EPA Enforcement Roundup: Week of 3/8
Every day, facilities across the US receive Notices of Violation from US EPA for alleged noncompliance with a wide variety of programs like the Clean Air and Clean Water Acts; chemical management and reporting regulations (TSCA, EPCRA, CERCLA, etc.); hazardous waste management and disposal standards (RCRA); and much more.
Below are examples of recent EPA enforcement actions that provide insight into how and why EPA issues civil penalties to facilities for environmental noncompliance. Names of companies and individuals cited by EPA are withheld to protect their privacy.
WHO: A coal production facility
As a result of inspections at a chemical by-products recovery facility in 2011 and 2014, EPA alleges a coal production facility violated the National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants. Since then, the company has taken steps to address the alleged violations, which includes implementing corrective actions to seal and enclose the open waste streams and leaking equipment.
The Consent Decree requires the facility to pay a civil penalty of $775,000 and to conduct periodic inspections using a leak-detecting infrared thermal imaging camera.
WHO: A semiconductor manufacturer
According to EPA, a manufacturing plant in Maine was storing solvent hazardous wastes in several tanks without a RCRA air emissions compliance program in place. EPA also found that the company did not meet labeling, monitoring, and recordkeeping requirements for the equipment associated with the tanks.
Under the settlement, the company agreed to maintain compliance with federal regulations to reduce hazardous air pollutants and volatile organic compounds (VOCs) emissions. The manufacturer also certified that the facility has corrected its violations and was cooperative during EPA's enforcement investigation and the case settlement negotiations.
WHO: A seafood processing company
A seafood processor in Washington State allegedly violated its wastewater discharge permit by exceeding discharge limits and using improper sampling and reporting practices. EPA brought forth the alleged violations after an inspection in 2017.
Since then, the seafood processor has agreed to pay a penalty and implement new processes and technologies to address compliance challenges at the plant.
Check out the latest EPA compliance training options here:
Complete Environmental Regulations
Clean Air Act Regulations Online
TSCA Regulations Online
Clean Water Act & SDWA Regulations Online
Superfund and Right-to-Know Act Regulations Online
Below are examples of recent EPA enforcement actions that provide insight into how and why EPA issues civil penalties to facilities for environmental noncompliance. Names of companies and individuals cited by EPA are withheld to protect their privacy.
WHO: A coal production facility
WHERE: Birmingham, AL
WHAT: Clean Air Act violations
HOW MUCH: $775,000 plus a Supplemental Environmental Project
As a result of inspections at a chemical by-products recovery facility in 2011 and 2014, EPA alleges a coal production facility violated the National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants. Since then, the company has taken steps to address the alleged violations, which includes implementing corrective actions to seal and enclose the open waste streams and leaking equipment.The Consent Decree requires the facility to pay a civil penalty of $775,000 and to conduct periodic inspections using a leak-detecting infrared thermal imaging camera.
WHO: A semiconductor manufacturer
WHERE: South Portland, ME
WHAT: RCRA violations
HOW MUCH: $104,545
According to EPA, a manufacturing plant in Maine was storing solvent hazardous wastes in several tanks without a RCRA air emissions compliance program in place. EPA also found that the company did not meet labeling, monitoring, and recordkeeping requirements for the equipment associated with the tanks.Under the settlement, the company agreed to maintain compliance with federal regulations to reduce hazardous air pollutants and volatile organic compounds (VOCs) emissions. The manufacturer also certified that the facility has corrected its violations and was cooperative during EPA's enforcement investigation and the case settlement negotiations.
WHO: A seafood processing company
WHERE: South Bend, WA
WHAT: Clean Water Act violations
HOW MUCH: $101,630
A seafood processor in Washington State allegedly violated its wastewater discharge permit by exceeding discharge limits and using improper sampling and reporting practices. EPA brought forth the alleged violations after an inspection in 2017.Since then, the seafood processor has agreed to pay a penalty and implement new processes and technologies to address compliance challenges at the plant.
Convenient, Effective Online EHS Manager Training
Managing site compliance with the many complex EPA programs that affect your business—from the Clean Air and Clean Water Acts to TSCA, EPCRA, CERLCA, and more—is a major challenge. If you’re new to the field or need an update on changing EPA rules, online training is a convenient way to quickly build in-depth expertise.Check out the latest EPA compliance training options here:
Complete Environmental Regulations
Clean Air Act Regulations Online
TSCA Regulations Online
Clean Water Act & SDWA Regulations Online
Superfund and Right-to-Know Act Regulations Online
Tags: Clean Air Act, Clean Water Act, enforcement, environmental, EPA, EPA Enforcement Roundup, fines, hazardous waste, penalties, RCRA
Find a Post
Recent Posts
Compliance Archives
Download Our Latest Whitepaper
Your hazmat paperwork is the first thing a DOT inspector will ask for during an inspection. From hazmat training records to special permits, make sure your hazmat documents are in order.
By submitting your phone number, you agree to receive recurring marketing and training text messages. Consent to receive text messages is not required for any purchases. Text STOP at any time to cancel. Message and data rates may apply. View our Terms & Conditions and Privacy Policy.