Region 9: Compliance and Enforcement

In addition to enforcement accomplishments achieved in purer water, cleaner air and better protected land, EPA’s Pacific Southwest Region implements a number of ongoing programs that produce significant environmental results.

Community right-to-know laws

Chevron’s national settlement includes environmental projects for community

Chevron USA agreed to pay an $800,000 penalty for failure to immediately report releases of hazardous substances at its refinery in El Segundo, Calif. and also committed to projects that will directly benefit the environment and the city’s residents. Chevron will spend $300,000 to reduce diesel emissions from in-service fleet vehicles in El Segundo and $100,000 on emergency response equipment to be donated to the El Segundo Fire Department.

Self-reporting – EPA provides incentives to industries that audit their own environmental program

Under the agency policy, facilities audit themselves, report their findings to EPA and take steps to prevent future violations.

EPA provides incentives to companies that audit their own environmental program

Under the agency’s policy, facilities audit themselves, report their findings to EPA and take steps to prevent future violations. In exchange for correcting their violations and reporting to EPA, companies may have their penalties reduced up to 100 percent.

California and Arizona companies voluntarily report their violations to EPA

Thirteen Arizona companies and seventeen California companies saved up to 100 percent in potential penalties for voluntarily disclosing their chemical release, chemical inventory and risk management plan violations. These companies voluntarily discovered violations of federal Emergency Planning and Community Right-To-Know Act or Clean Air Act Risk Management Plan requirements and promptly disclosed their violations to the agency. These facilities and the surrounding communities now have more information for emergency planning, emergency response and risk management.

Tribal Lands

EPA and tribal partners have made significant progress in protecting tribal lands, waters, and cultural resources. EPA’s stewardship responsibility involves working with tribes as partners in compliance and enforcement, fostering cooperative relationships with other governments, and providing funding and technical assistance for capacity building, infrastructure improvements and environmental cleanup and restoration projects. In 2005, EPA issued enforcement actions totaling over $1.25 million to companies operating on tribal lands and also succeeded in getting companies to undertake environmental projects to benefit affected Tribal communities.

Mobil settlement includes environmental projects on tribal land

Mobil Exploration and Producing U.S. agreed to pay nearly $1 million for Clean Act violations at Mobil’s oil production facility on the Navajo Nation in the Four Corners area near Aneth, Utah. As part of the settlement, the company will pay a $350,000 penalty and spend about $500,000 on operation improvements to control air pollution at its oil field. Mobil will also spend $99,349 on a public health project that will provide x-ray equipment, an x-ray processor and a pulmonary function testing machine to the Montezuma Creek Community Health Center in Montezuma Creek, Utah. In 2004, Mobil also paid a $515,000 penalty and was required to spend about $4.7 million on improvements to reduce the risk of oil spills.

Romic will spend $100,800 on equipment for community, pay penalty for hazardous waste violations

Romic Environmental Technologies agreed to pay a $67,888 penalty for multiple hazardous waste violations and to correct the violations at its facility on the Gila River Indian Reservation in the Lone Butte Industrial Park in Chandler, Ariz. The company will also spend $100,800 on life-saving equipment for the Gila River Indian community fire department and air monitoring and meteorological equipment for the Gila River Indian community Department of Environmental Quality.

Arizona Department of Transportation pays for asbestos training seminars and penalty for Clean Air Act violations

The Arizona Department of Transportation agreed to pay EPA $9,625 and the Environmental Information Association (EIA) $45,000 to conduct asbestos regulatory compliance training seminars for violating federal asbestos notification requirements. In 2003 and 2004, the ADOT demolished a variety of structures owned by the agency throughout the state, including on tribal lands. EPA stipulates procedures that must be followed by anyone disturbing building materials that may contain or disturb asbestos, a serious health hazard if not handled properly.

Oil Production Company fined for oil spill prevention violations

EPA fined an oil production company $40,000 for oil spill prevention violations at three facilities on Navajo lands near Bloomfield, New Mexico. Elm Ridge Resources failed to have a plan in place to prevent oil discharges at three of its facilities near intermittent streams or dry washes that carry flows to the San Juan River during periods of heavy rains. Oil spills can cause serious environmental damage – wildlife can be harmed and waters polluted. Facilities must have oil spills plans and effective spill containment in place to prevent accidents from contaminating the environment.

Developers violate environmental regulations on Tribal land, pay penalties

• E.J. Mahoney Construction and the owner of the Deer Lodge Park residential subdivision agreed to pay $6,000 penalties for illegally discharging storm water from construction at a new housing development on tribal allotments lands in Douglas County, Nev., without first getting a stormwater permit from EPA.
  
• West Ridge Homes Inc. and Steve Brown Construction discharged storm water from the Pine View Estates Subdivision construction site in Gardnerville, Nev., without an NPDES permit. West Ridge paid a $6500 penalty and Steve Brown paid a $9500 penalty.
  
• A Minden, Nev., developer, was fined $76,800 for violations of the federal Clean Water Act during construction of a housing development on tribal lands in Douglas County. In December 2003, EPA ordered PTP Inc. to correct violations of federal stormwater requirements found during inspections of the Pine View Estates.

 

Assessment activities completed at abandoned underground storage tank facilities on tribal lands

EPA, in coordination with tribal nations, launched an initiative to assess and clean up abandoned leaking underground storage tank sites on tribal lands. The initiative was launched to work with the tribes to clean up contaminated sites and restore precious lands and water resources in Indian Country. The EPA began assessment and cleanup at nine sites on the Hopi and San Carlos reservations and is also gathering information on other sites to determine legibility and priority for assessment and cleanup. The EPA expects to address all of the eligible sites in the next several years.

On the Navajo Nation, the EPA inspected nearly 50 underground fuel tanks sites, fining 11 operators a total of $6,000 for violations of underground storage tank regulations. Unseen leaks caused by corrosion, overfills or other spills can pollute precious groundwater supplies–a limited resource on the Navajo Nation.

Lead abatement work at California rental units

 

Lead paint disclosure case settled, environmental project set for lead abatement work

A San Jose landlord agreed to perform lead abatement work where hazards are found in 21 rental units - an environmental project valued at $138,500 - for violating federal lead paint disclosure requirements at 72 rental units in two California cities. The owner, Allen Wong, will conduct lead inspections and risk assessments as well as lead abatement work where hazards are found in 21 rental units in San Jose. Wong will also pay the EPA a $15,393 penalty. EPA insists that renters and buyers receive adequate information necessary to protect public health, especially childrens’ health, from lead-based paint. An estimated three-quarters of the U.S. housing stock built before 1978 contains some lead-based paint.

Pesticides Enforcement

EPA’s pesticide program exceeded enforcement projections for the third year in a row. The sustained enforcement presence resulted in 22 actions against companies that did not comply with federal regulations for pesticides.

Protecting consumers from illegal imports

EPA’s Pacific Southwest Pesticides Office settled four enforcement cases for illegal importation or distribution of pesticides. Two cases resulted from inspections on Guam, a focus of FY05 compliance efforts because of the large number of products imported from Asia. One case involved Quality Swimming Pools fined for importing an EPA registered swimming pool disinfectant that did not have the EPA-approved label attached. The label on the product was missing crucial use directions, which can lead to over-application of the product, thus creating unintended illnesses, or under-application which can reduce the efficacy of the product in the pool.

EPA’s Pesticides Office also settled with Flash International Trading Inc., a distributor in Hawaii, and American Wah Ta, a distributor in San Francisco. Both allegedly attempted to import and/or distribute unregistered naphthalene mothballs for sale to bargain stores. Flash International attempted to import 119 pounds of illegal naphthalene mothball product. Of particular concern with these products is the potential for accidental ingestion of these products by children. Naphthalene is an irritant to the eyes and skin and also poses an inhalation risk to people of all ages if not used correctly. Registered products will have the proper use directions to mitigate these risks. A potentially life threatening effect of naphthalene is hemolytic anemia, more common in individuals of Asian descent. Both cases involved potential sales in Asian markets. Naphthalene is illegal for sale in California, although federally registered products are available in other states. The companies paid a total of over $6,000 in fines.

Ensuring proper labeling for safe use

Appropriate labeling of pesticide products is EPA’s first “defense’ against injuries to human health and/or the environment. In fiscal year 2005, enforcement of misbranded products was a priority. EPA’s Pesticides Office fined Sierra Chemical of Sparks, Nev., $28,800 for selling a mislabeled product; Leffingwell Ag Sales, Inc., of Lindsay, Calif., $10,400 for selling containers of pesticides without directions booklets; and the Los Angeles Chemical Co. $28,500 for sale and distribution of a pesticide known as “Acid Anionic Sanitizer and Cleaner,” an unregistered disinfectant. Because the product was not registered, EPA had no information on product efficacy. This product, intended only for pool use was sold to a company to use in treating cooling towers. There were no directions on the label for how to use the product in cooling towers, which can lead to over- or under-application. Finally, the Pesticides Office fined two Fresno firms, and a German owner and pesticide registrant $16,148 for selling and distributing a lawn herbicide with a label failing to include directions for use.

Ensuring proper use of pesticides

Using a pesticide according to label directions is critical to ensure that no unreasonable risk occurs to human health and/or the environment. EPA fined Crop First, an aerial applicator, $4,160 after the application of to pesticides which drifted onto a residential property adjacent to agricultural fields in Casa Grande, Ariz. Crop First was fined for use of a registered pesticide in a manner inconsistent with the product label instruction. The company was also fined in 2003.

Addressing unregistered pesticides making public health claims

EPA issued one Stop Sale, Use or Removal Order against Los Angeles-based Morwear Manufacturing Inc. to prevent the company from selling two unregistered pesticides, “MoldWash” and “MoldWash Household.” The products, as originally labeled, claimed to kill toxic molds on household surfaces.

Helping importers comply with pesticide regulations

EPA sent approximately 650 flyers to import brokers throughout the Pacific Southwest Region. The flyer, another in a series of EPA compliance assistance publications, helps brokers define pesticides and how to legally import them into the United States.

Top of page