DSHW-2024-009073

NARRATIVE EXPLANATION TO SUPPORT PENALTY AMOUNT FOR PROPOSED STIPULATION AND CONSENT ORDER SCO # 2402031 Violation Number 1 Violation Description: Utah Admin. Code R315-262-11: Mr. Oviatt failed to make an accurate hazardous waste determination on a contaminated shipping container and on the concrete floor contaminated with listed and characteristic hazardous waste. 1. Gravity Based Penalty: $10,400
(a) Potential for Harm – Major.
Failing to make a hazardous waste determination can cause hazardous waste to be mismanaged while at the generator site, while in transport, and at the disposal site. Mr. Oviatt failed to make an accurate hazardous waste determination, which created a major potential for harm because:
i. The contaminated Conex shipping container was disposed of at an unlined, unmonitored
construction and demolition waste landfill instead of a hazardous waste landfill that is designed and operated to prevent hazardous waste from being released to the environment and to prevent landfill workers from being exposed to hazardous waste; and
ii. Three dump truck loads of contaminated concrete were disposed of at a concrete recycling
facility where concrete is crushed and stored outdoors in uncovered piles on unpaved land instead of at a landfill that is designed and operated to prevent hazardous waste from being released to the environment and to prevent landfill workers from being exposed to hazardous waste.
Mr. Oviatt failed to make a hazardous waste determination, which led to the mismanagement of hazardous waste and created a high potential to harm workers, the general public, and the environment through exposure to hazardous chemical constituents.
(b) Extent of Deviation – Major.
Mr. Oviatt failed to comply with any of the requirements for making an accurate hazardous waste determination (i.e., performing analytical testing, applying generator knowledge, and documenting the determination), which is a major deviation from the requirements of this regulation.
(c) Multiple/Multi-day - NA 2. Adjustment Factors (if applicable) - NA (a) Good faith - NA (b) Willfulness/Negligence - NA (c) History of Compliance or Noncompliance - NA (d) Ability to pay - NA
(e) Other Unique Factors - NA 3. Economic Benefit – Mr. Oviatt derived an economic benefit from managing the contaminated Conex shipping container and the concrete floor as non-hazardous waste. However, an economic benefit adjustment was not applied because the Division does not have sufficient information to accurately calculate the economic benefit. 4. Recalculation of Penalty based on New Information - NA TOTAL: $10,400.00
NARRATIVE EXPLANATION TO SUPPORT PENALTY AMOUNT FOR PROPOSED STIPULATION AND CONSENT ORDER SCO # 2402031 Violation Number 2 Violation Description: Utah Admin. Code R315-262-17(a)(8)(ii)(C): Mr. Oviatt failed to notify the Director using EPA Form 8700-12 within 75 days of the expected closure date to request an extension and provide an explanation as to why the additional time is required. 1. Gravity Based Penalty - $1,560.00
(a) Potential for Harm – Minor.
The hazardous waste notification procedures are necessary to provide the Division adequate time to oversee the closure process and ensure that human health and the environment are protected. The
potential for harm is significant when the Division is cut out of the process. While Mr. Oviatt failed
to notify the Director within 75 days of the expected closure date, Mr. Oviatt later requested an extension to develop a plan and schedule for closure. Therefore, the potential for harm is minor.
(b) Extent of Deviation – Major.
Mr. Oviatt failed to meet all important aspects of the requirement to notify the Director that the Facility could not be closed within the required timeframe and similarly failed to provide an explanation as to why additional time was required. This constitutes a major deviation from the requirements of this regulation.
(c) Multiple/Multi-day - NA 2. Adjustment Factors (if applicable) - NA (a) Good faith - NA (b) Willfulness/Negligence - NA (c) History of Compliance or Noncompliance - NA (d) Ability to pay - NA (e) Other Unique Factors - NA 3. Economic Benefit - Because Mr. Oviatt requested an extension to develop a plan and schedule for closure, no obvious economic benefit was derived from failing to request an extension to close the Facility within 75 days of the expected closure date. 4. Recalculation of Penalty based on New Information - NA TOTAL: $1,560.00
NARRATIVE EXPLANATION TO SUPPORT PENALTY AMOUNT FOR PROPOSED STIPULATION AND CONSENT ORDER SCO # 2402031 Violation Number 3 Violation Description: Utah Admin. Code R315-262-17(a)(8)(iii)(A)(II): Mr. Oviatt failed to close the Facility in a manner that “[r]emoves or decontaminates all contaminated equipment, structures and soil and any remaining hazardous waste residues from waste accumulation units including containment system components (pads, liners, etc.), contaminated soils and subsoils, bases, and structures and equipment contaminated with waste.” 1. Gravity Based Penalty: $10,400.00 (a) Potential for Harm – Major.
Mr. Oviatt failed to properly close the Facility in a manner that removes all contaminated equipment, structures, and soil and any remaining hazardous waste residues from waste accumulation units, including containment system components. While there may be more contamination at the Facility than is currently documented, the documented contamination is summarized below.

i. Soil samples collected in 2015 indicated hexavalent chromium, cyanide, arsenic, cadmium, copper and nickel contamination that exceeded industrial or residential EPA Regional Screening Levels (RSLs). Soil samples collected in 2022 exceeded the Residential RSL for cadmium and hexavalent chromium, and one sample exceeded the Industrial RSL for
hexavalent chromium; ii. The 2015 groundwater data showed that maximum contaminant levels (MCLs), or tap water RSLs, were exceeded for: nickel, arsenic, hexavalent chromium, cyanide, 1,1-DCA and
1,4-dioxane. Multiple volatile organic chemicals (VOCs) were reported in groundwater
samples collected at the site in 2022, including tetrachloroethylene and daughter products. Trichloroethene (TCE) was detected in several groundwater samples above a Vapor Intrusion Screening Level (VISL) or the MCL. 1,1-Dichloroethane was detected above the Residential
VISL; and
iii. Wipe samples were collected from floor and wall surfaces in 10 different areas of the Facility. Multiple samples exceeded both the Operational and the Non-Operational Areas reporting limits for chromium, copper, lead, nickel, sodium hydroxide, sulfuric acid, and
hexavalent chromium, indicating a significant risk of hazardous chemical exposure to site workers. Failing to properly close the Facility in a manner that removes all contaminated equipment, structures, soils, and any remaining hazardous waste residues, including the documented
contamination summarized above, poses a major potential for harm to human health and the environment because the hazardous constituents remain in place without the controls necessary to limit exposure and migration.
(b) Extent of Deviation – Major. Mr. Oviatt failed to comply with the requirement to close the Facility, and Mr. Oviatt did not properly remove or decontaminate all contaminated structures and contaminated soil at the Facility. This constitutes a major extent of deviation from the requirement to close the Facility in a manner that removes contaminated structures and contaminated soils. (c) Multiple/Multi-day – NA 2. Adjustment Factors (if applicable) - NA (a) Good faith - NA (b) Willfulness/Negligence - NA (c) History of Compliance or Noncompliance - NA (d) Ability to pay - NA (e) Other Unique Factors - NA 3. Economic Benefit – Mr. Oviatt has not received any economic benefit because he cannot use the Facility until the Facility has been decontaminated and properly closed under the Rules. 4. Recalculation of Penalty based on New Information - NA TOTAL: $10,400.00
NARRATIVE EXPLANATION TO SUPPORT PENALTY AMOUNT FOR PROPOSED STIPULATION AND CONSENT ORDER SCO # 2402031 Violation Number 4 Violation Description: Utah Admin. Code R315-262-17(a)(8)(iii)(A)(III): Mr. Oviatt failed to manage hazardous waste generated in the process of closing the generator's facility “in accordance with all applicable standards of Rules R315-262, R315-263, R315-265 and R315-268, including removing any hazardous waste contained in these units within 90 days of generating it and managing these wastes in a hazardous waste permitted treatment, storage and disposal facility or interim status facility.” 1. Gravity Based Penalty: $10,400.00 (a) Potential for Harm – Major.
Mr. Oviatt generated hazardous waste in the process of closing the Facility by hiring a standard construction demolition company, SH Excavation, LLC (SH), to (1) demolish and dispose of the concrete floor from the Racking Room and the Plating Room that was contaminated with listed and characteristic hazardous wastes and (2) dispose of a Conex shipping container in which hazardous
wastes were accumulated prior to shipping. If SH was not aware that the concrete floor and Conex
shipping container were contaminated, SH may not have used appropriate personal protective equipment when doing the work. Moreover, the waste was not managed appropriately because SH disposed of the contaminated debris at facilities that were not permitted hazardous waste treatment, storage, and disposal facilities. For these reasons, improperly managing these hazardous wastes and
disposing of these hazardous wastes at facilities not permitted to receive such waste creates a major potential for harm to human health and the environment. By failing to manage the contaminated concrete waste and contaminated Conex shipping container as
hazardous waste, Mr. Oviatt interfered with the Division’s ability to ensure the safe management,
treatment, and disposal of the hazardous waste, causing a high adverse effect on the purposes and procedures of the hazardous waste program. (b) Extent of Deviation – Major. Mr. Oviatt did not follow any of the requirements associated with managing the waste generated from the demolition of the contaminated concrete floor and Conex shipping container, which is a major deviation from the requirements of this regulation. (c) Multiple/Multi-day - NA 2. Adjustment Factors (if applicable) - NA (a) Good faith - NA (b) Willfulness/Negligence - NA (c) History of Compliance or Noncompliance - NA (d) Ability to pay - NA
(e) Other Unique Factors – NA 3. Economic Benefit – Mr. Oviatt derived an economic benefit from managing the contaminated concrete and Conex shipping container as non-hazardous waste. However, an economic benefit adjustment was not applied because the Division does not have sufficient information to accurately calculate the economic benefit. 4. Recalculation of Penalty based on New Information - NA TOTAL: $10,400.00
NARATIVE EXPLANATION TO SUPPORT PENALTY AMOUNT FOR PROPOSED STIPULATION AND CONSENT ORDER SCO # 2402031 Violation Number 5 Violation Description: Utah Admin. Code R315-262-10(a)(3): Mr. Oviatt offered hazardous waste for transport, or otherwise caused hazardous waste to be sent to a facility that is not a designated facility, and not otherwise authorized to receive hazardous waste. 1. Gravity Based Penalty: $10,400.00 (a) Potential for Harm – Major.
Mr. Oviatt hired SH to transport for disposal (1) the concrete floor from the Plating and Racking Rooms that was contaminated with listed and characteristic hazardous wastes and (2) a Conex shipping container in which hazardous wastes were accumulated. The concrete floor and Conex shipping container were hazardous waste, and Mr. Oviatt caused such waste to be sent to
unauthorized facilities. This creates a major potential for harm to human health and the environment
because: i. SH disposed of the contaminated concrete floor at a concrete recycling facility that was not authorized to receive hazardous waste. Concrete at the recycling facility is generally
crushed and stored on unpaved surfaces, which, in this case, had the potential to create toxic air emissions, expose employees to heavy metal and cyanide-laden dust, and contaminate groundwater and surface water; and
ii. SH disposed of the contaminated Conex shipping container at an unlined, unmonitored
construction and demolition waste landfill instead of a hazardous waste landfill, which could expose humans to hazardous constituents and contaminate groundwater. (b) Extent of Deviation – Major. Mr. Oviatt did not follow any of the requirements associated with managing the hazardous waste generated from the demolition of the contaminated concrete floor and the Conex shipping container. Instead, Mr. Oviatt offered this hazardous waste for transport or otherwise caused SH to send such waste to improper facilities, which is a major deviation from the requirements of this regulation. (c) Multiple/Multi-day - NA 2. Adjustment Factors (if applicable) - NA (a) Good faith - NA (b) Willfulness/Negligence - NA (c) History of Compliance or Noncompliance - NA (d) Ability to pay - NA (e) Other Unique Factors – NA
3. Economic Benefit - Mr. Oviatt derived an economic benefit from managing the contaminated concrete and Conex shipping container as non-hazardous waste. However, an economic benefit adjustment was not applied because the Division does not have sufficient information to accurately calculate the economic benefit. 4. Recalculation of Penalty based on New Information - NA TOTAL: $10,400.00