Every year, the Maine Department of Environmental Protection (Maine DEP), the New Hampshire Department of Environmental Services (NHDES), the Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection (MassDEP), the Vermont Department of Environmental Conservation (VT DEC), and the United States Environmental Protection Agency (US EPA) publicly release details of enforcement actions taken throughout the year. St.Germain reviewed more than 400 cases across the four states where agencies issued more than $6 million in penalties in 2025.
Some notable trends in 2025:
- Hazardous waste fines continue to be issued for “easy gotchas” such as violations of signage requirements and insufficient recordkeeping, though generally these violations are only documented with a penalty when other, more serious violations are also encountered.
- Massachusetts issued several penalties for not notifying MassDEP of spills within two hours, even when the party causing the spill immediately initiated clean-up actions, including hiring emergency spill response contractors. Private homeowners have also been caught up in the state’s enforcement focus here.
- Penalties for stormwater violations were substantial in 2025. Maine alone issued penalties and required supplemental environmental projects totaling more than $500,000 for three stormwater related cases. EPA also issued more than $500,000 in penalties in Massachusetts, Vermont, New Hampshire, and Maine. The violations included both active industrial facilities as well as construction sites operating without stormwater permit coverage or with inadequate stormwater pollution controls.
- Following a fatality caused by an ammonia release at a facility in 2022, the EPA focused on Risk Management Program enforcement, conducting targeted inspections in Region 1, resulting in penalties at six facilities in Massachusetts.
- Late filing of annual reports, such as the Toxics Release Inventory, continues to catch facilities around the region.
Environmental violations can carry substantial consequences beyond the immediate operational and financial impacts. Civil penalties, mandated corrective actions, third-party oversight, and supplemental environmental project costs can quickly escalate total expenditures, particularly when violations involve multiple media, repeat noncompliance, or delayed reporting and response. Enforcement actions can create reputational risk by becoming part of the public record—affecting relationships with regulators, customers, lenders, insurers, and host communities, and increasing scrutiny during permitting, property transactions, and future compliance inspections.
Compliance with environmental, health and safety (EHS) regulations remains essential for businesses and property owners alike. At St.Germain, our senior scientists and professional engineers can help with all your compliance needs, from program development and maintenance to outsourcing or training. If you need assistance with any form of EHS compliance, please contact us at (207) 591-7000.
Details of highlighted enforcement cases from 2025 across the northeastern United States
Note: This list includes cases where penalties and relevant details are available. Not all cases where enforcement action has occurred are readily available, and not all cases where penalties or other enforcement action information is available are included. This list includes cases that were finalized or had penalties issued in 2025 – actual violations may have occurred earlier.
Some civil enforcement actions are settled under consent agreements or other instruments where the violations are alleged by the enforcing agency, and penalties agreed to by both the enforcing agency and the respondent, but the facts of the case are neither admitted to nor denied by the respondent.
Hazardous Waste
Manufacturer, Maine: Alleged violations of multiple hazardous waste management rules, including failure to obtain a license for the treatment of hazardous waste; failure to comply with hazardous waste tank storage standards, including proper tank management, labeling, inspections, and required licensing; failure to maintain an impervious surface for hazardous waste storage; failure to post required signage; failure to provide secondary containment; failure to segregate incompatible hazardous wastes; and other miscellaneous failures related to containerization, labeling, dating, and signage.
US EPA Penalty = $140,000
Metals Facility, Massachusetts: Alleged violations of multiple hazardous waste management rules, including storing hazardous waste beyond 90 days without a permit, failing to label containers, inadequate aisle space, failing to make hazardous waste determinations, maintaining an inadequate contingency plan, training failures, and other violations.
US EPA Penalty = $136,383
Manufacturer, Massachusetts: Alleged violations of multiple hazardous waste management rules, including organic air emission standards for equipment and tanks, hazardous waste tank inspections, contingency plans, closure and labeling of hazardous waste containers, and labeling and accumulation of universal waste.
US EPA Penalty = $122,589
Metals Facility, Maine: During a compliance inspection, multiple violations were found including containers of hazardous waste stored beyond 90 days, improper labeling and signage, inaccessible container areas, broken universal waste lamps, an outdated contingency plan, and failure to properly inspect tanks and sewer lines, among other violations.
Maine DEP Penalty = $49,920
Fabrication Facility, Maine: During a compliance inspection, multiple violations were found including failure to determine if wastes were hazardous, treating and disposing of hazardous waste on-site without a license, improper storage and labelling, failure to use manifests and licensed transporters, missing training, failure to conduct weekly inspections, and failure to secure mutual aid agreements, among other violations.
Maine DEP Penalty = $47,000
Healthcare Facility, Maine: During an inspection, multiple violations were found including missing danger and no-smoking signs at the hazardous waste storage area, failure to conduct weekly inspections, improperly labeled containers, insufficient aisle space, no contingency plan, failure to update mutual aid agreements, and inadequate employee training, among other violations.
Maine DEP Penalty = $22,740
Metals Facility, New Hampshire: During a compliance inspection, multiple violations were observed including failure to maintain wastewater treatment unit inspection logs, failure to maintain required analytical data, improper hazardous waste container storage, inadequate employee training program, failure to conduct weekly inspections, and failure to submit hazardous waste manifests within required timeframes.
NHDES Penalty = $18,550, reduced to $10,202.50 given cooperation and no prior record of violations
Manufacturer, New Hampshire: During a compliance inspection, alleged violations observed included failure to conduct hazardous waste determinations, failure to retain training records for former employee, failure to document attempts to coordinate with emergency responders and hospitals, improper container labeling, missing emergency postings, failure to properly label used oil containers for recycling, and failure to store universal waste lamps in containers, among other violations.
NHDES Penalty = $9,340, reduced to $7,005 after cooperation and gravity reductions.
Other National Hazardous Waste Enforcement Cases of Note: Nationally, hazardous waste enforcement actions in 2025 included significant fines and criminal convictions.
- EPA alleged a hazardous waste transportation and disposal company in Illinois systematically violated hazardous waste tracking and transportation requirements across all ten EPA regions and failed to submit thousands of manifests to EPA’s electronic manifest system, among other violations, leading to a US EPA penalty of $9,500,000.
- A former employee at a manufacturing facility in Virginia pleaded guilty to illegally transporting hazardous waste without a manifest, having removed 31 drums of ignitable hazardous waste from the facility and buried them in a hole near his residence, crushing some drums and causing hazardous waste to spill onto the ground. A citizen tip led EPA investigators to the burial site. The employee was sentenced to a one-year term of probation.
- Two affiliated companies in Oregon pleaded guilty to illegally treating hazardous waste without a permit and knowingly violating the Clean Air Act by venting hazardous air pollutants. The companies were sentenced to pay $1,500,000 in criminal fines and serve five years of probation. The company president was sentenced to 90 days of incarceration followed by one year of supervised release.
Solid Waste
Salvage Yard, Vermont: Property owner operated a salvage yard without a salvage yard permit.
VT DEC Penalty = $12,750
Salvage Yard, Vermont: Property owner operated a salvage yard without a salvage yard permit, stored solid waste without required approvals, and released petroleum products into soils on the property.
VT DEC Penalty = $11,250
Solid Waste Transfer Station, Massachusetts: Site failed to maintain required procedures for management of rodents, leading to a severe rodent infestation and a public nuisance.
MassDEP Penalty = $29,980
Spill Reporting
Trucking Company, Maine: Alleged violation by spilling 1,680 gallons of vegetable oil into a water of the state during an oil transfer.
US EPA Penalty = $49,528
Hydroelectric dam operator, Massachusetts: Spilled approximately 445 gallons of hydraulic fluid into a state waterway.
MassDEP Penalty = $25,062, of which $20,000 payable and $5,062 suspended
Hardware store, Massachusetts: Waited four days before notifying MassDEP of a waste oil release from a ruptured storage tank, and initiating clean remediation without a health and safety plan, site professional, or state approval.
MassDEP Penalty = $21,000
Telecommunications Site, Maine: Spilled more than 1,000 gallons of diesel oil discharging to the ground and into forested wetlands adjacent to the site. Did not immediately undertake spill clean-up to the satisfaction of the state.
Maine DEP Penalty = $20,000.
Convenience store operator & Fuel Supplier, Massachusetts: Following a spill of 30 gallons of gasoline released during a fuel delivery, the store operator and fuel supplier immediately remediated the spill with assistance from the local fire department, but failed to notify MassDEP within two hours.
MassDEP Penalties = $15,625 assessed to store operator and $12,000 to fuel supplier; total of $28,125 with $17,000 payable and $11,125 suspended
Residential property owner, Massachusetts: Homeowner failed to notify MassDEP of a heating oil spill from a leaking tank, and conducted remediation work without MassDEP approval.
MassDEP Penalty = $45,600
Stormwater
Manufacturer, Maine: During an inspection, the facility was found to have recordkeeping failures, incomplete corrective action reports, failure to maintain best management practices, uncontrolled dust, illicit discharges of wastewater, and an improperly sited, unregistered sand-salt pile discharging salt to groundwater.
Maine DEP Penalty = $99,000, plus $141,000 supplemental environmental project payment, for a total financial cost of $240,000, excluding costs of reestablishing compliance
Site Development, Maine: During site construction, sediment-laden water left the site and entered navigable waters. Approximately 30 acres of the site were disturbed at one time with inadequate erosion and sedimentation controls, and soil was discharged to state waters without a license.
Maine DEP Penalty = $235,697, with approximately $722,343 spent on remediation, for a total financial impact of $958,040
Waste and Recycling Processor, Massachusetts: Alleged violations include discharging stormwater without a stormwater permit (MSGP) at seven waste and recycling processing facilities. Inspections confirmed all seven sites were discharging stormwater into waters of the United States.
US EPA Penalty = $170,000
Aggregate supplier, Massachusetts: Failed to implement adequate stormwater controls, resulting in sediment-laden runoff into nearby waterways.
MassDEP Penalty = $65,000, plus unspecified costs to install stormwater management controls and implement restoration measures
Residential Developer, Massachusetts: EPA alleged that stormwater was discharged from a construction site without authorization under the NPDES Construction General Permit for stormwater at a residential development site. Inspections revealed failed silt fences and unstabilized stockpiles and slopes.
US EPA Penalty = $32,550
Chemical Company, Massachusetts: EPA alleged that following a desktop compliance audit the facility was determined to be operating without an NPDES permit for stormwater.
US EPA Penalty = $25,468
Land
Property Owner, Maine: Alleged violations include filled wetlands and other waters of the United States without a permit. The settlement requires 3.2 acres of wetland restoration and installation of erosion controls.
US EPA Penalty = $14,500
Property Owner, Maine: Permanent structures including a road and a kayak rack were constructed within a wetland of special significance without a permit. Vegetation was removed and erosion controls were inadequate.
Maine DEP Penalty = $70,000, with $41,200 suspended upon compliance
Property Owner, Massachusetts: Failed to assess and address soil and groundwater contamination at a former gas station property, ignoring state notices requiring action.
MassDEP Penalty = $62,000
Trucking company, Massachusetts: Commercial trucking company failed to complete required cleanup of an approximately 65-gallon diesel fuel spill. Ignored MassDEP notices for five years regarding obligation to address soil contamination.
MassDEP Penalty = $32,000
Property Owner, Massachusetts: Failed to conduct required cleanup response actions at a contaminated property after purchase. Repeatedly ignored MassDEP notices regarding cleanup obligations.
MassDEP Penalty = $14,000
Country Store Operator, Vermont: Country store owner failed to pay required annual underground storage tank permit fees and Petroleum Cleanup Fund contributions, failed to maintain a certified UST operator, failed to test and report spill containment device results, and failed to properly take an out-of-service UST through required closure procedures. VT DEC Penalty = $9,000.
Air
Food Processing Facility, Massachusetts: Alleged violations include failure to comply with Clean Air Act chemical accident prevention requirements and CERCLA release reporting requirements.
US EPA Penalty = $1,100,000
Food Processing Facility, Massachusetts: Alleged violations include failure to design and maintain a safe facility under the Clean Air Act General Duty Clause. Deficiencies included inadequate piping labels, missing impact protection, emergency valve access issues, and inadequate protective barriers.
US EPA Penalty = $138,506
Power Plant, New Hampshire: Alleged violations include failure to complete stack testing by deadlines and exceedances of NOx emission limits.
NHDES Penalty = $88,373
Hospital, Massachusetts: Excessive VOC emissions over three years, missed fuel usage records, missed boiler efficiency tests, excessive nitrogen oxide emissions from emergency generators, and missed operational logs.
MassDEP Penalty = $31,030 (includes penalties related to hazardous waste violations)
Manufacturer, Vermont: Failed to conduct required emissions testing, failed to perform monthly combustion efficiency testing, failed to maintain a required digital chart recorder and visible emission records, and failed to notify the agency of equipment startups as required by its air pollution control permit.
VT DEC Penalty = $12,000
Aggregate Facility, Vermont: Facility operated an engine beyond the permitted period.
VT DEC Penalty = $11,350
Manufacturer, Maine: Alleged violations of the Clean Air Act Risk Management Program (RMP) regulations, including improper pipe and alarm labeling, damaged insulation, improperly stored transfer hoses, and missing signage.
US EPA Penalty = $10,200
EPCRA
Chemical Distribution Company, Massachusetts: Alleged violations include failing to file Toxic Release Inventory (TRI) reports for two chemicals over multiple calendar years.
US EPA Penalty = $74,159, plus $150,051 supplemental environmental project consisting of donations of emergency equipment to local emergency responders
Chemical Distribution Company, Massachusetts: Alleged violations include late filing of six Toxic Release Inventory (TRI) reports.
US EPA Penalty = $64,327, plus $30,068 supplemental environmental project consisting of donations of emergency equipment to local emergency responders
Medical Facility, Massachusetts: Alleged violations include filing four Toxic Release Inventory (TRI) reports late.
US EPA Penalty = $21,021
This summary was prepared by St.Germain as a service to clients and the environmental compliance community. All penalty amounts and case details are drawn from publicly available agency enforcement records. For more information on how St.Germain can assist with your environmental, health, and safety compliance needs, contact us at (207) 591-7000.