Waste Management, Inc. Criminal Cases
Waste Management, Inc. Antitrust Civil Cases
Waste Management, Inc. Environmental Civil Cases
Waste Management, Inc. Administrative Cases
WASTE MANAGEMENT EMPLOYEE CRIMINAL CONDUCT/NON ANTITRUST ITEM 1 NAME JOHN HORAK PLEA NOT GUILTY CASE u.S.VS HORAK,FOX LAKE ILLINOIS DISPOSITION QONVICTION DATE 01/01/85 SUMMARY In 1985, John Horak~ the General Manager of HOD Disposal, a waste
Managements Inc. 6ubsidiary near Chicago, was indicted for paying
$12,000.00 in bribe money to the mayor of Fox Lake, Illinois and another municipal off
icer in order to obtain a waste hauling contract. At the time of the indictment, Horak
managed the disposal company he had previously sold to waste Management. Mr. Horak was charged with mail fraud and Rico forfeiture chargea, and was
convicted after a jury trial and sentenced to a six-month jail term and a $25,000.00
fine. waste Management fired Mr. norak as a result of this incident. waste Management denied any prior }cnowledge of Mr. Horakes actions. After a
lengthly investigation, neither waste Management, Inc., nor its local subsidiary were ever
charged in this case. ITEM NAME 2 RAYMOND AKERS JR. CASE U.S.Vs AKERS,CHICAGO DISPOSITION
CONVICTION
DATE PLEA ___________
01/01/87 GUILTY
¼UMXARY
In 1987, after a probe of municipal corruption in the Chicago area, the Justice Department arrested Mr. Raymond Akers, a former waste Management employee. Based on his conduct while acting as a lobbyist and marketing representative for waste Management, evidence established Mr. Akers had bribed Chicago Alderman Clifford Kelley to acquire, among other things, an option to buy land for a waste transfer facility
Prior to the trial, Mr. Akers plead guilty and was sentenced in March of 1988 to sixty days of work release, three years probation amd a $150.00 fine.
Waste Management was not charged in the indictment and ~ischarged Mr. Akers, indicating that he never acted to benefit the company.
{ÿ_À_ _
WASTE MANAGEMENT
CRIMINAL CASES
ITEM DATE:
1 01/01/80
VIOLATION:
SHERMAN ANTITRUST CASE
PLEA GUILTY VERDICT
DISPOSITION
$350,000.00 FINE
SUMMARY
The Department of Justice prosecuted Georgia Waste Systems, Inc.,' a Waste Management 5ubsidiary, and Mr. Raymond Dinkle, its former general manager, for violations ot the Sherman Antitrust Act, section 1, in the Atlanta area. specifically, the government alleged that Waste Management, SCA services of Georgia, Inc., and Drowning-Ferris Industries of Georgia, Inc., conspired to fix prices and allocate customers for waste disposal services in the Atlanta area. The government alleged that the activity began in 1974,.and continued through at least
1979
In a jury trial in February, 1983, Georgia Waste Systems, Inc., and Mr. Raymond
Dinkle were found guilty. Georgia waste Systems, Inc., received a fine of
$350.000.0O and Mr. Raymond Dinkle received a one year jail sentence, with all but
45 days suspended.
ITEM DATE:
2 06/30/84
VIOLATION:
SHERMAN ANTITRUST CASE
PLEA GUILTY VERDICT
DISPOSITION
$10,500.00 FINE
sUMMARY
In an indictment filed July 30, 1984, the Department of justice charged David Hoopengardner, general manager of waste Management's Florida subsidiary, United Sanitation Services, of engaging in a conspiracy involving price fixing, bid rigging and market allocation. In April 1986, Mr. Roopengardner was convicted, fined $10,500.00 and sentenced to two years probation.
ITEM DATE: VIOLATION: PLEA
-3 11/08/85 SHERMAN ANTITRUST CASE NOLO CONTENDERE
DISPOSITION
UNKNOWN FINE
¼MMARY
In an indictment filed November 8, 1985, the Department of Justice charged Mr. Lewis Goodman, chief operations officer of United Sanitation Services, a Waste Management subsidiary, of continuing the illegal practices outlined in the noopengardner indictment. specifically, the government charged that between 1971 and 1985, Mr Goodman was involved in price fixing, bid rigging and market allocation.
Mr Goodman was convicted at trial in December, 1986. The conviction was reversed by the Circuit Court of Appeals and remanded for retrial. Mr. Goodman plead nob contendere prior to retrial, received a fine and was sentenced to a short
period of cor~finernent iz~ a Community Treatment Center.
WASTE MANAGEMENT
CRIMINAL CASES
ITEM DATE:
4 01/01/86
VIOLATION:
SHERMAN ANTITRUST CASE
PLEA NOLO CONTENDERE
DISPOSITION
$250,000.00 FINE
SUKMARY
Bestway Disposal, a trash hauling subsidiary in nenriette, New York, acquired by Waste Mana9ement in 1984, was charged in 1986 with engaging in an agreement to allocate otistomers in the late 1970's and through at least 1984. As part of the agreement to allocate customers, Bestway Disposal and four other waste haulers, were alleged to have met and agreed which company would serve certain customers in the Monroe County area of New York, and provided noncompetitive.and rigged bids for industrial refuse removal.
On June 7, 1988, the company plead nob contendere, and was fined $250,000.00. The remaning defendants went to trial and were acquitted. DISPOSITION
ITEM DATE: VIOLATION: PLEA _ __________
5 01/01/87 SRERMAN ANTITRUST CASE NOLO CONTENDERE $1,000,000.00 FINE
SUMMARY
Los Angeles County District Attorney filed a felony complaint against Western Waste Industries, Inc~, Angelus-HudsOn, Inc., and Waste Management of California alleging that they were involved in a five year conspiracy to allocate markets and fix prices. waste Management entered a plea of '9fl0 contest, el similar to a nob contendere plea and agreed to pay the maximum fine of $1 million. Mr Clifford Chamblee, a former manager ot.Waste Management of Gardena, and Mr. Wiley Scott, operations manager for Waste Management of Sun valley were also charged.
ITEM DATE: VIOLATION: PLEA D ISPOSITION
6 09/01/87 SHERMAN ANTITRUST CASE NOLO CONTENOERE $1,000,000.00
SUNKARY
In September, 1987, the Department of Justice tiled felony information against Waste Management, Inc., of Florida, charging the company with engaging in a conspiracy to allocate customers for waste disposal services in Dade and Broward Counties in Southern Florida from as early as February, 1980, until at least November, 1985. The corporate prosecution stemmed from the same facts charged against Mr. Hoopengardner and Mr. Goodman.
As part of a plea bargain, Waste Management waived indictment and agreed to prosecution by felony information. On January 15, 1988, Waste Management plead nob contenders to one count of a Sherman Antitrust Act, Section 1 violation, and received the maximum fine of $1 million.
FINE
WASTE MANAGEMENT
CRIMINAL c).JES
ITEM DATE:
7 10/01/87
VIOLATION:
SHERMAN ANTITRUST CASE
PLEA PLEAD GUILTY
DISPOSITION
si,ooo,0O0.OO FINE
SUTMIRnYOctober, 1987, the Department of Justice filed a one count information,
}34 lle9ing violation of the Sherman Antitrust Act against a Waste Management
Waste Systems, Inc., and Browning-Ferris Industries of Ohio and Michigan, Inc. The information alleged that the companies conspired to allocate customers between 1981 and 1982 and to fix prices in the greater Toledo area by
means of collusive, noncompetitive and rigged bids.
Department of Justice records indicated that on November 23, 1987, Ohio Waste
Systems, Inc., plead guilty to the count charged in the information and received
the maximum fine of $1 million.
ITEM DATE: VIOLATION: ___________
8 12/28/89 SHERMAN ANTITRUST ACT
PLEA
PLEA AGREEMENT
DISPOSITION
$500,000.00 FINE
SUMMARY
On December 28, 1989~ the ~~5.Attorney's Office for the Southern District of California filed a Sherman Antitrust Act, criminal case against Waste Management of California, Inc., d/b/a/ Daily Disposal Service in the San Diego County area.
The complaint alleges a conspiracy to allocate customers and fix prices in San Diego County, Los Angeles County and Orange county. Daily Disposal and the U.S. Government agreed that a fine of $500,000.00 was an appropriate disposition in this case.
ITEM ___________
DATE:
9 12/28/89
VIOLATION
:SHERMAN ANTITRUST CASE
PLEA
PLEAD GUILTY
DISPOSITION
$l,oOO,00O.0O FINE
SUMMARY
On December 28, 1989, the U.S. Attorney's office for the Central District of California, filed a Sherman Antitrust criminal case against Dewey's Disposal Service, a subsidiary of Waste Management. The complaint alleges that the defendents engaged in price fixing and customer allocation in the orange County
area.
pursuant to an agreement with the Government, a plea of guilty was
™¼_ _
WASTE MANAGEMENT
CRIMINAL CASES
ITEM DATE: VIOLATION: PLEA DISPOSITION
10 01/12/90 MISDEMEANOR ODOR L.A. Co NOLO CONTENDERE $2,450.00 PENALTY
SUMMARY
On Jahuary 12, 1990, a case was filed in L.A. Municipal Court alleging three misdemeanor violations regarding odor compaints which occured on May 1 and 2, 1989. The complaint was filed against Valley Reclamation Co, a Waste Management subsidiary. Waste Mana7ernent~p1ead nob contendere and paid a $2,450.00 penalty.
Waste Management indicates that they decided to upgrade the environmental integrity of the Bradley Landfill in Sun Valley. To install a state of the art landfill gas recovery system, some fairly ripe garbage was uncovered. Waste Management felt that the greater environmental results outweighed the brief minor nuisance of the odors. Waste Management also paid $10,000.00 to the University of California, Board of Regents, to be utilized for an asbestos exposure course at
UCLA
~ASTE MANAGEMENT CRIMINAL CASES SUMMARY
TOTAL ITEMS: 10
TOTAL STATES INVOLVED: 5
TOTAL FINES AND PENALTIES: $5,112,950.00
IF
WASTE MANAGEMENT
ANTITRUST CIVIL CASES
ITEM DATE: VIOLATION: PLEA DISPOSITION
1 07/03/80 ANTITRUST CIVIL CASE SETTLED $750,000.00
SUMMARY
A private individual, Mr. Frank filed a civil case against Chemical Waste Management on July 3, 1980, in the State of Illinois. Mr. Frank alleged that waste Management took his customers by fixing prices and underbidding. The case was settled in March of 1986 with Waste Management paying $750,000.00 to the plaintiff and the plaintiff retaining portions of waste ~~~~gemefltis hauling business.
ITEM DATE: VIOLATION: PLEA D ISPOSITION
2 03/31/82 ANTITRUST CIVIL CASE NONE DISMISSED
SUMMARY
On March 31, 1982, a private individual by the flame of Margaret savage filed a civil antitrust suit complaint against Waste Management of South Carolina, alleging a invalid exclusive franchise. The complaint was dismissed on December 19, 1985, with prejudice, in favor of Waste Management of South Carolina.
ITEM DATE: VIOLATION: PLEA D ISPOSITION
3 01/01/83 ANTITRUST CIVIL CASE SETTLED $525,000.00
SUMMARY
In the State of Georgia, Metro Development Corp, filed a class action law suit against B.F.I. et al., which was settled in 1985. The settlement required a payment of $525,000.00 into a settlement fund. This case was listed in the Seattle report.
ITEM DATE: VIOLATION: PLEA D ISPOSITION
4 12/20/83 ANTITRUST CIVIL CASE SETTLED $85,000.00
SUMMARY
In the State 0£ Pennsylvania, Applied Technology, Inc., filed a civil antitrust suit against Chemical Waste Management, et al., on December 20,1983. The law suit alleged that Chemical Waste Management was attempting tb monopolize the hazardous waste hauling business in the Northeast. The civil suit was settled in March of 1987 for $85,000.00.
ÿÿÿUÀ_ _
WASTE MANAGEMENT
ANTITRUST CIVIL CASES
ITEM DATE:
5 10/18/84
VIOLATION
:ANTITRUST CIVIL CASE
PLEA
DISPOSITIONPENDING PENDING
$~RY
In the State of New Jersey, the State filed a civil antitrust law suit on October~ 18, 1984, against Arace Brothers, et al. The civil suit alleges that Arace
Brothers were involved in customer allocations and price fixing. The case is pending and settlement is expected.
ITEM DATE:
VIOLATION: PLEA DISPOSITIONNONE DISMISSED
6 11/27/85 ANTITRUST CIVIL CASE
SUMMARY
In the State of Florida, a private individual by the name of nenetield, filed antitrust civil case against Waste Management, Inc. of Florida, et al. The plaintiff alledged that Waste Management and the County were involved in a conspiracy to prevent him from developing a landfill. The case was dismissed on its merits in favor of Waste Management on October 30, 1986.
ITEM DATE: VIOLATION: PLEA D ISPOSITION
7 02/28/86 ANTITRUST CIVIL CASE NONE SETTLED
a
SUMMARY
In the State of California, Vinci Enterprises, Inc, filed a civil antitrust suit
against Oakland Scavenger, a Waste Management subsidiary, on February 28, 1986.
The plaintiff alleged that Oakland scavenger was attempting to monopolize the local
trash hauling business. The suit was dismissed after settlement on March 29,
1989
ITEM DATE:
VIOLATION: PLEA DISPOSITION8 03/17/86 ANTITRUST CIVIL CASE SETTLED $1,200,000.00
SUMMARY
In the State of Florida, carefree David Travel Co, filed a class action antitrust civil case on March 17, 1986, against IWS, Waste Management of Florida, et al. The case was settled for $1,200,000.00 in 19.88.
_¿_ _
WASTE MANAGEMENT
ANTITRUST CIVIL CASES
ITEM DATE: VIOLATION: PLEA < FONT FACE="Courier New" SIZE=2>DISPOSITION
9 05/15/86 ANTITRUST CIVIL CASE SETTLED $51,000.00
SUMMARY
On May' 15, 1966, in Sonoma County California, Industrial Carting filed a civil antitrust case against Empire Disposal, a Waste Management subsidiary. Industrial Carting alleged that Empire Disposal was involved in below cost bidding. The case was settled on November 2, 1987, for $51,000.00 without admission of any liability on the part of Waste Management.
ITEM DATE: VIOLATION: PLEA D ISPOSITION
10 05/22/86 ANTITRUST CIVIL CASE SETTLED $350,000.00
SUMMARY
On May 22, 1986, the Attorney General for the State of Ohio, filed a civil antitrust case against Waste Management of North America, and ~rowning-Ferris Industries, et al. This case was filed prior to any Federal antitrust action. This case was settled for $350,000.00 in damages and attorney's fees.
ITEM
PLEA DISPOSITION
DATE: VIOLATION:
NONE DISMISSED
11 07/22/86 ANTITRUST CIVIL CASE
SUMMARY
On July 7, 1986, a private individual by the name of Robert O'Conner, filed a civil antitrust case against Oakland Scavenger, a Waste Management subsidiary. He alleged in his complaint that Oakland Scavenger used exclusive franchise to improperly obtain a monopoly over recycleable materials. The case was dismissed on June 17, 1989, on the merits in favor of Waste Management.
ITEM DATE: VIOLATION: PLEA DISPOSITION
12 09/17/86 ANTITRUST CIVIL CASE SETTLED $1,000.00
SUMMARY
on September 17, 1986, in the State of Louisiana, C.C. Sanitation filed a civil antitrust case against Waste Management, Inc., et al. C.C. Sanitation alleged that Waste Management attempted to monopolize the portable sanitation market. The case was settled on January 20, 1989, for a '1nuisance value" of
$1000.00 and dismissed.
a¿_ _
ITEM
WASTE MANAGEMENT
ANTITRUST CIVIL CASES
DATE: VIOLATION: PLEA DISPOSITION
13 01/08/87 ANTITRUST CIVIL CASE PENDING PENDING
SUMMARY
on January 8, 1987, in the State of New York, Scrantomes Book and 5tatjonary Company, filed an antitrust civil case against Bestway Disposal Corp., a Waste Management~subsidiary. The case is still pending.
ITEM DATE: VIOLATION: P~ ~A DISPOSITION
14 03/18/87 ANTITRUST CIVIL CASE ;L£i'LED $130,000.00
SUMMARY
On March 18, 1987, in the State of Florida, the Attorney General filed a
antitrust civil case against Waste Management, Inc,, of Florida. The Attorney
General alleged that Waste Management violated the Sherman Antitrust Act, section
1. The~case was settled in January, 1988, with Waste Management paying a tine of
$130, 000,00.
ITEM DATE: VIOLATION: PLEA D ISPOSITION
15 03/18/87 ANTITRUST CIVIL CASE SETTLED $595,000.00
SUMMARY
In the State of Florida, the Attorney General filed a antitrust civil case against Waste Management, Inc., of Florida, alleging a violation of the Sherman Antitrust Act, Section 1.
This case was also settled in January, 1988, for $595,000.00 in damages and attorneyss fees.
ITEM DATE: VIOLATION: PLEA DISPOSITION
16 06/12/87 ANTITRUST CIVIL CASE PENDING PENDING
SUMMARY
On June 12, 1987, in the State of California, Marina Two filed a State court class action against Waste Management of California, alleging violations of the statecs antitrust laws. The case is pending at this time.
§Á_ _
WASTE MANAGEMENT
ANTITRUST CIVIL CASES
ITEM DATE: VIOLATION: PLEA
17 06/18/87 ANTITRUST CIVIL CASE SETTLED $19,500,000.00
SUMMARY
On June 18, 1987, in the State of pennsylvania, a private company called Cumberland Farms, filed a class action antitrust law suit against Waste Mana9ernent, Inc., and~Browning-Ferris Industries, et al., alleging a nation wide price fixinq conspiracy. On October 30, 1990, the suit was settled with Waste Management paying $19.5 million and Browning-Ferris also paying $30.5 million toward a fund.
ITEM DATE: VIOLATION: PLEA D ISPOSITION
18 06/23/87 ANTITRUST CIVIL CASE PENDING PENDING
SUMMARY
On June 23, 1987, in the State of California, Airport Century Inn, Ltd., filed a class action law suit in federal court against Waste Management. The suit alleges violations of both state and federal antitrust laws. The suit is still pending.
ITEM
DATE: VIOLATION: PLEA DISPOSITION
19 07/01/87 ANTITRUST CIVIL CASE PENDING PENDING
SUMMARY
On July 1, 1987, the L.A. District Attorney filed a civil penalty/injunctive action against Waste Management of California, Inc. This case follows the criminal case and alleges price fixing and custQmer allocation. The suit is still pending.
ITEM DATE: VIOLATION: PLEA DISPOSITION
20 04/14/88 ANTITRUST CIVIL CASE PENDING PENDING
SUMMARY
On April 14, 1988, in the State of Missouri, a private individual by the name of Cone, tiled a antitrust civil case against Waste Management of Missouri, Inc. She is alleging wrongful termination for "Whistle blowing" on company price fixing activities. The case is pending.
ÿÿEÀ_ _
WASTE MANAGEMENT
ANTITRUST CIVIL CASES
ITEM DATE: VIOLATION: PLEA DISPOSITION
21 06/29/88 ANTITRUST CIVIL CASE PENDING PENDING
SUMMARY
On June 29, 1988, in the State of Colorado, a private company by the name of Crabtree, filed a civil antitrust case against the State of Colorado. The plaintitf~alleges a conspiracy to violate Minority Business Enterprises preference laws. There are parallel cases pending in both State and Federal courts on this issue. This case was listed in the Seattle report.
ITEM DATE: VIOLATION: PLEA D ISPOSITION
22 07/05/88 ANTITRUST CIVIL CASE PENDING PENDING
SUMMARY
On July 5, 1988, in the State of Texas, a private company by the name of
Johnson~s Disposal, filed a antitrust civil case against Browning-Ferris
Industries, et al. The plaintiff alleges violations of both Section 1 and Section
2 of the Sherman Antitrust Act. This case is identified in the Seattle report.
ITEM DATE: VIOLATION: PLEA D ISPOSITION
23 03/17/89 ANTITRUST CIVIL CASE PENDING. PENDING
SUMMARY
On March 17, 1989, in the State of Ohio, a private individual by the name of Veager, filed a antitrust civil case against Waste Management, Inc. The plaintiff alleges violations of the Sherman Antitrust Act, Section 1. The case is pending
WASTE MANAGEMENT ANTITRUST CIVIL CASE SUMMARY
TOTAL ITEMS: 23
TOTAL STATES INVOLVED: 23
TOTAL FINES, PENALTIES AND SETTLEMENT COST: $23,187,000.00
WASTE MANAGEMENT
ENVIRONMENTAL CIVIL CASES
ITEM DATE: VIOLATION: PLEA DISPOSITION
1 08/08/74 OPERATIONAL VIOLATION NONE $48,000.00 PENALTY
SUMMARY
Case 'tiled by State of Wisconsin, against United Waste Systems, Inc., alleging a failure to comply with DNR Order 2A-73-719 in that united Waste Systems did not install a~groundwater monitoring system or leachate removal system,.did not submit full site engineering plans or, in alternative, did not close landfill by dates specified in order.
Case closed on May 10,1985 via an Administrative Consent Order, entered into
between Wisconsin Department of Natural Resources and Waste Management of Wisconsin,
Inc.1 requiring implementation of groundwater and leachate monitoring programs. May
16, 1985, Stipulation and Order for Dismissal upon terms whereby WMWI agreed to pay
$6260 civil penalty and $41,740 forfeitura.
PLEA DISPOSITION
ITEM flATE: VIOLATION: $35,00 0.00 PENALTY
CONSENT DECREE
2 08/10/83 RCRA VIOLATIONS
SUMMARY
SCA Chemical Services, Inc., CWM chemical Services, Model City, New York. EPA alleged numerous hazardous waste violations including leaking containers, open containers, storage and handling violations.
PLEA DISPOSITION
ITEM DATE: VIOLATION: $2,500, 000.00 PENALTY
CONSENT DECREE
3 09/30/83 RCRA AND TSCA VIOLATIONS
SUMMARY
Waste Management Inc., Ohio Liquid Disposal, Vickery Division Vickery, Ohio. EPA alleged numerous TSCA and RCRA violations, especially dilution of PCB'S in large lagoons, in addition to storage, labelling and disposal requirements violations. A complaint seeking $6.8 million was filed. Case settled in April, 1985 with $2,500,000.00 penalty. This may be the same as item 10, attachment 6.
ITEM DATE: VIOLATION: PLEA DISPOSITION
4 05/31/84 OPERATIONAL VIOLATIONS NONE DISMISSED
SUMMARY
Case tiled in District Court, State of Michiqan, against Michigan Waste Systems, Inc., alleging that the company failed to provide required amount of daily cover for
gASTE MANAGEMENT
ENVIRONMENTAL CIVIL CASES
the landfill site.
On January 22, 1985, case was dismissed after agreement with the prosecuting attorney.
DISPOSITION
PLEA
ITEM DATE:
VIOLATION: SUMI{ARY JUDGtMENT $40,000.00 FINE5 01/15/85 RCRA VIOLATIONS
SUMMARY
Chemical Waste Management Inc., Denver-Arapahoe Chem waste Pro. Co., Aurora, Co.
EPA alleged groundwater and reporting violations.
DISPOSITION
PLEA
ITEM DATE: VIOLATION: $8,500.00 FINE
CONSENT DECREE
6 04/01/85 CLEAN AIR ACT VIOLATION
SUMMARY
Waste Management of Wisconsin, Inc., Omega Hills North Landfill, Germantown, WI. EPA alleged failure to comply particulate emissions limits. Fined and required to pave one of the roads into the facility.
PLEA DISPOSITION
ITEM DATE: VIOLATION:
NONE $2,000.00 PENALTY
7 04/09/85 RCRA VIOLATIONS
SUMMARY
Case tiled in Town Court of Whitestown, New York, against Mohawk Valley Sanitation, Inc., alleging that hauling company disposed of 55 qa1lon~drums into hardfill landfill.
Case closed on April 9, 1985, with $2,000 penalty.
PLEA DISPOSITION
ITEM DATE: VIOLATION: $8,500. 00 CIVIL PENALTY
CONSENT DECREE
8 04/15/85 CLEAN AIR ACT
SUMMARY
Case filed in U.S, Distri'Jt Court against Waste Management of Wisconsin, Inc., regarding the Omega Hills Landfill. Case alleged that Omega Hills Landfill emitted particular matter into the ambient air so as to contribute to exceedance of nation&l and secondary ambient air quality standards, as recorded by site monitoring equipment on 34 dates from 05/08/81 through 10/03/84.
Case closed on September 12, 1986, by Consent Decree whereby Waste Management of Wisconsin, Inc., agreed to institute a program to reduce emissions and pay a $8,500
WASTE MANAGEMENT
ENVIRONMENTAL CIVIL CASES
civil penalty.
DISPOSITION
ITEM DATE: VIOLATION: PLEA
CASE DISMISSED
9 06/14/85 OPERATIONAL VIOLATIONS NOT GUILTY
6UMMARY
Case~f fled by New York Department of Environmental Conservation against waste Management of New York-Utica. Case alle7ed Waste Management of New York-Utica relinquished to a facility without &valid permit covering such waste and transported, collected and removed waste from its point of orgin without a permit. Case closed in 1985 with Waste Management of New York-Utica plead not guilty, paying a $100 fee on appearances and case was then dismissed.
ITEM DATE: VIOLATION: PLEA DISPOSITION
10 07/25/85 PERMIT NONE $1,500.00 CIVIL PENALTY
SUMMARY
Case filed by State of New York against SCA Services, Inc., doing business as Mohawk Valley Sanitary Landfill. Case alleged Mohawk Valley Landfill accepted special waste without having the 1?roper permits as required by New York Law.
Case closed on 12/12/85 with civil penalty in the amount of $1,500.
DISPOSITION
ITEM DATE: VIOLATION: PLEA< /P>
$5,000.00 PENALTY
11 08/22/85 OPERATIONAL VIOLATION CONSENT DECREE
SUMMARY
Case tiled by state of Illinois against SCA Services of Illinois, Inc., regarding the Chain of Rocks Landfill. Case alleged that Chain of Rocks landfill failed to place daily cover on exposed refuse and failed to collect and dispose of litter.
Case closed on January 6, 1988 by Consent Decree and the payment of $5,000 penalty.
ITEM DATE: VIOLATION: PLEA DISPOSITION
12 09/03/85 OPERATIONAL VIOLATIONS CASE DISMISSED $2,000.00 PENALTY
SUMMARY
Case filed in Los Angeles Municipal Court against Waste Management of California. Case alleged Waste Management was using coatings with excessive VOC content in spray booth. Case dismissed on October 14, 1986 with ~qaste Management paying a $2,000
Y¿_ _
WASTE MANAGEMENT
ENVIRONMENTAL CIVIL CASES
penalty.
ITEM DATE: VIOLATION: PLEA DISPOSITION
13 04/11/86 PERMIT STIPULATION $800,000.00 FINE
SUMMARY
Case filed by State of Wisconsin against Waste Management of Wisconsin, Inc., regarding the Omega Hills Landfill, North Germantown, Wisconsin.
Case alleges that Waste Management failed to comply with leachate head level requirements in the original and modified plans of operations for Omega Hills North; leachate has contaminated nearby groundwater; failure to properly operate the site by using till areas in a sequential manner; deficient groundwater monitoring program; failure to submit an adequate closure 1?lan.
Case closed on April 3, 1989, by stipulation and judgement whereby Waste Management agreed to conduct certain remedial activities and pay fines and forfeitures of $800,000 over four years.
PLEA DISPOSITION
ITEM DATE: VIOLATION:
CONSENT DECREE $1,200,000.00 PENALTY
14 06/10/86 CERCLA VIOLATIONS
SUMMARY
Case filed by EPA against SCA services of Indiana, Fort Wayne Reduction Dump, Fort Wayne, Indiana. The remedy required by the ROD calls for excavation and ott-site incineration of drums, reconsolidation and capping of contaminated soils, groundwater collection and treatment at the western portion of the site to prevent migration of contaminated groundwater into the nearby river, and monitoring of groundwater in perpetuity.
ITEM DATE: VIOLATION: PLEA D ISPOSITION
15 06/23/86 APC REGULATIONS NONE $100.00 & COURT COST
SUMMARY
Case filed in District Court, Jefferson County, Kentucky, against Waste Management of Kentucky, Inc. Case alleges violations of APC Regulations 6.05 section 2(c) by causing the discharge of fugitive dust indxcess of~2O% opacity
Case closed on 08/05/86 with Waste Management~of Kentucky paying $100.00 and court cost.
PAGE 4
WASTE MANAGEMENT
ENVIRONMENTAL CIVIL CASES
ITEM DATE: VIOLATION: PLEA DISPOSITION
16 09/09/86 AIR POLUTION VIOLATION NONE NONE
SUMMARY
Case filed in the District Court of Harms County by Harms County and the State of
Texas against Atascocita Development Corporation, et al. Case alleges that the defendant, Atascocita Dev. Corp operated the Atascocita Road Landfill in such a manner as to violate rules and regulations of the Texas Air Control Board, Article
4477-5, V:A.T.S., by allowing or permitting emissions of one or more air contaminants; alleged emissions caused nuisance odor.
As of 04/18/89, the County has taken no further action in prosecuting this suit. Atascocita continues to work with, and provide status reports to, the Harris County Pollution Control Department on implementation of a landfill odor assessment and control program.
ITEM DATE: VIOLATION: PLEA D ISPOSITION
17 06/08/87 OPERATIONAL VIOLATIONS PLEA AGREEMENT $685.00 FINE
SUMMARY
Case filed by Maricopa County Air Polution Control Board against Waste Management of Phoenix regarding 27th Avenue Landfill. Case alleged failure to take reasonable precautions to effectively prevent fugitive dust from becoming airborne.
Case closed on 11/29/88 by plea agreement with Waste Management paying a fine of $500 plus 37% surcharge for a total of $685.00. (This case may be duplicated in Attachment 6, Item fl33.)
ITEM DATE: VIOLATION: PLEA D ISPOSITION
18 09/29/87 RCRA VIOLATIONS CONSENT DECREE $750,000.00 PENALTY
SUMMARY
Case filed by EPA against Cheat ical ~aste Management, Ohio Liquid Disposal, Vikery, Ohio. In addition to the fine partial closure of plant was ordered, for numerous violations, includin9 groundwater monitoring, permit violations, reporting violations, admin. violations, build ups of metal, waste oil and PCB's. Chemical Waste Management paid a penalty of $750,000.00.
ÿ]À_ _
q
ATTACHMENT 5
WASTE MANAGEMENT
ENVIRONMENTAL CIVIL CASES
DISPOSITION
PLEA
ITEM DATE: VIOLATION: $1,100.00 PENALTY
NONE
19 .12/11/87 PERMIT VIOLATIONS
SUMMARY
Case~filed in Kent County Circuit Court, State of Michigan, which alleged that Waste Mana9ement hauled recycleables to a recycling center in Kent county without the
required Michigan public Service Commission permit.
Case closed on May 15,1988 with Michigan Waste Systems paying a $1,100 penalty.
PLEA DISPOSITION
ITEM DATE: VIOLATION: NONE
NONE
20 02/22/88 PUBLIC HEALTH NUISANCE
SUMMARY
Case filed in Camden Township Court, New Jersey by Robert pirrotts of the Camden County Health Department against O'Connor Corporation. Case alleges a violation of a public health nuisance code, odors from a partially filled trash truck left overnight
Settlement was pending as of October, 1989.
DISPOSITION
PLEA
ITEM DATE: VIOLATION:
GUILTY $22,500.00 FINE, PLUS
21 04/12/88 PERMIT VIOLATIONS
SUMMARY
Case filed by Ontario Ministry of the Environment, Canada, against York sanitation, a division of waste Management of Canada, Inc. Case alleged the York Sanitation failed to operate a waste management system in accordance with conditions set out in the provisional certificate of approval #8454 by delivering waste to a disposal site other than the one identified, specifically, Innisfil Landfill.
Waste Management of Canada, Inc., plead guilty to nine outstanding charges on April 3, 1989. Court imposed fine of $22,500~plus $750 in court cost.
PLEA DISPOSITION
ITEM DATE: VIOLATION:
22 05/10/88 CITY ORDINANCE AGREEMENT DISMISSED
£!L-MMARY
Case filed by City of Moraine, State of Ohio, against pinnacle Road Landfill, Inc. Case alleged borrowing of soils on 16 acre tract at landfill which violated city soil removal and erosion control ordinances.
Case closed on June 27, 1988, by agreement for entry of dismissal without
i¿_ _
WASTE MANAGEMENT
ENVIRONMENTAL CIVIL CASES
prejudice. Pinnacle Road Landfill agreed to submit plans for sedimentation and erosion control to the city.
ENVIRONMENTAL CIVIL CASE SUMMARY:
TOTAL ITEMS: 22
TOTAL STATES INVOLVED: 12 PLUS CANADA
TOTAL FINES, PENALTIES AND SETTLEMENT COST: $5,424,885.00
WASTE MANAGEMENT
ADMINISTRATIVE CASES
PLEA DISPOSITION
ITEM DATE: VIOLATION: $15,000.00 PENALTY
CONSENT DECREE
1 01/16/79 GENERAL FACILITY REQ.
SUMMARY
SCA Chemical Waste Services, Model City, NY. dealing with TSCA/6E PCB EPA alleged violations of General Facility Requirements
markings and disposal regulations.
PLEA DISPOSITION
ITEM DATE: VIOLATION: $13,500.00 PENALTY
CONSENT DECREE
· ~2 11/19/80 GENERAL FACILITY. REQ.
SUMMARY
SCA Chemical Waste Services, Model City, NY. dealing with TSCA/6E PCB EPA alleged violations of General Facility Requirements
marking and disposal regulations.
PLEA DISPOSITION
ITEM DATE: VIOLATION: $20,000.00 PENALTY
CONSENT DECREE
a 02/24/84 GENERAL FACILITY REQ.
SUMMARY
SCA Chemical Services, Inc., Model City, NY. dealing with TSCA/6E PCB EPA alleged violations of General Facility Requirements
markings and disposal regulations.
PLEA DISPOSITION
ITEM DATE: VIOLATION: $18,000.00 PENALTY
CONSENT DECREE
4 02/24/84 GENERAL FACILITY REQ.
SUMMARY
SCA Chemical Services, Inc., Model City, NY.
EPA alleged violations of General Facility Requirements dealing with TSCA/6E PCB markings and disposal regulations.
ITEM DATE: VIOLATION:
S 06/28/84 RCRA VIOLATIONS
DISPOSITION
PLEA
____________DISMISSED AFTER FINE $2,475.00 PENALTY
SUMMARY
EPA allegedWaste Management, Inc., Lyncott Corporation, New Milford, PA.
violations of RCRA /3008A. Cnse voluntarily dismissed after tine.
WASTE MANAGEMENT
ADMINISTRATIVE CASES
DISPOSITION
ITEM DATE: VIOLATION: PLEA
6 07/06/84 OPERATIONAL VIOLATIONS NONE APPEALING
SUMMARY.
USEPA-Region V alleged that Michigan Waste Systems, Inc., failed to monitor groundwater. Administrative Order seeks ~onitoring~wells in clay fill. flichigan Waste Systems, Inc., is appealing the Order0
DISPOSITION
PLEA
ITEM DATE: VIOLATION: $15,000.00 PENALTY
SOURCE AGREEMENT
7 07/06/84 RCRA VIOLATION
SUMMARY
Chemical-Security Systems, Inc., Chemical waste Management of the Northwest, Arlington, Oregon. EPA alleged TSD facility failed to submit complete part B permit application in a timely manner.
PLEA DISPOSITION
ITEM DATE: VIOLATION: $4,000. 00 PENALTY
SOURCE AGREEMENT
8 11/13/84 FIFRA VIOLATION
SUMMARY
Torco Pest and Terminate Control Company. Columbus, Ohio. EPA filed an action alleging violation of FIFRA 14. Respondent agreed and paid fine of $4,000.00.
ITEM DATE: VIOLATION: PLEA D ISPOSITION
9 01/24/85 TSCA VIOLATIONS SOURCE AGREEMENT $2,500,000.00 PENALTY
SUMMARY
Chemical Waste Management, Inc., llinsdale, IL. EPA report is not specific, however~ Seattle report list a case in the same time frame and with the same penalty. This case grew out of mixing PCfls with oil and selling the solution which was sprayed on the roadway. Seattle report identifies site as Vickery, Ohio.
PLEA DISPOSITION
ITEM DATE: VIOLATION: $2,000, 000.00 PENALTY **
SOURCE AGREEMENT
10 04/05/85 RCRA VIOLATION
SUMMARY
Chemical Waste Management, Ohio Liquid Disposal, Vickery Division, Vickery, Ohio. Case involves hazardous waste left in lagoons. Total amount of $2 million dollars paid in full. This may be the same as item #3, attachment 5.
¼TTAcHi~iT6
WASTE MANAGEMENT
ADMINISTRATIVE CASES
ITEM DATE: VIOLATION: PLEA DISPOSITION 'I
11 .05/31/85 RCRA/SUPERFUND 106 NONE SLUDGE REMOVAL
SUMMARY
Chemical Waste Management of Kansas; Valley Cent, Kansas. Remedial design in process. Some of the evaporation ponds linked to construction of aboveground storage cell fonthe disposal of E-pond sludge. Last proposal to temporarily store sludge over winter.
PLEA DISPOSITION
ITEM DATE: VIOLATION: $15,000.00 PENALTY
CONSENT DECREE
12 05/31/85 RCRA VIOLATION
SUMMARY
SCA Chemical services, Inc., Chemical Waste Management, Model City, NY. EPA alleged failure to properly monitor~ground water.
PLEA DISPOSITION
ITEM DATE: VIOLATION: $125,0 00.00 PENALTY
SOURCE AGREEMENT
13 06/07/85 RCRA VIOLATIONS
SUMMARY
EPA alleged that Chera-Security Systems, Inc., Chem Waste Management of the Northwest, Arlington, Oregon, violated RCRA regulations. $125,000.00 penalty assessed. This item may be the same as Attachment 7, item 40.
PLEA DISPOSITION
ITEM DATE: VIOLATION: $235,000.00 PENALTY
SOURCE AGREEMENT
14 07/16/85 TSCA VIOLATION
SUMMARY
Chemical-security Systems, Inc., Chemica~ Waste Management of the Northwest; Arlington, oregon. EPA alleged violations of PCB's Regulations. ordered to pay penalty. EPA to conduct quarterly PCB audits for one year according to work plan. This item may be the same as Attachment 7, item 39.
ITEfl DATE: VIOLATION: PLEA& #9;DISPOSITION
15 10/13/85 HEALTH DEPT. REGULATIONS STIPULATION/CONSENT $200.00 FINE
SUMMARY
Complaint filed on 10/13/85, 10/25/85, 01/08/86 and 01/23/86 by Wayne County Department of Health against Michigan Waste Systems, Inc., Woodlands Meadows
WASTE MANAGEMENT
ADMINISTRATIVE CASES
Landfill-South. Complaint alleges violations of Health regulation regarding road maintenance and odors.
On 01/24/86, both parties entered into an order and stipulation whereby Michigan Waste Systems agreed to pay $200.00 in fines and plead tino contest" to the allegation concerning road maintenance.
On 05/29/86, both parties entered into an administrative consent order which resolved the odor violations.
DI6POSITION
ITEM DATE: VIOLATION: PLEA
$1,200.00 PENALTY
16 11/05/85 OPERATIONAL VIOLATIONS CONSENT ORDER
SUMMARY
Complaint filed by South Carolina Department of Health and Environmental Control against SCA Services of South Carolina, Inc., Waste Management of South Carolina. Complaint alleges failure to provide verification of financial ~esponsibility for sudden and accidential occurrences; storage of electroplating sludge in excess of permitted storage period; failure to accurately document origin and intended disposal facility for electroplating waste; and failure to implement an approved personnel training program. On December 18, 1985, both parties entered into Consent Order assessing $1,200.00 penalty and acknowledging that compliance was achieved.
PLEA DISPOSITION
ITEM DATE: VIOLATION: $30,00 0.00 PENALTY
17 11/06/85 RCRA VIOLATIONS SOURCE AGREEMENT
SUMMARY
The action was taken because the facility had installed an inadequate groundwater assessment program under 40 CFR ~65.93 and had not completed its certification of insurance properly
Parties have reached agreement to settlement in principal.
CAFO to be redrafted. Agreement includes penalties of $30,000.00; groundwater assessment program; additional wells and admendment of certificate of insurance. Adams Center Sanitary Landfill, Chemical Waste Management, Fort Wayne, IND.
ITEM DATE: VIOLATION: PLEA DISPOSITION
18 01/10/86 OPERATIONAL VIOLATION NONE PENDING
SUMMARY
Complaint filed by Arkansas Department of Pollution Control and Ecology against Waste Management of Arkansas, Pine Bluff Landfill. Complaint alleges failure to
PAGE 4
WASTE MANAGEMENT
ADMINISTRATIVE CASES
identify and dispose properly of hazardous waste at a landfill not authorized to receivq such waste.
Disposition pending as of 10/1989.
PLEA DISPOSITION
ITEM DATE: VIOLATION: $15,000.00 P ENALTY
CONSENT DECREE
19 03/19/86 TSCA VIOLATIONS
SUMMARY
chemical Waste Management, Inc., Denver-Arapahoe Chemical Waste Pro. Aurora, Co.
EPA alleged failure to properly dispose of PCB's (4) counts.
PLEA DISPOSITION
ITEM DATE: VIOLATION: $40,000.00 PENALTY
SOURCE AGREEMENT
20 03/28/86 RCRA VIOLATIONS
SUMHARY
Wayne Disposal operates a landfill in Belleville, Michigan. Ford Motor Company owns the property upon which Wayne Disposal operates its landfill facility. several RCRA inspections found Wayne Disposal to be operating in violation of RCRA regulations. The complaint cites those violations, and orders Wayne Disposal and Ford Motor Company to cease operating in violation of the regulations.
PLEA DISPOSITION
ITEM DATE: VIOLATION: $6,000. 00 PENALTY
CONSENT AGREEMENT
21 04/11/86 OPERATIONAL VIOLATIONS
SUMMARY
Complaint filed by USEPA-Region V against Ohio Waste Systems, Inc., Evergreen Landfill. Complaint alleges Evergreen violated the shipping manifest regulations and had an inadequate groundwater assessment plan.
On 01/24/88, both parties entered into a consent agreement and final order whereby OWS agreed to pay a civil penalty in the amount of $6,000.00; submit an assessment report including a determination of whether hazardous waste or hazardous waste constituents are in the groundwater at the Evergreen Facility and if so, the concentration, rate and extent of migration.
ITEM DATE: VIOLATION: PLEA D ISPOSITION
22 04/11/86 RCRA VIOLATIONS LITIGATED $8,425.00 FINE
SUMMARY
EPA Alleged that respondent is in violation of groundwater monitoring regulations,
)¿_ _
WASTE MANAGEMENT
ADMINISTRATIVE CASES
in particular 40 CYR 265.93 by failure to submit an adequate groundwater assessment plan. Facility is in closure.
Respondent is Ohio Waste System
of Toledo, Ohio.DISPOSITION
ITEM DATE: VIOLATION: PLEA
$8,000.00 PENALTY
23 06/30/86 OPERATIONAL VIOLATIONS COMPLIANCE ORDER
SUMMARY
Complaint tiled by LDEQ against American Waste. and Pollution Control Company, Magnolia Sanitary Landfill. Compliance order issued stemming from a inspection which occurred on 06/17/86. Inspection report alleged~insufficient daily cover and contaminated surface water. Compliance order suggest penalty of $8,000.00.
On 07/30/86, a response was filed to the~compliance order, outlining how compliance was achieved.
On 10/23/86, $8,000.00 penalty was paid.
ITEM DATE: VIOLATION: PLEA D ISPOSITION
24 07/18/86 APPLICATION VIOLATION NONE PENDING
SUMMARY
Complaint tiled by USEPA-Region V against Waste Management of Illinois, Inc.,
E.S.I. Facility. Complaint alleges deficiencies in the Part B application for
E.S.I.
Disposition pending as of 10/89.
ITEM DATE: VIOLATION: PLEA DISPOSITION
25 07/21/86 RCRA VIOLATIONS SOURCE AGREEMENT UNKNOWN
SUMMARY
Complaint filed alleging failure to submit adequate part (B) permit application. The application allegedly contained deficient groundwater monitoring information and was a violation of the RCRA. Respondent is Waste Management of Ill., Inc.
ITEM DATE: VIOLATION: PLEA DISPOSITION
26 09/16/86 OPERATIONAL VIOLATIONS NONE $10,000.00 PENALTY
SUMMARY
Complaint tiled by LDEQ against Recovery I, Inc., New Orleans, LA. Complaint alleges permit violations by surface water and mismanagement leachate, litter, levee
PAGE 6
WASTE MANAGEMENT
ADMINISTRATIVE CASES
in disrepair and other repetitive or minor violations.
Compliance order issued.
On 19/22/86, Recovery I, Inc., filed a response to the compliance order, setting forth a compliance schedule and paying a $10,000.00 penalty.
ITEM DATE: VIOLATION: PLEA DISPOSITION
27 09/22/86 OPERATIONAL VIOLATION NONE PENDING
SUMMARY
Complaint filed by USEPA-Region V against Waste Management of Illinois, Inc, CIDChemical Waste Management Inc. Complaint alleged failure to implement groundwater monitoring program required by RCRA.
Disposition pending as of 10/89.
PLEA DISPOSITION
ITEM DATE: VIOLATION:
SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT $300.00 PENALTY.
28 10/06/86 OPERATIONAL VIOLATIONS
SUMMARY
Complaint filed by Regional Air Pollution Control Agency against the pinnacle Road Landfill. Complaint alleges observations on a release of visible emissions of asbestos containing waste. On August 19, 1986, Ohio EPA issued a letter directing pinnacle Road Landfill to cease acceptance of asbestos containing waste.
on 01/09/87, both parties entered a settlement agreement whereby pinnacle Road Landfill agreed to continue to follow the OHIO EPA'guidelines for asbestos waste acceptance and disposal; $300.00 penalty paid.
ITEM DATE: VIOLATION: PLEA DISPOSITION
21 10/09/86 OPERATIONAL VIOLATIONS NONE $18,000.00 PENALTY
SUMMARY
Complaint filed by LDEQ against American Waste and pollution Control Company and the City of New Iberia Landfill. Complaint alleges AWPCC failed to apply required daily cover as outlined in compliance order, dated March 31, 1986.
Complaint resolved with AWPCC entering into an agreement and paying $18,000 settlement.
ÿiÀ_ _
WASTE MANAGEMENT
ADMINISTRATIVE CASES
PLEA DISPOSITION
ITEM DATE: VIOLATION: $27,00 0.00 PENALTY
SOURCE AGREEMENT
30 01/01/87 FIFRA VIOLATION
SUMMARY
EPA alleged that Mighigan Waste System violated sections of FIFRA.' Case settled with Michigan Waste Systems paying $27,000.00.
ITEM DATE: VIOLATION: PLEA D ISPOSITION
31 03/19/87 OPERATIONAL VIOLATIONS NONE VIOLATION CORRECTED
SUMMARY
Complaint filed by City of Los Angeles against Valley Reclamation Company, Bradley West Landfill, Sun Valley, California. Complaint alleges refuse was not covered at the end of the day.
Complaint settled after follow-up inspection and violation corrected.
ITEM DATE: VIOLATION: PLEA DISPOSITION
32 05/01/87 OPERATIONAL VIOLATIONS NONE $11,000.00 PENALTY
SUMMARY
Complaint filed by LDEQ against American Waste and Pollution Control Company~ Magnolia Sanitary Landfill. Complaint alleges permit violations regarding receiving and monitoring of incoming special waste, and failure to follow contingency plan.
Compliance order issued on 05/01/87 and civil penalty assessed dn 07/17/87 for $11,000.00.
On 07/25/87, company paid civil penalty of $11,000.00.
ITEM DATE: VIOLATION: PLEA D ISPOSITION
33 06/03/87 STATE AIR LAWS SETTLEMENT $278.00 **
SUMMARY
On 06/03/87, Maricopa County Air Pollution Bureau, State of Arizona, filed a complaint against Oakland Scavenger Company, Waste Management of Phoenix-South. The complaint alleges two separate occasions of.violations of the state air laws due to fugitive dust emissions from the 27th Avenue Landfill.
On 07/'2l/87, per a pre-litigation settlement agreement: Defendant paid $139.00 for each violation. Agreement also stated that no future Nov's would be issued as long as Waste Management remains in compliance. (This case may be duplicated under Attachment 5, Item #17).
™¿_ _
WASTE MANAGEMENT
ADMINISTRATIVE CASES
ITEM DATE: VIOLATION: PLEA DISPOSITION
34 06/19/87 PUBLIC ACT 84- 1320 NONE $500.00 CIVIL
SUMMARY
Complaint filed Illinois Pollution Control Board against Waste Management of Illinois, Inc, Woodland Sanitary Landfill. Complaint alleges violation of Public Act
84-1320, based on a site inspection on 04/30/S7 which observed refuse that remained uncovered from a previous day.
On 04/21/88, an Administrative Order issued to dismiss without admitting or denying the allegations. Civil penalty paid by Waste Management of Illinois, Inc., in
amount of $500.00.
ITEM DATE: VIOLATION: PLEA DISPOSITION
35 06/24/87 RCRA VIOLATION UNKNOWN $27,000.00 PENALTY
SUMMARY
Waste Management of Peoria, Ill., settled for alleged violations of Res. Conserv. and Rec. Act.
PLEA DISPOSITION
ITEM DATE: VIOLATION: $27,00 0.00 CIVIL PENALTY
CONSENT ORDER
36 06/25/87 USEPA-Region V
SUMMARY
Complaint filed by USEPA-Region V against Michigan Waste Systems, Inc., Woodland Meadows Landfill-North. Complaint alleges unapproved waste piles resulting from the installation of a gas recovery system.
On June 25, 1987, Consent order whereby Michigan Waste Systems, Inc., agreed to submit a closure plan for the removal of the waste pile and pay a civil penalty of
$27,000.
ITEM DATE: VIOLATION: PLEA D ISPOSITION
11 07/21/87 OPERATIONAL VIOLATION NONE $500.00 CIVIL FEE
SUMMARY
Complaint filed by Illinois Pollution Control Board agaitst Waste Management of Illinois, Greene Valley Landfill. Complaint alleges site inspection noted that refuse left uncovered from previous day.
Complaint settled by Waste Management of Illinois paying a civil penalty of $500.00 on 04/21/88.
WASTE MANAGEMENT
ADMINISTRATIVE CASES
ITEM DATE: VIOLATION: PLEA< /U> DISPOSITION
38 08/13/87 RCRA VIOLATION UNKNOWN $18,240.00 PENALTY
SUMMARY
SCA Chemical Services, Inc., Chicago, Ill reached agreement with the EPA, which called for penalty assessment and required groundwater monitQring. (This case may be a duplication under Attachment 7, Item #56).
ITEM DATE: VIOLATION: PLEA DISPOSITION
39 08/26/87 LA MUNICIPAL CODE NONE PENDING
SUMMARY
Complaint filed by City of Los Angeles, Bureau of Sanitation against Valley Reclamation Company, Bradley West Landfill, Sun Valley. Complaint alleges Valley has violated L.A. Municipal Code for failure to control gas migration at the site.
Disppsition pending as of 10/1989.
ITEM DATE: VIOLATION: PLEA DISPOSITION
40 10/09/87 OPERATIONAL VIOLATION NONE SETTLEMENT
SUMMARY
Complaint filed by LEDQ against American Waste and Pollution Control Company, Lafayette Landfill. Complaint alleges that inadequate cover, surface water and litter violations.
Complaint resolved by settlement agreement.
ITEM DATE: VIOLATION: PLEA DISPOSITION
41 10/15/8? ODOR VIOLATIONS SETTLEMENT AGREEMENT $1,625.00 PENALTY
SUMMARY
Complaint tiled by Broward County Environmental Quality Control Board against Waste Management Inc., of Florida, Central Disposal, Pompano Beach, Florida. Complaint alleges Central Disposal caused, allowed or permitted the discharge of air pollutants which contributed to an objectionable odor.
Complaint settled by agreement and payment of penalty of $1,625.00 on 02/19/88.
WASTE MANAGEMENT
ADMINISTRATIVE CASES
ITEM DATE: VIOLATION: PLEA DISPOSITION
42 12/22/87 OPERATIONAL VIOLATIONS NONE VIOLATION CORRECTED
SUMMARY
complaint filed by City of Los Angeles, Bureau of Sanitation, against Valley Reclamation Company, Bradley West Landfill, Sun Valley, California. complaint alleges failure to cover refuse at end of day.
Complaint settled after follow-up inspection and violation corrected.
ITEM DATE: VIOLATION: PLEA D ISPOSITION
43 12/22/87 OPERATIONAL VIOLATIONS NONE COMPLIANCE ORDER
6UMKARY
Complaint filed by LDEQ against AWPCC/Waste Management of South Louisiana, Inc.
Complaint alleged discharge without a permit, absence of secondary containment, oil
spills contaminating soil.
Compliance order issued and on 01/25/88, AWPCC filed a response stating the action to be taken to comply with the order.
ITEM DATE: VIOLATION: PLEA D ISPOSITION
44 02/10/88 OPERATIONAL VIOLATIONS NONE COMPLIANCE ORDER
SUMMARY
Complaint filed by LDEQ against American Waste and Pollution control Company and Waste Management of Central Louisiana.. complaint alleged contingency plan not available; inadequate training plan and failure to apply for a new generator facility number when facility moved.
On 03/07/88, AWPCC filed a response, addressing the issues identified in the compliance order.
ITEM DATE: VIOLATION: PLEA DISPOSITION
45 02/25/88 STATE MINIMUM STANDARDS NONE RESOLVED
SUMMARY
Complaint filed by California Waste Management Board against Valley Reclamation
Company, Bradley West Landfill. complaint alleges violation of State Minimum
Standards: section 17660- Internal Roads (mud on hauling roads) , section 17710-
Grading of fill surfaces, during rain, small pouds were observed.on current lift, and
section 17708-Draining and Erosion control. Inspector misinterpreted existing
WASTE MANAGEMENT
ADMINISTRATIVE CASES
drainage conditions.
Complaint settled by written response; no further agency action.
ITEM DATE: VIOLATION: PLEA DISP OSITION
COMPLIANCE ORDER
46 03703/88 OPERATIONAL VIOLATION NONE
SUMMARY
complaint filed by LEDQ against American Waste and Pollution control Company and Waste Management of St. Tammany. complaint alleges that on October 7, 1987, an inspection observed the discharge of contaminated wastewater from a truck wash and package treatment plant.
AWPCC filed a responce to the compliance order, outlining action to be taken in terms of the compliance order.
PLEA DISPOSITION
ITEM DATE: VIOLATION:
NQNE $10,000.00 PENALTY
47 03/03/88 OPERATIONAL VIOLATIONS
SUMMARY
complaint tiled by NYDEC against Genessee Valley Waste Systems, Inc. complaint alleges CVWS operated a storage area for solid waste without a valid permit.
On 12/16/88, a civil penalty of $10,000.00 was assessed and paid.
ITEM DATE: VIOLATION: PLEA DISPOSITION
48 03/09/88 TSCA VIOLATIONS NONE DISMISSED
SUMMARY
EPA alleged possible UIC and PCB related violations. chemical Waste Management, Ohio Liquid Disposal, Vickery Div.
ITEM DATE: VIOLATION: PLEA DISPOSITION
49 03/11/88 OPERATIONAL VIOLATIONS NONE $23,000.00 SETTLEMENT
SUMMARY
Complaint filed by NJDEP against Interstate Waste, Inc., parkiands Reclamation Project. complaint alleges violations of odor regulations.
On 01/04/89, Administrative Order issued with settlement for $23,000.00.
÷‰À_ _
WASTE MANAGEMENT
ADMINISTRATIVE CASES
DISPOSITION
PLEA
ITEM DATE: VIOLATTON: SLUDGE REMOVAL
NONE
11 .05/31/85 RCRA/SUPERFUND 106
SUMMARY
Chemical waste Management of Kansas; valley Cent, Kansas. Remedial design in process. Some of the evaporation ponds linked to construction of aboyetgronnd storage cell for the disposal of E-pond sludge. Last proposal to temporarily store sludge over winter.
PLEA DISPOSITION
ITEM DATE: VIOLATION: $15,00 0.00 PENALTY
CONSENT DECREE
12 05/31/85 RCRA VIOLATION
SUMMARY
SCA Chemical services, Inc., Chemical Waste Management1 Model City, NY. EPA alleged failure to properly monitor ground water.
PLEA DISPOSITION
ITEM DATE: VIOLATION: $125,0 00.00 PENALTY
SOURCE AGREEMENT
13 06/07/85 RCRA VIOLATIONS
SUMMARY
EPA alleged that chem-Security Systems, Inc., Chem waste Management of the Northwest, Arlington, Oregon, violated RCRA regulations. $125,000.00 penalty assessed. This item may be the same as Attachment 7, item 40.
PLEA DISPOSITION
ITEM DATE: VIOLATION: $235,000.00 PENALTY
SOURCE AGREEMENT
14 07/16/85 TSCA VIOLATION
SUMMARY
chemical-security Systems, Inc., Chemical~Waste Management of the Northwest; Arlington, Oregon. EPA alleged violations of PCB's Regulations. ordered to pay penalty. EPA to conduct quarterly PCB audits for one year according to work plan. This item may be the same as Attachment 7, item 39.
ITEM DATE: VIOLATION: PLEA D ISPOSITION
15 10/13/85 HEALTH DEPT. REGULATIONS STIPULATION/CONSENT $200.00 FINE
SUMMARY
complaint filed on 10/13/85, 10/25/85, 01/08/86 and Ol/23/8& by Wayne County Department of health against xichigan Waste Systems, Inc., Woodlands Meadows
_¿_ _
WASTE MANAGEMENT
ADMINISTRATIVE CASES
conclusions of law and entered an order providing that no penalties were to be assessed and the matter was dismissed with prejudice.
ITEM DATE: VIOLATION: PLEA D ISPOSITION
54 04/28/88 OPERATIONAL VIOLATIONS NONE $1,000.00 CIVIL
SUMMARY
Complaint filed by Illinois EPA against Waste Management of Illinois, Wheatland Prairie Landfill. Complaint alleges site inspection noted uncovered refuse remaining from the previous day and inadequate depth of daily cover.
Complaint settled with payment of $1,000.00 in civil penalties.
ITEM DATE: VIOLATION: PLEA D ISPOSITION
55 05/11/88 OPERATIONAL VIOLATIONS NONE $500.00 CIVIL
SUMMARY
Complaint filed by Illinois Pollution control Board against Waste Management of Illinois, Inc., Kankakee Landfill. Complaint alleges site inspection noted uncovered refuse remaining from a previous operating day.
Complaint settled by payment of $500.00 civil penalty.
ITEM DATE: vIOLATION: PLEA DI SPOSITION
56 05/17/88 OPERATIONAL VIOLATIONS NONE $500.00 CIVIL
SUMMARY
Complaint filed by Illinois Pollution Controll Board against Waste Management of Illinois, Inc., Tazewell County Landfill. Complaint alleges failure to collect and contain litter from the site by the end of each day.
Complaint settled by payment of $500.00 civil penalty by Waste Management of Illinois, Inc.
ITEM DATE: VIOLATION: PLEA DISP OSITION
57 05/23/88 OPERATIONAL VIOLATIONS NONE $10,000.00 PENALTY
SUMMARY
Coniplaint filed by NYDEC against Genessee Valley Waste Systems, Bestway Disposal Facility~ NY. Complaint alleges Bestway stored nine rotloff containers of drummed waste that were not tarped; that liquid was observed bein9 released.
On 12/15/88, Administrative consent Order issued and civil penalty of $10,000.00
WASTE MANAGEMENT
ADMINISTRATIVE CASES
paid.
PLEA DISPOSITION
ITEM DATE: VIOLATION:
NONE DISMISSED
58 05/31/88 ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION
SUMMARY
complaint tiled by Madison county Environmental control Department against Waste Management of Illinois, Inc., Chain of Rocks Landfill. complaint alleges violation of the Illinois Environmental protection Act in that during the
os/l6/88~inspection~ the following were observed: Insufficient operable equipment to comply with the permit, act or regulations, uncovered refuse remaining from the previous day, and inadequate depth of the daily coverage.complaint dismissed on 07/16/88.
PLEA
ITEM DATE: VIOLATION:
CONSENT DECREE
59 06/10/88 OPERATIONAL VIOLATIONS
DISPOSITION
$10,000.00 PENALTY
SUMMARY
complaint filed by Georgia Department of Natural Resources against Georgia Waste Systems, Rolling hills Landfill. Complaint alleges landfill was operated in violation of certain rules
for solid waste management relating to daily cover andbird control. complaint issued on 06/10/88, 07/01/88, 10/07/88 and 11/30/88.
Complaint settled on 02/28/89 by Consent Order requiring payment of $10,000.00 penalty.
ITEM DATE: VIOLATION: PLEA D ISPOSITION
60 07/13/88 OPEItATIONAL VIOrJ\TION NONE COMPLIANCE ORDER
SUMMARY
Complaint filed by LDEQ against American Waste and Pollution control Company regarding Jefferson Davis Landfill. Complaint alleged that inspection on July 13, 1988 revealed that soil cover was inadequate.
On 09/30/88, compliance order issued requiring adequate cover to be applied daily.
WASTE MANAGEMENT
ADMINISTRATIVE CASES
DISPOSITION
ITEM DATE: VIOLATION: PLEA
61 07/14/88 CLEAN AIR ACT INFO REQUEST ONLY CONCLUDED
SUMMARY
Lakeview Landfill, East Erie, Pa. EPA seeking information from landfills regarding asbestos disposal in bribery cases.
ITEM DATE: VIOLATION: PLEA D ISPOSITION
62 07/14/88 CLEAN AIR ACT INFO REQUEST ONLY CONCLUDED
SUMMARY
EPA seeking information from landfills
Waste Management Services, Pottstown, PA.
regarding asbestos disposal in bribery cases.
ITEM DATE: VIOLATION: PLEA D ISPOSITION
63 07/14/88 CLEAN AIR ACT INFO REQUEST ONLY CONCLUDED
SUMMARY
SCA Chemical Services, Model city, New York.
EPA seeking information from landfills regarding asbestos disposal in bribery cases
ITEM DATE: VIOLATION: PLEA D ISPOSITION
64 07/14/88 CLEAN AIR ACT INFO REQUEST ONLY CONCLUDED
SUMMARY
EPA was seeking information from Modern Landfill regarding asbestos disposal in bribery cases. Modern Landfill P.O. Box 209 Model City, NY.
ITEM DATE: VIOL3TION: PLEA DI SPOSITION
65 07/15/88 OPERATIONAL VIOLATIONS NONE COMPLIANCE ORDER
SUMMARY
Complaint filed by LDEQ against American Waste and Pollution Control Company and Woodside Landfill. complaint alleged that construction commenced without prior approval and that geophysical shot hole was improperly plugged.
On 09/02/88, AWPCC filed a response, addressing the action referred in the compliance order.
PAGE 16
ÿÿiÀ_ _
ATTACIihLINT 6
WASTE MANAGEMENT
ADMINISTRATIVE CASES
DISPOSITION
PLEA
ITEM DATE: VIOLATION: $6,000.00 SETTLEMENT
NONE
66 0~/28/88 OPERATIONAL VIOLATION
SUMMARY
Complaint filed by NJDEP against The O'connor corporation, Blackwood, New Jersey. complaint alleges noise problems at the facility.
$6,000.00 settlement.
DISPOSITION
ITEM DATE: VIOLATION: PLEA
67 08/12/88 ILLINOIS EPA NONE $500.00 CIVIL FINE
SUMMARY
complaint tiled by Illinois EPA against waste Management of Illinois, Greene Valley Landfill. complaint alleges site inspection noted that refuse from previous day was left uncovered.
Complaint settled by Waste Management of Illinois paying a $500.00 civil penalty.
DISPOSITION
PLEA
ITEM DATE: VIOLATION: $45,000.00 FINE
CONSENT DECREE
68 09/01/88 TSCA VIOLATIONS
SUMMARY
EPA filed complaint against Chemical Waste Management of Oak Brook, Ill., alleging five counts of violations of TSCA and regulations promulgating there from; improper Poe storage container; failure to date PCB container; failure to mark one PCB container with ML mark. complaint also alleges three counts of improper disposal of PcBt S
In addition to paying fine of $45,000.00, CWM also completed a cleanup directive from the EPA at the site.
PLEA DISPOSITION
ITEM DATE: VIOLATION:
NONE $1,500.00 FINE
69 09/09/88 oPERATIONAL VIOLATIONS
SUMMARY
complaint filed by pennsylvania Department of Environmental Resources filed a complaint against Lakeview Landfill1 Parrie Pennsyvania. Complaint alleges failure to prevent accelerated erosion and install proper erosion control measures during earthmovinq activities to install new lift stations.
On September 15, 1988 DER report noted that the final necessary erosion control measures were completed by September 7th. Fine i)aid 01/01/89; $1,500.00.
WASTE MANAGEMENT
ADMINISTRATIVE CASES
DISPOSITION
ITEM DATE: VIOLATION: PLEA
$668.00
09/18/88 OPERATION?\L VIOLATION NONE
SUMMARY
Complaint filed by Bay Area Air Quality Management District, Livermore, California, against Oakland Scavenger Co, Altamont Landfill. Complaint alleges failure to operate flare. (2 counts)
Case settled by installation of extra alternator and payment of $334.00 on each notice.
ITEM DATE: VIOLATION: PLEA D ISPOSITION
COMPLIANCE ORDER
71 09/30/88 OPERATIONAL VIOLATION NONE
SUMMARY
Complaint filed by LEDQ against American Waste and Pollution control company, Lafayette Landfill. Complaint alleged that contaminated water was allowed to run off into the buffer zone.
Complaint resolved by compliance with order by AWPCC on 10/17/88.
PLEA DISPOSITION
ITEM DATE: VIOLATION:
72 10/04/88 OPERATIONAL VIOLATION NONE $600.00 SETTLEMENT
SUMMARY
complaint filed by NJDEP against Gloucester Solid Waste complex, Gloucester complaint alleges spill of approximately 100 gallons of fuel
county0 New Jersey. from a tank.
On 06/28/89, settlement agreement for payment of $600.00.
ITEM DATE: VIOLATION: PLEA D ISPOSITION
73 12/14/88 TSCA VIOLATIONS UNKNOWN $4,250.00 PENALTY
SUMMARY
EPA filed a complaint against chemical Waste Management alleging that they improperly disposed of an unknown amount of PCB's.
PAGE 18
ÿiÀ_ _
WASTE MANAGEMENT
ADMINISTRATIVE CASES
ITEM DATE: VIOLATION: PLEA< /U> DISPOSITION
74 12/16/88 OPERATIONAL VIOLATIONS NONE ADMINISTRATIVE ORDER
SUMMARY
complaint filed by NJDEP against Waste Disposal, Inc.; New Jersey. Complaint alleges failure to submit a closure plan and recommends penalty of $7,500.00.
On 01/27/89, closure plan submitted and penalty suspended.
ITEM DATE: VIOLATION: PLEA D I6POSITION
75 12/30/88 ODOR VIOLATION NONE CASE CLOSED
SUMMARY
complaint filed by Department of Health, Welfare and Bio-Environmental Services against Refuse Service, Inc of Jacksonville, Florida. complaint alleges objectional odor violations. citation closed on 07/28/89.
ITEM DATE: VIOLATION: PLEA D ISPOSITION
76 03/23/89 TSCA VIOLATION CONSENT DECREE $8,500.00 FINE
SUMMARY
complaint against chemical Waste Management Services, Inc., in Model City, New York. EPA alleges disposal of one drum of PCB contaminated waste in a land disposal unit which was not authorized for such disposal. Fine of $8,500.00 assessed.
PLEA DISPOSITION
ITEM DATE: VIOLATION: $8,500. 00 PENALTY
77 03/23/89 TSCA VIOLATION CONSENT DECREE
SUMMARY
complaint against Chemical Waste Management alleging that they improperly disposed one (1) drum of PCB contaminated waste in a land disposal unit which was not authorized for such disposal.
ITEM DATE: VIOLATION: PLEA DISPOSITION
78 05/01/89 OPERATIONAL VIOLATIONS NONE VIOLATION CORRECTED
SUMMARY
complaint filed by South coast Air Quality Management District against Valley Reclamation Company, Bradley West Landfill, Sun Valley, california. Complaint
complaint settled 05/08/89 as Valley
alleges emission of odors from working face.
-¿_ _
WASTE MANAGEMENT
ADMINISTRATIVE CASES
Reclamation Company took immediate corrective action upon receipt of NOV.
ITEM DATE: VIOLATION: PLEA DISPOSITION
79 07/20/89 OPERATIONAL VIOLATIONS NONE DISMISSED
SUMMARY
Complaint filed by LDEQ against American Waste and pollution control Company, Alexandria Landfill. complaint alleges inspection on 04/17/89 revealed large areas of exposed waste, improper leachate control, inadequate erosion protection and deficiencies with city's operational plan relating to leachate cbntrol, waste management and disposal, daily cover, and vector control.
Appealed filed on 07/28/89 and case dismissed on 10/09/89 without prejudice.
ITEM DATE: VIOLATION: PLEA D ISPOSITION
80 07/25/89 OPERATIONAL VIOLATION NONE $486.00 PENALTY
SUMMARY
complaint filed by Day Area Air Quality Management District a9ainst Oakland Scavenger Co., Altamont Landfill, Livermore, California. Complaint alleges caterpillar punctured pipe to electric generating~faci1ity at gas plant.
Complaint settled by payment of $486.00 penalty.
ITEM DATE: VIOLATION: PLEA D ISPOSITION
81 07/26/89 OPERATIONAL VIOLATIONS NONE COMPLIANCE ORDER
SUMMARY
complaint filed by LDEQ against Waste Management of North America, Inc., Magnolia Landfill. complaint alleges site records reveal containing selenium exceeded the maximum allowable limits that may be received at a solid waste facility.
On 08/18/89, AWPcc filed a response to the compliance order and requested a hearing if the response was not satisfactory.
ITEM DATE: VIOLATION: PLEA D ISPOSITION
62 07/28/89 OPERATION~L VIOLATION NONE $952.00 PAID
SUMMARY
Complaint filed by Washington Department of Ecology against Northwest GarbageCo, Inc. Complaint alleged that on 01/21/89, a fish kill occurred in silver creek, snohornish County, as a result df lot runoff and catch basin overflow from Northwest
PAGE 20
!¿_ _
ATTACHA iT 6
WASTE MANAGEMENT
ADMINISTRATIVE CASES
Garbage company garbage.
FOn Augutt 19, 1989, payment of damage claim for $952.00.
ITEM DATE: VIOLATION: PLEA& #9;DISPOSITION
83 08/03/89 OPERATIONAL VIOLATIONS NONE NONE
SUMMARY
Complaint filed by LDBQ against American Waste and Pollution Control Company.
complaint alleges company allowed discharqe of inadequately treated sanitary waste water on 05/09/89.
ITEM DATE: VIOLATION: PLEA DISP OSITION
$487.00 PENALTY
84 08/11/89 OPERATIONAL VIOLATIONS NONE
SUMMARY
Complaint tiled by Bay Area Air Quality Management District against Oakland Scavenger Co., Altamont Landfill, Livermore, california. complaint alleges earthmoving equipment ruptured landfill gas pipeline.
Complaint settled by payment of $487.00 penalty.
ITEM DATE: VIOLATION: PLEA DISPOSITION
85 09/02/89 OPERATIONAL VIOLATIONS NONE PENDING
SUMMARY
Complaint filed by USEPA-Region V against Ohio Waste Systems, Inc., Evergreen Landfill. Complaint alleges monitorin9 system is not capable of determining the facilities impact on the uppermost aquifer; failure to comply with the postclosure groundwater monitoring requirements; failure to include the required statistical evaluations in the 1987 ground water annual report.
Disposition Pending.
ITEM DATE: VIOLATION: PLEA DISPOSITION
86 09/12/89 OPERATIONAL VIOLATIONS NONE NONE
SUMMARY
complaint filed by LDEQ against American Waste and Pollution control company and Woodside Landfill. complaint alleged a failure to provide LDEQ with requested copies of the facility's daily construction activity report.
On 09/21/89, AWPCC requested a hearing and no other information regarding this
WASTE MANAGEMENT
ADMINISTRATIVE CASES
matter is available.
ITEM DATE: VIOLATION: PLEA DISPOSITION
87 09/29/89 OPERATIONAL VIOLATION NONE PENDING
6UMMARY
Complaint filed by USEPA-Region v against Waste Management of Illinois, Inc., E.S.I. complaint alleges failure to prepare adequate groundwater assessment plan.
Disposition Pending.
ADMINISTRATIVE CASES sU?4MARY:
TOTAL ITEMS LISTED: 87
TOTAL STATES INVOLVED: 13
TOTAL FINES, PENAUrIES AND SETTLEt4ENT COST: $3,345,408.00
** This item may be a duplication, the cost are not included in this section.
g)_
ATTACHMENT 7
ChEMICAL WASTE MANAGEMENT
JUDICIAL AND ADMINISTRATIVE ENVIRONMENTAL ACTIONS
ITEM DATE: STATE: AGENCY PENALTY
1 11/13/78 NEW YORK NEW YORK DEPT. ENV. CONS. $1,000.00 PENALTY
· SUMMARY
Alleged causation of noxious odors and unauthorized waste water discharge.
$1,000.00 penalty. (complaint occurred prior to Chemical Waste Management
purchasing company.)
PENALTY
ITEM DATE: STATE: AG ENCY
$5,000.00 PENALTY
2 01/09/79 NEW YORK NEW YORK DEPT. ENV. cONS.
SUMMARY 4
Alleged violations for odor emissions, improper fencing~and other operating
deficiencies.
$5,000.00 penalty. (Complaint occurred prior to Chemical Waste Management obtaining the company.)
PENALTY
ITEM DATE: STATE: AGENCY
$9,000.00 PENALTY
3 10/11/79 NEW YORK NEW YORK DEPT. ENV. CONS.
SUMMARY
Alleged odor emissions caused by pumping leachate.
$g,ooo.00 penalty. (complaint occurred prior to chemical Waste Management
obtaining company.)
ITEM DATE: STATE: AGENCY&# 9;PENALTY
PENALTY
4 03/06/SO NEW YORK NEW YORK DEPT. ENV. CONS. $7,500.00
SUMMARY
Alleged odors released during construction,
$7,500.00 penalty. (complaint occurred prior to Chemical Waste Management obtaining company.)
ITEM DATE: STATE: AGENCY&# 9;PENALTY
5 01/08/81 NEW YORK NEW YORK DEPT. ENV. COMS. $2,750.00 CIVIL
SUMMARY
Alleged allowance of leachate levels to exceed authorized levels.
$2,750.00 penalty. (Complaint occurred prior to chemical Waste Management
CHEMICAL WASTE MANAGEMENT
JUDICIAL AND ADMINISTRATIVE ENVIRONMENTAL ACTIONS
obtaining company.)
PENALTY
ITEM DATE: STATE: AGENCY
$2,000.00 CIVIL
6 04/16/81 OHIO U.S.E.P.A.
SUMMARY
Alleged acceptance of hazardous waste from Canada without providing the required notice to EPA; alleged failure to prevent pond erosion and provide cover to a hazardous waste pile; alleged failure to submit a contingency plan to local authorities
$2,000.00 civil penalty.
PENALTY
ITEM DATE: STATE: AGENCY
$8,550.00 PENALTY
7 09/18/81 KANSAS u,S.E.P.A.
SUMMARY
Alleged improper storage of PcB transformers and failure to maintain an annual record of PcBs handeled during 1978 and 1979.
$8,550.00 penalty. (complaint occurred prior to CWM acquisition of site)
¼NALTY
ITEM DATE: STATE: AGENCY&# 9;$13,5O0~00 PENALTY
8 11/17/81 NEW YORK NEW YORK DEPT. ENV. cONS.
SUMMARY
Alleged violations of PcB's regulations, including leaking storage drums; improper storage and labeling of articles containing pcB~s; failure to report PCB storage tanks; allowance of leachate levels in a PCB storage cell to exceed the approved level
$l3~500.O0 penalty. (coniplaint occurred pri~ to chemical Waste Management obtaining this company.)
ITEM
DATE:
9
04/16/82
PENALTY
STATE: AGENCY $7,500.00 CIVIL
NEW YORK NEW YORK DEPT. ENV. CONS.
SUMMARY
Alleged discharge of lagoofi liquid into a drainage ditch and failure to cover sludge and prevent off-site odors.
$7,500.00 civil penalty. (complaint occurred prior to Chemical Waste Management obtaining this company.)
ATTACHMENT V
CHEMICAL WASTE MANAGEMENT
JUDICIAL AND ADMINISTRATIVE ENVIRONMENTAL ACTIONS
ITEM DATE: STATE: AGENCY PENALTY
10 05/14/82 NEW YORK NEW YORK DEPT. ENV. CONS. $10,000.00 CIVIL
SUMMARY
Alleged noxious odor emissions.
$10,000.00 civil penalty. (complaint occurred prior to Chemical Waste Management obtaining this company.)
ITEM DATE: STATE: AGENC Y PENALTY
11 01/18/83 NEW YORK NEW YORK DEPT. ENV. CONS. $12,000.00
SUMMARY
Alleged noxious odor emissions $12,000.00 penalty.
obtaining this company.)
(Complaint occurred prior to Chemical waste Management
ITEM DATE: STATE: AGENC Y PENALTY
12 03/29/83 ALABAMA ALA DEPT. OF ENV. MGMT. $50,000.00 CIVIL
SUMMARY
Alleged failure to complete leachate collection system in facility plan; alleged improper PCB storage; alleged improper within disposal cells.
$50,000 civil penalty, $100,000 reimbursement of costs to Environmental Management.
accordance with '3mapping" of waste
Alabama Department of
ITEM DATE: STATE: AGENC Y PENALTY
13 05/11/83 KANSAS KANSAS DEPT. OF hEALTh & ENV. $700.00 CIVIL
SUMMARY
Alleged late payment of closure escrow account. $700.00 civil
penalty.
ITEM DATE: STATE: AGENC Y PENALTY
14 12/07/83 ALABAMA U.S.E.P.A. $13,500.00 CIVIL
SUMMARY
Alleged failure: to have an organized inspection check for leaks from stored POB items; to mark storage dates on containers; to install collector drain in storage
CHEMICAL WASTE MANAGEMENT
JUDICIAL AND ADMINISTRATIVE ENVIRONMENTAL ACTIONS
area. Alleged storage of PCB drums on top of closed disposal cells. Alleged amount
of spillage of drained material. Alleged crack in storage area floor. $13,500.00 civil penalty.
PENALTY
ITEM DATE: STATE: AGENCY
15 12/09/83 OREGON u.S.E.P.A. $3,500.00
SUMMARY
Alleged solidification and burial of PCBs in violation of 40 CFR 761.60 (a) (1).
$3,500.00 penalty.
DATE:
16 02/22/84
ITEM
PENALTY
STATE: AGENCY
$40,990.00 CIVIL
COLORADO U.S. E.P.A.
SUMMARY
Alleged failure: to maintain adequate inspection logs; to correct alle9ed ~eakage at a surface impoundment; to conduct proper groundwatet monitoring; to maintain an up to date contingency plan.
$40,990.00 civil penalties.
PENALTY
ITEM DATE: STATE: AGENCY
$1,500.00 PENALTY
17 03/30/84 cOLORADO U.s.E.P.A.
SUMMARY plan.
Alleged failure to follow decontamination procedure in closure
$i,soo.oo penalty.
PENALTY
ITEM DATE: STATE: AGENCY $1 0,000.00 PENALTY
18 05/22/84 OhIo ATTORNEY GENERAL~S OFFICE
SUMMARY
annulus pressure differential less than that Alleged operation error led to an
permitted
$10,000.00 penalty.
PAGE 4
CHEMICAL WASTE MANAGEMENT
JUDICIAL AND ADMINISTRATIVE ENVIRONMENTAL ACTIONS
ITEM DATE: STATE: AG ENCY PENALTY
19 05/22/84 OHIO ATTORNEY GENERAL'S OFFICE $l0,00O,OOO.OO CIVIL
SUMMARY
Alleged violation of permits on: deep well injection; failure to close surface impoundments; odor emissions; PC8 nuisance; violations of state RCRA regulaions and permits; alleged unauthorized air polution emissions.
$5,000,000.00 civil penalty; $3,000,000.00' paid for permitting and inspection costs; $2,000,000.00 paid to Sandusky Co.
ITEM DATE: STATE: AGENCY PENALTY
20 05/25/84 NEW JERSEY NEW JERSEY DEPT. ENV. PRQTECTI $15,700.00 CIVIL
SUMMARY
Alleged storage of drums in unpermitted areas, storage of waste in excess of 90 days, and failure to maintain complete operating 107.
$15,700.00 civil penalty. (Complaint ocdurred prior to Chemical Waste Management's acquisition of the company.)
PENALTY
ITEM DATE: STATE: AGENCY
21 06/27/84 COLORADO U.S.D.O.T. $5,000.00 PENALTY
SUMMARY
Alleged improper transport of hazardous materials.
~5,000.00 penalty.
ITEM DATE: STATE: AGENCY&# 9;PENALTY
22 08/01/84 NEW JERSEY NEW JERSEY SUPERIOR COURT $1,025.00 FINE
SUMMARY
Alleged knowledcje of storage of hazardous waste without authorization from New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection. (Complaint occurred prior to purchase of company by Cheminal Waste Management.)
ITEM DATE: STATE: AGENCY&# 9;PENALTY
23 08/20/84 COLORADO U.S.E.P.A. $70,000.00 CIVIL
SUMMARY
Alleged: discharged of leachate sump pumping contrary to 06/15/82 order; failure
ChEMICAL WASTE MANAGEMENT
JUDICIAL AND ADMINISTRATIVE ENVIRONMENTAL ACTIONS
to grade and maintain a drainage ditch; malfunctioning run on control system; deteridrated and improperly lidded storage drums; drum storage preventing inspection for leaks.
$70,000.00 civil penalty.
PENALTY
ITEM DATE: STATE: AGENCY $4 0,000.00
24 09/28/84 OHIO OHIO EPA
SUMMARY
Alleqed mixing of incompatible waste in lagoons.
$40,000.00 penalty.
¼NALTY
ITEM DATE: STATE: AGENCY $8,000. 00
25 11/27/84 OHIO OHIO EPA
SUMMARY
Alleged violations of manifest regulations.
$8,000.00 penalty.
PENALTY
ITEM DATE: STATE: AGENCY
$600,000.00 CIVIL
26 12/19/84 ALABAMA u.S.E.P.A.
SUMMARY
Alleged violation of 40 CFR 761-65(a) regarding storage of PCB1s beyond storage deadline. Amended complaint alleged RCRA violations of 40 CFR 265.74, 40 CFR 265,314, 40 CFR 365.90(c), 40 CFR 265.19(a) (?) and 40 CFR 265.15(d).
$600,000.00 civil penalty.
PENALTY
ITEM DATE: STATE: AGENCY $367,500.00 CIVIL
27 01/28/85 NEW YORK U.S. E.P.A.
SUMMARY
Alleged disposal of sludge containing PCBs in excess of EPA approved levels and in violation of TSCA regulations.
$367,500.00 civil penalty. (complaint occurred prior to Chemical Waste Management obtaining this company.)
PAGE 6
ÿñÀ_ _
CHEMICAL WASTE MANAGEMENT
JUDICIAL AND ADMINISTRATIVE ENVIRONMENTAL ACTIONS
PENALTY
ITEM DATE: STATE: AGENCY
$15,750.00 CIVIL
28 01/28/85 NEW YORK U.S.E.P.A.
SUMMARY
Alleged failure to complete annual PCB document for 1983.
$l5,75Q..00 civil penalty. (Complaint occurred obtaining this company.)
prior to Chemical Waste Management
PENALTY
ITEM DATE: STATE: AGENCY
$20,000.00
29 03/27/85 NEW YORK U.S.E.P.A.
SUMMARY
Alleged storage of PCB liquids in an unmarked
$20,000.00 penalty. (Complaint occurred prior obtain~ng this company.)
area.
to Chemical Waste Management
PENALTY
ITEM DATE: STATE: AGENCY
$18,000.00
30 03/27/85 NEW YORK U.S.E.P.A.
SUMMARY
Alleged improper disposal of PCB contaminated
$18,000.00 penalty. (Complaint occurred prior obtaining this company.)
sludge.
to Chemical Waste Management
ITEM DATE: STATE: AGENCY&# 9;PENALTY
31 03/30/85 PENNSYLVANIA PA DEPT. ENV. RESOURCES $20,000.00 CIVIL
SUMMARY
No description given.
Fund,
$20,000.00 civil penalty, $70,000.00 contribution to Solid Waste Abatement payments made by chemical Waste Management and Lyncott Corp.
ITEM DATE: STATE: AGENCY&# 9;PENALTY
**
32 04/05/85 OI~IO U.S.E.P.A. $2,500,000.00
SUMMARY
Alleged violations of RCRA and TSCA regulations for the treatment, storage and disposal of hazardous waste. $2,500,000.00 penalty.
This record may be a duplication of Attachment 6, item 10 and Attachment 5, item/~
CHEMICAL WASTE MANAGEMENT
JUDICIAL AND ADMINISTRATIVE ENVIRONMENTAL ACTIONS
3'
AGENCY PENALTY
ITEM DATE: STATE:
U.S.DISTRICT COURT,WESTERN DIS $35,000.00 CIVIL
33 08/08/85 NEW YORK
SUMMARY
No description given.
$35,000.00 civil penalty.
DATE:
34 08/16/85
ITEM
STATE: AGENCY ¼NALTY
$1,000,000.00
TEXAS DISTRICT COURT, JEFFERSON CO
SUMMARY
waste permit.
Alleged violations of industrial
$1,000,000.00 penalty.
ITEM DATE: STATE: AGENCY ¼ENALTY
$28,000.00 CONTRIBUTION
35 08/25/85 01110 OHIO EPA
SUMMARY
Alleged allowance of release of rain water that has fallen on stabilized hazardous waste; alleged failure to timely report incident.
$28,000.00 contribution to Ohio riazardous Waste special cleanup Account.
PENALTY
ITEM DATE: STATE: AGENCY $1 5,000.00 CIVIL
36 09/30/85 NEW YORK U 5.£. P. A.
· SUMMARY
Ai1e~ed failure to notify NYDEC of statistical increase in indicators parameters; to submit an adequate groundwater quality assessment to NYDEC And USEPA; to submit annual report for 1982 and 1983.
~is,oo0 civil penalty.
PENALTY
ITEM DATE: STATE: AGENCY
$2,100,000.00 CIVIL
37 11/07/85 CALIFORNIA U.a.E.P.A.
SUMMARY
Alle9ed failure: to have ground water monitoring program; to have unsaturated zone monitoring program; to I~avo partial facility closure plan.
PAGE 8
©¾_ _
CHEMICAL WASTE MANAGEMENT
JUDICIAL AND ADMINISTRATIVE ENVIRONMENTAL ACTIONS
Alleged modifications to facility in violation of state permit and regulations. $2,100,000 civil penalty and $1,100,000 monitoring over ten years.
ITEM DATE: STATE: AGENCY&# 9;PENALTY
38 11/18/85 ILLINOIS ILLINOIS DOT $1,650.00 PENALTY
SUMMARY
Alleged shipment of hazardous waste without proper identification. $1,650.00 penalty.
ITEM DATE: STATE: AGENCY&# 9;PENALTY
**
39 12/02/85 OREGON U.S.E.P.A. $235,000.00 CIVIL
SUMMARY
Alleged failure: to properly handle hazardous waste; to accurately document storage and disposal of PcBs; to sample and analyze waste; to operate a leachate detection system.
$235,000.00 civil penalty. This item may be the same as Attachment 6, item 14.
ITEM DATE: STATE: AGENCY&# 9;PENALTY
40 12/26/85 OREGON U.S.E.P.A. $125,000.00 CIVIL **
SUMMARY
Alleged failure: to properly handle waste; to accurately document waste transactions; to sample and analyze waste; to modify and update contingency plans.
$125,000.00 civil penalty. This item may be the same as Attachment~6, item 13.
ITEM DATE: STATE: AGENCY&# 9;PENALTY
41 03/25>86 NEW YORK NEW YORK DEPT. ENV. CONS. $105,000.00 CIVIL
SUMMARY
Alleged various deficiencies in groundwater sampling; analysis, and statistical analysis; alleged exceedance of allowed leachate levels.
$105,000.00 civil penalty.
ÿ1Á_ _
CHEMICAL WASTE MANAGEMENT
JUbICIAL AND ADMINISTRATIVE ENVIRONMENTAL ACTIONS
ITEM DATE: STATE: AGENCY < U>PENALTY
42 04/21/86 NEW JERSEY U.S.D.O.T. $5,000.00 PENALTY
SUMMARY
Alleged transport of hazardous waste in an unauthorized cargo tank in violation of
49 cER 173.22.
$5,000.00 penalty.
ITEM DATE: STATE: AGENCY PENALTY
43 05/22/86 LOUISIANA LOUISIANA DEPT. OF PUBLIC SAFE $1,250.00 FINE
SUMMARY
Alleged failure to display proper identification numbers markings on a vehicle; alleged use of a non-specification cargo tank. $1,250.00 fine.
PENALTY
ITEM DATE: STATE: AGENCY
$5,800.00
44 07/03/86 ALABAMA WEST VA. DEPT, OF HIGHWAYS
SUMMARY
Alleged existence of manifest irregularties and tractor trailer containing leaking package.
PENALTY
ITEM DATE: STATE: AGENCY $3,900.00 CIVIL
45 07/31/86 ILLINOIS ILLINOIS DOT
SUMMARY
Alleged violation of IDOT regulations by improperly transporting waste xylene. $3,900.00 civil penalty.
DATE
:46 08/26/86
ITEM
PENALTY
STATE: AGENCY
$3,900.00 CIVIL
ILLINOIS ILLINOIS DOT
SUMMARY
Alleged violation of IDOT regulations by transporting waste in tank without proper venting capacity, piping protection or closure means.
$3,900.00 in civil penalties.
PAGE 10
CHEMICAL ~ASTE
MANAGEMENTJUDICIAL AND ADMINISTRATIVE ENVIRONMENTAL ACTIONS
ITEM DATE: STATE: AG ENCY PENALTY
47 09/26/86 INDIANA U.S.E.P.A $30,000.00 CIVIL
SUMMARY
Alleged failure: to install monitoring wells in a certain required locations; to submit or timely implement an adequate groungwater quality assessment program; to obtain adequate liability coverage. $30,000.00 civil penalty.
ITEM DATE: STATE: AGENCY PENALTY
48 10/22/86 NEW JERSEY FIRST DISTRICT COURT, HAUPPAUG $5,000.00 PAYMENT
SUMMARY
No description given.
$5,000.00 payment of restitution and investigative costs.
ITEM DATE: STATE: AGENCY PENALTY
49 04/22/87 FLORIDA FLORIDA DEPT. OF ENV. REGULATI $3,550.00 CIVIL
SUMMARY
Alleged miscellaneous storage deficiencies. $fl,550.00 civil penalty and $500.00 reimbursement of costs.
ITEM DATE: STATE: AGENCY&# 9;PENALTY
50 06/04/S? OREGON U.S.E.P.A. $15,000.00 CIVIL
SUMMARY
Alleged failure: to keep certain inspection records on site; to maintain a signed copy of a manifest; to conduct repairs on certain occassions; to record the storage location of a hazardous waste; to comply with the facility waste analysis plan; to properly manage water reactive waste.
$15,000.00 civil penalty.
(May be same case as listed on 08/04/87.)
ITEM
DATE:
51 07/02/87
STATE: AGENCY PENALTY
LOUISIANA LOUISIANA DEPT. OF ENV. QUALIT $2,500.00 SETTLEMENT
SUMMARY
Alleged failure to sign two asbestos disposal verification forms and submit them in a timely manner. $2,500.00 settlement.
CHEMICAL WASTE MANAGEMENT
JUDICIAL AND ADMINISTRATIVE ENVIRONMENTAL ACTIONS
ITEM DATE: STATE: AGENCY&# 9;PENALTY
52 07/07/87 MIChIGAN DISTRICT COURT, DISTRICT NO. 1 $3,000.00 FINE
SUMMARY
Alleged transportation of hazardous waste without proper state vehicle permit. $3,000.00 fine.
PENALTY
ITEM DATE: STATE: AGENCY
$20,000.00 SETTLEMENT
53 07/26/87 ALABAMA ALABAMA DEPT. OF ENY. MGMT.
SUMMARY
Alleged failure to follow pesticide materials.
$20,000.00 settlement and
waste analysis plan by accepting 14 drums of outdated
reimbursement.
ITEM DATE: STATE: AGENCY&# 9;PENALTY
54 08/04/87 OREGON U.S.E.P.A. $15,000.00 SETTLEMENT **
SUMMARY
Alleged failure: to maintain inspection reports for two days; to record certain repairs; to maintain a signed copy at a manifest; to record location of storage of hazardous waste; to properly manage water reactive waste; to comply with waste acceptance plan. $15,000.00 settlement.
(May be same incident as recorded on 06/04/87.)
ITEM DATE: STATE: AGENCY PENALTY
55 08/05/87 CALIFORNIA MUNICIPAL COURT,SANTA CLARA,CO $680.00 CIVIL
SUMMARY
No description given of complaint. May be a duplicate of item dated 08/07/88, however, courts and datec~ are different; $680.00 civil penalty.
ITEM DATE: STATE: AGENCY&# 9;PENALTY
56 08/13/87 ILLINOIS U.S.E.P.A. $18,240.00 PENALTY **
SUMMARY
Alleged delay in implementation of groundwater assessment, late filings. $18,240.00 penalty. This item is duplicated under the waste Management Administrative Cases~ Item 38.
CHEMICAL WASTE: MANAGEMENT
JUDICIAL AND ADMINISTRATIVE ENVIRONMENTAL ACTIONS
PENALTY
ITEM DATE: STATE: AGENCY
57 08/26/87 NEW YORK NEW YORK DEPT. ENV. CONS. $7,500.00 CIVIL
· SUMMARY
Alleged failure
$7,500.00 civil
to obey permit condition and regulation relating to daily cover. penalty.
ITEM DATE: STATE: AGENCY&# 9;PENALTY
58 10/09/87 NEW JERSEY NEW JERSEY DEPT. ENV. PROTECTI $700.00 SETTLEMENT
SUMMARY
Alleged operation of tank without associated scrubber. $700.00 settlement.
ITEM DATE: STATE: AGENCY&# 9;PENALTY
59 10/11/87 COLORADO U.S.E.P.A. $15,000.00 CIVIL
SUMMARY
Alleged improper disposal of drums containing POD'S.
$15,000.00 civil penalty.
ITEM DATE: STATE: AGENCY&# 9;PENALTY
60 11/02/87 CALIFORNIA CALl?. DEPT. OF HEALTH SERVICE $20,000.00 PAYMENT
SUMMARY
$20,000.00
Alleged failure to comply with groundwater monitoring requirements.
payment for agency oversight costs.
ITEM DATE: STATE: AGENCY&# 9;PENALTY
61 11/30/87 LOUISIANA LOUISIANA DEPT. OF ENV. QUALIT $32,500.00 CIVIL
SUMMARY
Alleged failure: to notify LDEQ when certain waste shipments were rejected for manifest discrepancies; various drums handling and disposal deficiencies. $32,500.00 penalty.
ÿØÿ_À_ _
CHEMIcAL WASTE MANAGEMENT
JUDICIAL AND ADMINISTRATIVE ENVIRONMENTAL ACTIONS
ITEM
DATE:
62 01/22/88
STATE: AGENCY
ILLINOIS ILLINOIS DOT
PENALTY
$3,450.00 PENALTY
SUMMARY
Alleged transportation of waste without adequate labeling on containers, without complete description on shipping paper, and without complete vehicle placarding.
$3,450.00 penalty.
ITEM DATE: STATE: AGENCY PENALTY
63
04/11/88 LOUISIANA LOUISIANA DEPT. OF ENV. QUALIT $2,000.00 CIVIL
SUMMARY
Alleged untimely submission of groundwater quality assessment plan. $2,000.00 civil penalty.
. DATE:
64 04/28/88
ITEM
STATE:
NEW JERSEY
AGENCY PENALTY
NEW JEI~EY DEPT. ENV. PROTECTI $5,000.00 CIVIL
SUMMARY
Alleged discharge of treated aqueous waste which was not permitted by facility's permit.
$5,ooo~00 civil penalty.
PENALTY
ITEM DATE: STATE: AGENCY $53,000.00 CIVIL
65 06/02/88 ILLINOIS CIRCUIT COURT OF COOK COUNTY
SUMMARY
No description given. $53,000.00 civil penalties; anticipate additional payments of $290,000.00 plus $350,000.00 /year tar five years.
DATE:
66 07/01/88
ITEM
PENALTY
STATE: AGENCY
$1,000.00 CIVIL
NEW YORK NEW YORK DEPT. ENV. CONS.
SUMMARY
Alleged shipment of waste which were not included on manifest.
$i,ooo.00 civil penalty.
PAGE 14
q½_ _
ATTACHMENT 7
CHEMICAL WASTE MANAGEMENT
JUDICIAL AND ADMINISTRATIVE ENVIRONMENTAL ACTIONS
ITEM DATE: STATE: AGENCY PENALTY
67 08/05/88 ALABAMA U.S.E.P.A. $150,000.00 SETTLEMENT
SUMMARY
Alleged acceptance of wastes for landfilling not listed in the RCRA permit. $150,000.00 settlement. (this may be the same items as listed on 09/19/88)
ITEM DATE: STATE: AGENCY&# 9;PENALTY
68 08/07/88 CALIFORNIA U.S.DISTRICT COURT, NORTHERN $680.00 **
SUMMARY
No description given of complaint. May be duplicative of item listed at 08/05/87, but dates and courts are different. $680.flO civil penalty.
PENALTY
ITEM DATE: STATE: AGENCY
$1,000.00 FINE
69 08/15/88 PENNSYLVANIA PA DEPT. ENV. RESOURCES
SUMMARY
Alleged transportation of waste without completion of manifest by generator. $1,000.00 fine.
ITEM DATE: STATE: AGENCY&# 9;PENALTY
**
70 09/19/88 ALA BAfriA U.S.E.P.A. $150,000.00
SUMMARY
Alleged disposal of certain wastes whose waste codes were not authorized in the facility's Part B permit. $150,000.00 penalty. (this may be duplicative of item listed at 08/05/88)
ITEM DATE: STATE: AGENCY PE NALTY
71 09/30/88 INDIANA ~NDIANA DEPT. OF ENV. MGMT. $16,000.00 PAYMENT
SUMMARY
Alleged failure: to properly install and operate groundwater monitoring wells; alleged deficiency of cost estimates and financial assurance. $16,000.00 payment.
ã¿9À_ _
CIIEMICAL WASTE MANAGEMENT
JUDICIAL AND ADMINISTRATIVE ENVIRONMENTAL ACTIONS
ITEM DATE: STATE: AG ENCY PENALTY
72 11/03/88 ILLINO~S ILLINOIS DOT $1,500.00 PENALTY
SUMMARY
Alleged failure to comply with placard requirements. $1,500.00 penalty.
ITEM DATE: STATE: AGENCY&# 9;PENALTY
73 11/03/88 I LLtNOIS ILLINOIS DOT $1,050.00 PENALTY **
SUMMARY
Alleged failure to comply with placard requirements $1,050.00 penalty. May be same as above.
ITEM DATE: STATE: AGENCY&# 9;PENALTY
$1,800.00 PENALTY
74 11/03/88 ILLINOIS ILLINOIS DOT
SUMMARY
$1,800.00
Alleged failure to properly label a waste container.
penalty
ITEM DATE: STATE: AGENCY PENALTY
75 12/27/88 OHIO OHIO PUBLIC UTILITIES COMMISSI $450.00 SETTLEMENT
SUMMARY
Driver allegdly smoking while operating vehicle.
$450.00 settlement.
ITEM DATE: STATE: AGENCY&# 9;PENALTY
76 01/13/89 OHIO OHIO EPA $14,000.00 SETTLEMENT
6UMMARY
Alleged operation of waste storage tanks that were not in compliance with newly applicable tank standards.
$14,000.00 settlement.
PAGIn, 16
ÿ]Á_ _
CHEMICAL WASTE MANAGEMENT
JUDICIAL AND ADMINISTRATIVE ENVIRONMENTAL ACTIONS
costs)
CHEMICAL WASTE MANAGEMENT SUMMARY
TOTAL ITEMs 81
TOTAL STATES INVOLVED: 12
TOTAL FINES, PENALTIES AND SETTLE~ENT COST: $15,251,690.00
** This item may be a duplication, the cost are not included in this section.
PAGE 18
CHEMICAL WASTE MANAGEMENT
JUDICIAL AND ADMINISTRATIVE ENVIRONMENTAL ACTIONS
PENALTY
ITEM DATE: STATE: AGENCY $5,000.00
77 01/13/89 OHIO u.S.E.P.A.
SUMMARY
Alleged violation of 40 CER 263.193 $5,000.00 penalty.
ITEM DATE: STATE: AGENCY&# 9;PENALTY
$5,000.00 SETTLEMENT
78 01/13/89 OHIO U.S.E.P.A.
SUMMARY
Alleged operation of waste storage tanks that were not in compliance with newly applicable standards.
$5,000.00 settlement.
PENALTY
ITEM DATE: STATE: AGENCY $2 6,595.00 SETTLEMENT
79 03/27/89 WASHINGTON SEATTLE MUNICIPAL POTW
SUMMARY
Facility failed to comply with POTW permit applications (Western processing Superfund Site)
$26,595.00 settlement, subject to 80 t reimbursement under certain conditions.
ITEM DATE: STATE: AGENCY&# 9;PENALTY
80 03/31/89 NEW YORK U.S.E.P.A. $8,500.00 SETTLEMENT
SUMMARY
Alleged landfill had one drum containing material with excessive PCB concentrations.
$8,500.00 settlement agreed to in prindipal.
ITEM DATE: STATE: AGENCY PE NALTY
81 04/07/89 CALIFORNIA U.S.E.P.A. $117,500.00 SETTLEMENT
SUMMARY
Alleged failure: to post warning signs no more than 200 feet apart; to timely notify the State of fires; to perform certain supplemental analyses; to maintain sufficient cover; to maintain adequate shower and eyewash.
$117,500.00 settlement. ($82,500.00 penalties and $35,000.00 administrative