U.S. Department of Justice Office of Justice Programs Bureau of Justice Statistics Special Report November 1999, 175686 By John Scalia BJS Statistician Numerous Federal laws have been enacted to protect the environment and wildlife. In this report, this collection of environmental laws comprises (1) environmental protection laws that protect the safety and well-being of communities from excessive and unnecessary emission of environmental pollutants and (2) wildlife laws that protect endangered or threatened species as well as migratory birds. As part of the framework of environmental laws and regulations, the EPA has identified more than 700 substances as hazardous to the environment. Other substances -- through not hazardous -- may otherwise be considered environmental pollutants if discharged into the Nation's waterways. The U.S. Departments of the Interior and Commerce have identified more than 1,500 species of wildlife as endangered or threatened. During 1997 Federal prosecutors filed in U.S. district courts 207 civil and 446 criminal enforcement actions for violations of environmental law. ------------------------------------------------ Highlights * During 1997 U.S. attorneys initiated criminal investigations involving violations of environmental law against 952 suspects -- 47% for an environmental protection offense and 53% for a wildlife offense. * More than a quarter of the 952 suspects investigated were identified as organizations. * Overall, U.S. attorneys declined to prosecute about half of those investigated -- 70% of organizations and 46% of individuals. * Because many environmental statutes contain civil penalties, U.S. attorneys can dispose of an environmental matter through civil litigation. Eleven percent of criminal referrals were declined for prosecution in favor of a civil action. Criminal enforcement * During 1997, 446 defendants were charged with a criminal environmental violation -- 47% for the unlawful emission of a hazardous substance or other pollutant and 53% for a wildlife violation. * About a quarter of the individuals convicted were sentenced to a term of imprisonment. The average term imposed was 21.5 months with half sentenced to a year or less. * The courts ordered 64% of those convicted to pay a fine. The average fine imposed was $67,416. Fines for environmental protection offenses ($124,035) were higher on average than for wildlife offenses ($2,710). Civil enforcement * During 1997, 207 cases were filed by the Federal government charging a civil violation of environmental laws. Almost all involved environmental protection violations. * 73% of civil enforcement actions were concluded following a settlement (27%) or a consent agreement (46%). Few (4%) cases went to trial. * As a result of civil litigation, the Federal government was awarded an average of $2.5 million in the 74 cases with a reported monetary award or settlement. -----------------End of highlights------------ About half of defendants charged by U.S. attorneys with an environmental protection offense violated the Clean Water Act; 15% violated the Clean Air Act (table 1). ------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Table 1. Federal environmental enforcement actions initiated, by type of violation and enforcement action, 1997 Type of enforcement action Type of violation Total Administration Civil/a Criminal/b Total 4,129 3,427 207 446 Environmental protection 3,842 3,427 204 211 Clean Air Act 457 391 35 31 Clean Water Act 1,812 1,642 62 108 RCRA 505 423 23 59 CERCLA 391 305 82 4 TSCA 191 185 0 6 Other 486 481 2 3 Wildlife 287 -- 3 235 --Statistics not available. a/Represents filing by U.S. Attorneys in U.S. district court only. Statistics describing administrative actions for wildlife and conservation offenses were not available. b/Criminal actions include only those offenses classified as felonies or Class A misdemeanors. Source: Administrative: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Enforcement and Compliance Assurance Accomplishments Report, Fiscal Year 1997 (July 1998); Civil and Criminal: Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts, court docket data files, fiscal year 1997. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Of the civil cases filed by U.S. attorneys, a third involved a Clean Water Act violation and a fifth, a Clean Air Act violation. Of EPA administrative actions, about 50% involved the Clean Water Act and 11% the Clean Air Act. For wildlife offenses 57% of criminal filings were Lacey Act violations, offenses that apply to trade in exotic plants or animals. The same proportion was charged with migratory bird violations as were charged with endangered species (including eagle) violations. Federal environmental laws provide U.S. attorneys the discretion to initiate criminal or civil enforcement actions. Of the 456 environmental cases declined prosecution, 11% were declined in favor of a civil action. U.S. attorneys often declined to prosecute organizational defendants for criminal violations in favor of civil sanctions. U.S. attorneys initiated 182 civil enforcement actions involving organizations in U.S. district courts. The average monetary penalty imposed or settlement reached following the concluded civil actions was almost $2.5 million. The average criminal fine imposed on organizations was about $308,000. State environmental agencies and private citizens may also enforce Federal environmental protection standards. State environmental agencies initiated 10,515 administrative actions involving environmental protection violations and made 379 judicial referrals. Private citizens filed 642 suits in U.S. district court alleging environmental violations -- 86% of these suits concerned the emission of hazardous substances or other environmental pollutants. Administrative enforcement actions The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) initiates the majority of Federal enforcement actions. Through administrative enforcement actions, the EPA may (1) require that the violator comply with Federal environmental standards, (2) suspend the violator's permit to discharge, and/or (3) assess a penalty for noncompliance. During 1997 the EPA initiated 3,427 administrative enforcement actions. About half of administrative actions involved a violation of the Clean Water Act; 12%, involved RCRA; 11%, the Clean Air Act; and 28%, violations of other statutes. EPA imposed administrative penalties in 1,350 actions concluded during 1997 (***footnote 1: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Enforcement and Compliance Assurance Accomplishments Report, Fiscal Year 1997, July 1998, p. 2.3.***) The total value of administrative penalties assessed was $49.2 million. --------------------------------- Federal environmental and wildlife protection acts Environmental protection acts Clean Air Act -- to prevent the deterioration of air quality. (42 U.S.C. Sec.s 7401-7491) Clear Water Act -- to regulate the sources of water pollution. (33 U.S.C. Sec.s 1251-1376) Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability (CERCLA) -- to address the problem of abandoned hazardous waste sites. (42 U.S.C. Sec.s 9601-9675) Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) -- to protect human health and the environment from dangers associated with waste management. (42 U.S.C. Sec.s 6901-6992) Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) -- to regulate chemical substances in which the public or environment may become exposed. (15 U.S.C. Sec.s 2601-2671) Act to Prevent Pollution by Ships (APPS) -- to address the discharge of harmful substances into the oceans. (33 U.S.C. Sec.s 1901-1950) Emergency Planning and Community Right to Know Act (EPCRA) -- to protect the environment from pollu- tion. (42 U.S.C. Sec.s 11001-11050) Wildlife acts Endangered Species Act (ESA) -- to conserve the various species of fish, wildlife, and plants facing extinc- tion. (16 U.S.C. Sec.s 1531(b)) Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act (BGEPA) -- to provide a program for the conservation of bald and golden eagles. (16 U.S.C. Sec.s 668) Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA) -- to protect migratory birds during their nesting season. (16 U.S.C. Sec.s 707) Lacey Act -- to control the trade in of exotic fish, wildlife, and plants into the United States. (16 U.S.C. Sec.s 3372) Note: For more detailed descriptions, see Appendix A, page 9. ------------------------------------- In addition to administrative penalty orders, two other elements of EPA's enforcement policy are injunctive relief and supplemental environmental projects. Injunctive relief is action required by EPA to eliminate noncompliance, correct environmental damage, and restore the environment to its original condition. In 1997 EPA concluded 3,735 enforcement actions that included injunctive relief (Table2). ----------------------------------------------------------------- Table 2. Administrative enforcement actions initiated by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, by type of violation, 1994-97 Type of violation 1994 1995 1996 1997 Total 3,544 2,969 2,171 3,427 Clean Air Act 435 232 242 391 Clean Water Act 1,841 1,774 998 1,642 RCRA 115 92 238 423 CERCLA 264 280 234 305 FIFRA 249 160 83 181 TSCA 333 187 178 185 EPCRA 307 244 198 300 Data source: Administrative U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Enforcement and Compliance Assurance Accomplishments Report, Fiscal Year 1997, July 1998. -------------------------------------------------------------------- The total estimated value of injunctive relief orders was $1.9 billion.***footnote 2: Enforcement Compliance Assurance, p.2.7.*** Supplemental environmental projects are extra actions taken by a violator to benefit the public or the environment. In 1997 violators in 266 enforcement actions agreed to undertake environmental projects with a total value of $85.4 million.***footnote 3: Enforcement Compliance Assurance, p. 2.8.*** Many Federal environmental protection laws permit delegation of enforcement to States that have environmental laws and regulations at least equivalent to Federal law. In 1997 State environmental agencies initiated 10,515 administrative actions and made 379 referrals to State courts involving environmental protection violations.***footnote 4: Enforcement Compliance Assurance, p. 2.6.*** Investigations by U.S. attorneys During 1997 U.S. attorneys and attorneys from the Environment and Natural Resources Division of the U.S. Department of Justice initiated investigations of 952 individuals and organizations suspected of an environmental offense (table 3). ---------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Table 3. New matters involving violations of Federal environmental law referred to U.S. attorneys for investigation, by type of violation, 1994-97 Type of violation 1994 1995 1996 1997 Total* 936 986 909 952 Environmental protection 455 493 493 445 Act to Prevent Pollution by Ship 3 0 8 0 Clean Air Act 40 56 59 58 Clean Water Act 201 230 261 227 RCRA 160 172 136 143 CERCLA 20 15 12 5 TSCA 14 5 8 7 Other 17 15 9 5 Wildlife 481 493 416 507 Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act 43 44 29 18 Endangered Species Act 49 74 44 63 Lacey Act 241 241 158 251 Migratory Bird Treaty Act 132 113 175 168 Other 16 21 10 7 *Criminal actions include only those offenses classified as felonies or Class A misdemeanors. Data source: Executive Office for U.S. Attorneys, central system data file, annual. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------------- About equal proportions were investigated for environmental protection violations as for wildlife violations. About half the investigations of the environmental protection offenses dealt with a violation of the Clean Water Act, and a third, the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA). About half of wildlife offenses involved a violation of the Lacey Act, and a third, the Migratory Bird Treaty Act. Pursuant to Federal law, organizations can be held liable and prosecuted for the actions of their employees and agents.5 During 1997 U.S. attorneys initiated investigations involving possible violations of Federal environmental law against 260 organizational defendants (not shown in a table). About three-quarters of organizational defendants were investigated for an environmental protection violation. More than half of the 200 organizations investigated were suspected of violating the Clean Water Act; a fourth were suspected of a RCRA violation. Of the 60 organizations investigated for a wildlife offense, half were suspected of violating the Lacey Act and a third the Endangered Species Act. About half of the 871 investigations concluded by U.S. attorneys during 1997 that involved a possible environmental offense were declined for criminal prosecution (not shown in a table). Environmental protection violations were declined prosecution more often -- 61% declined -- than wildlife violations (41%). 5 See 33 U.S.C. $ 1362(5). In matters involving both environmental and wildlife violations, U.S. attorneys declined to prosecute organizations more often than individuals. U.S. attorneys declined to prosecute 70% of organizations investigated for an environmental protection offense and 67% of those investigated for a wildlife offense. By contrast, U.S. attorneys declined to prosecute 55% of individuals investigated for an environmental protection offense and 38% for a wildlife offense. In a quarter of the cases declined for prosecution, the U.S. attorneys concluded that either no Federal offense had been committed (9%) or the suspect lacked culpability (16%) (table 4). ------------------------------------------------------------------- Table 4. Reason for declined criminal prosecution of environmental violations, by U.S. attorneys, 1994-97 Reason for declination Number Percent Total* 1,949 100 % No crime 521 27 % No Federal offense 177 9 No culpability 344 17.7 Referred or handled in other prosecution 320 16.4 % Transferred 12 1 Prosecuted by other authorities 220 11.3 Prosecuted on other charges 88 4.5 Alternative resolution 206 10.6 % Civil or administrative 170 8.7 Pretrial diversion 36 1.8 Case-related reasons 432 22.2 % Stale case 22 1.1 Weak evidence 390 20 Jurisdiction or venue problems 20 1 All other reasons 469 24.1 % Minimal Federal interest 85 4.4 Agency request 107 5.5 Lack of resources 110 5.6 U.S. attorney policy 29 1.5 Suspect-related reasons 46 2.4 Other 92 4.7 *Criminal actions include only those offenses classified as felonies or Class A misdemeanors. Data source: Executive Office for U.S. Attorneys, central system data file, annual. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- The U.S. attorney referred the matter to other authorities in 14% of the cases, transferred the case to another U.S. attorney (11%), or prosecuted the suspect on other charges (3%). In 11% of the cases U.S. attorneys declined criminal prosecution in favor of a civil or administrative action. Criminal enforcement actions Defendants charged Between 1994 and 1997 the number of defendants charged with a criminal environmental offense ranged from a low of 343 during 1994 to a high of 546 during 1995 (table 5). This rise was primarily attributable to defendants charged with environmental protection offenses whose number increased from 127 to more than 200 during 1995-97. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Table 5. Defendants charged with criminal violations of Federal environmental law in U.S. district courts, by type of offense, 1994-97 Defendants charged Type of offense 1994 1995 1996 1997 Total* 343 546 511 446 Environmental protection 127 234 203 211 Act to Prevent Pollution by Ship 0 12 8 2 Clean Air Act 19 36 40 31 Clean Water Act 52 88 97 108 RCRA 31 34 37 59 CERCLA 11 15 4 4 TSCA 6 6 12 6 Other 8 43 5 1 Wildlife 216 312 308 235 Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act 30 25 28 22 Endangered Species Act 30 48 43 25 Lacey Act 101 174 123 134 Migratory Bird Treaty Act 47 58 97 50 Other 8 7 17 4 *Criminal actions include only those offenses classified as felonies or Class A misdemeanors. Data source: Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts, criminal master file, annual. ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- By contrast, the number of defendants charged with a wildlife offense decreased from a high of 312 during 1995 to 235 during 1997. During 1997 about half were charged with an environmental protection offense and about half with a wildlife offense. More than half of the environmental protection offenses involved a violation of the Clean Water Act; 28% a violation associated with waste management (RCRA); 15% a violation of the Clean Air Act; and the remainder, violations of other statutes. More than half of wildlife offenses involved a violation of the Lacey Act; 21% a violation of the Migratory Bird Act (MBTA); 20% a violation of Endangered Species Act or Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act; and the remainder involved other wildlife statutes. Seventeen percent of those charged were identified as organizational defendants (not shown in a table). Most organizations (87%) were charged with an environmental protection violation. Outcome of criminal proceedings Eighty-five percent of defendants charged with a criminal environmental offense and whose cases were concluded during 1997 were convicted (not shown in a table). Most (91%) of those convicted pleaded guilty. The court dismissed charges against 16% of defendants charged with a wildlife offense. Sixty-four percent of defendants convicted of an environmental offense were ordered to pay a fine -- either alone (14%) or with a sentence of imprisonment (9%) or probation (41%) (table 6). -------------------------------------------------------------- Table 6. Fines imposed on defendants convicted of a criminal violation of Federal environmental law in U.S. district courts, by type of offense, 1997 Fines imposed Type of violation Total Mean Median Total* 225 $67,416 $1,000 Environmental protection 120 124,035 2,500 Clean Air Act 20 2,734 243 Clean Water Act 61 183,681 5,000 RCRA 29 123,849 3,000 Other 10 3,335 2,000 Wildlife 105 2,710 1,000 Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act 11 928 500 Endangered Species Act 8 -- -- Lacey Act 66 2,773 1,000 Migratory Bird Treaty Act 18 1,155 625 Other 2 -- -- *Criminal actions include only those offenses classified as felonies or Class A misdemeanors. ---Not calculated, too few cases. Data source: Administrative Office of the U.S. courts, criminal master file, annual. ------------------------------------------------------------------------ The average fine imposed was $67,416; half were ordered to pay a fine of $1,000 or less. About 68% of defendants convicted of an environmental protection offense and 60% of those convicted of a wildlife offense were ordered to pay a fine. Fines imposed for environmental protection offenses were $124,035 on average, compared to $2,700 for wildlife offenses. Ninety-four percent of organizational defendants and 59% of individual defendants were ordered to pay a fine (not shown in a table). Fines imposed on organizations were $308,000 on average, compared to $8,000 for individuals. About a quarter of the individuals convicted of an environmental offense were sentenced to a prison term (table 7). ------------------------------------------------------------------------ Table 7. Prison sentences imposed on defendants convicted of criminal violations of Federal environmental law in U.S. district court, by type of offense, 1997 ----------------------------------------------------------------- Sentence to prison Type of offense Total Mean Median Total* 78 22 mo 12 mo Environmental protection 54 18 mo 12 mo Clean Air Act 8 -- -- Clean Water Act 22 16 12 RCRA 17 27 15 Other 7 -- -- Wildlife 24 30 mo 11 mo Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act 4 -- -- Endangered Species Act 0 -- -- Lacey Act 18 35 12 Migratory Bird Treaty Act 1 -- -- Other 1 -- -- *Criminal actions include only those offenses classified as felonies or Class A misdemeanors. --Not calculated, too few cases. Data source: Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts, criminal master file, annual. ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Those convicted of an environmental protection offense were sentenced to prison almost twice (36%) as often as those convicted of a wildlife offense (19%). Half of each received a sentence of a year or less in prison. However, because the average sentence for Lacey Act offenses was almost 3 years, the average prison term for wildlife offenses (30 months) was greater than for environmental protection offenses (18 months). Sixty-two percent of those convicted -- including 54% of organizations -- were sentenced to a term of probation (not shown in a table). Civil enforcement actions Cases filed During 1997, U.S. attorneys filed 207 cases charging a civil violation of environmental law (table 8). ---------------------------------------------------------------------------- Table 8. Cases filed in U.S. district court charging a civil violation of Federal environmental law, 1994-97 Filed cases charging a civil violation Type of violation 1994 1995 1996 1997 Total 209 207 220 207 Environmental protection 199 200 211 204 Clean Air Act 45 35 56 35 Clean Water Act 80 $74 $72 62 CERCLA 60 66 61 82 RCRA 13 25 21 23 Other 1 -- 1 2 Wildlife 10 7 6 3 National Environmental Policy -- -- 3 -- --Not calculated, too few cases. Data source: Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts, civil master file, annual. -------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Almost all (99%) involved the emission of environmental pollutants: 40% a Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability (CERCLA) violation; 30% a Clean Water Act violation; 17% a Clean Air Act violation; and 12% other statutory provisions. The number of cases involving civil violations of environmental law has remained stable between 1994 and 1997 -- averaging about 210 case filings per year (table 9). --------------------------------------------------------------- Table 9. Disposition of cases concluded in U.S. district court charging a civil violation of Federal environmental law, 1997 Concluded cases charging a civil violation, 1997 Method of disposition Number Percent Total 198 100 % Consent decree 91 46 % Settlement 53 26.8 Dismissal 25 12.6 Summary judgment 8 4 Trial 8 4 Other 13 7 Data source: Administrative Office of the U.S. courts, civil master file, annual. ------------------------------------------------------------ The types of violations charged by U.S. attorneys continue to be primarily Clean Air, Clean Water, and CERCLA violations. Outcome of civil proceedings During 1997, 198 civil enforcement actions were concluded in U.S. district courts. About half these actions followed a consent decree between the U.S. attorney, the defendant(s), and the district court. About 27% of the cases were settled out of court; 13% were dismissed; in 4% a summary judgment was filed; 4% were disposed of following a trial; and 7% were disposed of by other means. A majority of the cases were disposed of in favor of the Government. Of the 115 cases for which a judgment was reported by the courts, the Government prevailed in 77% of the cases; the defendant prevailed in less than 3%; and in 20% both prevailed in part (not shown in a table). In 65% of the 83 cases for which a judgment was not reported, a settlement was reached or a consent decree was entered into while the remainder were dismissed. A monetary award or settlement was reported for 74 cases (table 10). ------------------------------------------------------------------ Table 10. Monetary award/settlement in cases concluded in U.S. district court charging a civil violation of Federal environmental law, 1997 Cases with a monetary award/settlement Type of violation Total Mean Median Total 74 $2,454,447 $287,500 Environmental protection 74 2,454,447 287,500 Clean Air Act 15 520,039 275,000 Clean Water Act 24 2,877,190 98,927 CERCLA 22 1,815,722 440,000 RCRA 12 5402087 279800 Other 1 -- -- Wildlife 0 -- -- --Not calculated, too few cases. Data source: Composite, See Methodology. ------------------------------------------------------------------- The average monetary award was about $2.5 million; the median award was $287,500. Cases involving RCRA violations resulted in the largest monetary awards -- $5.4 million, on average. ---------------------------------------------------------------------- Citizen suits In addition to criminal and civil enforcement actions by the Federal Government, private parties may bring environmental suits in U.S. district courts. Private suits may be brought against violators of the Clean Air Act, the Clean Water Act, CERCLA, and RCRA. (33 U.S.C. Sec. 1365; 42 U.S.C. Sec. 6991e, 7604, 9659, and 11046.) Under RCRA and CERCLA, suits may be brought against owners or operators of treatment, storage, or disposal facilities or contributors to the storage, treatment, transportation, or disposal of any solid or hazardous waste that may present an imminent and substantial danger to health or the environment. The number of private suits involving environmental issues increased from 576 cases in 1994 to 642 cases in 1997 (table). Most (86%) of the private environmental cases brought between 1994 and 1997 involved the emission of hazardous substances or other environmental pollutants. Few involved wildlife. Filing of cases that involved the National Environmental Policy Act began during 1996. Forty-six percent of the environmental protection cases litigated between 1994 and 1997 involved the Clean Water Act; 27% CERCLA; and 23% RCRA. Few cases (4%) involved the Clean Air Act. In about a third of the private suits filed during 1997, the U.S. Government was named as a defendant (not shown in a table). In 44% of the cases with the Federal Government as the defendant, the statutory provision litigated was the National Environmental Policy Act; in 25%, the Clean Water Act. During 1997, 649 private environmental suits were concluded in U.S. district courts. About 33% of the suits concluded were settled out of court; 15% were disposed of by the court following a consent decree between the parties; 17% resulted in a summary judgment; 29% were dismissed; 2% were disposed of following a trial; and 5% were disposed of by other means (not shown in a table). In the 243 cases for which a judgment was reported by the courts, the plaintiff and the defendant prevailed at nearly equal rates: in 38% of the cases the plaintiff prevailed; in 42% the defendant; and in 20% both prevailed (not shown in a table). In the 406 cases for which a judgment was not reported, 52% were settled out of court and 46% were dismissed. Citizen suits filed in U.S. district court charging civil violations of environmental laws, 1994-97 Type of violation 1994 1995 1996 1997 Total 576 584 658 642 Environmental Protection 540 548 536 496 Clean Air Act 19 $21 $16 28 Clean Water Act 223 254 249 242 CERCLA 157 142 132 130 RCRA 133 127 136 94 Other 8 4 3 2 Wildlife 36 $36 $24 27 National Environmental Policy Act -- -- 98 119 --Not calculated, too few cases. Source: Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts, criminal master file, annual. --------------------------------------------------------------------------------- Methodology The source of data for tables presented in this report is the BJS Federal Justice Statistics Program (FJSP) database. The FJSP database is comprised of data provided by the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts, the Executive Office for U.S. Attorneys, the U.S. Sentencing Commission, and the Federal Bureau of Prisons. The unit of analysis in tables describing criminal actions is a suspect or defendant, where applicable. Each defendant in each case is presented. The unit of analysis in tables describing civil actions is the case. Multiple parties may be represented in each civil case. Records of environmental offenses were identified using a set of 102 statutory provisions describing civil and criminal environmental violations. A record was included in the analysis if any of the statutes charged was one of the environmental offenses identified. Excluded from this analysis are -- (1) environmental offenses prosecuted under general statutes such as 18 USC Sec.s 1001 (false statements) and 1341 (mail fraud); and (2) offenses charging Class B and C misdemeanors. Among Class B and C misdemeanors excluded are those offenses involving the unlawful harvesting of timber on government lands and the unlawful hunting of migratory birds. Because these offenses involve lesser penalties, many of the defendants charged with these offenses were adjudicated before a U.S. magistrate and were ordered to pay fines. Limited information describing cases adjudicated by U.S. magistrates is available from the Federal judiciary and the U.S. attorneys. During 1997 U.S. attorneys investigated more than 300 persons for a timber violation and more than 2,000 were charged with a "hunting, fishing, or camping" violation. In its report Judicial Business of the U.S. Courts, the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts reports that 1,120, 1,081, 1,131, and 958 civil cases involving environmental issues were commenced during 1994, 1995, 1996, and 1997, respectively. Of the 4,290 total cases reported by the Administrative Office as environmental matters from 1994 to 1997, 282 (or 6.6%) did not have a statutory citation and were excluded from the analysis. Cases in which the statutory citation recorded did not identify a substantive violation, such as the Clean Water Act, were also excluded. These cases were primarily private suits. The monetary awards or settlements in table 10 were generated using a composite of data provided by the Administrative Office of the U.S. Courts and the Executive Office for U.S. Attorneys. Appendix A: Federal legislation protecting the environment The Clean Air Act was enacted to prevent the deterioration of air quality. (42 U.S.C. Sec.s 7401-7491.) The Clean Air Act vests the EPA with the authority to control the emissions of pollutants from sources that cause or contribute to air pollution or could endanger human health. Substances identified as air pollutants include ozone, lead, sulfur dioxide, carbon monoxide, nitrogen dioxide, and particulate matter. Offenses include violating performance standards, violating emissions standards, releasing hazardous air pollutants in disregard of emission standards, making false statements in required documents, and tampering with required monitoring devices. (42 U.S.C. Sec.s 7413, 7414, 7420, and 7524.) The Clean Water Act was enacted to restore and maintain the integrity of the Nation's waters and to regulate the sources of water pollution. (33 U.S.C. Sec.s 1251-1376.) Pursuant to the Clean Water Act, the discharging of pollutants into the navigable waters of the United States including filling wetlands requires a permit. Offenses include the unpermitted discharge of any pollutant into a waterway, discharging pollutants into a public waste water treatment facility in violation of pretreatment standards, failing to report the discharge of a reportable quantity of a hazardous substance, making false statements in required documents, and tampering with required monitoring devices. (33 U.S.C. Sec.s 1319 and 1321.) The Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) addresses the problem of abandoned hazardous waste sites specifically the clean-up of these waste sites. CERCLA also contains provisions that regulate uncontrolled releases of hazardous substances into the environment. (42 U.S.C. Sec.s 9601-9675.) CERCLA requires the notification of the Federal National Response Center when a there has been a release of a reportable quantity of a hazardous substance. Offenses include failing to notify of the release of a reportable quantity of a hazardous substance, destroying or making false statements on required documents. (42 U.S.C. Sec. 9603.) The Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) was enacted to protect human health and the environment from the dangers associated with waste management and disposal and to encourage the conservation and recovery of natural resources through reuse, recycling, and waste minimization. (42 U.S.C. Sec. 6902.) RCRA requires cradle-to-grave management of hazardous waste by imposing requirements on generators and transporters of hazardous waste as well as storage, treatment, and disposal facilities (42 U.S.C. Sec.s 6901-6987.) Offenses include knowingly transporting hazardous waste to an unpermitted facility, transporting hazardous waste without the required manifest, treating, storing of disposing of hazardous waste without a permit or in violation of a permit, making false statements in required documents, exporting hazardous waste to another country without its consent or in violation of an international agreement. (42 U.S.C. Sec. 6928.) The Toxic Substances Control Act (TSCA) regulates chemical substances to which the public or environment may become exposed. TSCA authorizes the EPA to prohibit the manufacture, processing, or distribution of a substance, prohibit certain uses of a substance, or regulate the disposal of certain substances. (15 U.S.C. Sec.s 2601-2671.) Offenses include failing to place warning labels on products containing certain hazardous substances or mixtures, improper storage or disposal of certain hazardous substances, and failing to maintain proper records regarding the removal, storage, or disposal of certain hazardous substances. (15 U.S.C. Sec.s 2614-2615.) The Act to Prevent Pollution by Ships (APPS) implements the International Convention for the Prevention of Pollution of Ships. (33 U.S.C. Sec.s 1901-1950) The international convention addresses the discharge of oil, noxious liquids, harmful substances carried in packaged form, sewage, and garbage into the oceans. Pursuant to APPS, seagoing ships are prohibited from disposing of plastics anywhere in the oceans, disposing of dunnage and other packing material within 25 miles of nearest land, and disposing of food materials within 12 miles. (33 U.S.C. Sec.s 1907-1908.) Emergency Planning and Community Right to Know Act (EPCRA) was enacted to ensure that emergency response officials are cognizant of hazardous substances in communities (42 U.S.C. Sec.s 11001-11050). EPCRA requires facilities handling hazardous substances to submit a chemical inventory to State and local emergency planning units. In the case of accidental releases, EPCRA requires operators to notify emergency planning units. Failure to notify officials of hazardous substances may result in civil penalties. Failure to notify of a release of involving an "extremely hazardous substance" is a felony offense. Extremely hazardous substances are identified at 40 CFR Part 355. Other laws enacted to protect the environment from pollution include the Rivers and Harbors Act, the Safe Drinking Water Act, the Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act (FIFRA), the Hazardous Materials Transportation Statute, the National Environmental Policy Act and the Marine Protection Research and Sanctuary Act. Appendix B: Federal legislation protecting wildlife The Endangered Species Act implements international agreements designed to conserve, to the extent practicable, the various species of fish, wildlife, and plants facing extinction. The ESA provides a means whereby the ecosystems upon which endangered species and threatened species depend may be conserved and provides a program for the conservation of "endangered" and "threatened" species. (16 U.S.C. Sec. 1531(b).) More than 1,500 species have been identified as endangered or threatened by the departments of the Interior and Commerce. (50 C.F.R. Sec. 17.11-12, 17.95-96.) Endangered species are species that are in danger of extinction throughout all, or a significant part, of their range; threatened species are species that are likely to become endangered in the foreseeable future. (16 U.S.C. Sec. 1532.) Pursuant to the ESA, it is unlawful for any person subject to the jurisdiction of the United States to "take," import, sell, or ship endangered or threatened wildlife. (16 U.S.C. Sec.s 1538 and 1540.) (Taking includes conduct other than killing such as harassing, harming, and pursuing.) The Bald and Golden Eagle Protection Act (BGEPA) addresses the importance of the bald eagle as a symbol of America. (Pub. L. 86-70 Sec. 1, 54 Stat 250 (1940).) Like the Endangered Species Act (which was enacted more than 30 years after the BGEPA), the BGEPA provides a program for the conservation of bald and golden eagles. Pursuant to the BGEPA, it is unlawful to take, possess, or sell any bald or golden eagle or any part, nest or egg, except pursuant to a permit or regulation. (16 U.S.C. Sec. 668.) The Migratory Bird Treaty Act (MBTA) implements a 1916 treaty between the United States and Great Britain (on behalf of Canada) and later to include Mexico, Japan, and Russia that protects migratory birds. (16 U.S.C. Sec. 703.) Pursuant to the MBTA, it is unlawful to take, import, export, sell, or ship any migratory bird without first receiving a permit. (16 U.S.C. Sec. 707.) Migratory bird hunting regulations establish designated hunting seasons and place limits on the number of birds taken. Protected birds include various groups of waterfowl, cranes, rails, shorebirds, and song birds. (50 C.F.R. Sec.s 10.13 and 20.11.) The Lacey Act is used to control the smuggling and trade in illegally taken fish and wildlife. It also regulates the transportation of live wildlife, requiring that animals be transported into the United States under humane and healthful conditions. Enacted in 1900, the Lacey Act prohibits the import, export, transportation, sale, acquisition, receipt, or purchase of wildlife taken, possessed, transported, or sold in violation of U.S., State, tribal, or foreign law. (16 U.S.C. Sec. 3372.) The Bureau of Justice Statistics is the statistical agency of the U.S. Department of Justice. Jan M. Chaiken, Ph.D., is director. BJS Special Reports address a specific topic in depth from one or more data sets that cover many topics. John Scalia wrote this report. Carol DeFrances and Marika Litras of the Bureau of Justice Statistics provided statistical review. Raymond Mushal, Senior Counsel in the DOJ Environ- mental Crimes Unit, and John T. Webb, Assistant Chief of the Wildlife and Marine Resources Section, provided substantive comments. Tom Hester and Tina Dorsey produced and edited the report. Jayne Robinson prepared the report for publication. November 1999, NCJ 175686 Data from the Federal Justice Statistics Programs are by the Bureau of Justice Statistics. Data can be obtained on CD-ROM from he Bureau of Justice Statistics Clearinghouse, 1-800-732-3277 or from the Federal Justice Statistics Resource Center located on the Internet at http://fjsrc.urban.org. The Resource Center, as well as the report and supporting documentation, are also accessible through the BJS web site: http://www.ojp.usdoj.gov/bjs/ ih 11/26/99