EPA Enforcement Roundup: Week of 11/27

Posted on 11/27/2023 by Nick Waldron

US businesses are subject to complex, overlapping environmental regulations related to air emissions, discharges to water, hazardous waste management and disposal, oil spills, chemical management, and more. Failure to comply with all applicable US EPA requirements can result in future liability and civil penalties as high as $100,000+ per day, per violation.

The EPA Enforcement Roundup highlights enforcement actions that offer insight into how and why US EPA and state partners assess penalties for noncompliance for environmental regulations.

All violations or claims discussed below are alleged only unless we say otherwise, and we withhold the names of organizations and individuals to protect their privacy.

Your EPA Enforcement Roundup for this week:

A baking yeast manufacturer settled with EPA over alleged hazardous waste management violations.

US EPA states that it found the Cedar Rapids, Iowa manufacturer failed to comply with Federal RCRA regulations. The Agency alleges that the company stored hazardous waste for longer than 90 days without a permit, failed to properly label containers, failed to inspect storage areas, and  failed to keep at least one hazardous waste container closed.

The company is set to pay $37,705 in penalties and will purchase emergency response equipment for the local fire department and hazmat team as part of the settlement.

A specialty alcohols and ingredients producer will pay a combined $501,890 to resolve alleged Clean Air Act violations.

The company’s production facilities were found by EPA investigators to have violated National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants (NESHAPs) for miscellaneous organic chemical manufacturing.

The first facility allegedly failed to comply with NESHAPs standards at three fiber dryers. In addition, regulators allege, the facility failed to maintain compliant operating parameters at two carbon dioxide scrubbers and failed to control emissions generated at fermentation tanks.

The second facility allegedly failed to demonstrate continuous compliance with temperature setpoints at two of its dryers, failed to maintain records of corrective actions, and failed to report deviations of temperature setpoints. The first facility will pay a penalty of $308,374 and the second facility will pay a penalty of $193,516.

An automotive tool, equipment, and specialty product manufacturer settled with EPA over alleged Clean Water violations.

According to EPA, two of the company’s facilities—that are located near or on a river—had over a million gallons of oil storage capacity and failed to develop a Spill Prevention, Control, and Countermeasure (SPCC) Plan as required under the Clean Water Act.

The SPCC Rule exists to prevent oil from reaching navigable waters and adjoining shorelines, and to contain discharges of oil, and requires regulated facilities to develop and implement SPCC Plans that include a response plan in the event of an oil release.

The manufacturer will pay $258,978 to resolve the allegations.

Catch the Last Complete EPA Regulations Training of the Year! 

Want a clearer idea of how major EPA air, water, and chemical programs all fit together to affect your site's activities? Join in on the next Complete Environmental Regulations Webinar on December 14–15 at

EH&S professionals who attend can identify the regulations that apply to their facility and locate key requirements to achieve compliance with the Clean Air and Clean Water Acts to EPCRA, TSCA, Superfund, and more. Prefer to train at your own pace? Try the interactive online course.

Tags: Clean Air Act, EPA Enforcement Roundup, hazardous waste, NESHAPS, RCRA

Find a Post

Compliance Archives

Lion - Quotes

I was able to present my scenario to the instructor and worked thru the regulations together. In the past, I attended another training firm's classes. Now, I have no intention of leaving Lion!

Diana Joyner

Senior Environmental Engineer

The workshop covered a lot of information without being too overwhelming. Lion is much better, more comprehensive than other training providers.

George Alva

Manufacturing Manager

The instructor took a rather drab set of topics and brought them to life with realistic real-life examples.

Tom Berndt

HSE Coordinator

I was recently offered an opportunity to take my training through another company, but I politely declined. I only attend Lion Technology workshops.

Stephanie Gilliam

Material Production/Logistics Manager

Lion courses are the standard to which all other workshops should strive for!

Brody Saleen

Registered Environmental Health Specialist

Excellent course. Very interactive. Explanations are great whether you get the questions wrong or right.

Gregory Thompson

Environmental, Health & Safety Regional Manager

We have a very busy work schedule and using Lion enables us to take the course at our own time. It makes it easy for me to schedule my employees' training.

Timothy Mertes

Hazmat Shipping Professional

This was the 1st instructor that has made the topic actually enjoyable and easy to follow and understand. Far better than the "other" training providers our company has attended!

Lori Hardy

Process & Resource Administrator

The instructor made the class very enjoyable and catered to the needs of our group.

Sarah Baker


Lion courses always set the bar for content, reference, and practical application. Membership and access to the experts is an added bonus.

John Brown, CSP

Director of Safety & Env Affairs

Download Our Latest Whitepaper

In most cases, injuries that occur at work are work-related and must be recorded to maintain compliance with OSHA regulations. This report shows you the 9 types of injuries you don’t record.

Latest Whitepaper

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.