Hazardous Waste Enforcement: U.S. Environmental Protection Agency and Wapato, Washington Facility Enter into Expedited Settlement Agreement

Mitchell, Williams, Selig, Gates & Woodyard, P.L.L.C.
Contact

Mitchell, Williams, Selig, Gates & Woodyard, P.L.L.C.

Download PDF

The United States Environmental Protection Agency and McClarin Plastics d/b/a Amtech, LLC (“MPA”) entered into an August 22nd Expedited Settlement Agreement (“ESA”) addressing alleged violations of the federal Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (“RCRA”) hazardous waste regulations. See Docket No. RCRA-10-2018-0314.

MPA is stated to be the owner and/or operator of a facility located in Wapato, Washington.

The ESA provides that EPA inspected the facility on July 7, 2017. The document alleges the facility violated the following RCRA regulations:

  • MPA did not determine that its generator category in violation of 40 C.F.R. § 262.13
  • MPA had multiple containers containing hazardous waste acetone still bottoms that were not marked with the words “Hazardous Waste,” an indication of the hazards of the contents, nor the date accumulation began, in violation of conditions set for in 40 C.F.R. § 262.17(a)(5)(i)(A), (B), (C)
  • MPA was not conducting weekly inspections of hazardous waste accumulation areas in violation of a condition set forth in 40 C.F.R. § 262.17(a)(1)(v)
  • MPA did not provide adequate isle space between containers of hazardous waste, in violation of a condition set forth in 40 C.F.R. § 262.17(a)(6)
  • Training records reviewed by EPA indicated that facility personnel had not completed the specified training, in violation of the condition set forth in 40 C.F.R. § 262.17(a)(7)(ii)(iii)
  • MPA had a container used to accumulate hazardous waste aerosol cans that were not closed and was not labeled with the words “Hazardous Waste” or an indication of the hazards of the contents, in violation of 40 C.F.R. § 262.15(a)(4) and (5)
  • MPA had multiple containers of universal waste that were not closed or properly labeled for which the company could not demonstrate the length of time they had been accumulated, in violation of 40 C.F.R. Part 273.

A civil penalty of $7,000 is assessed.

A copy of the ESA can be found here.

DISCLAIMER: Because of the generality of this update, the information provided herein may not be applicable in all situations and should not be acted upon without specific legal advice based on particular situations.

© Mitchell, Williams, Selig, Gates & Woodyard, P.L.L.C. | Attorney Advertising

Written by:

Mitchell, Williams, Selig, Gates & Woodyard, P.L.L.C.
Contact
more
less

Mitchell, Williams, Selig, Gates & Woodyard, P.L.L.C. on:

Reporters on Deadline

"My best business intelligence, in one easy email…"

Your first step to building a free, personalized, morning email brief covering pertinent authors and topics on JD Supra:
*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
Custom Email Digest
- hide
- hide

This website uses cookies to improve user experience, track anonymous site usage, store authorization tokens and permit sharing on social media networks. By continuing to browse this website you accept the use of cookies. Click here to read more about how we use cookies.