Below, you will find summaries of major environmental-related cases that have affected local governments. Information on Supplemental Environmental Projects (SEPs) is also included. Supplemental environmental projects are compliance agreements that reduce a facility's stipulated penalty in return for an environmental project that exceeds the value of the reduction. Often, these projects fund pollution prevention activities that can significantly reduce the future pollutant loadings of a facility. As indicated in EPA's Enforcement and Compliance Assurance Accomplishments Reports from 1992 to 1997, many significant enforcement actions were resolved involving local governments.

From 1992 to 1997, 147 cases can be categorized as follows:

• 8 Clean Air Act cases
• 67 Clean Water Act cases
• 12 Safe Drinking Water Act cases
• 4 Ocean Dumping Ban Act cases and Marine Protective Research and Sanctuaries Act cases
• 7 RCRA cases
• 31 CERCLA cases
• 14 TSCA/EPCRA/FIFRA cases
• 4 multimedia cases

Some settlements required defendants to initiate cleanup projects for the remedial action. In U.S. v. School District of Philadelphia, PA(1997), a complaint and consent decree was filed that seeks the cleanup and disposal of PCBs that are in 29 transformers located at 12 schools. The school district must also comply with the PCB Rule and implement a PCB Management Plan. The Plan would provide for the repair, inspection, cleanup, and proper disposal of PCB contaminated materials. The school district must remove or upgrade all of the PCB transformers within three years and bi-monthly progress reports must be submitted to EPA which will provide for the monitoring of the school district's cleanup efforts.

U.S. v. Kansas Bureau of Water (1995) involved the Kansas' Bureau of Water issuing 25 wastewater treatment orders against various municipalities and trailer courts in Kansas. The consent orders to cities, including Lawrence, Topeka and Leavenworth, initiate projects to eliminate the discharge of water treatment sludge to streams. The orders to trailer courts in Pittsburgh, KS have resulted in ongoing efforts to form sewer districts that will be connected to the Pittsburgh wastewater treatment plant. These sewer districts will help to eliminate sewage discharges into abandoned mine shafts.

In U.S. v. City and County of Denver, CO (1995) violations included an exceedance of performance standards by air emissions from the treatment plant on two occasions; failure to notify EPA and Colorado Department of Public Health and Environment; failure to recycle vapor-phase carbon units and implement changeout procedures; and failure to submit a schedule for proposed corrective measures. The City will pay a penalty of $79,550.

In U.S. v. City of San Diego, CA (1997), a stipulated final order settled an enforcement action that addressed deficiencies with San Diego's sewage treatment facilities. The order calls for the City to continue work on infrastructure projects, replace 200 miles of decaying concrete sewers, audit pump stations and force mains, increase efforts to reduce grease loadings to the system and upgrade its data collection and modeling capabilities. The order also requires $60-$200 million for projects.

In the 1996 Clean Water Act case of U.S. v. City of Blackhawk, CO, the City allowed the illegal construction of a water supply pump station on Clear Creek (without U.S. Army Corps of Engineers Clean Water Act permit), including excavation and backfilling of about 1,800 square feet of river bed on the north fork of Clear Creek. The result was a temporary loss of wetlands and destruction of aquatic life. The penalty payment was $61,515.

In U.S. v. Town of Hempstead, NY (1997), the town had violations of unpermitted discharge into an underground injection well and the endangerment of a Department of Highways facility in Roosevelt. An AOC was issued that required the town to implement a compliance/closure plan, pay a $5,500 penalty, perform a facility audit, and provide employee training. The town will (1) inventory and address facilities where there may be Class V injection wells, (2) test for pesticides, and (3) keep the public informed of the status of closure implementation at the Roosevelt facility.

In U.S. v. City of New York Department of Transportation, NY (1995 and 1997), the City generated, during bridge repainting operations, hazardous paint chips without a RCRA identification number, manifests, and stored wastes without a permit or authorization. A joint penalty (with contractor) of $25,000 was assessed and an administrative CACO was issued. The City drafted a lead-based paint removal protocol, the implementation of which will cost the City over $5 million. The City must pay a civil penalty of $145,000.

In the CERCLA case U.S. v. City of Algoma, Algoma Municipal Landfill, WI settled in 1992, a consent decree concerned the City of Algoma Municipal Landfill for the City and eight generator PRPs to implement the remedy selected by ROD. Defendants will reimburse EPA and the State for their future oversight costs and pay 90% of EPA's past oversight costs. Settlement is for $1.3 million. Monitoring detected an exceedance of the MCL for cadmium, iron, and manganese.

The case U.S. v. City of Jacksonville, AR (1994) involved two consent decrees that were lodged for the Jacksonville and Rogers Road Municipal Landfill Superfund Sites. Both sites have soils that are contaminated with dioxin that was produced by a herbicide manufacturer. An estimated 800 cubic yards of soil is contaminated. The City agreed to pay $100,000 in past costs.

In U.S. v. Montgomery County Solid Waste District (MCSWD), Moraine, OH (1996), excess waste from an MCSWD-operated incinerator was sent to a municipal landfill. Thirty-one municipalities are members of MCSWD. The landfilled waste included commercial or industrial waste containing hazardous substances. The defendants will pay $60,000 for previous oversight costs and 50% of remaining oversight costs.

U.S. v. New York City, NY Board of Education, settled in 1996 involved an allegation that the head of the Board's Asbestos Task Force knowingly submitted false information on 375 AHERA management plans. A CACO was issued under AHERA that requires a payment of $1,500,000, systematically reinspecting each of 1,069 schools for asbestos, and the preparation of new management plans to ensure that all buildings are in compliance.