- United Stater Office of April 1986 

I Ewironmenml Protenion Enforcement and .. 

Cornplianc. Moniroring ECDIC-1998-97 :. Agenol . _, . ... . . ~1 

GEPA Summary of 

Enforcement 

A cco m p 1 ish men ts 

Fiscal Year 1985 

.. 

.. 

' ..',., . , ~. . ., 

.. . , .~ 
 

. ., . 

SUMMARY OF ENFORCEMENT ACCOMPLISHMENTS REPORT 

Fiscal Year 1985 

Office of Enforcement and Compliance Monitoring 

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency 

Washington, D.C. 

.. 

April 1986 
FOREWORD/ACRNOWLEDGEMENT 

The purpose of this report is to summarize the enforcement 

and compliance accomplishments of EPA and the States in Fiscal 

Year 1985. This report was prepared by the Office of Enforcement 

and Compliance Monitoring (OECM) and is based on information and 

data from various EPA enforcement offices and management systems. 

The principal coordinator of the report was Robert Banks of the 

Compliance and Evaluation Branch of OECM. We would like to thank 

each of the Regional Offices and Program Offices for their valuable contributions which aided in the production of this report. 
! 

SUMMARY OF ENFORCEMENT ACCOMPLISHMENTS REPORT 

Overview.. ........................ 

I. 

11. 

111. 

IV. 

V. 

Building a Stable and Predictable Enforcement 

Program ........................ Undertaking Enforcement Initiatives .......... Improving Strategies for Compliance and 

Enforcement ........................ Achieving Successful Resolution of Significant 

Violations and Record Levels of Enforcement 

Actions and Inspections ................ Highlights of Key Cases and Precedents ......... 

1 

1 

3 

5 

a 

18 
Overview 

Fiscal Year 1985 was a turning point for the national 

compliance and enforcement program, both for EPA and the States. 

It was a year in which state and federal environmental civil, 

criminal, and administrative enforcement actions and inspections 

were undertaken at record levels. More important, however, it 

was a year of putting in place more systematic approaches to 

managing EPA's compliance monitoring and enforcement programs to 

ensure more stable, predictable and timely responses to violations and assuring effective deterrence to future violations. 

This report summarizes the accomplishments EPA and the 

States have made in FY 1985: (1) building a stable and 

predictable national enforcement program: (2) undertaking key 

enforcement initiatives: (3) improving strategies for compliance 

and enforcement: (4) achieving successful resolution of significant violations and record levels of enforcement and inspections; 

and (5) establishing legal precedents and achieving favorable 

settlement of key cases. 

I. Building a Stable and Predictable National Enforcement Program 

State/EPA Enforcement Relationship 

Fiscal Year 1985 was the first year of implementation of the 

State/EPA Enforcement "Agreements" which established a systematic 

national approach for ensuring timely and appropriate enforcement 

response to significant violations. This established a basis for 

expediting enforcement, for ensuring penalties or other sanctions 

are imposed in appropriate cases to deter future violations, and 

for establishing appropriate State and federal roles in taking 

enforcement actions under parallel authorities. 

there has been a steady improvement in coordination and consultation with the States under a "no surprises" policy. The 

enforcement consultation process, where the States and EPA meet 

regularly to mutually review the status of significant noncompliers, based upon negotiated commitments for returning these 

sources to compliance, is now generally viewed as a constructive 

joint problem solving process by both the Regions and States and 

is considered one of the most successful features of the agreements process. 

As a result of these Agreements, over the last 18 months 
-2- 

As part of the agreements process the Agency also began in 

FY 1985 to receive where appropriate improved state data on 

compliance rates, significant noncomplier status, inspections, 

administrative orders and civil and criminal referrals, allowing 

EPA for the first time to present a national picture of the 

combined State/Federal compliance and enforcement effort. 

Beyond the formal enforcement agreements the'Agency continues 

to assist State criminal and civil enforcement officials with 

funding, data sharing and technical assistance. Through a grant 

to the .National Association of Attorneys General, the Association 

is periodically informing.al1 Attorneys General and EPA of significant cases, investigations and new developments in the States. 

Additionally, the grant provides funding to assist groups of 

States to organize themselves to better coordinate criminal and 

civil enforcement actions through joint training, data sharing, 

and technical assistance. One such organization funded by the 

Agency is the Northeast Hazardous Waste Project, a 13-State group 

in.the Northeastern United States that has made significant 

strides in environmental enforcement and continues to be a model 

for similar future State organizations. 

Establishing Consistent Deterrence 

the 1984 Agency's Uniform Penalty Policy. This policy, which 

applies to EPA imposed civil penalties, sets forth the requirement 

that dollar penalties recoup at a minimum, the economic benefit 

of noncompliance where this concept is applicable, in addition to 

imposing a penalty based upon the gravity of the harm. The tenet 

is that recouping the economic benefit of noncompliance is the 

most effective means of deterring'future violations. 

the air and NPDES programs, data systems were developed and 

improved to record penalty information on cases and the BEN 

computer model was improved to make it easy for Regions to calculate the economic benefit a violator may have derived from noncompliance. There have been extensive training programs on the use 

of the EPA BEN model throughout the Regions and this training 

will be extended to States next year. .Early results show marked 

increases in penalties levied in federal enforcement cases. 

.,.: . 

FY 1985 also marked the first full year of implementation of 

In FY 1985 new penaity policies were "issued or developed in i. 
-3- 

TO improve use of penalty authorities and policy, OECM 

completed a comprehensive study of civil penalties including a 

review of federal practices, state civil penalty authorities and 

perceptions of penalties and the role of EPA oversight in improving 

deterrence. This work has culminated in a more detailed policy 

on how EPA will oversee State civil penalty assessments in addition 

to improvements of EPA penalty practices. 

appropriate cases to enhance deterrence, especially in areas of 

agency priority where civil and administrative enforcement have 

not significantly benefited compliance. Among other activities, 

OECM has sponsored legislative initiatives to increase most 

criminal penalties in environmental statutes from misdemeanors to 

felonies as an added deterrent, and has been encouraging judges and 

probation officials in selected cases to impose incarceration on 

egregious violators. 

Tracking Systems for Follow-Through 

OECM has been encouraging the use of criminal enforcement in 

Fiscal Year 1985 was the first year EPA uniformly tracked 

Consent Decree Compliance and enforcement follow through. It is 

of great concern to the Agency that once public and private 

resources have been expended to reach agreement on compliance, 

these agreements must be carefully monitored to ensure they are 

implemented as promised. 

Suits under the Clean Water Act, RCRA, and TSCA. Citizen suits 

provide an important additional impetus for regulatees to comply 

and decisions must be made by Agency officials on whether to join 

such actions and whether significant decisions rendered in citizen 

suits affect Agency policy. 

11. Undertaking Enforcement Initiatives 

A major agency goal for the enforcement and compliance 

monitoring functions of the Agency is to ensure they further the 

most important goals and objectives of Agency programs. In 

FY 1985, the Agency launched several multi-case enforcement 

initiatives in priority areas. This approach supplements the 

systems established for predictable enforcement by streamlining EPA referral and DOJ filing procedures for similar cases, 

and generating greater publicity from the filing of a number of 

Improved tracking systems were also developed for Citizen 
-4- ,. 

. .. .- - 

related case'g over a relatively short time period through. use of 

a coordinated: c,eunications strategy. EPA &is taken these 

innovative st'epk- to enhance the deterrence idact of indi*idual 

cases on the broader' regulated community. 

targeted and planned enforcement actions. Experience to .date 

indicates that handling a number of similar cases at one:Xime is 

also more efficient as.many of the technical and .legal issues are 

similar and can be resolved in a more standardized and consistent 

manner. Also, several criminal enforcement initiatives are 

planned or underway that will have a similar deterrent effect. 

Tlgis is achie3d in .well 

Pretreatment 

The first enforcement initiative was undertaken for the 

pretreatment program established under the CWA. In a series of 

well publicized waves in FY 1985 the Agency targeted for legal 

enforcement action those municipalities-publicly owned treatment 

works, (P0TWs)--that had not submitted approvable local pretreatment programs. These programs are required to control pollution 

(including toxic pollutants) that industrial users were discharging into municipal sewage treatment systems which could either 

interfere with the treatment system's effectiveness or pass 

through directly into waters of the U.S. Early in 1985 the 

Agency filed lawsuits simultaneously against 7 of these municipalities. In a second wave at the end of FY 1985, the Agency filed 

4 more cases. These enforcement efforts produced a surge in 

approved pretreatment programs - from only 20% of the subject POTW 

with approved programs in April 1984 to almost 90% at the end of 

FY 1985. 

Asbestos 

Throughout FY 1985 preparation was made for civil and 

criminal enforcement actions against violations of asbestos 

demolition rules under the Clean Air'Act. Violation of the 

National Emission Standard for Hazardous Air Pollutants regarding 

demolitions and renovations of buildings containing friable 

asbestos is a significant health hazard and a requirement about 

which many are ignorant. On January 16, 1986 this initiative 

came to fruition when WJ filed 11 cases nationwide resulting in 

national news coverage on the major television and radio networks. 
-5- 

Premanufacture Notification 

In FY 1985, under TSCA, EPA issued 13 administrative . complaints for violations of premanufacture notification requirements. Under these provisions, industry must notify the Agency 

of the manufacture of a new chemical 90 days prior to its commercial distribution. Failure to provide notice carries a maximum 

civil penalty of $25,000 per day. Under the enforcement initiative, penalties totaled over $15 million, three of the complaints 

sought penalties over $1.5 million each, among the largest assessed 

by the Agency over its history. Currently five of these cases 

have been concluded with total final assessed penalties worth 

$965,000. 

This initiative has helped EPA develop an effective "presence" 

to promote compliance with the information submission requirements, 

violations of which are difficult to discover. The regulated 

community has received a clear message that they - can get caught, 

and that the cost is high. 

111.- Improving Strategies for Compliance and Enforcement 

FY 1985 was the year in which the Agency designed and 

implemented an ongoing strategic planning process for refining 

and improving compliance and enforcement strategies and programs 

that is now an integral part of the Agency's overall Strategic 

Planning and Management System (SPMS). The process is designed 

to promote strategic thinking and focus on addressing emerging 

problems in the compliance and enforcement programs through joint 

meetings at the beginning of the planning cycle. 

Written strategies for compliance and enforcement especially 

for new programs, serve as important communications tools and 

frameworks for program operations. Highlighted below are several 

example accomplishments for improved strategies in FY 1985. 

NPDES Inspection Strategy/Guidance 

In April 1985, the Office of Water Enforcement and Permits 

(OWEP) issued the NPDES Compliance Inspe,ction, Strategy and Guidance 

on Preparing Annual State/EPA Inspection Plans.'. These documents '. 

describe the major inspection priorities and make clear the mix 

., 
-6- 

of inspections within each State that should be tailored to the 

State's needs while making proper use of inspection resources. 

The Guidance describes expected content of Annual State/EPA 

inspection plans and discusses in general terms management of 

resources. 

Federal Facilities Compliance Strategy 

In Fiscal Year 1985 in response to the Administrator's call 

to make federal facility compliance a model for others, OECM has 

been working jointly with EPA's Office of Federal Activities to 

revise and update the Agency's strategy. An Agencywide workgroup 

composed of representatives from the Headquarters program offices 

and the Regions, held a series of meetings to discuss the key 

federal facilities compliance issues and make recommendations. 

The draft strategy expands the scope of the current straJegy 

providing a comprehensive approach to achieving high levels of 

compliance. It includes improved use of the A-106 budget review 

process on behalf of compliance needs, integration of the timely 

and appropriate enforcement response concept tailored to each 

media program's authorities, clarification of the involvement of 

States, emphasis on innovative approaches, more systematic technical assistance and training programs and clear identification of 

internal EPA management roles. Although not yet final, the work 

done on this strategy is already serving to guide improved agency 

response and support for the program. When completed this will 

be a major accomplishment, putting in place a far more effective 

program to gain expeditious compliance. 

Clean Water Act Administrative Orders 

In 1985, OWEP completed an assessment of the CWA 

Administrative Orders, and in July 1985 issued an Administrative 

Order Guidance covering recommendations on standard language and 

format for administrative orders issued under Section 309 of the 

Act. The purpose is to encourage a consistent nationwide approach 

to administrative order content as well as to assure legally 

defensible administrative orders. 

Criminal Enforcement Strategy 

its criminal enforcement program. In FY 1985 OECM drafted a 

criminal enforcement strategy that is designed to guide the 

program in the short and long term future. The focus of the 

strategy is to foster the integration of the criminal program 

Since FY 1982 EPA has developed and systematically expanded 
-7- 

with the Agency's operating priorities to assure the appropriate 

use of the full range of enforcement tools-- criminal, administrative, and civil-- to further agency goals. This was accomplished 

in large measure this year for FY 1987 Operating Guidance and FY 

1986 SPMS Measures. Additionally, the strategy establishes (1)- 

ways to set enforcement priorities, (2) a plan for incorporating 

the program into agency management systems, (3) plans for coordination of activities with State and local prosecutors, (4) a 

legislative strategy, and (5) education and training programs for 

the future. This strategy is now under Agency and State review. 

Compliance and Enforcement Strategy for UIC 

One of the first major efforts in the new UIC program was to 

develop a compliance and enforcement strategy, first for direct 

implementation by the Regions and then later in draft for state 

use. The strategy delivered as much useful information out to 

the Regions and States as quickly as possible, as they began to 

implement the program. 

outreach programs to address the regulated community about 

comp'liance with the Safe Drinking Water Act. Examples of outreach 

materials developed by Region VI11 were included with the compliance strategy for others to use. 

Environmental Auditing 

policy on environmental auditing to promote improved environmental 

management for improved compliance with environmental requirements. 

One innovation is the introduction of environmental auditing provisions in selected consent decrees where environmental management 

improvements are clearly part of the desired~~rernedy. ExtenSive 

violations in a number of media at the same firm suggest a significant failure of management sytems to attain and maintain compliance with environmental laws. When this is the case, requesting 

a firm to audit and/or correct that same violation at other plants 

may vastly enhance the clean-up leverage of a single enforcement 

action. Hence, the virtue of environmental auditing, which the 

Agency, is now testing in a few precedential decrees. 

The strategy'includes a section on compliance promotion and 

In FY 1985, OECM and OPPE cooperated in developing an Agency 

.. .. . .. 
-0- 

Iv. Achieving Successful Resolution of Significant Violations 

Addressing Significant Noncompliers 

criteria what it considers to be its most important violations to 

receive highest priority in taking enforcement actions. These 

are called “significant noncompliers or significant violations.” 

In.PY 1985, the EPA and States improved their ability to 

identify and address facilities in significant noncompliance. In 

PY 1984, EPA and the States addressed 87% of their BOY significant 

noncompliers, while in FY 1985, 95% of the significant noncompliers 

were addressed. 

and Record Levels of Enforcement Actions and Inspections 

Starting in FY 1984 each program defined within some broad 

Proqress in Returning Significant Air Violators to Compliance 

The air enforcement program focuses on violators of State 

Implementation Plans (SIPS) in nonattainment areas and violators 

of New Source Performance Standards (NSPS), National Emissions 

Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAPS), and Prevention 

of Significant Deterioration (PSD) regulations. 

significant air violators to compliance. At the beginning of the 

year, EPA/States had 513 significant air violators remaining 

from the previous year. At the end of the year, 391 significant 

violators had been addressed by returning 107 to compliance, 

taking enforcement action against 109, and placing 95 on acceptable compliance schedules, leaving a total of 122 to be addressed 

next year (graph A). During FY 1985, EPA/States identified 569 

new significant violators. In responding to these new violators, 

EPA returned 105 to compliance and placed 42 on acceptable 

compliance schedules (graph B). 

In comparing the air enforcement efforts in FY 1984 to 

PY 1985 in this area, good performance has been maintained. At 

the beginning of PY 1904, there were 326 significant violators 

versus 513 at the beginning of PY 1985 (graph C/D). In PY 1984, 

126 (39%) of the BOY violators were returned to compliance, while 

in PY 1985, 187 (36%) were returned. A total of 51 (16%) violators were placed on acceptable schedules in PY 1984 compared to an 

increase to 95 (19%) in PY 1985. In taking enforcement actions, 

In PY 1985, EPA and the States made progress in returning 
EPA/States..acted against 109 (21%) in FY 1985 and 92 (28%) in the 

previous year. At the end of FY 1984, 57 (17%) violators were 

pending, versus 122 (24%) pending at the end of PY 1985. Overall, 

in.PY 1985 EPA/States addressed 391 of the BOY significant violators compared to 269 in FY 19B4. 

Besides addressing a majority of the significant air 

violators remaining from the previous year, continued progress 

was made in identifying and addressing new significant violators. 

In responding to new violators during FY 1985, EPA/States identified 569 new significant violators. Qf this universe, 105 (18%) 

were returned to compliance, 42 (7%) were placed on acceptable 

compliance schedules and 422 (74%) were pending. 

-1 

I 
- 10 - 

Air Inspection Frequency and Compliance Levels 

In FY 1985, eventhough inspection rates declined for SIP 

sources, rates improved for both NSPS and NESHAPS sources. 

Inspection frequency rates (States and EPA) for Class A1 SIPS 

were 87% of all major sources for the year, while inspection frequency rates for NSPS and NESHAP were 92% and 89% respectively: 

At the end of the fourth quarter FY 1984, rates were Class A1 

SIPS 90%, NSPS 88% and NESHAP 87%. Of the total Class A1 SIP, 

NSPS and NESHAP universe in FY 1985, 90% were in compliance, 2% 

on compliance schedules, approximately 6% were in violation (2% 

were significant violators and 4% were in violation but did not 

meet the definition of significant violator), and 2% were of 

unknown compliance status. The reported compliance levels in FY 

1985 for Class A1 SIP and NSPS were 90% each while the compliance 

level for NESHAP was 87%. At the end of FY 1984 reported compliWater - Progress in Reducing Significant Noncompliance 

that are in significant noncompliance with compliance (construction) schedules, permit effluent limits and previous enforcement 

orders. 

significant noncompliance in FY 1985. At the beginning of the 

year EPA and the States identified 187 major industrial facilities 

in significant noncompliance. By the end of the year, 96% of the 

major industrials had been addressed by returning 127 to compliance 

and taking enforcement actions against 52 others (graph E). For 

’ ance levels were Class A1 SIPS 91%, NSPS 90% and NESHAP 92%. 

The water enforcement program focuses on major facilities 

EPA and the States continued to have success in addressing 

-1 

mi i j i 

aumm 

8 L 

mi i i 

awnw 
~ 

- 11 - 

major municipal facilities, there were 384 significant noncompliers 

at the start of FY 1985. By the end of the year, 98% had been 

addressed by returning 230 to compliance and taking enforcement 

actions against 147 others (graph F). 

At the beginning of FY 1984, there were 291 major industrial 

facilities in significant noncompliance, versus 187 at the beginning of 1985 (graph G). In FY 1984, 65% of the BOY major industrial significant noncompliers were returned to compliance, 

while in FY 1985, 68% were returned. A total of 100 (34%) significant noncompliers had enforcement action taken against them in 

FY 1984, compared to 52 (29%) in FY 1985. For major municipal 

facilities, there were 703 significant noncompliers at the 

beginning of FY 1984 and 384 at the beginning of FY 1985 (graph 

H). In FY 1984, 321 (46%) were returned to compliance while in 

FY 1985, 230 (60%) significant noncompliers were returned. A 

total of 363 (52%) major municipals had action taken against them 

in FY 1984 compared to 147 (38%) in FY 1985. 

"1 

In PY 1985, EPA and the States introduced an exceptions 

reporting mechanism for responding to newly found significant 

noncompliers. 

violation for two or more quarters are reported by EPA and the . States. 

facilities were identified as being in significant noncompliance 

for 2 or more quarters without an enforcement action taken. Of 

these, 32 were returned to compliance and 26 had enforcement 

actions taken, leaving a pending balance of 40. For major municipal facilities, a cumulative total of 239 facilities were 

identified as being in significant noncompliance for 2 or more 

quarters without an enforcement action taken. Of these, 78 were 

returned to compliance and 84 had enforcement actions taken, 

leaving a pending balance of 77. 

Only those significant noncompliers that are in 

During FY 1985 a cumulative total of 98 major industrial 
- 12 - 

NPDES Compliance Status 

In FY 1985, EPA made further progress in achieving greater 

compliance in its National Pollution Discharge Elimination System 

(NpDES) program. In FY 1984 and FY 1985, 94% of the major industrial facilities completed the construction needed to achieve 

final effluent limits while 6% needed additional construction. 

But, the overall compliance rate for major industrials increased 

from 93% in FY 1984 to 95% in FY 1985. For major municipal 

facilities in FY 1984, 62% completed the construction needed to. 

achieve final effluent limits while 38% needed additional construction. Compliance status improved in PY 1985 showing that 67% of 

the major municipal facilities completed the construction needed 

to achieve final effluent limits while 33% needed further 

construction. 

RCRA - Progress on Addressing Major Handlers in Significant 

Noncompliance 

The RCRA program considers a significant noncomplier as a 

land disposal facility with one or more Class I violations of 

regulatory or statutory requirements related to groundwater, 

closure, post-closure, or financial responsibility. 

At the beginning of FY 1985, EPA and the States had 729 

major handlers in significant noncompliance remaining from the 

previous year. By the end of the year, 684 had been addressed 

including 327 which were returned to compliance, 357 against which 

an enforcement action was taken, leaving 45 to be addressed in 

FY 1986 (graph I). During the year, EPA and the States identified 

551 major handlers as new significant noncompliers. Of this 

number, 144 had formal enforcement actions initiated against them 

and 112 were returned to compliance (graph J). 
.. 

- 13 - 

In PY 1985, EPA and the States substantially increased their 

efforts to address significant noncompliance over the levels 

achieved in the previous year. During PY 1985, EPA and the States 

addressed a higher percentage (94% compared to 81%) of significant 

noncompliers than in FY 1984 on a base that was 150% larger (729 

compared to 535). 

RCRA - Inspections of Major Handlers 

of major handlers than in FY 1984 (5,497 compared to 4,115). EPA 

and the States completed 1,104 record reviews for closure plans 

and cost estimates in FY 1985 while completing 953 in FY 1984. 

In PY 1985, EPA and the States conducted 34% more inspections 

Response to TSCA Significant Noncompliance 

The TSCA program significant noncomplier i4 any violation of 

a PCB, asbestos, or premanufacturing notice rule which warrants 

the issuance of an administrative complaint for penalties. 

The Regions had a beginning of year inventory in PY 1985 of 

454 TSCA significant noncomplier cases. During the year the 

Regions closed 342 (75%) cases on the inventory (graph K) by 

completing an agreement and final order. In FY 1984, 183 (74%) 

cases were closed against a beginning of year inventory of 247. 

During the year, EPA made progress in identifying and initiating 

actions against new significant violators. Of the 5,097 inspections conducted, 919 (18%) significant violators were detected. 

More than half of these, a total of 514, had action taken: 156 of 

these were closed, leaving 358 new cases open at the end of the 

year (graph L). In FY 1985, EPA instituted a major enforcement 

.. 
- 14 - 

effort in the Asbestos-in-Schools program. Of the 919 new significant violators, 59% were asbestos-in-schools violators. In 

response to significant noncompliance in asbestos-in-schools, EP& 

issued 383 administrative complaints in FY 1985, over four times 

the 82 issued in all of FY 1984. 

Regional TSCA Inspection and Compliance Levels 

In FY 1985, of the 3,083 inspections (compared to 2,022 for 

FY 1984) conducted for PCB and other violations, 31% were pending 

review for a compliance determination at the end of the year. of 

the 2,110 inspections reviewed during the year, 74% were found in 

compliance and 26% were in violation, minor and significant (344 

with enforcement action taken; 242 with enforcement action pending). 

For asbestos-in-schools, the Regions conducted 2,014 inspections 

compared to 1,918 in FY 1984. Nine percent were pending for a 

compliance determination at the end of the year. Of the 1,835 

inspections reviewed in FY 1985, 32% were in compliance, 68% were 

in minor and significant violation (1,083 with enforcement action 

taken; 162 with enforcement action pending). 

Response to FIFRA Significant Noncompliance 

The Regions had a beginning of year inventory in FY 1985 of 

257 FIFRA significant noncompliers. During the year, the Regions 

nearly cleared their backlog of cases by closing 242 (94%) cases 

on the inventory (graph M). In FY 1984, 137 (64%) cases were 

closed against a beginning of year inventory of 214. During 

FY 1985, the Regions and States made good progress against new 

significant violators. The Regions conducted 1,647 inspections 

and detected 299 significant violations. A total of 172 of these 

violations had action taken; 74 of these were closed, leaving 98 

cases open at year end (graph N). In closing FIFRA significant 

noncomplier cases, 113 cases remain open at the end of FY 1985, 

compared to the inventory of 214 open cases at the end of FY 1984. 

m 

I 

I 

.. 
- 15 - 

National Enforcement Activity 

continued at record levels in PY 1985. By the end of the year, 

2,785 administrative orders had been issued by EPA. This is the 

second highest number of administrative orders issued since 1981 

(graph A). 

cases in the Agency's history (graph B). The national figure 

of 323 civil referrals represents an increase of 23% over FY 

1984 and includes 22 air mobile cases. Since 1981 the number of 

civil cases referred by the Regions has increased 247%. Civil 

referrals are those cases referred by the Regions to EPA and 

direct to the Department of Justice. 

FY 1985 was also a record year for criminal referrals. An 

all time high of 44 criminal cases were referred by the Regions 

to Headquarters. Of these, 22 (50%) were through the RCRA program. 

Criminal referrals to DOJ only were also at an all time high with 

36 referred in PY 1985, as compared to 31 in PY 1984, 26 in 

PY 1983, 20 in FY 1982 and 26 in FY 1981. 

The overall level of compliance and enforcement activity 

In PY 1985, the Regions referred the highest number of civil 

-1 

Air Enforcement Activity 

EPA's air enforcement activity has remained'at a 

consistently high level during PY 1985. EPA issued 100 administrative orders during the year (graph C). The Regions referred 

85 civil cases, one of the highest number of referrals in Agency 

history (graph D). PY 1985 civil referrals surpassed the end of 

year target of 79 and also represented a 7.5% increase over PY 

1984. Also in PY 1985, 8 criminal cases were referred in the air 

enforcement program. 
- 16 - 

-1 

"1 

Water Enforcement Activity 

for administrative orders and reached an all time high for civil 

case referrals. EPA and the States issued 1,028 administrative 

orders, which is the second highest total in the last five years 

(graph E). During PY 1985, the Regions referred 118 civil cases, 

the highest number ot referrals in the last five years (graph F). 

This represents a 12% increase in the number of referrals from FY 

1984. The Regions also made 7 criminal case referrals in PY 1985. 

EPA's water enforcement activity remained at a high level 

-1 
- 17 - 

Superfund and RCRA Enforcement Activity 

activity in FY 1985 over the previous year. Under Superfund, in 

PY 1985, 39 enforcement managed RI/FS were initiated as compared 

to 35 in FY 1984. By the end of FY 1985, 160 administrative 

orders had been issued, a 17% increase over the 137 issued in FY 

1984. For RCRA, 525 administrative complaints and consent agreement and final orders were issued in PY 1985. This is the second 

highest number in the last 5 years (graph GI. 

Under the Superfund program, 54 civil referrals were made in 

FY 1985, representing a 38% increased over the previous year. In 

PY 1985, 19 RCRA civil cases were referred compared to 16 in PY 

1984. RCRA and Superfund combined for a total of 73 civil referrals. This is the highest number of referrals in the Agency's 

history (graph A). There were 22 RCRA criminal referrals (50% of 

all criminal referrals) and 1 Superfund criminal referral in PY 

1985. 

Additional progress was made in Superfund and RCRA enforcement 

TSCA Enforcement Activity 

In PY 1985, the Regions nearly doubled the-'number of . 

adminkstrative complaints, the primary enforcement tool of the 

program, issued in FY 1984. 

plaints were issued in PY 1985 compared to 376 in FY 1984. 

increase resulted from the Asbestos-in-Schools program, which 

issued 443 (60%) of the complaints in PY 1985. There was a total 

of 6 civil referrals in PY 1985, compared to 7 in FY 1984. Also, 

in FY 1985, 5 criminal cases were referred. 

A total of 733 administrative comThe 
- 18 - 

FIFRA Enforcement Activity 

The Regions initiated 236 administrative complaints for 

significant violations in PY 1985, only slightly below the total 

of 272 in FY 1984. There were 11 Civil judicial referrals in FY 

1985 and 1 criminal referral from the Regions. In FY 1985 the 

States conducted 52,409 compliance inspections and took 8,899 

enforcement actions. 

The enforcement activity for TSCA and FIPRA combined, 969 

administrative complaints and 11 civil referrals, is the highest 

level of activity in the last five years. 

V. Highlights of Key Cases and Precedents 

Each enforcement action, be it administrative, civil or 

criminal judicial is important in bringing a violator back to 

compliance, deterring future violations by that source or others 

and establishing useful legal precedent. Following are highlights from key cases which go beyond just success in an individual 

action. Examples are selected from each media program. 

Air Enforcement 

In PY 1985, EPA continued to be successful in litigating and 

settling major air enforcement cases while also establishing some 

valuable legal precedents and obtaining large penalties for 

cleanup. Cases 1 and 2 below are examples: 

Case 1: In September, a U.S. district court in Texas (Region VI) 

imposed one of the largest civil penalties in EPA history against 

Chevron? Inc., for Clean Air Act violations of prevention of significant deterioration (PSD) requirements, sulfur dioxide emission 

requirements, and permit requirements in the Texas State Implementation Plan. Over $4.5 million was awarded to the United States 

and over $1.5 million to the state of Texas and City of El Paso. 

Without specifically noting that it was doing so, the court 

assessed penalties for violations that occurred prior to EPA's 

issuance of the Notice of Violation (NOV). The ruling may help 

to assess such penalties in future cases. 

- 
- 19 - 

Case 2: In July and August, EPA and LTV Steel Corporation filed 

threesettlement documents in federal court resolving environmental litigation involving four of the company's iron and steelmaking facilities in Ohio and Illinois (Region V). The company 

was required to spend a total of approximately $4,000,000 for 

additional air and water pollution control equipment to achieve 

compliance, pay $1,000,000 in civil penalties and spend $2,225,000 

for environmentally beneficial projects. 

entities and a citizens group joined in the settlement. 

Enforcement of volatile organic compounds (VOC) emission 

limitations in State Implementation Plans has been identified as 

a top priority by EPA's Office of Air and Radiation. As a result, 

more VOC enforcement cases were initiated in FY 1985. Approximately one-third of the Clean Air Act stationary source civil 

judicial enforcement docket in FY 1985 was made up of VOC enforcement actions. In addition to judicial actions, EPA was also 

active in administratively enforcing compliance with VOC emissions 

requirements. Approximately one-half of the section 120 

administrative enforcement actions pending at the end of FY 1985 

concerned violations of VOC requirements. Case 3 below was the 

first adjudicated S120 action which EPA won and is a typical 

example of a successful administrative action in this area: 

Case 3: On July 19, and Administrative Law Judge issued an Initial 

Decision in favor of EPA with regard to liability initiated under 

Section 120 of the Clean Air Act, against American Cyanamid. In 

September 1984, Region VI issued a Notice of Noncompliance (NON) 

to the company for violations of the Louisiana State Implementation Plan (SIP). The NON alleged that volatile organic compound 

emissions were not being controlled by any means set forth in the 

SIP. The company petitioned for reconsideration on grounds that 

had been approved by Louisiana. The bubble has been submitted 

to, but not approved by EPA. The judge held that since EPA had 

not approved the bubble as a SIP revision, the company was, in 

fact, in violation of the SIP at the time the NON was issued. 

The judge also held that a Section 120 proceeding may proceed 

even when EPA has failed to approve or disapprove a proposed SIP 

revision for more than four months after submittal by the State. 

Several governmental 

- it was in compliance with the SIP by virtue of a 'bubble" that 
- 20 - 

Case 4 is an example of One of EPA's successful efforts in 

the air criminal enforcement program in FY 1985: 

Case 4: After three days of trial, on August 8, 1985, Albert . 

Mardikian pled guilty to nine felony counts of making false 

statements to EPA and one felony count of mail fraud. Garabet 

Mardikian pled guilty to three counts of mail fraud on the same 

day. The charges arose out of a scheme by the defendants and 

their company, the largest U.S. importer, modifier and emissions 

tester, to falsely certify the non-conforming ("gray market") 

motor vehicles imported into this country were modified to meet 

U.S. emission standards. Subsequently, Albert Mardikian was 

sentenced to 5 years imprisonment (with all but 6 months suspended), 5 years probation, and to do a minimum of 8 hours of 

community service per week for 5 years teaching under privileged 

individuals to improve job seeking skills, and must place at 

least 20 individuals per year in jobs. He must also make restitution. Garabet was sentenced to 3 years imprisonment (with all 

but 30 days suspended), 3 years probation and to perform community 

service for 5 years. 

Water Enforcement 

Case 1: In FY 1985, EPA successfully settled a nationallycoordinated pretreatment case for violations by an industrial 

user of the newly effective federal categorical pretreatment 

standards for electroplaters. The consent decree required 

Chrysler Corporation to establish a compliance schedule for 

several of its plants across the country and pay a civil penalty 

of $1.5 million, one of the largest cash settlements in the 

history of EPA's water enforcement program. In all, EPA filed 

actions against 26 industrial users who failed to comply with 

categorical standards. 

Case 2: Region I1 undertook a major initiative during FY 1985 to 

enforce industrial user pretreatment standards in the New York 

metropolitan area. The initiative involved the identification of 

and referral for civil action against 28 integrated and non-integrated electroplating and metal finishing facilities. These 

facilities discharged cyanide and various heavy metals, including 

lead and cadmium into publically owned treatment works. The cases 

were filed in FY 1986. 
- 21 - 

In FY 1985, the Office of Enforcement and Compliance 

Monitoring and the Office of Water began a jointly-sponsored case 

initiative to support the National Municipal Policy and its July 1, 

1988 deadline. Schedules have been coordinated with the Regions, 

and EPA is planning for a group of referrals during the first - quarter of FY 1986 with participation by the majority of Regions. 

Case 3: In Region 1's Boston Harbor cleanup litigation, EPA won 

ament against the Metropolitan District Commission and the 

Commonwealth of Massachusetts, establishing their liability for 

violating NPDES permit provisions. 

was the court's rejection of the defendants argument that there 

was no liability for violating secondary treatment requirements 

because defendants were pursuing a Section 301(h) waiver. This 

marked the first time that a court ruled on this issue in an 

enforcement case. The total cleanup involved will cost 

approximately $2 billion. 

Case 4: In PY 1985, Region VI settled a total of nine major 

municipal cases in Arkansas, Louisiana and Texas. These settlements require compliance with the appropriate NPDES permit limitations on or before July 1, 1988, with or without Federal Grant 

Funds. The cuiiiiiive up-front penalties from these settlements 

will exceed $660,000, including three of the largest cash penalties ever to be collected from municipalities in the NPDES 

program. In two Louisiana cases alone the settlements require 

construction that will contribute to the clean up of several 

coastal oyster beds, currently closed to harvesting due to high 

bacterial counts in the estuaries. 

Of particular significance 

. 

Case 5: On September 6, Eric D. Roth, the owner of a private 

water testing laboratory, was sentenced to 8 months imprisonment 

Reports in violation of Section 309(c)(2) of the Clean Water Act 

after pleading guilty. 

of making a false statement. Sentencing on the felony count was 

suspended pending Roth's completion of 5 years probation and 200 

hours of community service. 

. on two misdemeanor counts of falsifying Discharge Monitoring 

He also pled guilty to one felony count 

.. 

! .. 
- 22 - 

Hazardous Waste Enforcement 

cases were litigated and/or settled with major corporations such 

as the following cases (Region V served as the lead region in - Cases 1, 2, and 3): 

Case 1: U.S. V. Chem-Dyne, Inc. involved a multi-party long-term 

cleanup 03 significant groundwater contamination. This was one 

of the first decrees to provide for long-term remedial work for 

groundwater contamination. 

Case 2: U.S. v. Westinqhouse required $1 million in reimbursement 

forst response costs in evacuating PCB-contaminated waste from 

six sites plus incineration of waste in a fully permitted incinerator. EPA estimated the value of the negotiated remedy at $75 to 

$100 million. 

Case 3: U.S. V. Berlin and Perro required 87 settling defendants 

to perform extensive surface removal action estimated by EPA to 

cost $14 million and the reimbursement of $350,000 to U.S. for 

past costs. 

Case 4: In the Diamond Shamrock case EPA received 100% of 

=million in past costs. 

Further examples of hazardous waste enforcement 

accomplishments in PY 1985 include the following examples: 

Case 5: Region X obtained it's first criminal conviction 

resulting in imprisonment of a company's president. 

the Department of Justice obtained a twelve-count indictment 

against the president of Wyckoff Company and three supervisors for 

alleged conspiracy, disposing of hazardous waste without a permit, 

making false statements to the government, and discharging pollutants without a permit. The case resulted in fines, imprisonment, 

and sentences to perform community service while on probation. 

In FY 1985, several nationally significant hazardous waste 

In FY 1985, 

Case 6: Region I was involved in the first liability trial 

ming multiple off-site generators. 

Ottati and GOSS, et al., the court found that the generator 

defendants and owners and operators of the sites were jointly and 

severally liable for costs incurred at the sites and for harm that 

may result from the sites, and that such liability is strict. 

In the case, U.S. v. 
- 23 - 

Case 7: In Region VlI, the National Industrial Environmental 

Services Facility, a subsidiary of Chem Waste, entered administrative orders on consent under CERCLA and.RCRAr-committing the 

company to approximately $12.5 million dollars in corrective 

action. The cleanup plan requires development and implementation 

of groundwater extraction wells, monitoring wells, and closure of 

surface impoundments. The orders were issued on May 24, 1985, 

and implementation has commenced, with groundwater extraction 

activities underway. 

Case 8: On November 14, 1984, a 14 count indictment was filed 

mng John Suerth, president of QuVoe Chemical Industries, 

Inc., with transportation of hazardous waste to an unpermitted 

facility; treatment, storage and disposal of hazardous waste 

without a permit, and submitting a false statement to the government. After a plea agreement, the court on May 248 1985, sentenced Suerth to 9 months imprisonment plus 5 years probation and 

a $25,000 fine. This is the longest actual jail time (not suspended) imposed on an individual from a case investigated and 

referred by the Agency. 

Pesticides and Toxic Substances Enforcement 

and Pesticides programs was the highest it has been in the last 

five years including the filing of two criminal cases. Several 

policy and management initiatives were also undertaken in FY 1985 

to enhance this effort. 

In FY 1985 total enforcement activity for the Toxic Substances 

Under FIFRA, emphasis was given to the use and enforcement 

of Stop Sale, Use and Removal orders and tracking data call-ins 

in keeping with the Agency priority on controlling the use of 

existing chemicals. A new National Evaluation Protocol was 

developed by Headquarters to evaluate enforcement programs in 

primacy states. 

of PCB marking, disposal, and storage violations. In FY 1985 

such complaints accounted for only about 30% of total cases. EPA 

caseload has been expanded by the dramatic increase in the 

Asbestos-in-Schools program and the developing enforcement programs 

for the recently implemented sections of TSCA. Development of 

these new areas continue to raise complex and novel enforcement 

For several years, the bulk of TSCA cases has been composed 
- 24 - 

issues. Thirty million dollars in total penalties for TSCA and 

FIFRA violations were assessed in FY 1985 with over $6 million 

collected on completed cases. This record amount included several 

precedentially large penalties. The largest civil administrative 

penalty in the history of EPA was collected in PY 1985. In addition, for the first time, full scale environmental audits were 

included in Agency case settlements. Among the most significant 

TSCA civil administrative actions in 1985 were the following: 

Case 1: On December 19, 1984, an Order was issued enforcing the 

mstrative Consent Agreement entered by EPA, the State of 

Alabama and Chemical Waste Management, Inc. (CWM) in resolution 

of a 1984 enforcement action involving violations of PCB storage 

and disposal rules. The Agency's action alleged that the company 

illegally stored PCB's at its Emelle, Alabama facility beyond the 

one year time limitation of TSCA and that the company violated 

several RCRA monitoring provisions. The litigation constitutes 

the most comprehensive administrative enforcement action taken 

under TSCA. The Consent Agreement establishes several important 

and precedential provisions. The Agreement requires the company 

to perform a full-scale environmental audit of its storage and 

disposal facilities, the first such requirement to be obtained by 

the Agency under any statute. The settlement assesses a precedentially large penalty of $600,000, with $150,000 accruing to 

the State of Alabama, and requires compliance-related performance 

costing about $14 million. In addition, the company is required 

to meet a schedule for the disposal of 2.8 million gallons of 

PCB's, conduct an innovative technology demonstration for mechanical waste solidation, establish a compliance officer program, 

and provide a dioxin sampling, analysis and disposal plan. 

Case 2: In a settlement against Diamond Shamrock Corporation, 

mg, Texas) EPA obtained a penalty of $900,000, the highest 

single penalty ever collected under TSCA S5 Premanufacture Notification requirements. In addition, the company will conduct TSCA 

compliance audits at forty-three facilities nationwide. 

Case 3: In September, OECM, working closely with Region V, 

negotiated a Consent Decree and Final Order in resolution of a 

1982 FIFRA enforcement action involving misbranded hospital 

disinfectants manufactured and sold by Huntington Laboratories, 

Inc. In this action, EPA charged that seven batches of the 

tested products, Quanto and Hi-Tor, failed to meet federal 

standards for control of organisms when tested in accordance with 

the A.O.A.C. Use Dilution Test at EPA's Beltsville, Uaryland 
- 25 - 

laboratories. The company vigorously contested the Agency's 

enforcement action and challenged the accuracy of the A.O.A.C. 

Use Dilution Test Method. Huntington spent over $400,000 dollars 

contesting EPA's data and test methodology. In settlement, the 

company agreed to cease manufacture of Quanto and Hi-Tor and to 

register new and more effective formulations of the products us-ing 

a modification of the disputed A.O.A.C. test method acceptable to 

EPA. In addition, the company agreed to pay a civil penalty of 

$5,000. 

The settlement is significant for a number of reasons. First, 

substantial public health benefits accrue from the elimination of 

ineffective products. The company's products .command over 40% of 

the domestic hospital disinfectant market. Second, the Agency's 

future enforcement efforts were enhanced by the pioneering coordination and involvement of the Registration Division of the Office 

of Pesticides Program and OECM. Third, future litigation will be 

eliminated by the agreement between industry and EPA in this case 

on the need for refining and modifying the A.O.A.C. Use Dilution 

Test to include certain scientific refinements. 

Case 4: Chemical Waste Management (Vickery, Ohio) - This 

settlement, negotiated by EPA Region V staff, concerned TSCA and 

RCRA violations. These violations included the illegal sale and 

distribution in commerce of over 6,000,000 gallons of PCB-contaminated waste oils. The settlement required the suspension of 

additional waste receipts at the facility for a period of 10 

months, construction of a toxic chemical waste landfill, implementation of a corllprehensive groundwater monitoring program, an 

environmental management audit, and the payment of a civil penalty 

in the sum of $2,500,000. This is the largest civil administrative penalty ever collected in the history of EPA. 

Case 5: Commonwealth Edison Corporation -- Chicago, Illinois. 

-settlement, negotiated in January, 1985, by Region V staff, 

settled an administrative penalty action involving improperly 

disposed of PCBs, which had been spilled from polemounted electrical capacitors. Edison decontaminated each spill site, 

demonstrated the cleanup levels through verification sampling and 

analysis, and paid a civil penalty of $80,000, the largest penalty. 

ever paid by an electrical utility. 
- 26 - 

In addition to the above enforcement actions brought in 

FY 1985, the Agency also undertook four enforcement initiatives 

in areas of high priority to the toxics and pesticides program. 

In June, EPA simultaneously filed six Civil administrative complaints under TSCA's PMN requirements seeking penalties rangingfrom $6,000 to $3.7 million. The simultaneous filings of these 

actions by Headquarters and by Region V were intended to promote 

the visibility of the Agency's chemical assessment program. 

A similar effort followed in July with respect to TSCA 

reporting requirements. As part of a Headquarters-coordinated 

effort, EPA regional personnel filed administrative cases 

assessing civil penalties totaling $160,000 against six companies 

for reporting violations. 

requirements with respect to commercial and industrial uses of 

asbestos. These were the first such cases ever brought by EPA 

concerning asbestos reporting under TSCA. 

The Agency followed with two additional enforcement 

initiatives in September, 1985, both undertaken by Region I1 

attorneys. First, the Region filed three civil administrative 

actions under TSCA seeking total penalties of $75,000. Section 4, 

a test rule, requires manufacturers to submit notices of intent to 

test shipments of certain chemicals or to submit an application 

for exemption from the test rule at the time of manufacture. 

These cases represented the first EPA enforcement actions ever 

taken under TSCA section 4. 

These cases all concerned major violations of the reporting 

Also in September, Region I1 filed twelve administrative 

complaints seeking total penalties of $90,000 for failure to 

comply with the import certification requirements of TSCA. This 

provision requires a chemical importer to either certify the 

compliance of shipments with TSCA requirements, or to declare 

that shipments are exempt from TSCA requirements. These were the 

first enforcement actions to be taken by the Agency for import 

violations.