20 August 2008
|
Home |
Search |
Contact |
Help
| |
 | |
Honeywell International, Inc. was ordered on 13 September 2007 by a US District Court to pay fines and restitution after the company was found negligent in the release of hazardous air pollutants which caused the death of employee Delvin Henry. The company will pay an $8 million fine, serve two years' probation and pay the following in restitution: $2 million to be paid to Henry’s three children; $1.5 million to be divided between the Louisiana Department of Environmental Quality and the Louisiana State Police Hazardous Materials Unit; and $500,000 to be paid to the Louisiana State Police Emergency Operations Center. This constitutes the largest criminal fine and restitution ordered in the Middle District of Louisiana. On 23 July 2003, Henry, an employee at Honeywell’s Baton Rouge plant, opened a one‑ton cylinder that had been stored for five years and erroneously labelled as containing a relatively benign refrigerant. Once opened, approximately 1,800 pounds of spent antimony pentachloride, a highly toxic and corrosive hazardous material, were released from the cylinder. Henry was struck by the material and died the following day from his injuries. Last February, the company pled guilty to negligently causing the release of hazardous air pollutants and negligently placing another person in imminent danger of death in violation of the Clean Air Act.
This week, the Inter-regional Environment Team (IMT) of the Zuid-Nederland Supra-regional Investigation Unit (BRZN) concluded an investigation into the illegal storage of magnesium waste. The investigation, targeted at five companies in the provinces of Noord-Brabant, Noord-Holland, Gelderland and Utrecht, was launched in October 2006.
Source: Brabant Zuid Oost Police
22/08/2007 The Assets Recovery Agency (ARA), working in partnership with the Environment Agency, has successfully obtained restraint orders to freeze properties belonging to a Bradford man convicted of illegally dumping asbestos and excavation waste. ARA’s investigation follows the conviction of William John Peter Reidy, aged 60, of Bradford. The prosecution against Mr Reidy was brought by the Environment Agency following the illegal activities of a demolition business run by him, called Space Making Development. In spite of not holding a waste management licence, the firm was being paid to take building waste away from companies across Yorkshire. Officers from the Environment Agency carried out surveillance on the site and estimated that a total of 200 lorry loads of waste had been illegally dumped. A skip containing asbestos sheeting was also discovered, for which the business did not hold a licence. Mr Reidy was sentenced to 16 months’ imprisonment of each of four charges relating to the keeping and depositing of waste, including asbestos. The sentences were ordered to run concurrently, as were further sentences of three months for each of nine further waste charges. ARA is investigating whether or not and if so, to what extent, the defendants have benefited from their illegal activities and will seek to recover assets equal to a value of the benefit established.
THE prominent New Zealand oil and gas company which won a TRC environmental award last year has been fined $20,000 for polluting a waterway. The Taranaki Regional Council took Swift Energy New Zealand Ltd to the Environment Court over an illegal discharge of drilling mud and sediment from its Kowhai-A wellsite near Tikorangi on December 11 last year. Swift, which won the TRC's 2006 Environmental Award, pleaded guilty to the charge before Environment Court Judge, Brian Dwyer, on Thursday. After the incident, the company offered a $9000 payment towards the TRC's costs. Judge Dwyer said Swift had taken immediate, effective and costly measures to fix the situation. 'Overall it seems clear that the environmental damage was temporary and has been substantially remedied,' he said. Swift paid $49,400 to clean up the mess and $52,600 to stop it happening again. Judge Dwyer convicted Swift and fined the company $20,000. Copyright: Taranaki Daily News
A London waste company was fined £30,000 yesterday after attempting to illegally export maggot-infested household waste to India. Community Waste Ltd, of Earls Court in London, was also ordered to pay £13,000 in costs by Maidstone Crown Court after pleading guilty to illegally exporting shipments of unsorted household waste to India in breach of the Transfrontier Shipments of Waste Regulations at an earlier hearing. The court heard that on 13 and 14 October 2005 three Environment Agency officers and two Scottish Environmental Protection Agency officers visited Thamesport, in Kent, and inspected 11 40-foot containers, which were due to be shipped to India. These 11 containers were labelled as containing paper waste and were due to be shipped by Community Waste Ltd to an address in India. But when they inspected the containers, officers found that Community Waste Limited had not sorted or separated the waste into separate waste streams and had not removed any non-recyclable material. Instead of paper they found cardboard, tins, plastic bottles, packaging, dog food cans, nappies, plastic flower pots, toothpaste tubes and yoghurt tubs, glass, metals, and textiles. Two of the containers also contained maggots. Two containers inspected on the 14 October, also labelled as paper waste, appeared to contain council-collected rubbish and one of the containers was infested with maggots. All 11 containers were banned from being exported because they illegally contained a mixture of waste. Regulatory waste officer Dr Helen Ahmed said: 'We are delighted with the fine imposed on the company by the court, which reflects the seriousness of the offence – in his summing up the judge highlighted the potential damage that illegally shipped waste can cause to the environment and the people who would have had to deal with the waste in India. This successful prosecution shows that we won’t hesitate to pursue companies who export waste illegally. There is a legitimate and growing market abroad for recyclables, but there are rules covering waste exports.'
Following a complaint filed by a municipality in the Stockholm area regarding suspected environmental crime etc., a preliminary investigation has resulted in the arrest of three persons charged with environmental offence and unauthorised environmental activities carried out within the period of 2005-2007. Another four persons have been notified of the suspicion of the same offences. The Criminal Investigation Department of Stockholm County Police inquired into the handling of large quantities of hazardous waste in an industrial estate in Tumba, one of Stockholm’s suburbs. Large quantities of refrigerators, motors, compressors, computers and other waste had been collected to the industrial site. The waste was in some measure processed at the site in order to be loaded in ship containers. Consignment notes that have been seized indicate that the waste has been shipped to the Congo. Refrigerators contain freons and aggressive oils, which may have been discharged at the site. Electronic components contain flame retardants and similar hazardous waste. The forensic examination is still in progress. The trader lacks authorisation to handle and export hazardous waste. District Prosecutor at the Public Prosecution Office in Stockholm, Mr Gunnar Jonasson, says: More information about the Swedish Police Service is available at www.polisen.se.
A waste company has been ordered to pay £25,000 after trying to illegally export hazardous waste to China. The Remet Company Ltd, which is based in Cody Road, Tower Hamlets in London, was fined £9,000 after pleading guilty to one offence at Maidstone Crown Court. It was also ordered to pay £16,017 in costs. The court heard that the company, which runs a metal recycling facility, had tried to export shredded refrigerator waste, which included hazardous chlorofluorocarbons (CFCs) to China in January 2005. The Environment Agency, which regulates the waste industry, investigated the company under the Transfrontier Shipment of Waste Regulations 1994 and inspected a container bound for China on 17 January 2005 after being informed about the shipment by HM Customs and Revenue, which was suspicious of the contents. When the container was opened, regulatory waste officers noticed a strong and distinctive smell similar to solvents. The description of the waste in the container said it held mixed metal scrap, but there was no mention that the waste contained CFCs. Officers also discovered other waste, including plastic, wood and medicine strips. It is illegal to export waste containing CFCs to China. Regulatory waste officer Dr. Helen Ahmed said: 'Under the rules, it's illegal for anyone to export waste for disposal, but items such as metal, waste paper or glass can be sent abroad for recycling.' Under the regulations, the maximum penalty for exporting waste illegally imposed in the Magistrates’ Court is £5,000 but in the Crown Court this fine can be unlimited.
English waste exports company, Grosvenor Waste Management Ltd, were ordered to pay £55,000 fine (80,700 €) after pleading guilty to illegally exporting household waste destined for developing countries in South East Asia. This follows a two year investigation into the company led by the Environment Agency for England and Wales, who is responsible for enforcing the regulation of shipments of waste into and out of England and Wales under the Transfrontier Shipment of Waste Regulations. They worked closely with UK HM Customs, Indonesian Customs and the Dutch environmental regulator, VROM. Grosvenor, who handle household recyclable waste from London and south east England, pleaded guilty in February 2007 to six counts relating to illegally exporting shipments of around 95 twelve metre containers. This amounted to approximately 1.8 million kgs (the equivalent of 90 lorries full of waste) of unsorted household waste and was destined for India, China, and Indonesia. The waste Grosvenor was sending abroad contained a poorly sorted mixture of waste including nappies, food waste, textiles, cardboard, plastic drink bottles, tin cans and black plastic bags. Environment Agency officers inspecting the containers detained at Southampton and Dutch officers inspecting the containers detained in Holland all recalled the waste as smelling of household waste. In one container Dutch officers saw what looked like the remains of an animal. John Burns, Environment Agency Ports Project Manager said: 'This is one of the largest cases if its kind and shows we won’t hesitate to pursue companies who export waste illegally.' 'There is a legitimate and growing market abroad for recyclables, but there are rules covering waste exports, and these need to be adhered to for the benefit of the environment here and abroad.' The company also agreed to pay a contribution of £85,000 (125,000 €) towards the Environment Agency’s costs.
The general manager and chairman of the board of Petro Oil AS, a chemical processing plant in Norway has been ordered to serve three years in prison after being convicted of gross fraud, committing a breach of trust with fraudulent intent, providing a false statement and committing breaches of the Pollution Control Act and the Accounting Act. In addition to his prison sentence, the man was deprived of the right to be self-employed for five years and sentenced to forfeiture of his gains in the amount of NOK 4 million (€ 500.000). The individual was indicted by the Norwegian National Authority for Investigation and Prosecution of Economic and Environmental Crime (ØKOKRIM). Petro Oil AS received work from inter alia oil companies and was engaged in the transport, collection and processing of special waste. The man was convicted of gross fraud committed against the Norwegian Pollution Control Authority (SFT), as a result of having abused the refund scheme for waste oil. He was also convicted of gross fraud because he had, on three occasions, allowed the company to pay his private expenses. The conviction also covered making a false statement to SFT. The man was also convicted of breaches of Section 78, first paragraph, of the Pollution Control Act because he had polluted the local sewage system and the Kilsfjord with water containing oil and chemicals, delivered hazardous waste with the waste oil and stored special waste illegally. He was also convicted of breaches of the accounting regulations, since he had provided incorrect information in the company’s annual reports.
German authorities at the port of Hamburg inspected a van in transit from Norway to Nigeria and found two refrigerators containing Chlorofluorocarbons (CFC) inside the van. The release of CFCs into the atmosphere poses a significant danger to the earth’s ozone layer. The German police sent a letter of request to Norwegian authorities to undertake legal steps. The case was investigated and prosecuted by The Norwegian National Authority for Investigation and Prosecution of Economic and Environmental Crime (ØKOKRIM). The person in question received a fine of NOK 7.000 (€ 875) for violation of the Product Control Act.
Petro Canada was found guilty on 3 May 2006 of unlawfully discharging oil from one of its unmanned oil-production platforms. The company agreed to pay a penalty of C$290,000 – a fine of C$70,000, a contribution of C$120,000 to the Environmental Damage Fund and C$100,000 towards Grenfell College’s Environmental Science Merit Scholarship. The penalty, levied by a Provincial Court judge in St. John’s, Newfoundland, is the largest ever imposed in the region for a maritime oil-pollution offence. Investigators with the Canada-Newfoundland Offshore Petroleum Board charged the company on 29 July 2005 with violation of the Canada-Newfoundland Atlantic Accord Implementation Act. The charge arose from a spill of 165,000 litres of oil discharged between 20-21 November 2004 at or near the Terra Nova Commercial Discovery Area, which is located 350 nautical miles southeast of St. John’s. In accordance with the Canada-Newfoundland Offshore Petroleum Agreement, the Canada-Newfoundland Offshore Petroleum Board is the lead government agency for the offshore oil and gas industry. It dispatched sent investigators on-board the FPSO (Floating Production Storage and Offloading) Terra Nova to conduct the formal investigation.
Sweden’s Svea Court of Appeal recently established that old refrigerators are waste products, which will allow the government to regulate their disposal as with other hazardous materials. The appeals court overturned a district court’s previous ruling. The court ruled against a businessman who, on two occasions, had exported 400 old refrigerators from Sweden to the United Kingdom without government permission. Stockholm District Court rejected the prosecution’s initial ruling, but the government appealed. The District Court had ruled that the refrigerators were not considered as waste because they would be used again, but Svea Court of Appeal established that refrigerators were hazardous waste even if they had financial value. The Court of Appeal also based its ruling on a decision by the European Court of Justice (Zanetti, C-206-207/88) which held that: ‘The concept of waste, within the meaning of Article 1 of Directive 75/442 and Article 1 of Directive 78/319, is not to be understood as excluding substances and objects which are capable of economic reutilization. The concept does not presume that the holder disposing of a substance or an object intends to exclude all economic reutilization of the substance or object by others.’ This is an important ruling regarding unauthorised environmental activity related to the intermediate storage and transport of refrigerators and violation of Article 6 of Council Regulation (EEC) No. 259/93, which covers the supervision and control of the shipment of waste within, into and out of the European Community. The businessman was fined 4,000 Swedish krona (US$500).
| |||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||||
)