PHILADELPHIA -- EPA's Environmental Appeals Board (EAB) has upheld the agency's enforcement action against the owner of Lowest Price gas stations in Maryland, Virginia and the District of Columbia. In cooperation with state and D.C. officials, EPA filed a complaint in September 2002 against station owner Euclid of Virginia Inc. for violating regulations designed to detect and prevent fuel leaks from underground storage tanks (USTs).
In a March 11, 2007, decision, the EAB ruled against every issue raised in an appeal filed by Euclid. The board ordered the company to pay a $3,164,555 penalty [image-nocss] for violations involving 72 USTs at 23 stations. The company had appealed an administrative law judge's November 2006 assessment of a $3.08 million penalty for these violations—the largest penalty ever assessed by an EPA administrative law judge for violations of any federal environmental law.
The board ruled in favor of EPA's cross-appeal against Euclid, increasing this precedent-setting penalty to $3,164,555. The EAB overturned the administrative law judge's rulings against EPA on three counts involving inventory control violations, and imposed the proposed $79,262 penalty for these counts.
The violations involved 14 stations in Maryland (Baltimore, Brentwood, Camp Spring, District Heights, Frederick, Hyattsville, two facilities in Landover Hills, Langley Park, Mitchellville, Palmer Park, Pasadena, Silver Spring, Trappe), two in Virginia (Chantilly and Ruckersville) and seven in D.C.
The EAB ruled that EPA had proven that Euclid failed to maintain required leak detection and control equipment, failed to perform required leak detection activities, failed to comply with corrosion-prevention standards and conduct cathodic protection testing, failed to properly install or maintain equipment to prevent releases of gasoline due to the overfilling of tanks or other spills when tanks are being filled and failed to maintain required financial assurances.
The size of the penalty was due not only to the large number of facilities and USTs involved, but also to Euclid's repeated noncompliance with the same regulations over periods that often lasted for several years. The administrative law judge also cited the breadth of the violations, Euclid's "high degree of "negligence" and its overall record of noncompliance in allowing violations to continue despite numerous warnings from EPA and the Maryland, Virginia and D.C. state environmental agencies as further justification for a substantial penalty. The state and D.C. agencies coordinated with EPA to conduct numerous inspections of Euclid-owned stations, and inspectors from each agency served as witnesses at the trial.
Euclid has the right to appeal the EAB decision to the federal circuit court.Click here to view the board's decision.
Members help make our journalism possible. Become a CSP member today and unlock exclusive benefits, including unlimited access to all of our content. Sign up here.