On November 19, 2012, the Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection (MassDEP) reached a settlement with the town of Hawley and the contractor E.T. & L. Corp. in Stow, Massachusetts.  The town and contractor were accused of removing boulders from the Chickley River, dumping the boulders on the riverbank, and forming a man-made channelization of the river around Hawley. 

All of the actions by the town and contractor caused huge amounts of damage to the ecosystem after Tropical Store Irene.  Their actions violated laws under the Massachusetts Division of Fish and Wildlife (DFW), U.S. Army Corp of Engineers (ACOE), EPA, as well as Trout Unlimited and the Connecticut River Watershed Association. 

After Tropical Storm Irene passed through in August of 2011, MassDEP passed issued emergency certificates to let areas start clearing storm debris, actions that usually require permits under the Wetlands Protection Act (WPA) as well as other laws.  The town of Hawley received emergency approval to start cleaning up to storm debris. 

Beginning on November 15, 2011, MassDEP started receiving numerous complaints about Hawley’s efforts along the Chickley River.  Within two weeks, MassDEP took away the town’s emergency certifications and recommended they start hiring a consultant to plan for restoration. 

MassDEP determined that the town and contractor far exceeded allowable measures in the emergency certifications.  The parties violated the WPA because they moved, dredged, and straightened roughly five miles of the Chickley River.  The river’s condition was also worsened compared to before the storm, and the contractor dumped dredged material in areas protected by the WPA. 

The town and E.T. & L directly violated the DFW’s Natural Hertiage and Endangered Species Program (NHESP) as well.  Parts of the river were protected by the NHESP and Massachusetts Endangered Species Act because a species of dragon fly and the long-nosed sucker fish were protected in these areas of river.  The Chickley River contained cold water that allowed brook trout, brown trout, salmon, slimy sculpin, and long-nose suckers to breed.  NHESP concluded the town’s actions caused significant destruction to the environment. 

The town has agreed to spend $400,000 on a restoration project to the river, and the town of Hawley placed $150,000 in an escrow account to handle maintenance in the future.  E.T. & L. was also required to pay a penalty of $175,000. 

Mary Griffin, the Department of Fish and Game Commissioner, stated: “I am pleased that MassDEP worked with Department of Fish and Game legal staff, our Division of Fisheries and Wildlife and Division of Ecological Restoration to ensure that a robust restoration plan would be the major element of the resolution of this matter.”

Source: Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection

On October 1, 2012, the Environmental Protection Agency announced a proposed cleanup plan for the contaminated section of the Grasse River in Massena, New York.  The EPA is holding several informational meetings and encourages the public to attend and comment.  The meetings are being held in the Akwesasne and Massena at the following locations and times:

The Akwesasne meeting will occur on October 29 between 1-3 p.m. and 7-9 p.m. at the St. Regis Mohawk School Office for the Aging in the multipurpose room.  The building is located on the corner of 385 Church Street and 29 Business Park Road.  

The Massena meeting will occur on October 30 between 1-3 p.m. and 7-9 p.m. at the Massena Town Hall in Board Room #30.  The building is located on 60 Main Street in Massena.  

According to the EPA, the Alcoa West facility in Massena release chemical waste from the 1950’s until the 1970’s.  The chemical waste included PCBs (polychlorinated biphenyls) and other harmful chemicals.  The harmful chemicals created polluted sediment as far downstream as 7 miles.  

In 1995, Alcoa was ordered to dredge nearly 3,000 cubic yards of the contaminated sediment in an area around the facility.  Alcoa then tested several materials to be used as a cap over the sediment.  The tested capping was successful at first, but the caps have been eroded and damaged.  

The new cleanup plan will dredge about 109,000 cubic yards of the contaminated sediment and then backfill the gaps with clean material.  The contaminated soil will then be placed in a secure landfill, and about 59 acres of the sediment will be covered with an armored cap.  The other 225 acres of sediment will be capped with clean sand and gravel.  

If you cannot attend either meeting, you can write your comments to the following address before November 15, 2012:

Young S. Chang, Remedial Project Manager
U.S. Environmental Protection Agency
290 Broadway, 20th Floor
New York, NY 10007-1866

Source: Environmental Protection Agency

On October 1, 2012, the Environmental Protection Agency and the Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection announced that they reached settlement for 4,300 Clean Water Act violations in 15 mobile home parks in PA and 900 Safe Drinking Water Act violations at 30 mobile home parks in the state.

The complaints were filed against Frank Perano who owned, operated, and managed mobile home parks in Pennsylvania, Delaware, and Virginia.  The state and federal government will split the monetary compensation.  

Mr. Perano faced Clean Water Act violations for illegally discharging partially treated or untreated sewage into streams nearby while failing to properly operating or maintaining treatment facilities.  The Safe Drinking Water Act violations stem from Mr. Perano allowing certain pollutants to exceed federal standards and failing to inform residents of the water problems.  

Mr. Perano is also ordered to take the following steps as part of the plea agreement:

•    hire an approved environmental consultant to perform audits at each park on the treatment, collection, and drinking water systems
•    correct the violations in a timely manner with supervision from the EPA and PADEP
•    undergo monthly compliance evaluations
•    work with an environmental consultant to help teach Perano how to decrease his impact to the environment and from repeating similar violations in the past
•    pay penalties for any future violations

According to Shawn M. Garvin, the EPA Regional Administrator, “This settlement protects human health and the environment by requiring the defendants to improve their environmental management systems, and achieve compliance at their numerous mobile home parks.  While reinforcing our commitment to environmental justice for rural communities, the case demonstrates the benefits of federal and state agencies working together to hold chronic violators of environmental regulations accountable for their actions.”  

Source: Environmental Protection Agency

In October 1, 2012, the US Environmental Protection Agency announced that New England residents experienced more smog and poor air quality this year compared to 2011.  According to data from April to September, New England experienced 29 days where ozone monitors recorded air quality above the health standard.  There were only 16 days of bad air quality in 2011.

The EPA specifies that the increased number of days with unhealthy air is directly attributed to the large number of hot days in the 2012 summer.  Large amounts of sunshine and hot temperatures create ozone, but pollution from ozone continues year around.  Ground-level ozone classifies as unhealthy when concentrations are over 0.075 parts per million during an 8-hour period.  

The EPA released the following numbers of unhealthy ozone days for each state in New England:

Connecticut: 27 days in 2012, 14 days in 2011
Massachusetts: 17 days in 2012, 10 days in 2011
Rhode Island: 12 days in 2012, 6 days in 2011
Maine: 4 days in 2012, 3 days in 2011
New Hampshire: 4 days in 2012, 2 days in 2011
Vermont: 0 days in 2012, 1 day in 2011

Even though unhealthy ozone days increased in 2012, the EPA reports that air quality is getting better in the long term.  For example, there were a total of 113 unhealthy days in 1983 compared to 29 days this summer.  Even with increased amount of commuter traffic, the air quality is still getting better.  The EPA reports that cars, motorcycles, trucks, and busses give off the most pollution that creates ozone.  Even though there are more cars, the combination of cleaner fuels, more efficient vehicles, and car pulling initiatives helping the air quality.  

Curt Spalding, a regional administrator for the EPA’s New England regional office, states: “When we look back to the air quality conditions a generation ago, we can feel proud of the advances we have made in reducing air pollution.”

Source: Environmental Protection Agency

On November 20, 2012, the New York Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC) approved $994,878 of urban forestry grants for communities around New York.  The grants were made available by Governor Cuomo’s funding of $134 million to the New York Environmental Protection Fund (EPF). 

The grants will help communities plant more trees, take tree inventories, and develop management plans as well.  A total of 66 cities, villages, towns, and not-for-profit organizations received large and small community grants. 

9 other communities received a $1,000 Quick Start grant to help plan tree planting programs and activities on Arbor Day. 

Large Community Grants totaled $382,299, small community grant totaled $603,589, and “Quick Start” grants totaled $8,990. 

The following recipients receive large community grants:

·  City Parks Foundation

·  City of Rochester, Forestry Division

·  Myrtle Avenue Revitalization Project LDC

·  Trees New York

·  New York Restoration Project

·  CEC Stuyvesant Cove d/b/a Solar one

·  Syracuse Department of Parks, Recreation, and Youth Program

·   County of Onondaga

·   Wave Hill Incorporated

·   Erie County Department of Parks, Recreation, and Forestry

·   Gowanus Canal Conservancy, Inc

·   Friends of Mount Hope Cemetary

The recipients of the rewards were chosen after population density, economic status, and the needs of underserved communities were accounted. 

The following cities, towns, villages, and not-for-profits received small community grants:

·   City of Geneva

·   City of Oswego

·   City of Plattsburgh

·   City of Poughkeepsie

·   City of Rome

·   Town of Cheektowaga

·   Town of Greece

·   Town of Huntington

·   Town of Irondequoit

·   Town of Lancaster

·   Town of Tonawanda

·   Village of Freeport

·   Town of Amherst

·   Nassau County Department of Public Works

·   Village of Webster

·   City of Tonawanda

·   City of Fulton

·   City of Rome, New York

·   Village of Williamsville

·   Village of Penn Yan

·   Village of Bath

·   Parks and Forestry, City of Ithaca

·   Town of Cortlandville

·   Village of Great Neck Plaza, Inc.

·   Town of Clarkson

·   Village of Adams, New York

·   City of Elmira

·   Village of Canton

·   Town of Monroe Conservation Commission

·   Village of Fayetteville

·   Village of Owego

·   Town of Ulster

·   Village of Fairport

·   City of Norwich

·   City of Newburgh, c/o Shade Tree Commission

·   Town of Trenton

·   Village of Hastings-on-Hudson, New York

·   Village of Homer

·   Village of Scottsville

·   The Village of Saugerties Tree Commission

·   Town of Forestport

·   Village of Angola

·   Village of Pelham

·   Village of Brockport

·   Cornell Cooperative Extension of Nassau

DEC Commissioner Joe Martens stated, “Urban forestry programs are vital in promoting clean air, clean water, energy savings, habitat creation and improved quality of life for New York residents.”

Source: New York Department of Environmental Conservation

On November 21, 2012, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) announced that four seafood processing vessels failed to comply with federal Clean Water Act permits.  The processors were all operating in federal waters off of the Alaska coast, and they each violated the Clean Water Act during seafood waste discharges. 

The EPA has reached a recent settlement with the following companies: Aleutian Spray Fisheries, Inc, United States Seafoods, LLC, and Ocean Peace Inc.  The EPA was able to conclude that these companies and their vessels dumped millions of pounds of seafood waste into the Bering Sea, Gulf of Alaska, and the North Pacific Ocean. 

Under the Clean Water Act, seafood processors are required to ground certain types of seafood into certain sizes before discharge into the water to allow for the greatest amount of dispersion.  Under the companies’ specific permit for remote areas of Alaska, the seafood waste had to be ground to a maximum of ½ inch. 

The vessels were processing Pacific cod, Atka mackerel, flathead sole, Pacific Ocean perch, yellowfin sole, and rock sole. 

Aleutian Spray Fisheries, Inc.

The company violated its permits between 2007 and 2011.  The EPA is requiring the company to pay a $120,000 fine after an inspection of the F/V Siberian Sea and F/V US Liberator proved the company was not keeping records of its discharges nor having its seafood waste treatment systems inspected. 

Ocean Peace, Inc.

During an inspection in December of 2010, the EPA concluded the F/T Ocean Peace was not fulfilling the 1/2 inch grind requirement.  The company also failed to take samples of the waste and failed to keep proper records showing the treatment systems were inspected.  The company violated the Clean Water Act permits from 2007 to 2010 and agreed to pay a fine of $98,000. 

United States Seafoods, LLC

The EPA inspected the F/T Ocean Alaska in September of 2011.  During the inspection, the EPA concluded the vessel failed to keep records showing the waste treatment was regularly inspected.  The violations took place between 2007 and 2010, and the company agreed to pay a $98,000 fine. 

Jeff KenKnight, EPA’s National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System Compliance Unit manager in Seattle, stated: “These permits are intended to protect Alaska's marine habitat and species.  Companies processing seafood must all play by the same rules and comply with the permit conditions.  In general, we find that seafood processing vessels are staying in compliance, but when they don’t, it can have negative consequences.”

Source: Environmental Protection Agency

The Department of Agriculture’s Animal and Plant Health Inspection Service (APHIS) recently announced that it took a considerable amount of actions against people who violated animal welfare regulations.  APHIS has attempted to make the violations transparent and has provided copies of court documents, official warnings, and more. 

The following administrative complaints were filed by APHIS in October for violating the Animal Welfare Act (AWA) and Horse Protection Act (HPA):

AWA Docket No. 13-0012; Willa Page

Willa Mae Page was charged with selling dogs at numerous auctions on several occasions without a USDA license—directly violating 9 C.F.R. § 2.1(a)(1).  The USDA has asked her to cease and desist immediately, pay civil penalties, and never again try to obtain a license under the Act again. 

AWA Docket No. 13-0024: David Still; Gloria Still

The respondents were charged with failing to maintain requirements for veterinary care—a direct violation of 9 C.F.R. §2.40.  The shelters for dogs were uncleanly, humid and hot, and cramped.  The dogs did not receive potable water on many occasions, and many APHIS employees were harassed when performing inspections.  The USDA is asking to suspend their licenses and have the respondents cease and desist immediately and pay civil fines. 

A USDA administrative law judge issued decisions and orders in the following case:

APHIS Case No. CA08462; Robert Conyers Customers Brokerage

Robert Conyers was cited for multiple violations in handling nonhuman primates.  He was cited for violating registration requirements, water and food requirements, ventilation requirements, and more during transportation of the primates.  Specifically, he violated 9 C.F.R § 2.25(a), 9 C.F.R § 3.86(c), 9 C.F.R §3.87(c), 9 C.F.R § 3.87(d)(2), and 9 C.F.R § 3.89(c). 

USDA administrative law judges heard multiple other cases, issued multiple decisions, and issued multiple orders in other cases well.  The selections chosen above simply reflect recent cases heard by the USDA. 

The AWA is enforced to make sure minimum requirements and treatment occurs in commercial breeding and selling, research, and transportation for exhibitions.  The Act applies to animals raised for food, and the Act specifically addresses housing, handling, sanitation, nutrition, water, veterinary care, and protection from weather and temperature. 

The HPA prohibits horses with soring to participate in shows, sales, auctions, exhibitions, or similar events.  Soring is abusive technique used to highlight the horse’s foot movement, or gait.  The USDA is allowed to conduct random investigations and enforce the AWA and HPA at any time. 

Source: United States Department of Agriculture

On September 27, 2012, the US Environmental Protection Agency approved a final plan to decontaminate ground water at the White Chemical Corporation Superfund site located in Newark, New Jersey.  The finalized plan comes after a 60 day period that let the public make comments. 

The White Chemical Corporation industrial site is located at 660 Frelinghuysen Avenue in Newark and covers about 4.4 acres.  In the 1930s and onward, parts of the site were used by numerous businesses for multiple industrial activities like the manufacturing of acid chlorides and fire retardants.  From 1983 to 1990, the White Chemical Corporation owned and operated the facility, but after the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection cited the company for several violations, the company abandoned the property. 

The EPA reports that thousands of drums containing hazardous chemicals were left behind.  Many of these drums began to leak and exposed the groundwater to volatile organic compounds which can cause damage to human health and the environment.  The site was added to the Superfund list in 1991.  

After removing the drums and contaminated soil, the EPA formulated a third phase of the cleanup to address the groundwater.  After study, the EPA found that the groundwater could not be pumped out because of certain rock formations under the site. 

The EPA then decided on a process call bioremediation.  The process requires chemicals to be injected into the ground water to then break down the compounds.  After the chemicals are injected into the groundwater, the EPA will collective samples to make sure the process was successful.  Additionally, the EPA is recommending that several monitoring wells be placed on the site to monitor the water in the future.  The groundwater cannot be used as a source of drinking water in the future. 

Source: Environmental Protection Agency