Recycler Pays $1.3-Million Settlement : Environment: The state accused Safety-Kleen Corp. of repeatedly violating hazardous-waste control law.
The state announced a $1.3-million settlement of a lawsuit Friday against the world’s largest recycler of degreasing solvents, alleging repeated violations of the state’s hazardous-waste control law at Los Alamitos and nine other facilities statewide.
State officials said the size of the settlement--the fourth largest in the 10-year history of the state law--was justified by the sheer number of alleged violations by the Safety-Kleen Corp. and by the fact that it was the second enforcement action the state had taken against the Illinois-based company in two years.
“Safety-Kleen’s operations throughout California reflected a cavalier attitude toward the state and federal hazardous-waste laws,” California Environmental Protection Agency Secretary James M. Strock said in a prepared statement. “These violations were inexcusable. Only one year earlier, the state penalized Safety-Kleen $725,000 for similar misdeeds.”
A lawsuit filed last April in Alameda County Superior Court charged Safety-Kleen with nearly 100 violations at the 10 state facilities. But the number of violations was reduced to 65 after further investigation by the state EPA’s Department of Toxic Substances Control.
The state lawsuit alleged violations at Safety-Keen plants in Los Alamitos, Highland, El Monte, San Diego and Sylmar in Southern California, and at plants in Central and Northern California. Those plants provide storage for a chemical agent, used primarily to degrease automotive parts, and dry-cleaning solvents.
Alleged violations included improper labeling of waste, deficient employee training records, a lack of a leak-detection system for underground storage tanks, and the operation of unsafe trucks.
Ken Alex, a deputy attorney general who handled the case, said that although the violations did not involve the release of toxic waste into the environment, the sloppiness of the operations might have led to an accident that would have endangered the company’s employees.
Jeffrey Bard, environmental manager for Safety-Kleen, said that while the company does not admit to any of the allegations as part of the settlement, it has “instituted a number of steps which we believe will prevent recurrence of these (alleged) violations.”
Bard said the company is also in the process of working with state regulators to draw up new plans to guide the operations of all 16 of its California facilities.
The state’s lawsuit sought a court order that would have required that any fine assessed against Safety-Kleen be paid out of revenue from the sales of new shares of the company’s stock. State officials said this was a new law-enforcement tactic that was intended to gain the attention of the company’s shareholders and pressure the company to comply with environmental regulations.
Alex said this proposed order did succeed in winning the company’s attention but was not part of the final settlement.
The $1.3-million settlement includes $300,000 in costs and $1 million in penalties, 75% of which will be used to help fund work of the state’s Toxic Substances Control Department, and 25% of which will be split among the environmental health offices of counties in which the toxic-waste violations were cited. The company said the settlement will be reflected in lower earnings for its fourth fiscal quarter, ending Dec. 31.
State and company officials said they are confident that Safety-Kleen will now operate in compliance with state regulations. “We believe that Safety-Kleen now understands how we enforce the laws that protect California’s environment,” Strock said. “We don’t expect Safety-Kleen to go a third round.”
