Painting Company Fined for Failure to Notify Customers about Lead Hazards in New England

News Release

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
New England Regional Office
August 28, 2012

Contact: David Deegan, (617) 918-1017

Painting Company Fined for Failure to Notify Customers about Lead Hazards in New England

(Boston, Mass. – Aug. 28, 2012) – A national house painting company with offices in Woburn, Mass., has agreed to pay a $7,200 penalty and to spend $65,000 on an environmental project at a school in Cambridge to settle claims by the US Environmental Protection Agency that it failed to provide required lead hazard information to home owners in four New England states on 41 occasions.

According to a settlement filed recently, College Pro Painters failed to provide EPA’s lead hazard information pamphlet to at least 41 owners and adult occupants of pre-1978 housing before beginning painting projects at units in Connecticut, Maine, Massachusetts, and New Hampshire. This was in violation of the federal Pre-Renovation Rule, and the Toxic Substances Control Act. 

In addition to paying the penalty, College Pro will spend $65,000 to replace or restore 79 windows that likely contain lead paint at Congregation Eitz Chayim (Harvard Hillel Children’s School) on Magazine Street in Cambridge, Mass.

College Pro, an interior and exterior house painting company based in Maryland, had more than 300 franchisees operating in 27 states as of 2009.  All of the work at issue in this case was performed by College Pro employees or contractors, not by franchisees.

The Pre-Renovation Rule aims to educate owners or occupants on how to minimize their exposure to hazardous lead dust that is often generated during painting projects conducted in older homes. The Rule requires that companies notify owners or occupants before starting work in homes built before 1978 that disturbs more than six square feet of interior or 20 square feet of exterior painted surface and that they provide them with an EPA-approved pamphlet with information about lead paint hazards and necessary precautions. Exposure to lead is particularly harmful to children under six years old and to pregnant women.

In June 2006, EPA’s New England office sent letters explaining the Pre-Renovation Rule to more than 600 painting companies, contractors, and remodeling firms in New England, including College Pro. In 2007, EPA began inspecting several of those entities who had received these letters.

This case stems from an Oct. 2009 inspection of College Pro’s New England offices in Woburn. EPA’s inspection and follow up information gathering showed that College Pro failed to provide the EPA lead information pamphlet to the owners or occupants (or mail the pamphlet to the owners during the time limits required) on at least 41 occasions - 28 in 2008 and 13 in 2009.

The lead abatement project in Cambridge must be completed within 150 days of the agreement.

More information: Pre-Renovation Lead Information Rule (http://www.epa.gov/lead/pubs/leadrenf.htm)

#  #  #

Rhode Island Property Owner Faces Fine for Failing to Notify Tenants about Potential Lead Hazards

News Release
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
New England Regional Office
July 20, 2012

Contact:  David Deegan, (617) 918-1017

Rhode Island Property Owner Faces Fine for Failing to Notify Tenants about Potential Lead Hazards

(Boston, Mass. – July 20, 2012) – A Rhode Island company faces a penalty of up to $421,900 for repeatedly violating federal lead-based paint disclosure laws and regulations when leasing residential property in Providence.

A recent EPA complaint alleges that Private Reserve Properties, LLC failed to notify prospective tenants, including families with young children, about potential lead-paint hazards in housing owned by the company, as required by the Residential Lead-Based Paint Hazard Reduction Act of 1992 and the Lead-Based Paint Disclosure Rule. 

Private Reserve Properties owns about 50 properties, with about 130 rental units, throughout Providence.  Many of the company’s holdings, including several subject to the complaint, are in environmental justice areas, which have higher than average rates of poverty. 

The complaint asserts 61 violations of the federal disclosure requirements associated with 16 leases signed between 2009 and 2011.  According to the complaint, Private Reserve Properties failed to disclose the presence of lead-based paint or lead-based paint hazards in its housing, provide tenants with available reports and records regarding lead-based paint, and supply educational information regarding lead-based paint hazards.  Eight of the leases include families with children who are more vulnerable to the adverse affects of lead exposure.

Exposure to lead paint is a serious health concern in New England due to the age of the housing stock.  Infants and young children are especially vulnerable to lead paint exposure, which can cause lowered intelligence, reading and learning disabilities, impaired hearing, reduced attention span, hyperactivity and behavior problems.  Adults with high lead levels can suffer difficulties during pregnancy, high blood pressure, nerve disorders, memory problems and muscle and joint pain.

The purpose of the Residential Lead-Based Paint Hazard Reduction Act and the Lead-Based Paint Disclosure Rule is to ensure that prospective tenants have enough information about lead-based paint in general and known lead-based paint hazards in specific housing to make an informed decision about whether to lease a particular property.  Among other things, the Disclosure Rule requires landlords to provide prospective tenants with an EPA-approved lead hazard information pamphlet and lead warning statement; disclose the presence of known lead-based paint and lead-based paint hazards; and provide prospective tenants with available records and reports pertaining to lead-based paint in the housing to be leased.  Property managers and owners therefore play an important role in helping to prevent lead poisoning.  Violations of the federal disclosure requirements are subject to the penalty provisions set forth in the Toxic Substances Control Act. 

More information: Lead disclosure rules and health concerns (http://www.epa.gov/lead/)

#   #   #

EPA Cites Realty Company for Violating Federal Law on Notice of Lead-based Paint Hazards in Reading, Pa.

EPA Cites Realty Company for Violating Federal Law on Notice of Lead-based Paint Hazards in Reading, Pa.

PHILADELPHIA (March 26, 2012) -- The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has cited Crespo Realty, Inc. , of Flushing, N.Y., for allegedly violating a federal law requiring the company to disclose information on lead-based paint hazards to tenants renting four Reading, Pa. properties.

The Disclosure Rule under the Residential Lead-Based Paint Hazard Reduction Act requires sellers and landlords of residential housing built before 1978 (when lead-based paint was banned under federal law) to disclose to purchasers and tenants the presence of known lead-based paint hazards (or lack of knowledge of hazards). Landlords must provide a lead hazard information pamphlet; provide a standard warning statement in the lease on the dangers of lead-based paint; and include disclosure and acknowledgment language in leases.

According to EPA's complaint, Crespo Realty, Inc. did not provide the required lead hazard information and lead hazard disclosures in five leases in four residential properties in Reading.   EPA will propose a penalty for these alleged violations after giving the company an opportunity to respond to the complaint. However, the complaint notes that the statutory maximum penalty for violations of the Disclosure Rule is $11,000 per violation. Crespo has the right to a hearing to contest the alleged violations.

EPA is cooperating with other federal, state, and local agencies to protect tenants and homeowners from the health risks of lead-based paint. High blood levels of lead can cause permanent damage to the nervous system and widespread health problems, such as a reduced intelligence and attention span, hearing loss, stunted growth, reading and learning problems and behavioral difficulties. Young children, in particular, are most vulnerable because their nervous systems are still developing.

For more information on environmental, health, and legal issues involving lead, please visit http://www.epa.gov/lead/index.html. 

CA Auto Recyclers Brace for Tightened Regulations

Excerpt from an article in The New York Times
Friday, February 10, 2012

California Auto Recyclers Brace for Tightened Regulations 

By MATT SMITH

In Oakland and Redwood City, industrial shredders the size of department stores grind thousands of junked automobiles into fist-sized scraps, loading the lumps onto waiting ships to become fodder for a global recycling industry.

But as the “green steel” goes out to sea, the leftovers — pulverized seat cushions, insulation and grime, collectively known in the shredding industry as “auto fluff” — are trucked to regional landfills. There, buried in mountains of trash, the byproducts of long-dead cars begin a second, potentially toxic life that could loom as a hazard to environmental health.

Off the road, junk cars continue to pollute because of what some critics say is a decades-long failure by California to properly regulate the powerful automobile recycling industry. Millions of tons of potentially toxic refuse created by recyclers of cars and heavy home appliances in the Bay Area have been buried in municipal landfills, instead of being transported in specially designated trucks and placed in dumps for toxic materials — a mode of transport and disposal that can dramatically increase costs.

The recyclers are able to avoid the increased cost of toxic waste disposal because of a special exemption from state regulators.

“Populations have moved close to those landfills,” said Gale Filter, a former deputy director for enforcement at the Department of Toxic Substances Control, or D.T.S.C., under Gov. Arnold Schwarzenegger. “We have an industry that’s not keeping pace with huge concerns about human health and the environment.”

“The shredding business poses a risk to the environment, as well as to people’s health,” Mr. Filter said.

In 2010, auto shredders deposited 591,271 tons of waste in California landfills. At the same time, their massive shredders can spew tons of toxic dust into the air, putting nearby residents at risk, according to a study by the University of California, Davis, that was commissioned by the toxic substance control agency. The industry commissioned its own study, which concluded that toxic emissions detected near a Los Angeles area facility came from sources other than automobile shredding.

The Environmental Protection Agency, meanwhile, announced in January that it had ordered Sims Metal Management to comply with federal Clean Water Act laws after inspections that revealed evidence of unlawful discharges of mercury, lead, copper and zinc near San Francisco Bay, as well as banned carcinogens known as PCBs, which are found in older cars.

The company issued statements saying it was committed to a healthy environment, and expected the matter to be resolved to the E.P.A.’s satisfaction.

Meg Rosegay, a lawyer in San Francisco who represents the auto recycling industry, said that the fluff is safe, despite Mr. Filter’s comments. “I think the former director of enforcement is expressing his personal opinion, and perhaps the opinion of certain individuals on the department staff,” she said. “We have done significant testing on the material and have reached different determinations.”

State regulators have long been concerned about the environmental impact of auto recycling. But for 30 years, former state officials say, the industry has used its influence in Sacramento to thwart further environmental controls. Recently, with Gov. Jerry Brown’s appointment of a new Department of Toxic Substances Control chief, there are signs the situation could be about to change. But any new rules about the handling of auto fluff may come too late to deal with millions of tons of potentially toxic waste already buried in California landfills.

Titan Environmental Services to Pay $10,878 Penalty

News release from EPA Region 7:

U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Region 7

901 N. Fifth St., Kansas City, KS 66101

Iowa, Kansas, Missouri, Nebraska, and Nine Tribal Nations

Titan Environmental Services to Pay $10,878 for Violations of Residential Lead-Based Paint Hazard Reduction Act

Contact Information: Chris Whitley, 913-551-7394, whitley.christopher@epa.gov

Environmental News

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE

(Kansas City, Kan., Feb. 6, 2012) - Titan Environmental Services, Inc., of Kansas City, Mo., has agreed to pay a $10,878 civil penalty to the United States to settle a series of violations of the Residential Lead-Based Paint Hazard Reduction Act, including failures to provide required hands-on training to contractors and other renovation professionals who enrolled in some of its training courses.

As part of its settlement with EPA Region 7, and in addition to paying the $10,878 civil penalty, Titan Environmental Services has agreed to offer the federally-required hands-on training at no cost to trainees who were enrolled in the company’s classes where EPA found violations.

The company has also agreed to perform a supplemental environmental project, through which it will spend at least $97,902 to fund lead abatement activities at five residential properties in St. Joseph, Mo. The project will cover window replacement and lead-based paint abatement, to be performed by entities licensed and/or certified by the State of Missouri. Titan Environmental Services must submit detailed work plans to EPA for approval before the abatement activities begin, and follow-up reports to the Agency when those activities are completed, under terms of the settlement.

According to an administrative consent agreement and final order filed by EPA Region 7 in Kansas City, Kan., Titan Environmental Services’ violations of the Residential Lead-Based Paint Hazard Reduction Act were based on findings from three EPA inspections: a May 2010 recordkeeping inspection at the company’s Kansas City business office, an October 2010 inspection at a lead-based paint training course given by the company at a hotel in Osage Beach, Mo.; and an October 2010 follow-up recordkeeping inspection at the company’s business office.

The Residential Lead-Based Paint Hazard Reduction Act of 1992, which amended the Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA), was designed to address the need to control exposure to lead-based paint hazards. The law directs EPA to regulate the accreditation of training programs offered to renovation professionals, including minimum requirements for training providers, training curriculum, training hours, hands-on training, trainee competency and proficiency, and requirements for training program quality control.

Common renovation activities like sanding, cutting and demolition can produce hazardous lead dust that can be harmful to adults and children.

EPA’s inspections found that, despite being accredited in August 2009 to offer training in the Renovator Initial Course – English, Titan Environmental Services: 

• Failed to properly notify EPA at least seven days in advance of offering training on at least six occasions during 2010.
• Failed to properly notify EPA within 10 days after completions of training on at least 35 occasions during 2010.
• Failed to maintain and make available to EPA necessary documents showing the education, work experience, training requirements or demonstrated experience for the principal instructor of a course offered in April 2010.
• Failed to cover all required portions of hands-on training activities during training courses provided on at least four occasions in April 2010 and October 2010.
• Failed to maintain and make available to EPA the necessary student assessment forms for training courses provided on at least two occasions in April 2010. 

By agreeing to the settlement with EPA, Titan Environmental Services has certified that it is presently in compliance with the applicable federal regulations.

# # #

Food Processing Facility to Pay Nearly $700K in Penalties

News release from EPA Region 9:


FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE: January 31, 2012                                                          

DOJ (202) 514-2007 / TDD (866) 544-5309                 
EPA (415) 947-4270


SOUTH SAN FRANCISCO FOOD PROCESSING FACTORY WILL PAY NEARLY $700,000 IN PENALTIES,
SPEND $6 MILLION TO UPDATE REFRIGERATION SYSTEM SAFETY

Upgrades at South San Francisco Salami Factory Following Hazardous Ammonia Cloud that Left 17 Hospitalized

WASHINGTON – South San Francisco food processor Columbus Manufacturing Inc., a wholly owned subsidiary of Columbus Foods LLC, has agreed to pay a penalty and make significant upgrades to settle Clean Air Act violations, the Department of Justice and the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency announced today.  The case stems from two releases of anhydrous ammonia that occurred in 2009 at its manufacturing facility located in South San Francisco, Calif.  

The releases were the result of Columbus’ failure of its general duty of care to identify hazards and to maintain a safe facility and its failure to comply with regulatory requirements for process safety management under Section 112(r) of the Clean Air Act.

“This settlement appropriately penalizes Columbus for violations of the Clean Air Act that resulted in two illegal releases of poisonous gas that put the community at risk, including one release that caused the hospitalization of people in the affected community,” said Ignacia S. Moreno, Assistant Attorney General of the Environment and Natural Resources Division at the Department of Justice. “Today’s agreement will prevent future violations of the Clean Air Act safety standards by requiring Columbus to upgrade its refrigeration technology and emergency notification system.”  

“Columbus is responsible for letting plumes of poisonous gas escape into the open air,” said Jared Blumenfeld, EPA’s Regional Administrator for the Pacific Southwest.  “Our goal is to safeguard neighbors and workers by requiring critical improvements to the company’s plant to prevent these industrial accidents from happening again.”  

As part of the consent decree announced today, Columbus will pay a penalty of $685,446 and spend approximately $6 million converting its refrigeration system to a safer technology that uses glycol and ammonia.  The company will also improve its alarm and ammonia release notification procedures.   

The first accidental ammonia release, in February 2009, sent 217 pounds of poisonous gases into the atmosphere. Six months later in August 2009, the plant again released an ammonia cloud, this time approximately 200 pounds of anhydrous ammonia was released into the atmosphere.  

The August incident resulted in the evacuation of all facility employees and several neighboring businesses.  Nearly 30 people from the downwind Genentech campus sought medical attention and 17 individuals were hospitalized.  One person remained hospitalized for four days.  In addition, off-ramps from Highway 101 and several local streets were shut down as a result of the release.  

EPA took action following the August 2009 incident, ordering Columbus to complete initial upgrades to its ammonia refrigeration system, including the replacement of safety relief valves and components with any signs of corrosion, and the proper labeling of all its piping.  In 2011, the company paid $850,000 in fines to San Mateo County as a result of the incident.   

Anhydrous ammonia is considered a poisonous gas.  Exposure to its vapors can cause temporary blindness and eye damage, and irritation of the skin, mouth, throat, respiratory tract and mucous membranes.  Prolonged exposure to anhydrous ammonia vapor at high concentrations can lead to serious lung damage and even death.  Anhydrous ammonia is one of the listed extremely hazardous substances to which Section 112(r) of the Clean Air Act applies.

Enforcement of the general duty of care and of the regulatory requirements under Section 112(r)(1) and (7) of the Clean Air Act  is critical to ensuring that industry focuses on the safety of the public and the environment.  

For more information, including a copy of the consent decree lodged in the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of California, please visit:  www.epa.gov/region09/superfund/emerprep.html

# # #

Illinois EPA to Clean Up Tarkowski Property

From the Illinois EPA:

FOR IMMEDIATE RELEASE January 26, 2012 Illinois EPA to Clean Up Tarkowski Property SPRINGFIELD – An Illinois Environmental Protection Agency contractor today is beginning cleanup of a dump site that has plagued the Lake Barrington – Wauconda area for decades. The cleanup is expected to take four to six weeks, weather permitting.   The Agency is working with the Village of Lake Barrington through an intergovernmental agreement to complete cleanup of the 16-acre John Tarkowski property located in unincorporated Lake County. Tarkowski had been illegally receiving waste material on his property since the late 1960s, according to public records.  “The Agency is pleased that we can finish cleanup of this environmental and safety hazard thanks to the efforts of the Village and their representatives in the General Assembly. The neighbors and the community have endured this mess too long,” said Illinois EPA Interim Director John Kim.    This last phase of the cleanup is being funded through a $430,000 state grant supported by Sen. Dan Duffy (Barrington), and Rep. Kent Gaffney (Wauconda). Remaining wastes will be removed and disposed of in a permitted landfill. Any recyclable materials will be separated and recycled to help defray the overall cost of the cleanup.  “The Village of Lake Barrington extends its thanks and appreciation to Governor Quinn, Sen. Dan Duffy, Rep. Kent Gaffney and the Illinois Department of Commerce and Economic Opportunity and the Illinois Environmental Protection Agency for their assistance in securing the funding for the final clean-up of the Tarkowski dumpsite located in the Lakeland Estates neighborhood of Lake Barrington,” said Lake Barrington Village President Kevin Richardson.  “These funds will address a vital environmental objective for the Village and help assure that the ground water in the northern part of our community remains protected.” Acting on results of an investigation, in 2004 the Illinois EPA confirmed through surveillance that Tarkowski was allowing trucks hauling various waste materials to illegally dump waste on his property. A notice of intent to pursue legal action was sent to Tarkowski. Subsequent court hearings resulted in a court order in April 2006 that required John Tarkowski to pay a $150,000 penalty and conduct a systematic cleanup of the property.  Tarkowski ignored the order and continued to allow dumping on the property; in July 2006 the Illinois EPA issued an Order to Seal the site to protect the public and the environment. Tarkowski removed the seal order sign within a few days and removed it again after the Agency replaced it. Illinois EPA worked with the Lake County Sheriff’s Department, and Tarkowski was arrested for violating the seal order. Cost recovery actions are currently pending with the Illinois Attorney General’s office, and environmental liens have been placed on the property. In 2006, the Illinois EPA conducted a partial cleanup which included spraying for mosquitoes to eliminate the risk of West Nile Virus, removing and recycling over 10,000 tires, removing and disposing various liquid waste containers, car batteries and various other special and hazardous wastes. An assortment of scrap metals and other materials were removed and when possible were recycled, which reduced the overall cost. Other costs were covered with funds from the Waste Tire Program. ###