Case Study on Electroplater Who Claims He Has No Hazardous Waste and Santa Clara Incident

For example, some institutions argue there is no such thing as trash since they still have a purpose for it or could have one in the future. According to a recent report, a state inspector visited an electroplating business; the owner was already investigated for unrelated conduct. After receiving complaints from employees, the inspector secured a search warrant (Welz, 2021). Health and safety concerns with waste management technique. A uniformed officer served the search warrant upon arrival; after entering the facility inspector identified two serious problems:

An ancient, deteriorating six-story structure was filled with hundreds of containers of electroplating chemicals. None of them claimed the owner. The containers were a complete waste of time and money. As a result, he said, they were still reasonable plating solutions. They were being preserved for eventual use, and that was a good thing. When the containers were tested, all “excellent” plating solutions were faked (Wang, 2021). The funds were so depleted that they would be essentially worthless in the future. The owner of the company, to avoid the cost of appropriate disposal, was accumulating the containers.

A “green cloud” of fumes permeated the premises as electroplating was still taking place, a procedure that involves plating. There were complaints from workers about unpleasant odors and respiratory problems issues with the torso. There was also a large plating tank that was separated into two halves. The cyanide solution was confined on one side of the steel plate, and on the other hand, there was an acid bath (Achaw, 2021). As a result of any mixing of the two solutions, deathly emission of cyanide gas was produced.

It wasn’t long after that the inspector called OSHA, which shut down the plant immediately owing to an impending threat caused by an acid and cyanide tank.

No trash was found in any container, according to the owner. Each container contained meaningful and usable plating solutions, which he planned to utilize in the future; according to him, “Product” was strewn around the six-story structure by the hundreds, many of them in terrible shape. Because the “product” was essentially garbage, the federal government proclaimed the entire land a national monument. Security and container removal cost the USEPA almost $2 million. After the cleaning, the structure was destroyed because it was judged structurally unstable.

Hazardous waste identification difficulties are illustrated in the case studies above. Many interpretations of the dangerous waste laws are possible, and the safest judgment is agreed upon by the USEPA and state regulatory agency employees. It’s a risky move for any firm to identify trash independently or depend on a waste broker or vendor.

There was a lot to learn in this chapter. The primary duties of generators and the kinds of hazardous waste were discussed. You also discovered the lowered criteria for universal wastes. In addition, you learned why it’s vital to check your waste findings, and you studied case studies depicting: that false trash identification may be costly, a firm that had left town without notice, and an electroplater who claimed no hazardous waste.

Toxic Waste Dumped on Fields by A Korean Brake Pad Manufacturer

When Liu Yuying of Miyun discovered an unidentifiable gray powder poured on a parcel of land that she was planned to utilize for cultivation in 2011, she was shocked. Hyundai, General Motors, Kia, and Renault-Samsung were among the companies that produced the trash at KB Autosys. Waste has been dumped onto the site since 2008, the firm confessed in 2013. According to government reports, several trenches are reaching four meters deep and 30 meters broad where the trash was deposited. There was no grass to be found in the vicinity, and the bark of the trees was damaged and broken.

Company officials initially said they would conduct tests on Liu’s land and reimburse him for his losses and clean up the garbage. Following these pledges were made, the Vice President of KB’s Miyun plant reneged on his word. “Value-creating corporation for the protection of mankind and the global environment” is the company’s mission statement, ironically. Liu notified Miyun’s environmental officials, who collected a sample of the trash and sent it to analysis. Authorities in Miyun wrote to Liu in February 2012 to certify that ecological laws had been violated but did not provide the sample data taken at the time. In 2012, authorities penalized the firm 180,000 (€22,487), but Liu was not reimbursed for his losses. There are substantial sales figures for the company in 2012, with revenues of 119,852,516,789 Korean Won.

SOUTHWESTERN, Calif. Faltemier (DOB 1-13-65) was sentenced earlier today for her part in a November 2014 blast at 815 Mission Rock Road in Santa Paula that battered numerous employees and first respondents, as well as for the following storage of unrevealed hazardous chemicals on spot in 2015, according to the district attorney’s office.

It happened at 3:45 a.m. on November 18, 2014, at the Santa Clara Waste Water Company’s wastewater treatment flair at 815 Mission Rock Road in Santa Paula. According to the inquiry, a 5,040-gallon vacuum truck was used to combine and dispose of hazardous chemicals, which were not certified to contain or transport such compounds. As a result of the first explosion and the poisonous fumes that formed on the spot soon afterward from elements that erupted out of the void truck, several workers of the commercial perpetrators and firefighters, and nurses who arrived at the section were harmed.

At the Santa Paula plant of the corporate defendants, a search warrant was executed in November 2015, and about 5,500 loads of sodium hydroxide (also recognized as Petromax) were found in a secured transport container. California Environmental Reporting System (CERS) was supposed to be notified of these chemicals; however, the corporate respondents had not disclosed their ownership of Petromax since 2013.

Before the November 2014 inspections were finished, Faltemier swapped text mails with sentenced co-defendant David Wirsing, describing the corporate attempts to conceal chemicals from environmental inspectors. “Petromax” is a chemical found on-site; however, Faltemier failed to disclose its presence to the California Environmental Reporting System as mandatory by law after the explosion occurred on November 18, 2014.

At the sentencing hearing earlier today, the judge sentenced Faltemier to two years in prison and placed him on five years of formal probation. Faltemier was also sentenced to pay $2,647,621.35 in compensation to the victims. California Attorney General’s Office, Ventura County District Attorney’s Office, United States Environmental Protection Agency (USEPA), US Department of Transportation (USDOT), Division of Occupational Safety & Health (Cal/OSHA), State Department of Industrial Relations, and Ventura County Police Department collaborated to investigate and prosecute this case.

References

Achaw, O. W., & Danso-Boateng, E. Chemical and Process Industries.

Wang, Y., Meng, Y., Ji, Z., Meng, X., Song, X., Lu, P., & Chen, F. (2021). Bioinspired colored degradable starch-based films with excellent tensile strength. Industrial Crops and Products, 167, 113525.

Welz, M. (2021). Noseweek 250, 2021-03.