“Housing built before 1978 may contain lead-based paint. Lead from paint, paint chips, and dust can pose health hazards if not managed properly. Lead exposure is especially harmful to young children and pregnant women.”

💡 This is the exact warning statement Evernest failed to provide to tenants, depriving families of critical health information.

“This proceeding pertains to Respondent’s management of target housing located in Georgia, Alabama, Florida, North Carolina, and Tennessee.”

💡 Evernest’s violations spanned five states, indicating systematic corporate policy rather than isolated failures.

“Respondent advised the inspector that the records were not available at Respondent’s Alpharetta location but would be provided after the inspection.”

💡 The company could not produce legally required compliance documentation during EPA inspection, suggesting records were never properly maintained.

“At the time Respondent offered to perform and/or performed the renovations at the Properties, Respondent had not obtained firm certification, as required by 40 C.F.R. §§ 745.81(a)(2)(ii) and 745.89(a)(1).”

💡 Evernest performed work that disturbs lead paint at three properties without obtaining the EPA certification legally required to protect occupants.

“Exposure to lead can cause severe and irreversible developmental and neurological damage, impacting cognitive function, behavior, and physical health.”

💡 This describes the permanent harm children face from the lead hazards Evernest allegedly failed to disclose.

“On April 5, 2023, an inspector with the EPA conducted an inspection at Respondent’s place of business located at 4020 Old Milton Parkway, Suite 200, Alpharetta, Georgia 30005.”

💡 EPA did not inspect Evernest until April 2023, over two years after the earliest documented violations in November 2020.

“For the purpose of this proceeding, as required by 40 C.F.R. § 22.18(b)(2), Respondent: neither admits nor denies the factual allegations set forth in Section IV (Findings of Facts) of this CAFO.”

💡 Evernest paid a penalty but avoided admitting it endangered families, limiting public accountability and future legal consequences.

“Respondent consents to pay a civil penalty, which was calculated in accordance with the Act, in the amount a of EIGHTEEN THOUSAND, FOUR HUNDRED DOLLARS ($18,400).”

💡 Less than $20,000 to settle years of lead safety violations across dozens of families in five states.

“Based on Respondent’s written certification to the EPA that payment of the entire penalty within thirty (30) days of the Effective Date of this CAFO would result in financial hardship, the EPA has agreed that the civil penalty may be paid in six (6) installments.”

💡 A property management company operating across five states convinced EPA it could not immediately pay a modest penalty for serious public health violations.

“The term target housing is defined at 40 C.F.R. § 745.103, to mean any housing constructed prior to 1978, except housing for the elderly or persons with disabilities (unless any child who is less than six years of age resides or is expected to reside in such housing) or any 0-bedroom dwelling.”

💡 All properties where Evernest violated regulations were built before 1978 and likely contained lead paint, making disclosures legally mandatory.

“By failing to disclose known lead hazards, provide lead hazard information pamphlets, or ensure proper certifications for renovations in target housing, Evernest may have inadvertently increased the risk of lead exposure for its lessees.”

💡 EPA explicitly states that Evernest’s failures increased health risks for tenants, particularly vulnerable children and pregnant women.

“At the time of the inspection, and subsequent to the inspection, Respondent was unable to provide records to the inspector documenting that prior to entering into the leases referenced in Paragraph 34, Respondent had: Provided the lessees with an EPA-approved lead hazard information pamphlet.”

💡 Evernest could not demonstrate it had ever performed one of the most basic required safety disclosures for these properties.

“The term renovation includes but is not limited to the following: the removal, modification, or repair of painted surfaces or painted components (e.g., modification of painted doors, surface restoration, window repair, surface preparation activity (such as sanding, scraping, or other such activities that may generate paint dust)).”

💡 These are the exact activities Evernest performed without certification, work that generates lead-contaminated dust in occupied homes.

“In accordance with 40 C.F.R. § 22.18(c), Respondent’s full compliance with this CAFO shall only resolve Respondent’s liability for federal civil penalties for the violations and facts specifically alleged above.”

💡 The settlement resolves only EPA’s penalty claim and requires nothing to address potential harm to families who lived in these properties.

“The EPA also reserves the right to revoke this CAFO and settlement penalty if and to the extent that the EPA finds, after signing this CAFO, that any information provided by Respondent was materially false or inaccurate at the time such information was provided to the EPA.”

💡 EPA can only revisit this settlement if Evernest lied during the investigation, providing no additional accountability for the underlying violations themselves.