contamination at the facili-
ties and will allow for decisions to be made regard-
ing remediation, or corrective action, at these sites.
Compliance Assurance and Enforcement Division 2009 Annual Report
-------
Success Story:
Mineral Processing
National Initiative
Agrifos - ExxonMobil 7003 Order On Consent
In August 2007, Agrifos Fertilizer, in Pasadena, Texas,
was storing excessive amounts of acidic wastewater that
threatened the catastrophic failure of an impoundment
(gypsum stack) containing hundreds of millions of gallons
of the wastewater. Heavy rainfall
contributed to a failure of a portion
of the retaining wall that released
wastewater into Cotton Patch Bay-
ou, causing a fish kill, and into the
Houston Ship Channel (spillway de-
picted in red below). The overflow
released approximately 54 million
gallons of wastewater between Au-
gust 16 and September 7, 2007.
EPA responded by issuing an Immi-
nent and Substantial Endangerment
Order (RCRA § 7003 - filed March
28, 2008) to Agrifos and ExxonMo-
bil, the past owner/operator of the
Agrifos Facility, The Order mandat-
ed:
Agrifos
• Minimize fresh water additions
• Reroute steam condensate from
evaporator to WWTP
• Cease green SPA Production
• Operate WWTP 24/7
• Operate phos acid plant 24/7
• Repair retaining wall
• Close Stack #3 Side-slope (cost reimbursement from
ExxonMobil)
• Develop/Submit Emergency Plan
ExxonMobil
• Complete Side-slope segregation/closure of Stack #4
• Sampling/Analysis around Stack#4
• Make Operational/Permit Deep Injection Well
• Build a 2nd WWTP (later modified to 2nd Deep Injec-
tion Well)
• Demonstrate (model) closure plan can contain 100
year rainfall event in any month for next five years
• Build lined auxiliary holding pond on top of Stack 4
once drained/side-slopes closed
Stack sf'J
Stack
(above #3)
Since the issuance of the RCRA § 7003, closure progress at
Agrifos has been exceptional:
Stack #4 is drained of acidic wastewater, side slopes are
closed, and a lined auxiliary holding pond has been placed
on the top.
Stack #4, July, 2009 - Emptied, lined, the Top (shown
here) has been converted into an Auxiliary Holding Pond
KlSBf
r
Stack #4
Stack #2
South Stack Complex
Stack #2 is no longer filled to ex-
cess with acidic wastewater.
Stack #2, July, 2009 - Looking East
from the Divide Between Stacks 2
and 5 of the South Stack Complex.
Stack #5 is also significantly drained
of acidic wastewater and now has
eleven feet of freeboard.
2009/07/22
Stack #5, July, 2009 - Looking West from the Divide Be-
tween Stacks 2 and 5 of the South Stack Complex.
Compliance Assurance and Enforcement Division 2009 Annual Report
21
-------
Surface Impoundments
In 2009. two cases were referred to DOJ that includ-
ed potential violations for surface impoundments.
The potential violations include improper storage of
hazardous waste in an unpermitted surface impound-
ment, failure to make a hazardous waste determina-
tion, and others.
A Consent Agreement and Final Order for Western
Refining that included the closing of surface impound-
ments and the installation of tanks was completed.
The violations included improper storage of hazard-
ous waste in an unpermitted surface impoundment,
and failure to make hazardous waste determination
among others.
The RCRA program has completed 42 surface im-
poundment inspections since 2005. Of these, seven
are presently referred to the Department of Justice.
Two cases have been settled, Giant and Shintec.
There are 10 potential cases under review with case
development pending.
Vapor Intrusion
Grand Prairie, Texas
Throughout the past year, staff from the Corrective
Action and Compliance Inspection Section has
been working collaboratively with staff from
several Region 6 Divisions and with the U.S. De-
partment of Justice to enforce an Order issued
to Deifasco, Inc., in 2008. The Order requires
Delfasco to mitigate the threat of trichloroethyl-
ene vapors entering homes from contaminated
groundwater in the vicinity of property owned
and formerly operated by Delfasco. Shortly
after the Order was issued, Delfasco filed for
bankruptcy. Through mediation, the United
States reached a settlement with Delfasco which
will allow the company to emerge from bank-
ruptcy and wili provide for installation of fans in
the crawl space of affected homes and contin-
ued monitoring of groundwater contamination.
22
Compliance Assurance and Enforcement Division 2009 Annual Report
-------
Kiowa Herbicide
Spill
Multi-media Referral to
Department of Justice
Inspections with States
In August 2009, staff from the Hazardous Waste Enforce-
ment Branch and the Office of Environmental Justice and
Tribal Affairs (OEJTA), collected soil, sediment, surface
water, and groundwater samples from Kiowa trust land in
Oklahoma. The sampling was conducted at the request of
the Kiowa tribe to determine current concentrations of an
herbicide that was spilled on the property in October 2008.
The spill occurred when a crop dusting plane experienced en-
gine trouble upon take-off and released its tank of cotton de-
foliant (approx. 350 gallons) onto residential tribal trust land
A Region 6 team, lead by staff from the Corrective Action
and Compliance Inspection Section, prepared a multime-
dia referral for enforcement actions to the US Department
of Justice (DOJ) for violations of the Clean Air Act, the
Clean Water Act, and the Resource Conservation and Re-
covery Act (RCRA) by a chemical manufacturing company.
The team coordinated with the National Enforcement In-
vestigation Center from Denver, Colorado and the Special
Litigations Program Branch from Washington, D.C., to pre-
pare a multiple violation complaint against the company
in approximately nine months. The referral document was
prepared using a relatively new annotated style which dis-
cusses numerous exemptions, anticipated defenses, and
explanations of reasoning behind the complaint as foot-
notes in the document to expedite transfer of the facts of
the case to the DOJ attorneys.
This year, the Corrective Action and Compliance Inspec-
tion Section of the Hazardous Waste Branch successfully
collaborated and partnered with the state environmental
agencies in Region 6 to conduct numerous compliance
inspections. With this team approach, inspections were
comprehensive, facilities' responses to regulatory con-
cerns increased, and camaraderie and knowledge transfers
between agencies are strengthened. Specifically, in part-
nering with Oklahoma Department of Environmental Qual-
ity (ODEQ), Hazardous Waste Compliance & Inspection
Section during inspections this year, environmental and
waste sampling intensified. To improve efficiencies, ODEQ
agreed to hand deliver all collected samples to the State's
lab in Oklahoma City and perform the analysis instead of
EPA transporting the samples to EPA's lab in Houston for
each inspection. This was an effective and resource saving
approach.
adjacent to the air strip. The release allegedly impacted the
land, water, horses, structures, and residents. At the time,
the Oklahoma Department of Agriculture, Food, and Forestry
(ODAFF) responded to the incident (including collecting soil,
sediment, and water samples) in coordination with EPA's
pesticides program and Office of Regional Counsel (ORC).
Sample results indicated that soil and water had been im-
pacted above EPA residential screening levels; however,
the material is believed toi
break down quickly in the
environment. The sampling
conducted in August was a
cooperative effort between
the EPA, ODAFF, the Bureau
of Indian Affairs (BIA) and
the tribe. Numerous coor-
dination meetings and con-
ference calls involving EPA's
Hazardous Waste Enforce
ment Branch, Pesticides En-
forcement Section, OEJTA,
ORC, BIA, Kiowa Tribe, and
ODAFF were held prior to the
sampling event. The samples
were collected by EPA with as-
sistance from ODAFF and BIA.
Compliance Assurance and Enforcement Division 2009 Annual Report
23
-------
Real-Time Enforcement
Process Proves To Be
Effective
The NPDES enforcement program incorporated real time
enforcement practices into the Onshore Oii and Gas (brine)
enforcement program beginning in October 2008 and ex-
panded real time enforcement efforts in the Concentrated
Animal Feeding Operations enforcement program during
fiscal year 2009. From October 1 through August 31, 2009,
senior technical staff conducted inspections and wrote real
time enforcement orders on over 40 occasions. These or-
ders were issued within 1 to 4 days of when the inspection
occurred. The median issuance time was approximately
2 days from
the time of
inspection.
These orders
resulted in
pollutant re-
duction of
over 40 mil-
lion pounds
of pollutants
and 3 ad-
ministrative
cases were
reported to
headquar-
ters as big cases (over a million pounds of pollutant reduc-
tion). This level of production accounts for over 50% of the
entire NPDES program's administrative order commitment
to EPA Headquarters for 2009. The real time enforcement
process has brought about timely and effective enforce-
ment and pollutant reduction. The use of this process will
continue to be expanded into all aspects of the water en-
forcement program, when there are obvious water quality
problems with obvious solutions.
Sanitary Sewer Overflows
(SSOs)
Sanitary sewer overflows (SSOs) are an increasing problem
in urban areas as a result of aging infrastructure and cit-
ies not maintaining the sewage collection systems as they
should. SSOs generally result from three main problems
with the sewer collection system including: 1) blockages
most frequently caused by grease and debris; 2) excessive
inflow and infiltration (I&I) caused by deteriorated pipes;
and 3) inadequate flow capacity.
SSOs have been a national priority for the past six
years. The goal of the priority is to address those cit-
ies with a discharge greater
than 10 million gallons per day
from the wastewater treatment
plants. The cost of conducting a
sewer system evaluation study
and pipe condition assessment,
repairing the deficiencies not-
ed, and upgrading the cities'
maintenance programs can
cost tens to hundreds of millions of dollars depending on
the size of the city. The cost of the repairs and upgrades
and the time required to complete the construction activi-
ties often makes a consent decree (cd), negotiated with
the assistance of the Department of Justice and the States,
the best enforcement tool to compel the cities to fix the
systems.
Region 6 currently has
several negotiated con-
sent decrees in place
with several more CDs
under negotiation. We
are also working with
our states as partners
to assist us in address-
ing the SSO issues. We
are using SSO informa-
tion collected and com-
piled by the states to target the worst case cities. We have
also been successful working with both Oklahoma and Ar-
kansas to take state actions that meet the requirements of
an EPA administrative or judicial action.
Concentrated An imal
Feeding Operations
Concentrated animal feeding operations (CAFOs) has
been a national priority for the past 5 years. Region 6 has
one of the largest universes of confined animal feeding
operations of any of the EPA regions. There are significant
numbers of hog farms in Oklahoma, dairies in Texas, New
Mexico and Oklahoma and poultry (chickens and turkeys)
in Arkansas, Texas, Louisiana and Oklahoma. The environ-
mental problems most often encountered at CAFOs is both
surface and ground water contamination resulting from
discharges from lagoons, uncontrolled discharges from the
production areas and feed storage areas, improper carcass
disposal and over application of manure to fields.
The surface water contamination problems include nutri-
ents (phosphorus and nitrates), solids, BOD and significant
concentrations of bacteria. The groundwater contamina-
tion issues most frequently found include nitrates and bac-
teria. We have also found a large number of unregulated
drinking water systems.
Compliance Assurance and Enforcement Division 2009 Annual Report
-------
Over the past several years the Region 6 CAFO enforce-
ment program has been driven primarily by responding to
citizen complaints and working with our State counterparts
to identify and address problem facilities. We have been
very successful in using our real time enforcement proce-
dures to address unpermitted discharges to waters of the
US.
Global Environmental Methods
The State of Louisiana referred a centralized waste treat-
ment facility to EPA for action. An inspection of the facility,
Global Environmental Methods (GEM), revealed untreat-
ed wastes being discharged onto the ground and into the
neighboring water canal. The inspector transmitted results
of his inspection immediately to the Regional office and a
CWA NPDES order to cease and desist discharging was is-
sued to the facility the next day. As a result of EPA's order,
the Port Authority was able to terminate GEM's lease to
operate at the port. RCRA was used to ensure that the site
was clean before GEM left the property. The cooperation
by the state of Louisiana was instrumental in obtaining the
quick results for stopping pollution and for the subsequent
clean up of the site.
The regional enforcement program to address water qual-
ity problems caused by CAFOs continues to be one of the
most effective CAFO enforcement programs in the nation.
During FY 2009, the Region conducted 7 investigations
and 41 inspections. These activities were taken to support
three ongoing civil referrals, to develop two additional civil
referrals, verify compliance with existing administrative
actions and initiate over a dozen new administrative en-
forcement actions. Improper carcass disposal, significant
over-application of animal wastes to fields and unauthor-
ized discharges continue to be the most frequent serious
problems encountered by inspectors and investigators.
Comp iance Assistance
In October 2008, training was conducted for operators of
Concentrated Animal Feeding Operations (CAFOs) in Hop-
kins County, Texas. EPA Region 6 staff participated in the
training at the Southwest Dairy Center Museum in Sul-
phur Springs, Texas. The goal of this mandatory training
was to provide educational opportunity for dairy CAFO
operators to be able to better protect the environment
and to comply with the CAFO permit and regulations.
Cease and Desist
Enforcement Orders
During fiscal year 2009, the water enforcement program is-
sued over 40 cease and desist administrative enforcement
actions. The orders issued to animal feeding operations,
oil and gas production facilities, and industrial operators
required the immediate elimination of unauthorized pollut-
ant discharges or cessation of pollution-causing activities.
Several actions required immediate proper disposal of ani-
mal carcasses or immediate cessation of over-application
of animal wastes to fields. The orders resulted in the elim-
ination of over 1.5 billion gallons of pollutant laden waste-
water over a years period. The cease and desist order has
proven to be an effective tooi for immediately addressing
serious water quality problems.
Storm Water Outreach
On June 4 and 9, 2009, Region 6 staff met with Tribal
Environmental Directors to discuss storm water issues on
Tribal lands. There were discussions about how the tribes
currently handle storm water issues, storm water training
and resources that are available, and the providing of out-
reach and assistance. With the passage of the American
Recovery and Reinvestment Act of 2009, residential, com-
mercial, and industrial construction activities are expected
to increase on Indian lands. This was an excellent oppor-
tunity to provide storm water information to Tribal Leaders
that included storm water training, inspector training, and
an explanation of the storm water permitting and enforce-
ment process for Indian lands.
The new EPA CAFO regulations promulgated in 2008 re-
quire only those CAFOs
that intend to or have the
potential to discharge to
obtain an NPDES discharge
permit. Region 6 has direct
implementation in both
Oklahoma and New Mexico.
The Region has issued gen-
eral permits under the new
regulations in both States.
Enforcement
Actions
Involving CAFOs
:j=E=prrP=ppp=j
Compliance Assurance and Enforcement Division 2009 Annual Report
-------
Trade Association, State
& Federal Agreement for
Storm Water Construction
Education
An agreement was signed October 1, 2009, by TEXO, the
Dallas-Ft. Worth Chapter of the Associated General Con-
tractors and the Associated Builders and Contractors, the
Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (TCEQ), and
the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) committing
TEXO members to work together with state and federal
agencies to take steps in a pilot program to prevent storm
water pollution by educating and assisting members who
voluntarily join the program. The program consists of an in-
ternal audit that each member performs at their construc-
tion site(s), an agreement to participate in the program,
and an inspection of the site by TEXO's environmental,
safety, and health professionals. The agreement is simi-
lar to other programs in Texas that have or are reducing
large amounts of pollutant carrying sediment and thereby
reducing the costs of maintenance of our waterways and
protecting aquatic life in our streams and rivers.
Enforcement in
Other Divisions
FIFRA Enforcement
Partnership with US Cus-
toms & Border Protection
One major component of Federal Insecticide, Fungicide,
and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA) enforcement is the Pesticide
Import Program. The Region receives approxiametly 5000
Notices of Arrivals of Pesticides and Devices annually. Be-
cause of the partnership that EPA Region 6 and State lead
agencies have with U.S. Customs and Border Protection,
the Region has succeeded in denying companies from im-
porting violative products into the country or has ensured
that their products were brought into compliance with FI-
FRA through enforcement actions. Such actions include,
Notice of Refusal of Admissions, Stop Sale, Use, or Re-
moval Orders and Complaint and Consent Agreements and
Final Orders with penalties.
During the 2008 Fiscal Year, EPA Region 6 issued 4 Notice
of Refusal of Admissions, 8 Stop Sales, Use or Removal
Orders, and 2 Complaint and Consent Agreement and Final
Orders of which several were assisted by US Customs. Re-
cently, EPA has taken greater steps to strengthen the bond
with US Customs by presenting a webinar. The webinar
occurred on September 9, 2009, and all Ports located in
the Region were invited. The main points discussed during
the webinar included, general information on FIFRA, the
Region's process of reviewing and denying/approving No-
tice of Arrivals, and the types of enforcement actions the
Region can take for violative products. Future webinars
are being planned to accommodate the ports that were not
able to attend the first one.
The following pictures are examples of pesticides that were
attempting to be imported into the country without a No-
tice of Arrival and were in violation of FIFRA. US Customs
and Border Protection alerted EPA of these shipments and
put them on hold, to allow EPA to make a determination
on how to proceed.
SAN 50 in the product on the right
is used a disinfectant on airline
masks. The product is an unregis-
tered pesticide and EPA determined
that it had to be exported out of the
country immediately.
26
Compliance Assurance and Enforcement Division 2009 Annual Report
-------
The product Rabon 50% Wettable Powder was attempting to
make entry without a Notice of Arrival. EPA found that the
product's registration was cancelled in October of 1988, and
it was forced to be exported out of the country immediately.
iMvuBJiaMsnRft
RABOND 50% £^$50%
M*
« m
TfRrra
WJir*»£»ffleMSa ¦ MIS#!; S - U'B ¦ ws -Bg
Wti ¦ q-fii - mma - tnasi«oiBSMi - aftnris'
•u ¦ - «mo o»:s
ITKtaSB7»a • S30KSW- s
MBS - «•. a BBaanwwmmwaii
#» ¦ fcioooMSJimesw*
•'ins ffffto
BBHWUPJWBHi ¦ Wtentamm *QH
•a M.infi 1 =sw,it«i r «*
a«S1S4.X»15flJI»
This product, was an unregistered pesticide to be used as
moth ball liners in individual's closets. The shipment was
forced to be exported out of the country immediately.
WX ft 30x52cm
«
-------
BP Products North America Inc. (BP)
EPCRA 313 violations at the BP Refinery
On March 5, 2009, EPA Region 6 filed a consent agreement and final order (CAFO) with the Re-
gional Hearing Clerk, settling certain EPCRA 313 violations. The CAFO alleges that BP, Tex-
as City, Texas, failed to file Form R's for certain toxic chemicals from calendar years 2002
- 2005, and failed to maintain certain records for calendar year 2004. The CAFO re-
quires BP to pay a $420,662 civil penalty within 30 days of the effective date of the CAFO.
In addition, the CAFO requires BP to spend $365,000 towards the purchase of emergency equipment for
Texas City, Texas. This equipment includes an ambulance, repeaters, computers, an optigon system,
and upgrading the
Texas City Emergen-
cy Response Center.
Repeaters
will provide the City
with the ability to
rapidly recover com-
munications from
catastrophic events.
Repeaters pick up
the transmission
from a patrol ve-
hicle, fire truck or
other authorized ve-
hicle and boost that
signal providing city-
wide coverage. The
repeaters would be
used in the event
that a major storm
or other catastrophic
event destroyed, or
otherwise incapaci-
tated a radio system
backbone, or spine
and severely limited
communications.
An optigon
system controls in-
tersection lights for
approaching fire ap-
paratus. The system
clears the intersec-
tion that a fire truck
is approaching by
turning the light
green well in ad-
vance of the vehicle
nearing the intersec-
tion. This system
is expandable and
will be expanded to
other response ve-
hicles in Texas City
that use emergency
lights.
Compliance Assurance and Enforcement Division 2009 Annual Report
-------
Wetlands Enforcement
35-
30-
25-
20-
15-
10-
5-
0-
nr
2003 2005 2007 2009
In FY 2009, the Wetlands Enforcement Program issued 38 formal enforcement actions.
This was the highest total in the history of the program and the second year in a row to
establish a new high mark. One of these actions was the successful elevation of a civil
referral to the Department of Justice. The quality of the documented field work and the
number of ongoing violations convinced OECA and DOJ of the merits of this case. Also, a
total of $66,380 was collected in penalties and an additional $50,000 was spent on Sup-
plemental Environmental Projects. Violators spent an estimated $141,500 in compliance
costs, primarily the cost of wetland and stream restoration. A total of 41 inspections were
conducted. A total of over 97 acres were directly saved through these actions, along with
1,623 linear feet of stream. As always, the deterrence effect, as reported to us by the
Corps of Engineers and other partners, protects many times these amounts.
Superfund Enforcement
Oil Pollution Act (CWA 311)
Final Administrative Penalty Orders
FY06 FY07 FY08 FY09
The Explorer Pipeline Company paid a $3.3 million civil penalty to resolve violation of the Clean Water Act, as amended
by the Oil Pollution Act of 1990, stemming from a July 14, 2007, spill of over 6,500 barrels (approximately 275,000
gallons) of jet fuel from its interstate pipeline at a location near Huntsville, Texas. Explorer's 28-inch interstate refined
petroleum products pipeline ruptured near Huntsville and jet fuel spilled onto the surrounding area and into nearby
Turkey Creek, which flows to the Trinity River at the upper reaches of Lake Livingston. The cost for clean-up was $6.6
million and over 2 million pounds of pollutant was treated.
Compliance Assurance and Enforcement Division 2009 Annual Report
29
-------
STRATEGIC PLANNING & ANALYSES
Strategic Planning is extremely important to our enforce-
ment work. Due to a large number of regulated entities in
all sectors within the Region, it is critical that we find ef-
fective and meaningful ways to deploy our resources. With
this in mind, we use the following questions to guide us as
we undertake our work.
Strategic Planning Questions
1.
Is the work results driven? (Starting with the end in mind)
a. does the work lead to significant injunctive relief?
b. does the work lead to significant reduction in pollu
tants?
c. does the work lead to a meaningful message?
2.
Does the work address National Priorities?
3.
Does the work address Regional Priorities?
4.
Does the work address Citizens' Complaints (e.g., EJ/Vulnerable
Communities) ?
5.
Does the work assist our States and Tribes?
6.
Does the work address sector/facilities in non-compliance?
(aggressive screening)
7.
Does the work ensure compliance with Consent Decrees and
Orders?
8.
Does the work address concerns in/around impaired
watersheds and/or non-attainment areas?
Using the correct tools to see where people are impacted.
Houston Initiative
The Team worked jointly to de-
velop and implement the Houston
Initiative Strategy. The Strategy is
comprised of a risk-based approach
created by the Team to identify
specific areas in which to conduct
real-time monitoring, surveillance,
The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the City
of Houston (City) have been aware of and have been con-
cerned with the high levels of hazardous air pollutants in
and around the Houston area. The Mayor of Houston (May-
or Bill White) met with the Region 6 Deputy Regional Ad-
ministrator to discuss the concern
and its risk to the citizens of Hous-
ton. As a result of the meeting, the
Houston Initiative Team (Team),
consisting of representatives from
EPA Headquarters, Region 6, and
the City was developed to work in
an on-going collaboration effort to
address the high levels of toxics
emissions in the Houston Area.
and compliance activities to address toxics emissions. The
real time component of the Strategy was the first time that
the Region had conducted surveillance activities tailored
to address monitoring results in an expedited fashion.
The findings of the monitoring and inspections were com-
municated to the Team on a real
time basis for enforcement con-
sideration. The coordinated effort
has yielded two referred facili-
ties to the Department of Justice
that are under case development
with the City as EPA's partners.
The Team will continue to work
together in a collaborative fashion
to address air toxics emissions.
Both Agencies are committed to
allocating resources on an on-
going basis in this area to seek to
reduce non-compliance that con-
tributes to the ievel of air pollut-
ants as it currently exists in the
Houston area.
Compliance Assurance and Enforcement Division 2009 Annual Report
-------
Pre-Inspection Planning
at Centralized Waste
Treatment Facilities
Region 6 shared its risk-based planning process with
Regional Enforcement Managers in the national meeting.
We discussed the importance of pre-inspection planning
and creating a team of Inspectors, Enforcement officers
and Regional Counsel for each targeted inspection. We
also made presentation to raise the national awareness
of centralized waste treatment facilities (CWTs). CWTs
are facilities that treat (for disposal, recycling or
recovery of material) any hazardous or nonhazardous
industrial wastes, hazardous or non-hazardous industrial
wastewater, and/or used material received from off-site. A
"CWT facility" includes a facility that treats waste received
from both on-site and off-site locations, or a facility that
treats wastes generated exclusively from off-site. EPA
estimates 223 CWTs in the nation with the majority of the
Concentrated An imall
Feeding Operation (CAFO)
Targeting
WATERSHEDS; IMPACTED BY CAFOs
Qair-y
Beef?
(
-------
PARTNERSHIPS
Participation
NFQhCEUEN
COLLABORATIVE SOLUTIONS
&
COLLABORATIVE PARTNERSHIPS
32
Compliance Assurance and Enforcement Division 2009 Annual Report
-------
Pollution Prevention/Source Reduction Grants
Pioneer Balloon: Reduce amount of scrap balloons by 20%
to reduce costs by $106,695.
Environmental
Management System
(ENS) Training
of water conserved and over $1,164,783 dollars saved.
TMAC's measures come from working with various indus-
tries: an electronics manufacturer, a balloon manufacturer,
an electronics recycler, a semiconductor equipment manu-
facturer, a plastic bag manufacturer, and a military con-
tractor supplier. TMAC has had such success that they are
being requested to do workshops and site visits to sites
both in Texas and in the surrounding states.
Region 6 Compliance Assurance and Enforcement Divi-
sion provided a Pollution Prevention Program grant to the
University of Texas at Arlington/Texas Manufacturing As-
sistance Center for coached EMS training. The focus was
on local governments, colleges and universities, however
industry was also included. The goal is to show the ben-
efits. both to the environment and their bottom line, of
managing their environmental impacts in a systematic
fashion. At the end, they are expected to have an imple-
mented EMS. The classroom portion, led by EPA Pollution
Prevention grantee, University of Texas at Arlington/Texas
Manufacturing Assistance Center, has seven municipalities,
four universities and four businesses, from the north cen-
tral Texas area, being coached through the development
process. This is the second such training in Region 6. The
first was through a Pollution Prevention grant to the Texas
Commission on Environmental Quality via a contract with
Culture Technologies. Eight municipalities and one regulat-
ed entity completed the training. These two projects have
potential for long term impact.
Lean and Clean
A Pollution Prevention grant to the University of Texas at
Arlington/Texas Manufacturing Assistance Center (TMAC)
has had excellent results from Lean and Clean workshops
and assessments. These workshops have targeted indus-
try and focus on the root causes of wasteful practices and
provide a framework for achieving specific, measurable
business and environmental goals. The results reported
are approximately 843.2 tons of C02, 7.4 tons of Sulfur
Dioxide and 3.9 tons of Nitrogen Oxides reduced, over 6.8
billion BTUs of energy conserved, nearly 8,564,400 gallons
Compliance Assurance and Enforcement Division 2009 Annual Report
Pollution Prevention Grant Results
(Interim)
Energy Conserved 10.76 Billion BTUs
Water Conserved 193,121,152 Gallons
Hazardous Waste Reduced 1,263,300 Pounds
Dollars Saved $7,768,545
RECYCLEGOOD
GLOVES: Re-
duced use of
gloves by 30%
to reduce costs
by $18,000/
year.
-------
Sustainabr ty Partnerships
The N-TREMS partnership is made up of locai public and
private organizations that collaborate to address regional
community and environmental issues throughout greater
Dallas/Fort Worth/Denton, TX. This partnership promotes
environmental sustainability, reduced environmental im-
pacts, and formal public/private relationships through the
use of environmental management systems. The N-TREMS
partnership provides specific benefits to each of its part-
nering organizations by helping them to improve local and
regional environmental quality; build communication and
trust between partners and the community; and cost ef-
fectively manage their environmental impacts to improve
environmental management. The
N-TREMS Partnership is based
on the Virginia Regional En-
vironmental Management
System (V-REMS) mod-
el, a successful public/ £*'
private Environmental ^
Management System
Partnership.
• 2006, EMS train-
ing for local gov-
ernments to address
storm water quality is-
sues, conducted by TCEQ
(Cultural Technologies) for
the North Central Texas Region.
t
January 2007, participants of the TCEQ training formed
the North Central Texas EMS WorkGroupand began meet-
ing quarterly on EMS implementation and networking.
September 2007, the North Central Texas Council of
Governments, Environmental Protection Agency Re-
gion 6, Texas Commission on Environmental Qual-
ity, and the North Central Texas EMS Work Group
hosted: Balancing Growth, Budget Constraints, and
Environmental Risk in City Governments. The cost
of NOT having an EMS, with guest Speaker Bob Her-
bert, Former City Manager for City of Roanoke, VA.
This was the kick-off for the TCEQ regional
coached implementation training in which 12 lo-
cal governments took course to implement an EMS.
March 2008, the Texas Commission on Environmen-
tal Quality's (TCEQ) Small Business and Environmen-
tal Assistance Division (SBEA) received a pollution
prevention grant from the Environmental Protection
Agency (EPA), Region 6, a project to establish a re-
gional environmental partnership; identify key issues,
set goals to address the issues, and identify projects
to address the issues; and to document the resulting
benefits and reduced environmental impacts. The Dal-
las-Fort Worth region was selected for the partnership
because numerous companies and public entities are
participating in one or more of TCEQ's or EPA's vol-
untary programs. Initially, members of TCEQ's Clean
Texas Program, EPA's National Performance Track Pro-
gram (NEPT), the North Central Texas EMS Working
Group, and EPA's Blue Skyways Partners were invited
to participate as regional partners. The Dallas/Fort
Worth Regional Environmental Partnership kick-off was
on March 26, 2008, to address priority environmental
issues in the region. This series of facilitated meetings
and free workshops sponsored by TCEQ assisted par-
ticipants to cooperatively identify and select high pri-
ority environmental issues in the region and set goals,
projects and measurable results to address those is-
sues. Regional Partnership Vision / Policy Adopted.
• August 2008, formalization and strengthening of the
North Central Texas EMS Work Group, DFW Regional
Environmental Partnership participants, and other pri-
vate/public organizations to the N-TREMS Partnership.
® October 2008, funding of NTREMS through North Cen-
tral Texas Council of Governments by Cooperative Pur-
chase Agreements
® March 2009, second round of coached implemen-
tation for 11 cities, 4 colleges/universities, 1 in-
dependent school district and 4 industrial enti-
ties to implement and/or enhance their EMS.
Training was provided by the University of Texas,
Texas Manufacturing Assistance Center (TMAC).
® April 2009, NTREMS.org website development with
funding from members to include Region 6 USEPA
• July 2009, NTREMS.org website launch
Expected Partnership Outcomes:
N-TREMS is dedicated to a regional forum where partici-
pating entities can choose common environmental issues
to address, as a group, using Environmental Management
Systems (EMS) as a tool/guide, thus contributing to envi-
ronmental improvement and reduced impact/footprint to
the region. Some expected outcomes to the partnership
are:
• Peer-to-peer mentoring to sustain improved environ-
mental performance;
• Participating companies and local governments em-
powered to perform collaborative environmental prob-
lem solving; and
• Develop case studies and success stories developed on
the benefits and results of the partnership.
Measurable environmental improvements and performance
from partnering organizations, such as:
Improved compliance:
• Prevention and/or reduction of air emissions, pollutant
discharges, water use, and energy use;
• Prevention, reuse, or recycling of hazardous waste and
solid waste; and money saved resulting from improved
environmental performance.
Compliance Assurance and Enforcement Division 2009 Annual Report
-------
NetDMR
The Water Enforcement Branch and the Office of Strategic Planning and Analyses worked
with the Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance (OECA) to provide the regu-
lated community with electronic reporting of analytical discharge monitoring data
through the NetDMR Project, Traditionally, these reports were made on paper to the
Region to manually re-key into the NPDES national database.
One of the primary NetDMR trainers for OECA reside in CAED and she collaborated
closely with us in implementing the NetDMR project. As a result, we were able to
serve as a leader in helping other Regions and States.
More information can be found on the internet at www.netdmr.us.
National Environmental Policy Act
Mississippi River
Hydrokinetic Project
suspended from the surface
Free Plow Power proposes to install up to 160,000 tur-
bines in the Mississippi River to generate electric-
ity. The Federal Energy Regulatory Commission is the
permitting authority and issues these permits for a 50-
year period. Participating and collaborating early in the
planning is critical with these projects since there is no
bench scale or other testing to see what the environ-
mental or other impacts are once the units are deployed.
Therefore, the CAED National Environmental Policy Act
(NEPA) office
spearheaded
the develop-
ment of an
EPA Environ-
mental Sci-
ence Con-
nector Site
for enhanced
collaboration
and commu-
nication for
the In Situ
Hydrokinetic Units being planned for the Mississipi River
and several tributaries in Regions 4, 5, 6 and 7. This col-
laboration lead to the development of joint comments on
how to improve coordination and provide consistent re-
views on these type projects in the future, regardless of
location. Although the Mississippi River is the first project
being planned, other projects are being considered on the
Ohio River, the Missouri River and other large riverine wa-
ter bodies. Staff continue to coordinate on the project, as
there are several steps in the Licensing and NEPA process-
es and multiple public meetings and workshops to attend.
NEPAssist & TxDOT
EPA Region 6 entered into an Interagency Agreement to
provide training to the Texas Department of Transportation
(TXDOT), the Federal Highway Administration, and local Mu-
nicipal Planning Organization staff on the use of NEPAssist.
To date, almost 200 users in the transportation community
have been trained. In addition, the agreement provides for
further enhancements to NEPAssist; including the addition
of web services; incorporation of another Region 6 Tool, the
GIS Screening Tool (GISST); and recalculation of GISST
components to enhance resolution. The use of NEPAssist
and GISST assists the transportation community in meet-
ing their coordination requirements under SAFETEA-LU.
attached to bridge abutment*
decoyed in fields of pylons
aciacned jo a single pywn
Eco-Logical Interagency
Agreement
EPA Region 6 entered into an Interagency Agreement with
the Federal Highway Administration under their Eco-Log-
ical initiative. The Eco-Logical Initiative's goal is to have
resource agencies and transportation coordinate early on
potential impacts, particularly those that might impact spe-
cies or habitat. In this way, sensitive areas have a greater
likelihood of being avoided and better mitigation efforts
can be investigated. EPA Region 6 is receiving funds un-
der Eco-Logical to extend its Texas Ecological Assessment
Protocol (TEAP) pilot project to the other Region 6 states.
The Regional Ecological Assessment Protocol (REAP) uses
electronic data to calculate ecological rarity, sustainability,
and diversity layers, which then can be combined into a
composite layer that shows ecologically important areas in
each of the ecoregions in EPA Region 6. CAED staff are also
partnering extensively with Superfund since the regional
GIS function resides there.
09 NEPA Workload
20
27
24
31
28
EIS Reviews
EIS Scoping Requests
Categorical Exclusions
information Requests
Findings of No Significant Impacts - EPA funded
projects (preparation of EA and FNSI)
Findings of No Significant Impacts - Other Federal
Agency funded projects (review only and response
letter)
National Historic Preservation Act Consultations (in
OK)
Compliance Assurance and Enforcement Division 2009 Annual Report
35
-------
is the community of Olmito, in Cameron County, Texas.
Olmito is a colonia located north of the city of Browns-
ville, approximately five miles north from the U.S./Mexico
border and 20 miles from the Gulf of Mexico. Olmito and
the surrounding unincorporated communities receive wa-
ter and wastewater treatment and collection service from
the Olmito Water Supply Corporation (OWSC). However,
279 residences are not connected to the OWSC system
and rely on septic tank systems for their wastewater treat-
ment. These systems do not work properly due to the clay
soils and high water table. During heavy rains, these sys-
tems back-up, resulting in raw sewage collection in yards
and drainage ditches that flow to major drainage ditches.
The situation creates a potential health and safety hazard
for all residents of Olmito. Through BEIF funds provided by
the BECC and the NADBank, OWSC is working to extend
its wastewater collection system to connect the 279 resi-
dences to the wastewater treatment system and eliminate
health and safety hazards. Total cost of the system is esti-
mated to be $5,900,000.
he Border Environment Coopera-
on Commission (BECC) certification
squires the performance of an En-
ironmental Assessment by the EPA.
ECC and the North American De-
velopment Bank (NADBank) work
with communities throughout the Mexico-U.S. bor-
der region to address their environmental infrastruc-
ture needs. The BECC and NADBank provide grants and
loans through the Border Environment Infrastructure
Fund (BEIF) to make BECC certified water and waste-
water infrastructure projects viable and affordable.
• More than $36.68 million US dollars have been allocated
by BECC's Technical Assistance Program to aid in the de-
velopment of 292 environmental infrastructure projects
related to water, sewage, and municipal waste in 149 com-
munities on both sides of the U.S.-Mexico border.
® Through its technical assistance programs, the NADBank
has authorized $23.74 million in grant funding to carry out
229 institutional strengthening and project development
studies for 119 border communities.
• To date, the BECC has certified 152 environmental infra-
structure projects which will cost an estimated $3.2 billion
to build.
• Of the projects certified, 77 are located in the United
States and 75 in Mexico.
• To date, NADB has contracted more than $932 million US
dollars in loans and/or grant resources to support imple-
mentation of 125 of those projects.
• Of those funds, a total of $784 million have already been
disbursed to support 113 projects.
36
To date, 40 projects have been completed in Region 6, while another 40 projects are currently in process.
(• project areas along the U.S./Mexico border)
Compliance Assurance and Enforcement Division 2009 Annual Report
Typical of these water/wastewater infrastructure projects
-------
lYl r1 I
David F. Garcia, Associate Director
The Air/Toxics Inspection and Coordination Branch
(the Branch) continues to make a significant contri-
bution to the environment by reducing the overall
emissions of criteria and toxic pollutants by resolving
significant enforcement cases. The Branch contin-
ues to generate the largest number of referrals in the
Division, In effect, concluding these cases results
in companies paying large penalties for their non-
compliance, millions of dollars on new and innova-
tive control technology and most of all, for emission
reductions. In FY10 it will be more of the same as in
FY09. National and Regional enforcement priorities
will continue to absorb most of our resources. 'Given
the amount of air and air toxics enforcement work
that remains in the Regions heavily populated indus-
trial sector, I am confident we will continue to make a
significant enforcement contribution to help preserve
our clean air.
On December 15, 2008, Administrator Jackson was
nominated by President Obama and confirmed in
January 2009. To date, -Administrator Jackson has
set a new tone and established values that shape the
agency's future.
EPA's actions must be transparent;
• 'Science must be the backbone for EPA programs;
and
•^EPA must follow the rule of law.
According to definition.com the word transparent
is defined as operating in such a way as to not be
perceived by users. ^In that light and to support Ad-
ministrator Jackson's decision making and records
should clearly be laid out. To the extent possible,
we will fully disclose to the public information that
forms the bases for our decisions in enforcement
cases, compliance assistance and with regulatory in-
terpretations/determinations. Implementing an ef-
ficient and effective freedom of information process
will be paramount for the Branch and Division. -fAd-
ditional resource needs will focus on adverse inhala-
tion impacted areas affecting vulnerable communi-
ties. Compliance inspections will be conducted that
may require new equipment and contract support for
innovative pollutant monitoring of facilities followed
by appropriate enforcement. In addition, we will
continue to evaluate the state's air inspection and en-
forcement programs. Accordingly, summary inspec-
tion reports will be available and visible to the public
eye. In way of housekeeping, we will take time to
clean up current enforcement and compliance files as
well as provide accurate and timely input to required
national air databases. •¦Both housekeeping activities
will be necessary as more and more information will
be shared with the public.
As you know, we work in a science based agency whose
decisions must be science and technically based. We
will use sound scientific judgement to support Na-
tional and Regional priorities. Investigating and en-
forcing New Source Review non-compliance with
coal-fired power plants, acid plants, cement plants
and glass manufacturing will continue. With National
Air Toxics priorities, we will continue to evaluate the
integrity of a petro-chemical facility's leak detection
and repair program and its flaring event practices.
New Regional priorities include 1) an expedited en-
forcement program targeted at facilities having inci-
dents (ie., explosions, chemical releases, fires, etc.),
2) addressing risk management plan non-compliance
and 3) investigating the Carbon Black and Calciner
sectors for air permit violations. We will also pilot
an investigation and enforcement effort to address
high benzene levels in and around communities. In
addition, we will use sound science evaluating state
enforcement programs, responding to NSPS/NESHAP
alternative monitoring plans/applicability determina-
tions request, monitor consent decree compliance
and respond to self disclosures requests.
We have a responsibility to uphold and enforce envi-
ronmental rules and regulations and to monitor state
environmental programs. *As stated by Administrator
Jackson we must follow the rule of the law. We will
continue to collaborate with the Multimedia, Permit-
ting and Planning Division as they work through their
backlog of State Implementation Plans (SIP). SIP
rules serve as the basis and foundation to the states
permitting program, for these are the federally en-
forceable rules that we rely on to protect the integrity
'of our air shed, j
I hope you are as excited as I as we approach FY10.
These are exciting times to be enforcing environmen-
tal rules and regulations as we have so many envi-
ronmental challenges ahead of us. Please remember
that along with these challenges comes opportuni-
ty and I hope you share my thought that it is these
opportunities that get me energized and excited to
come to work each day. Please join me as we take
advantage of each opportunity that comes our way.
Compliance Assurance and Enforcement Division 2009 Annual Report
37
-------
Hazardous Waste Enforcement
38
Compliance Assurance and Enforcement Division 2009 Annual Report
Ragan Broyles, Associate Director
During the past year, the Hazardous Waste Enforcement
Branch had significant accomplishments in all core and pri-
ority program areas, which resulted in major benefits to
the environment and public health. The Branch achieved
all goals and measures related to the RCRA, TSCA and
CAA acid rain programs. In 2010, we will build on the
2009 accomplishments through continuing support of our
National and regional priorities and our work on assessing
regulatory compliance and corrective action needs through
our core programs.
Our 2009 successes included the issuance of four referrals
to the DOJ and numerous administrative actions to achieve
compliance in the programs under our responsibility. We
also issued four corrective action orders to assess the na-
ture and extent of site contamination. These enforcement
and corrective
actions achieved
significant in-
junctive relief
and environmen-
tal benefits. One
administrative
order under the
surface impound-
ment initiative
resulted in the
largest environ-
mental impact of
any RCRA case in
the national pro-
gram. In 2010
we will continue
to support the
Division goals
with a balanced
number of civil
judicial and ad-
ministrative ac-
tions with emphasis on completing our actions early in the
fiscal year. We will also work actively as appropriate with
DOJ, OECA and our state partners on case settlements and
closures.
In 2010 we will continue to work aggressively on the na-
tional priorities for mineral processing and financial assur-
ance. For the mineral processing program, we will provide
all necessary technical support to DOJ to continue the sig-
nificant progress made in the past year toward settlement
of at least two cases. In the financial assurance initiative,
we will continue to actively assist the states in assess-
ing the adequacy of the financial assurance mechanisms
in the remaining inventory of files in anticipation of the
completion of the initiative in 2010. We will also support
the financial assurance initiative by incorporation of the
requirement in ail corrective action activities.
Concurrently we will continue to implement the region-
al initiatives for Surface Impoundments and Centralized
Waste Treatment Facilities with aggressive inspection and
case development efforts. We will work with OECA in
defining the national strategy for the implementation of a
national Surface Impoundment initiative building on the
considerable experience gained from our work on the re-
gional initiative in past years. We will also expand our
focus in the regional initiatives to include assessment of
shifting of pollutants/contaminants between media. This
work is likely to become progressively more complex and
time intensive and will require increased collaboration with
our EPA HQ and state partners.
In 2010 we will continue our efforts to define and streamline
our process for inspections and case development. We will
develop a risk based list of inspection targets that meets
all national core
priority program
goals and incor-
porates lessons
learned from
risk based tar-
geting in 2009.
We will imple-
ment a new
flow model for
inspections that
is expected to
streamline ac-
tivities from
the inspection
through case
development
and enable more
timely issuance
of enforcement
actions The
new process in-
cludes the early
assignment of case teams, pre-inspection planning meet-
ings and more emphasis on computer research, file re-
views and other preparations before the initiation of the
field inspection. We will also finalize an MOU on our work
activities with ORC in an effort to improve the overall coor-
dination and collaboration between our Branches.
With the continued defining and improving of branch pro-
cess and the development of the regional initiatives, the
Hazardous Waste Enforcement Branch will remain at the
forefront of the national hazardous waste programs. We
can and will achieve significant environmental benefits
and improved public health through our enforcement and
corrective action work.
-------
orders and real
Water Enforcement
time enforcement actions will continue to expand, to in-
clude obvious industrial, municipal, and storm water prob-
lems that are identified by experienced inspectors. The
program will also pursue delegation of specific facility files
that continue to be maintained by EPA in states with ap-
proved programs. Regional staff will work with our state
partners to facilitate the transfer of the remaining files.
The program will continue to refine its ability to target wa-
ter quality problems for inspection, investigation and en-
forcement action. The worst will become our first targeting
goal. We will develop techniques to identifiy the worst wa-
ter quality problems by utilizing water quality information
that is available in the state 303(d) reports, 305(b) reports,
fish tissue reports, oyster bed closure information, whole
effluent toxicity data, beach closure data and total maxi-
mum daily load (TMDL) reports. This information will be
used in conjunction with significant noncompliance reports
and water quality data from the PCS and SDVVIS systems
to identify the most critical threats to public health and the
environment in the Region. This water quality information
with input from our state partners, citizens' complaints and
feedback from our inspectors and investigators will form
a comprehensive basis for targeting our field activities for
maximum environmental and public health results. This
approach will be developed this year with several initial
targets identified during the year. The program's empha-
sis during FY 2010 will be to make the region a better place
to live by improving water quality.
Jerry Saunders, Associate Director
In FY 2010, the water enforcement program will focus its
resources on addressing the national program priorities
of sanitary sewer overflows (SSOs), concentrated animal
feeding operations (CAFOs) and storm water, while con-
tinuing to implement an effective core program that works
with our state partners to protect drinking water, insure
proper operation of municipal and industrial treatment
plants and addresses surface and ground water problems.
Compliance assistance will be used to inform the regulated
public of new requirements and to provide information on
compliance problems that are common in particular indus-
trial sectors. The regional program will coordinate and
partner with the state water quality agencies whenever
possible and when appropriate to make maximum utili-
zation of limited public resources. The program will be
responsive to citizens' complaints through timely written
responses, telephone conferences and site visits or inspec-
tions. The program will also provide training opportunities
for its state partners and other Regions when requested by
EPA Headquarters. The program will lead with its science,
by using established sampling protocols during investiga-
tions, using quality assurance techniques, and providing a
scientific basis for its enforcement actions. The program
will solve problems and serve the public to the extent that
our resources allow.
To continue to improve the efficiency and performance of
the program, the role of cease and desist
Compliance Assurance and Enforcement Division 2009 Annual Report
-------
^ IL4 Id ETT
Debra A. Griffin, Associate Director
Our vision for FY 10 is to continue to help solve environ-
mental problems using a collaborative approach both inter-
nally and externally. We will continue to provide strategic
targeting and modeling support to evaluate compliance
concerns against potential adverse impacts to the environ-
ment and vulnerable communities.
We are developing a multimedia Enforcement Actions
Tracking System that will provide easily accessible infor-
mation to our division and the rest of the regional office.
The database will improve overall transparency and cover
the entire enforcement process from "cradle to grave" in-
cluding targeting, inspections, enforcement actions, and
post enforcement action follow-up activities. This Regional
database wiil link to existing data systems including ICIS,
eRouting, ECMS, etc., so as to minimize any duplication of
data entry. This effort wiil improve the overall efficiency of
the enforcement process, enhance transparency, and ulti-
mately lead to better environmental results.
We will continue the use of our Pollution Prevention program
to provide capacity building for under-served communities
with the "One House, One Community, One City P2 project
in New Orleans, LA and Pas-
adena, TX. This project will
focus on (1) Home Efficien-
cy Programs for low income
homes, (2) Pollution Preven-
tion technical assistance for
industrial facilities, (3) Con-
sumer and organization pol-
lution prevention workshops
addressing consumer and in-
dustrial impacts while devel-
oping enhanced P2 capacity,
and (4) Development of a
community P2 Plan. A sec-
ond major P2 grant project,
the Refinery Efficiency Initiative, will be used to attain a
25% reduction in incidents and the total volume of hazard-
ous emissions released by all 17 refineries in the immediate
area of the Baton Rouge - New Orleans refinery corridor.
We will continue to use P2 grant funds to provide Environ-
mental Management System coached training sessions for
municipalities, colleges and universities and other public
entities. We wili also support the Texas Manufacturing As-
sistance Center, an affiliate of the University of Texas at
Arlington, with its Lean and Clean Workshops for small to
medium size manufacturers. This effort is supported by
Source Reduction funding from the OPPTS Office at head-
quarters.
CAED Associate Directors developed a FY 10 Compliance
Assistance (CA) Strategy for the Region which will focus on
our regional and national priorities. We will use the strat-
egy on a narrow array of sector issues consistent with the
priorities and with those developed by our Air, RCRA and
Water enforcement programs.
The CA effort for Air will include a collaborative action with
LDEQ to mail information to over 200 facilities in Louisi-
ana impacted by the new NESHAP Surface Coating Stan-
dards. This will be accomplished in early December 2010.
Additionally, we will assist the Air program in providing
specific compliance information via brochures and other
tools on the Area Source MACT Standards. The universe
of targeted facilities for these MACT standards is approxi-
mately 71. We wiil also help the Air program coordinate
with Air Permitting on getting compliance information to
approximately ten Part 71 facilities located on tribal lands.
These facilities are simple sources (i.e., Gas compressor
stations). The strategy includes collecting the compliance
documents and conducting on-site assistance consistent
with travel dollar allocations.
The Water CA effort will focus on dairy operations in New
Mexico based on branch priorities which have been de-
veloped. The other Water/Wet Weather area of focus for
CA will be the minor waste water collection and treatment
systems. Efforts will be pursued to appear at workshops
and conferences sponsored by associations and others to
provide compliance information to these entities.
RCRA's area of focus is Surface Impoundments and Cen-
tralized Waste Treatment Plants. The CA approach here will
be to utilize onsite assistance
visits that could be a part of
inspections or performed
separately. Discussions
are currently underway to
achieve this outcome and
identify other areas that
need assistance.
During the second quarter
of FY 2010, we will pro-
vide eRouting training to
the Superfund and Crimi-
nal Investigation Divisions.
The training is also open to
Enforcement and Regional
Counsel as a refresher course. An eRouting refresher for
all divisions that utilize eRouting is planned for the third
quarter of FY 2010. This is needed prior to the region mov-
ing from Microsoft Office 2003 to Microsoft Office 2007.
I will collaborate with the other Associate Directors about
increasing our eLearning repository since training and travel
funds are decreasing. This way we can train more people for
less money and have the ability to improve cross training.
We will continue to partner with other federal agencies to try
to minimize the environmental impacts of projects funded
with federal money (by EPA or any other federal agency)
and to mitigate those impacts which cannot be minimized.
We will continue to provide support fortheHoustonlnitiativeEJ
showcase projects and other special initiatives, as necessary.
Our FY 10 goal remains to assist in the accomplishment of
the Agency's mission and our vision to make environmen-
tal compliance commonplace and to establish a culture that
promotes going beyond compliance by pursuing steward-
ship through collaboration, innovation, and partnership.
$
40
Compliance Assurance and Enforcement Division 2009 Annual Report
-------
Compliance Assurance
and Enforcement Division
2009 Annual Report
December 2009
------- |