“Respondent entered into a contract to lease the target housing unit located at 1032 West Pacific Street in Springfield, Missouri 65803 on or about February 14, 2024. Respondent failed to provide the lessee of 1032 West Pacific Street with an EPA-approved lead hazard information pamphlet or to perform any other lead-based paint disclosure activities before lessee were obligated under contract to lease the target housing unit.”

💡 This shows R.A.L. Property Management completely ignored federal disclosure requirements designed to protect tenants from brain-damaging lead exposure.

“Section 16(a) of TSCA, 42 U.S.C. § 2615(a), authorizes the EPA Administrator to assess a civil penalty of up to $37,500 for each violation of Section 409 of TSCA, 15 U.S.C. § 2689. This maximum penalty amount is limited by Section 1018(b)(5) of the Residential Lead-Based Paint Hazard Reduction Act of 1992, 42 U.S.C. § 4852d(b)(5), which limited penalties assessed for violations of 42 U.S.C. § 4852d(b)(5), assessed under Section 16 of TSCA, 15 U.S.C. § 2615, to not more than $10,000 per violation.”

💡 Federal law allows penalties up to $49,772 adjusted for inflation, yet R.A.L. paid only $16,708.

“Lead is a highly toxic metal that can cause a range of serious health problems, especially in young children whose bodies and brains are still developing. The Residential Lead-Based Paint Hazard Reduction Act of 1992 was passed precisely because Congress recognized the need to control exposure to these hazards.”

💡 This establishes why the disclosure requirement exists and the severe consequences of ignoring it.

“Lead exposure can lead to: Damage to the brain and nervous system, Slowed growth and development, Learning and behavior problems (such as reduced IQ, ADHD), Hearing and speech problems.”

💡 Children exposed to lead face permanent, irreversible brain damage that affects their entire lives.

“The EPA-approved lead hazard information pamphlet is a crucial first step in risk communication, informing residents about how to identify and reduce lead hazards, the importance of testing young children for lead exposure, and where to go for more information.”

💡 By denying tenants this basic information, the company left them unable to protect themselves and their children.

“Respondent agrees that, in settlement of the claims alleged herein, Respondent shall pay a mitigated civil penalty of sixteen thousand seven hundred-eight dollars ($16,708).”

💡 The company paid a reduced penalty despite potentially exposing families to neurotoxic hazards.

“For the purpose of this proceeding, as required by 40 C.F.R. § 22.18(b)(2), Respondent: (a) admits the jurisdictional allegations set forth herein; (b) neither admits nor denies the specific factual allegations stated herein.”

💡 R.A.L. Property Management never had to publicly admit it failed to protect tenants from lead hazards.

“By signing this consent agreement, Respondent waives any rights or defenses that Respondent has or may have for this matter to be resolved in federal court, including but not limited to any right to a jury trial, and waives any right to challenge the lawfulness of the final order accompanying the consent agreement.”

💡 The company avoided public trial and gave up the right to challenge the case in exchange for a quick settlement.

“This CAFO constitutes a ‘prior such violation’ as that term is used in EPA’s Interim Final Consolidated Enforcement Response and Penalty Policy for the Pre-Renovation Education Rule; Renovation, Repair and Painting Rule; and Lead-Based Paint Activities Rule to determine Respondent’s ‘history of prior such violations’ under Section 16(a)(2)(B) of TSCA.”

💡 This violation now counts against the company if they commit future lead disclosure violations.

“Full payment of the penalty proposed in this Consent Agreement shall only resolve Respondent’s liability for federal civil penalties for the violations alleged herein. Complainant reserves the right to take any enforcement action with respect to any other violations of TSCA or any other applicable law.”

💡 The EPA can still pursue R.A.L. Property Management for other violations not covered in this settlement.

“Respondent certifies by the signing of this Consent Agreement that it is presently in compliance with all requirements of TSCA and its implementing regulations.”

💡 The company only certified compliance after being caught and penalized by federal inspectors.

“The penalty specified herein shall represent civil penalties assessed by EPA and shall not be deductible for purposes of Federal, State and local taxes.”

💡 At least the company cannot write off this penalty as a business expense on their taxes.

“Respondent understands that its failure to timely pay any portion of the civil penalty may result in the commencement of a civil action in Federal District Court to recover the full remaining balance, along with penalties and accumulated interest. In such case, interest shall begin to accrue on a civil or stipulated penalty from the date of delinquency until such civil or stipulated penalty and any accrued interest are paid in full.”

💡 The company faces additional financial consequences if they try to avoid paying the penalty.