Loading...
The data presented in these slides reflect all EPA enforcement actions and compliance monitoring, including Federal Facility Compliance Agreements and inspections. These data do not include state and local enforcement actions or compliance monitoring.
Known data issues related to Annual Results can be found at Identified Limitations with Analyzing and Interpreting Annual Results Data and Charts. In addition, see Known Data Problems for known problems in Enforcement and Compliance History Online (ECHO).
Note: These slides look best when viewed on a widescreen monitor. When viewing on a laptop monitor, to get each slide to show on one screen, you will need to decrease the zoom to 70% or lower.
Loading...
Footnotes:
1. An inspection is performed on-site at a regulated facility or activity; off-site compliance monitoring (OfCM) activities are performed off-site typically at an office. Beginning in FY 2021, the Office of Compliance required all manually reported SDWA UIC activities to be appropriately reported as either inspections or OfCM in ICIS.
2. Prior to FY 2020, OECA used a different methodology to determine which OfCM activities would be reported in Annual Results and did not collect data on all OfCM activities conducted.
Loading...
Footnotes:
1. An inspection is determined to have been performed in an area with potential EJ concerns either based on the EJScreen value or on the results of a more detailed manual review performed.
2. “EJ Not Applicable” are exempt because there is no specific locational impact data (e.g. imports).
3. “EJ Score Not Available” are missing facility information.
Loading...
Footnotes:
1. Initiations include the number of administrative actions and the referrals made to DOJ for civil judicial actions.
2. Total initiations include CERCLA cases.
Loading...
Footnotes:
1. Conclusions include the number of administrative and judicial enforcement actions concluded, as well as CERCLA cases.
Loading...
Footnotes:
1. EPA is reporting results for cases initiated since FY 2014, since we did not routinely collect information on potential EJ concerns prior to FY 2014. EPA relies on EJScreen or on the results of a more detailed manual review performed to determine if a case addressed facilities in an area of potential EJ concern.
2. The green bar indicates the case addressed at least one facility in an area of potential EJ concern. EJ Not Applicable are exempt because there is no specific locational impact data (e.g., imports).
3. The number of conclusions on this bar chart are slightly lower than the total number of conclusions that EPA obtained overall as reflected on the “Total Civil Enforcement Case Conclusions FY 2014 – FY 2023” slide, because cases initiated prior to FY 2014 are excluded.
Loading...
Footnotes:
1. The number of enforcement instruments completed in FY 2023 are higher because of 49 low-value administrative order-on-consents (AOCs) negotiated at one site in Region 4 with a contentious PRP group.
Loading...
Footnotes:
1. Totals include “allowed claims” under bankruptcy settlements.
2. All prior FY dollar figures in the graph are adjusted to reflect the current value in FY 2023 dollars based on the rate of inflation/deflation as determined by the U.S. Department of Labor Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers.
Loading...
Footnotes:
1. Totals include dollars committed for site Investigations, site cleanups and cost recovered from EPA cleanup work.
2. Totals include “allowed claims” under bankruptcy settlements.
3. All prior FY dollar figures in the graph are adjusted to reflect the current value in FY 2023 dollars based on the rate of inflation/deflation as determined by the U.S. Department of Labor Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers.
Loading...
Loading...
Loading...
Footnotes:
1. In FY 2020, the criminal program began using a new criminal case reporting system which also tracks outcomes. The system captured additional home detention - FY 2020 = 4 years; FY 2021= 6 years; FY 2022 = 4 years and FY 2023 = 2.3 years.
Loading...
Footnotes:
1. All prior FY dollar figures in the graph are adjusted to reflect the current value in FY 2023 dollars based on the rate of inflation/deflation as determined by the U.S. Department of Labor Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers.
Loading...
Footnotes:
1. “Injunctive relief” refers to actions mandated by an enforcement action that a regulated entity must perform, or refrain from performing, to bring that entity into compliance with environmental laws.
2. All prior FY dollar figures in the graph are adjusted to reflect the current value in FY 2023 dollars based on the rate of inflation/deflation as determined by the U.S. Department of Labor Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers.
Loading...
Footnotes:
1. EPA is reporting results for cases initiated since FY 2014, since we did not routinely collect information on potential EJ concerns prior to FY 2014, that addressed at least one facility in an area of potential EJ concern. EPA relies on EJScreen or on the results of a more detailed manual review performed to determine if a case addressed facilities in an area of potential EJ concern.
2. For multi-facility cases where only some facilities are in an area of potential EJ concern, the Cost of Complying Actions is adjusted for the percentage of the facilities in an area of potential EJ concern.
3. “Injunctive relief” refers to actions mandated by an enforcement action that a regulated entity must perform, or refrain from performing, to bring that entity into compliance with environmental laws.
4. All prior FY dollar figures in the graph are adjusted to reflect the current value in FY 2023 dollars based on the rate of inflation/deflation as determined by the U.S. Department of Labor Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers.
Loading...
Footnotes:
1. All prior FY dollar figures in the graph are adjusted to reflect the current value in FY 2023 dollars based on the rate of inflation/deflation as determined by the U.S. Department of Labor Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers.
Loading...
Footnotes:
1. EPA is reporting results for cases initiated since FY 2014, since we did not routinely collect information on potential EJ concerns prior to FY 2014, that addressed at least one facility in an area of potential EJ concern. EPA relies on EJScreen or on the results of a more detailed manual review performed to determine if a case addressed facilities in an area of potential EJ concern.
2. For multi-facility cases where only some facilities are in an area of potential EJ concern, the penalty assessed amount is adjusted for the percentage of the facilities in an area of potential EJ concern.
3. All prior FY dollar figures in the graph are adjusted to reflect the current value in FY 2023 dollars based on the rate of inflation/deflation as determined by the U.S. Department of Labor Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers.
Loading...
Footnotes:
1. A single settlement can have multiple SEPs.
2. All prior FY dollar figures in the graph are adjusted to reflect the current value in FY 2023 dollars based on the rate of inflation/deflation as determined by the U.S. Department of Labor Consumer Price Index for All Urban Consumers.
Loading...
Loading...
Footnotes:
1. EPA is reporting results for cases initiated since FY 2014, since we did not routinely collect information on potential EJ concerns prior to FY 2014, that addressed at least one facility in an area of potential EJ concern. EPA relies on EJScreen or on the results of a more detailed manual review performed to determine if a case addressed facilities in an area of potential EJ concern.
2. For multi-facility cases where only some facilities are in an area of potential EJ concern, the pounds reduced amount is adjusted for the percentage of the facilities in an area of potential EJ concern.
Loading...
Footnotes:
1. Starting in FY 2016, EPA combined reductions in hazardous waste and non-hazardous waste into one measure. Totals for FY 2014 – 2015 are for hazardous waste reductions only.
Loading...
Footnotes:
1. Starting in FY 2018, the Agency is reporting contaminated soil and water cleanup from all cases, not just from CERCLA and RCRA Corrective Action cases as in past years.
2. The VCMA is reported the year in which the enforcement action that initially required the cleanup is issued or entered. If a unilateral administrative order (UAO) is followed by a judicial consent decree that requires the same cleanup (i.e., the respondent did not comply with the UAO), the same VCMA is not counted again.
Loading...