Management Deficiencies in Environmental Enforcement: "forceless Enforcement" : Hearing Before the Committee on Governmental Affairs, United States Senate, One Hundred Second Congress, First Session, June 19, 1991 |
Other editions - View all
Common terms and phrases
administrative penalties Administrator for Enforcement Agency Agency's air pollution areas assessed penalties Assistant Administrator Avtex Fibers benefit and gravity benefit of noncompliance calculations civil judicial civil penalty policy Clean Air Act Clean Water Act compliance and enforcement criminal cross-media data integration delegated delegated programs discharge documentation economic benefit component economic benefit penalty economic benefit policies effective efforts enforcement actions enforcement program ensure environmental enforcement environmental laws Environmental Protection EPA Administrator EPA Penalties EPA regions EPA's enforcement facilities federal final penalty fiscal year 1990 guidance hazardous waste HEMBRA IDEA implementation information systems initial issues John Glenn LUDWISZEWSKI million monitoring NPDES Office of Enforcement oversight penalty amounts penalty assessments penalty practices percent permit problems program offices RCRA recommendation Recover Economic Benefits regional offices regulated community require responsible Senator LIEBERMAN significant Stationary Source STROCK Superfund Toxic Substances uniform civil penalty United States Senate violations Virginia
Popular passages
Page 45 - Statement of Richard L. Hembra, Director Environmental Protection Issues Resources, Community, and Economic Development Division Before the Environment, Energy, and Natural Resources Subcommittee Committee on Government Operations House of Representatives GAO/T-RCED-90-**3 i 1W (IS/IT) Mr.
Page 4 - Richard L. Hembra Director Environmental Protection Issues Resources, Community and Economic Development Division US General Accounting Office Washington, DC 20548 Dear Mr.
Page 146 - EPA requires companies to test selected existing chemicals for toxic effects and requires the agency to review most new chemicals before they are manufactured. To prevent unreasonable...
Page 47 - Because penalties should serve as a deterrent to violators and should ensure that regulated entities are treated fairly and consistently, it has been EPA's policy since 1984 that penalties for significant violations of environmental regulations be at least as great as the amount by which a company would benefit by not being in compliance.
Page 146 - Scope and Methodology We focused our review on penalty practices carried out under the Clean Air Act Stationary Source Program, the Clean Water Act National Pollutant Discharge Elimination System and National Pretreatment Program, the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) Hazardous Waste Treatment, Storage, and Disposal Program, and programs under Title I of the Toxic Substances Control Act. We chose these programs because together they accounted for over 80 percent of all penalties EPA collected...
Page 60 - Mr. Chairman, this concludes my prepared remarks. I would be pleased to respond to any questions that you or other members of the Subcommittee may have.
Page 109 - DOE's operations into compliance with environmental laws such as the Clean Air Act and the Clean Water Act. The...
Page 19 - I am concerned about is that, by drafting the bill to amend both the Clean Water Act and the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act, the jurisdictional wrangling by these committees is going to be perpetuated almost ad infinitum.
Page 65 - Environmental Protection Agency: Protecting Human Health and the Environment Through Improved Management (GAO/RCED-88-101, Aug. 16, 1988) relates to EPA07.
Page 190 - Environmental Enforcement: Penalties May Not Recover Economic Benefits Gained by Violators (GAO/RCED-91-166, June 17, 1991) and Environmental Enforcement: Alternative Enforcement Organizations for EPA (GACVRCED-92-107, Apr.