We didn’t intend to turn this into “shellac the Environmental Protection Agency” week, but EPA made this difficult to avoid. This installment is about its apparently light-as-a-feather Performance Track program.

NBC News, for Earth Day, highlighted the woes of Performance Track, a valued designation bestowed by EPA onto companies for self-reporting environmental gains, even if the company still violates environmental regulations.

NBC’s example of Performance Track’s failings was the Androscoggin Mill in Jay, owned by Verso. The mill, when owned by International Paper, was a charter member of Performance Track when the program began in 2000.

Since then, it has had Performance Track benefits: low priority for routine inspections, self-reporting, public recognition, etc. Yet Clean Water Act, Clean Air Act, and hazardous waste violations have all been lodged against the mill during this time.

Even today, the mill remains in violation, because its discharge actually raises the temperature of the Androscoggin River. A mill spokesman said inquiries into the cause and solution for the increase are still being conducted.

NBC didn’t delve into details. We did, and found an eye-opening argument for Performance Track hollowness. Although there’s disagreement about the significance of its violations, the mill does acknowledge its errors.

Such as: Unlicensed crushing/disposal of fluorescent light bulbs containing mercury, and the offering of hazardous waste to a transporter unlicensed to handle it. (As one environmental advocate told us about the transport, “This is how Superfund sites are started.”)

There were also reports of emissions violations, including the burning of fuel oil with an excessive sulfur content, and several town of Jay discharge limit violations, including for a string of five consecutive days in December 2003.

Although Verso has made laudable environmental promises for Performance Track, and the EPA claims the program has resulted in sizable decreases in its members’ carbon footprints, the mill’s cloudy record undercuts the significance of the designation.

And the primary role of Maine’s Department of Environmental Protection in enforcing federal environmental regulations, like the Clean Air Act and Clean Water Act, raises questions about actual EPA involvement at the mill. This makes it clear the EPA provides this status despite an uncontested record of environmental violations, and the essential subcontracting of enforcement and oversight to the state DEP, which has cited the mill for infractions.

A natural conclusion is Performance Track is long on public relations, but short on real environmental results. With more than 500 companies in the program, it appears more than going “green” is its value.

So what could it be? A recent press release from Northrup Grumman, whose East Coast facility was just accepted into Performance Track, gives an inkling:

It states, “EPA officials say this practice can benefit top-performing publicly traded companies, including many Performance Track members, by making them more attractive to investors and increasing their brand recognition.”

A green program, indeed.