Plastic bags, bottles and condoms remain in one of the Baltimore City treatment plant's oxygenator pools, where the city filters the last of its non-organic solids. The city of Baltimore was responsible for discharging millions of gallons of raw sewage into waters and tributaries of the Chesapeake Bay from 1996-2002. Photograph by Kristian Bjornard/flickr:bjornmeansbear

In the past decade, companies have shelled out millions and, in some cases, billions of dollars for skirting pollution regulations, careless control of hazardous waste and pumping raw sewage into waterways. The standard Environmental Protection Agency settlement requires the company to clean up damage, pay a civil penalty to either the state or the United States government, and to invest in local environmental projects.

In some cases, the company gets off easy — over the past 15 years, the courts have slashed by 90 percent (from $5 billion to $507 million) punitive damages for the 1988 Exxon Valdez oil spill, in which the Exxon Corp. (now ExxonMobil) smeared 1,200 miles of Alaska coastline with crude.

Environmental watchdog Layla Mansuri says even million-dollar penalties are not sufficient to persuade companies to comply with regulations.

"If [companies] operate out of compliance, there might be some financial benefits they receive. You need the penalty to outweigh the financial benefits of operating out of compliance,” says Mansuri, attorney at the Environmental Integrity Project, a nonprofit organization established by former EPA enforcement attorneys

The following list shows the decade’s 10 costliest settlements with the EPA. Whether or how much these companies profited by evading regulation is unknown.

10. Valero Eagle Petroleum Refinery, June 16, 2005
Total: $711 million

At the time of the lawsuit, Valero petroleum refineries were pumping more than 1.5 million barrels of oil per day in the United States, making up 10 percent of the industry, according to the EPA. This settlement, one among many made with U.S. petroleum companies that year, was part of the EPA’s Petroleum Refinery Initiative, meant to reduce emissions and enforce the Clean Air Act at refineries.

Valero agreed to clean up its act in refineries in California, Colorado, Louisiana, Oklahoma, New Jersey and Texas by spending more than $700 million through 2012 to reduce emissions of nitrogen oxide and sulfur dioxide. Valero, the second largest refiner to settle under the EPA’s initiative, also paid a civil penalty of $5.5 million and was required to spend another $5.5 million on environmental projects in those states.

9. Sanitation Dist. 1 of Northern Kentucky, Oct. 7, 2005
Total: $881 million

This sanitation district calls itself an environmental steward on its Web site. But before this Clean Water Act settlement with the EPA, it was pumping more than 1 billion gallons of sewage each year into the Ohio River and its tributaries. The district, which maintains about 1,500 miles of sewer lines, was found to be illegally discharging untreated sewage into the river and ignoring overflows of sewage and storm water.
District No. 1 agreed to improve its system and respond better to overflows at a cost of at least $880 million. The court also required the district to pay a $476,400 civil penalty, to spend an additional $311,000 dealing with local sewage problems, and to spend $325,000 on a state environmental project.

8. City of Baltimore sewer overflow, April 26, 2002
Total: $943.3 million

Baltimore has chronically bad sewage control; this is the first of two appearances for the city on the top 10 list. From 1996 to 2002, the city expelled 100 million gallons of raw sewage into Baltimore waters and Chesapeake Bay tributaries, the EPA estimates. Bacteria, pathogens and other pollutants floated freely, killed marine life and harmed water quality.

Old sewage systems like Baltimore’s tend to be neglected and overflow from too much use. To fix the problems, the city agreed to a $940 million upgrade to its system over 14 years, stop overflows and raw-sewage discharge and improve emergency response. The city also paid a $600,000 civil penalty and was required to design a biological nutrient reduction facility to remove nitrogen from the Patapsco Wastewater Treatment Plant.

7. Diesel Engines, Oct. 28, 1998
Total: $1 billion

In 1998, seven companies found out what it takes to incur the largest civil penalty ever for violating an environmental law. The companies were illegally emitting tons of pollutants into the air using "defeat devices.” The devices disable the emission controls of vehicles during normal driving, but allow engines to pass emissions tests.

The companies — Caterpillar Inc., Cummins Engine Co., Detroit Diesel Corp., Mack Trucks, Inc., Navistar International Transportation Corp., Renault Vehicules Industriels (France), and Volvo Truck Corp. — paid a $38.4 million penalty to settle those charges. The rest of the $1 billion settlement went toward preventing emissions of nitrogen oxide into the air. At the time, the companies made up 95 percent of the U.S. heavy-duty diesel engine market, according to EPA.

6. Baltimore County and Washington Suburban Sanitary Commission, July 26, 2005 — Total: $1 billion

In 2005, Baltimore County and the Washington Suburban Sanitary Commission (WSSC) agreed to $1 billion in sewage improvements to reduce overflows into such famous waterways as the Chesapeake Bay and the Potomac River. Baltimore County itself had been pouring tens of millions of gallons of raw sewage into waterways since 1997, the EPA said. While technically two settlements, they were filed the same day and involve the same water and the same sewage issues.

Baltimore County’s part of the settlement included more than $800 million to investigate and rehabilitate its 3,000 miles of sewer lines and 110 pumping stations; the WSSC paid $200 million to repair and upgrade its 5,000 miles of sewer pipe. The two also agreed to $1.875 million in penalties and $8.9 million in supplemental environmental projects.

5. Ohio Edison Company, W.H. Sammis Power Station, March 18, 2005 — Total: $1.1 billion

Sulfur dioxide and nitrogen oxide emissions cause environmental problems such as acid rain and contribute to respiratory problems and asthma in children. In November 1999, New York, New Jersey and Connecticut sued the Ohio Edison Co. for failing to obtain Clean Air Act permits and for not installing pollution controls during construction at its Sammis Power Station. This settlement, six years later, was the result and was part of a larger EPA effort to force power plants to curb pollution.

Ohio Edison agreed to spend $1.1 billion to reduce sulfur dioxide and nitrogen oxide emissions by 212,500 tons per year. The settlement also required the electric company to fund projects worth $25 million to reduce greenhouse gases and to pay an $8.5 million civil penalty.

4. Virginia Electric and Power Company, April 17, 2003
Total: $1.2 billion

Virginia Electric and Power Co. (VEPCO) was one of seven electric companies sued by the federal government in November 1999 for violating the Clean Air Act. The government charged VEPCO for failing to install controls against the pollution that causes smog, acid rain and soot.

The company agreed to spend $1.2 billion over the next 10 years to reduce its 2000 levels of sulfur dioxide and nitrogen oxide emissions by 16 percent in eight electricity-generating plants in the Virginias. The settlement is one of the largest Clean Air Act settlements against a utility, and came with a $5.3 million civil penalty and environmental projects with a price tag of $13.9 million.

3. Puerto Rico Aqueduct and Sewer Authority, June 22, 2006 — Total: $1.832 billion

The Puerto Rico Aqueduct and Sewer Authority had more than just environmental problems to deal with. Not only did it have to update all 61 of its wastewater treatment plants at a cost of $1.7 billion, it also pleaded guilty to 15 felony counts of violating the Clean Water Act.

The violations include illegally discharging pollutants from nine sanitary wastewater treatment plants and five drinking treatment plants and carry a criminal fine of $9 million. That’s the largest ever paid by a utility for violating the Clean Water Act, according to EPA.

The criminal violation requires $109 million in improvements to nine wastewater treatment systems and $10 million to clear up discharges to the Martin PeZa Creek, along with a five-year probation. The civil settlement carries a $1 million penalty and requires a $ 3 million sewer project.

2. City of Indianapolis, Oct. 5, 2006
Total: $1.8 billion

Indianapolis fell under the list of cities hit with EPA sewage cases with this settlement requiring $1.86 billion in improvements to reduce combined sewer overflows. The plan is spread over 20 years and should reduce overflows from 60 a year to four or fewer.

There had been no reported health effects in the city due to sewage problems at the time of the lawsuit. The settlement is more of a prevention measure to make sure that they don’t occur anytime soon in Indianapolis, according to the EPA. The settlement also comes with a $588,900 civil penalty and a $2 million project to repair septic systems.

1. American Electric Power Service Corp., Oct. 9, 2007
Total: $4.6 billion

The country, eight states, 13 citizen groups and 16 coal-fired power plants at one of the nation’s largest generators of electricity all play a part in the single largest environmental enforcement settlement in history. The charge: American Electric Power Service Corp. made major modifications at 16 of its plants without obtaining permits or installing pollution controls under the Bush Administration’s New Source Review provisions to the Clean Air Act.

But while the $4.6 billion needed to update the plants is the largest sum required by a company for environmental misdeeds, it’s only the beginning. The settlement is the Clean Air Act’s biggest success story, resulting in its largest pollution reduction. AEP will have to reduce pollution from those 16 plants by 813,000 tons annually.

AEP also was required to pay a $15 million civil penalty, the most paid by an electric utility under the New Source Review. And on top of these already astronomical amounts, AEP agreed to spend $60 million on an outside project to reduce greenhouse gas emissions. ?

Amanda Peterka is a senior journalism student at MSU. This is her sixth appearance in EJ. Contact her at peterkaa@msu.edu.