The Environmental Protection Agency announced last month that the University of Massachusetts-Amherst had been found to be in violation of the Clean Air Act.

As of Oct. 16, the EPA had proposed fines against UMass for four violations totaling $272,600.

The fines are negotiable, and the University is currently involved with the EPA to determine whether it should ultimately be paid, according to both the UMass News Office and EPA sources.

According to a press release put out by the EPA, the University “did not have a properly operating vapor recovery and control system at its gas station, thus allowing smog-causing chemicals into the air; did not keep records of gasoline storage tank maintenance, malfunctions and repairs; did not keep adequate records of its degreasing operations; and used automobile paints with excess levels of smog forming solvents.

“These violations resulted in an excess of volatile organic compounds, the main component of smog, being released into the air,” the release stated.

The EPA first introduced newer, tougher environmental codes for colleges and universities in March 1999, the release explained. Since then the “EPA has made an all out effort to help UMass meet its environmental responsibility,” according to a statement included in the press release by Robert W. Varney, Regional Administrator of the EPA’s New England Office.

Since the violations were found, the EPA has stepped up these efforts, according to EPA official Tom Olivier, who has worked closely with the University during the inspection process. Olivier said that the proposed fines are a last resort in this situation. He also said he sympathized with the problems that the UMass administration encounters as it manages a large facility.

“[The violations] are all easy to correct,” he said. “However, it’s a challenge for an institution like UMass, which essentially runs a medium-size town. It’s a challenge for any big organization.”

Location may also play a part in the violations on campus. Olivier said that to the best of his knowledge, no other University of Massachusetts campus was found to be in violation of air codes, but explained that this may be because the other campuses in the UMass system are located in the eastern part of the state.

“Western Massachusetts as a region is regularly at non-attaining levels of air quality,” he said.

The Massachusetts Institute of Technology and Boston University had also been cited for EPA violations, he said, but their violations concerned the storage of hazardous materials in labs. No other college campus in the western part of the state other than UMass had been cited. In fact, he remarked, “the problem at UMass Amherst has been unusual in that it focused on the Clean Air Act.”

Still, Olivier said he was optimistic about the current negotiation process.

“This will be a process to try to come to an agreement on applicable fines and what UMass will need to do to come into compliance and stay in compliance,” he said. “But my sense is that UMass is trying to learn about its environmental responsibilities.”

Representing the University, according to Olivier, are Vice Chancellor Paul Page, In-House Counsel Brian Burke, Environmental Health and Safety head Don Robinson, and a few representatives from the Physical Plant. An unnamed attorney from the Boston area is representing them.

The members of this group, as well as Rules Committee Chair Ernest May, Provost John Cunningham, Vice Chancellor for Student Affairs Javier Cevallos, Interim Chancellor Marcelette Williams, Chair of Environmental Health and Safety Department Salvatore DiNardi, Manager for the Campus Hazardous Waste Department James Fox and Head of University Communications Robert Connolly were unavailable for comment as negotiations got under way. The list of UMass representatives given by Olivier could not be confirmed by University sources.

According to News Office representative Barbara Pitoniak, the University is avoiding making statements about the violations to either the local or regional press as negotiations continue.

“Our response [to the press] [has been] limited,” she said, “but only by the fact that the matter is being taken up by UMass officials and the EPA, and neither party is interested in doing so in the press.”

However, she assured the Collegian that “there will be some sort of resolution at some point, which we will probably announce.”

Olivier mentioned that UMass could defer the fines by participating in “supplemental environmental projects,” in addition to coming into compliance with the basic codes. Olivier said that he didn’t know if UMass would take that option.

On Oct. 31, the University announced that it had been selected for an EPA Pilot Program concerning the disposal of hazardous waste. Though the EPA will fund the program, it remains unclear whether this is the type of supplemental project that Olivier specified.

“[The program] could result in less hazardous waste, greater energy conservation, wider use of environmentally safe materials, and improved management of solid waste, among other potential environmental health benefits. UMass is one of only five New England schools selected for the program,” according to the Oct. 31 press release.

Chancellor Williams was quoted in the release as saying, “This campus has a long history of environmental stewardship. I view this program as another step that is consistent with our mission.”

However, the University seems to have remained reserved about its commitment to the environment. Junior Psychology major Jamie Lavin said that she was shocked to hear of the violations.

“That’s really scary,” she said. “The fact that it’s being hidden from students, that we didn’t know about it is a little unsettling.”

As for Williams’ statement in the UMass press release, Lavin commented, “that is also extremely unsettling and I hope that there’s some truth in what she says. She’s got students to protect. Not just herself.”

Junior English major Clare Chadbourne, who is here for the year on exchange from the University of Leeds in England, said that her view of UMass had changed upon being told of the violations.

“This has an impact on the way I view the University now,” she said. “It’s obviously not prioritizing environmental issues. I thought it was a committed and liberal university that stood up for ethical values, but now I see that it still bows to the pressures of American commercialism. I’d have no hesitation about telling people at home about that.”

Chadbourne said that she hoped that students would speak out about the issue soon. “I hope students take notice and react against this.”