2010 EPA budget has increased to an all time record level, including $600 million

exclusively for enforcement.

Requirements for Government Agencies

● High Performance and Sustainable Buildings        

● Pollution Prevention and Recycling

● Electronic Stewardship

● Energy Efficiency and Renewable Energy

● Transportation and Fleet Management

EPA Initiatives

●Taking Action on Climate Change

- Current threshold levels are being reduced                   

- New pollutants are being added

- New Greenhouse Gas reporting takes effect and will

  push more companies into Title V requirements

- Improvements to Air Quality

- Reductions in Sox, Nox, Mercury, and other air toxins.

- Stronger Air quality Standards for Ozone

● Assuring the Safety of Chemicals

● Cleaning up our communities

● Protecting America’s Water

● Building Strong State and Tribal Relationships

● Working Toward Environmental Justice

EPA Enforcement Statistics – CY 2009

● “High Impact” Cases

- Repeat or chronic civil noncompliance                                  

- Import–Export cases.

● 387 New Cases (Largest number in 5 years)

● 200 Defendants charged (176 in 2008)

● $96 million in Fines/Restitution (63.5 million FY 2008)

● Average Sentence 76 years (57 years FY 2008)

● EPA Fugitive Website Developed and Utilized

- Used in the apprehension of environmental fugitives

● 2010 EPA budget has increased to an all time record level, including $600   

   million exclusively for enforcement

Enforcement Myth vs. Reality

Myth:

● Only specific industries (chemical/oil) need to be concerned           

   about environmental enforcement

Reality:

● The EPA fined a group of homebuilders $4.3 Million for failing

   to control sediment runoff from building sites

● A Virginia meatpacker was hit with a $12.6 million fine for

   7,000 violations of the Clean Water Act 

● The largest number of fines are given to businesses outside

   the chemical and oil industries

Enforcement Myth vs. Reality

Myth:

● The environmental action is only against major polluters

Reality:

● The EPA fined importers $2 Million for importing chainsaws that didn’t meet Federal Air Standards

● An Arkansas bakery was fined $3.5 million for leaky refrigeration equipment

● A California University was fined $65,000 for record keeping violations involving no pollution release

   at all

● The majority of fines don’t go to large companies

Each story starts the same way…

We didn’t know!

● No identification of the

   risk                                                 

● Not recognizing the impact of a mishap

● Unaware of regulatory requirements

● Unaware of employee or contractor activities

Cost of a “Mishap”

● Fines

          - Only the beginning. That is often the least expensive part of the total cost.

● Where the majority of the cost exists -

  - Remediation

    costs                                                     

  - Litigation costs

  - Loss of company assets

  - Damage to company reputation

  - Cost associated with consent decree

  - Increased insurance costs

What is the cost savings of avoiding a single accident?

Quantifiable Savings Possibilities

● Not just avoiding EPA fines and avoiding accidents

ISO 14001 cost savings on a daily basis include:

● Reduced energy costs

● Reduced waste costs

● Reduced insurance costs in some cases

● Regulatory agency leniency in many cases

● Reduced logistics costs

● Reduced administrative costs

Components of the “Triple Bottom Line”

                 Simply Stated…..

● People

            - Employees, Shareholders, Stakeholders

            - Business Partners

            - Community

● Planet                                                                    

            - Environment/Ecological Impact

            - Cradle-to-Grave Responsibility

● Profit

            - Financial Success harmonized with “People and Planet”

Not just about commerce, but sustained communities.

Key Concepts

● All sectors effected (Business, Public, Private, Government, Education, etc.)

● Increasing Regulatory Compliance and Enforcement

● Companies are stepping up to the challenge

● Environmental costs expand past regulatory fines

● Integration of Common Tools Into Environmental Tracking

● Recognizing the broader perspective of environmental activities within our Businesses

$425 M Federal funds to local cities for energy efficiency projects, April 28, 2010

Vice President Biden Kicks Off New Energy Efficiency Effort

Retrofit Ramp-Up initiative to save $100 million annually in utility bills.

The cities of Austin, Philadelphia, and Seattle are among 25 communities that will receive funding from the $425 million Recovery Act to be used for energy efficiency retrofits for commercial buildings and houses.

Recipients of the DOE’s Retrofit Ramp-Up initiative are communities, governments, private sector companies, and non-profit organizations that will work together on retrofits of neighborhoods and towns--and eventually entire states. These partnerships will support large-scale retrofits and make energy efficiency accessible to hundreds of thousands of homeowners and businesses, according to the DOE. Projects are set to begin in the fall.

The models created through this program are expected to save households and businesses about $100 million annually in utility bills, while leveraging private sector resources, to create what funding recipients estimate at about 30,000 jobs across the country during the next three years.

Vice President Joe Biden announced the award winners on April 21, the eve of the 40th anniversary of Earth Day.

"For 40 years, Earth Day has focused on transforming the way we use energy and reducing our dependence on fossil fuel—but this year, because of the historic clean energy investments in the Recovery Act, we're poised to make greater strides than ever in building a nationwide clean energy economy," said Biden. "This investment in some of the most innovative energy-efficiency projects across the country will not only help homeowners and businesses make cost-cutting retrofit improvements, but also create jobs right here in America."

Overall, Biden said, the program funding was eight times oversubscribed, with more than $3.5 billion in applications received, indicating significant demand for investment in energy-saving and job-creating projects nationwide. The DOE will use data from these pilot programs to develop best-practice guides to comprehensive retrofit programs that can be adopted and implemented by other communities across the country.

The Retrofit Ramp-Up award recipients are:

Austin, Texas: $10 million
Boulder County, Colorado: $25 million
Camden, N.J.: $5 million
Chicago Metropolitan Agency for Planning: $25 million
Greater Cincinnati Energy Alliance, Ohio: $17 million
Greensboro, N.C.: $5 million
Indianapolis: $10 million
Kansas City, Miss.: $20 million
Los Angeles County, Calif.: $30 million
Lowell, Mass.: $5 million
State of Maine: $30 million
State of Maryland: $20 million
State of Michigan: $30 million
State of Missouri: $5 million
Omaha, Neb.: $10 million
State of New Hampshire: $10 million
New York State Research and Development Authority: $40 million
Philadelphia: $25 million
Phoenix: $25 million
Portland, Ore.: $20 million
San Antonio, Texas: $10 million
Seattle: $20 million
Southeast Energy Efficiency Alliance: $20 million
Toledo-Lucas County Port Authority, Ohio: $15 million
Wisconsin Energy Conservation Corporation : $20 million