DSHW-2024-009074

Page 1 of 10

---oo0oo---
In the Matter of:
Matt Oviatt, Owner
:
:
STIPULATION AND CONSENT ORDER
Former Crown Plating Facility UTD009086372

: :
No. 2402031
---oo0oo--- This STIPULATION AND CONSENT ORDER (SCO) is issued by the DIRECTOR OF THE UTAH DIVISION OF WASTE MANAGEMENT AND RADIATION CONTROL (Director) pursuant to the
Utah Solid and Hazardous Waste Act (the Act), Utah Code Section 19-6-101 et seq., and Utah Administrative Code R315 (the Rules). JURISDICTION
1. The Director has jurisdiction over the subject matter of this SCO and jurisdiction over Matt Oviatt, the owner of the Former Crown Plating Facility (the Facility), pursuant to Utah Code Sections 19-6-107 and 19-6-112. Mr. Oviatt consents to and will not challenge the issuance of this SCO or the Director’s jurisdiction to enter into and enforce this SCO.
2. Mr. Oviatt and the Director are collectively referred to as the “parties” and individually as a “party” to this SCO.
3. The Waste Management and Radiation Control Board has authority to review and approve or disapprove this SCO pursuant to Utah Code Section 19-6-104(1)(e). FINDINGS
4. Mr. Oviatt is the owner of the Facility located at 14 South Jeremy Street, Salt Lake City, UT 84104. 5. Mr. Oviatt, as part of redeveloping the Facility, generated and managed hazardous waste subject to the provisions of the Act and the Rules.
6. Mr. Oviatt is a “person” as defined by Utah Code Section 19-1-103(4) and is subject to all applicable provisions of the Act and the Rules.
7. On October 20, 1980, Joseph Broschinsky, the then owner and operator of Crown Plating Company, Inc. (Crown Plating), filed an RCRA Subtitle C Site Identification Form 8700-12 identifying Crown Plating as a Large Quantity Generator (LQG) of hazardous waste, resulting in the issuance of EPA ID Number UTD009086372.

8. On March 2, 2006, Crown Plating filed a notification form identifying hazardous waste activity as a Small Quantity Generator (SQG).

Page 2 of 10
9. On February 6, 2016, a Phase II Environmental Site Assessment (2016 Phase II ESA) report was completed by Terracon Consultants, Inc. (Terracon) for the Redevelopment Agency of
Salt Lake City. a. The 2016 Phase II ESA showed photoionization detector readings, indicating the presence of volatile organic compounds at concentrations of 6.1 parts per million (ppm) from boring
CP-SB07, 3.4 ppm from boring CP-SB08, and 3.4 ppm from boring CP-SB09 in the fill material directly under the concrete floor in the Plating Room, and 5.2 ppm from boring CP-SB11 in the material layer under the concrete floor in the Racking Room. b. The 2016 Phase II ESA reported hexavalent chromium at a concentration above the industrial
screening level of 6.3 mg/kg in the soil sample from boring CP-SB07, which was installed adjacent to the plating baths within the Plating Room. c. The 2016 Phase II ESA reported cyanide at concentrations above the industrial screening
level of 12 mg/kg in soil samples collected from the borings in the Plating Room (CP-SB07 and CP-SB09). The highest levels of contamination were found in the material layer directly beneath the concrete floor. Cyanide was also identified in groundwater at a concentration above its maximum contaminant level (MCL) at boring CP-SB07.
10. On June 25, 2020, Mr. Oviatt assumed ownership of the Facility through a Warranty Deed recorded in the official records of the Salt Lake County Recorder as Entry Number 13310976, Book 10968, Page 7285-7286. While Mr. Oviatt assumed ownership of the Facility in 2020, Crown Plating continued to operate the Facility.
11. Pursuant to Utah Code Section 19-6-109, authorized representatives of the Director (inspectors) conducted a compliance evaluation inspection at the Facility on August 4, 2020 (DSHW-2020-012342).
12. The Director issued Warning Letter Number 2008088 (DSHW-2020-012184) to Crown Plating on September 1, 2020. The Warning Letter documented the presence of listed hazardous waste on the floor in the Wastewater Treatment Area and near the Central Accumulation Area in the Plating Room.
13. Pursuant to Utah Code Section 19-6-109, inspectors conducted a compliance assistance visit at the
Facility on June 22, 2021 (DSHW-2022-024219).
a. During the June 22, 2021, visit, inspectors observed hazardous waste liquid, sludge, and solids on the floor in the Plating Room. Inspectors observed hazardous plating liquids under and around open vats of cyanide plating solutions. Inspectors also observed open, non-empty
containers of cyanide, a non-empty container of listed hazardous waste methylene chloride stripping solution that was in poor condition, and vats and drums containing various plating solutions with residue running down the sides of the vats and drums onto the concrete floor.
b. During the June 22, 2021, visit, inspectors observed hazardous waste liquid, sludge, and solids on the concrete floor in the Wastewater Treatment Area, including hazardous waste
wastewater treatment filter cake (F006) on the concrete floor.
c. During the June 22, 2021, visit, inspectors observed open containers of liquid waste and what appeared to be hazardous waste residue on the floor beneath a container bearing a hazardous waste label in the area adjacent to the Plating Room referred to as the “Racking Room.”

Page 3 of 10

14. On July 14, 2021, Joseph Broschinsky, as operator of Crown Plating, filed a notification form identifying hazardous waste activity as a LQG on the RCRA Subtitle C Site Identification Form.
15. Pursuant to Utah Code Section 19-6-109, inspectors conducted a compliance assistance visit at the Facility on January 4, 2022 (DSHW-2022-024219).
a. During the January 4, 2022, visit, inspectors observed multi-colored staining, crystals, and other hazardous waste residues on the concrete floor.
16. On March 23, 2023, a Phase II Environmental Site Assessment (2023 Phase II ESA) was completed by Terracon for the Salt Lake Brownfields Coalition under EPA Cooperative Agreement No. 95811800. a. The 2023 Phase II ESA reported multiple wall wipe samples that exceeded both the
Operational and Non-Operational Areas reporting limits for chromium, lead, sodium hydroxide, sulfuric acid, and hexavalent chromium. b. The highest levels of cyanide in the 2023 Phase II ESA were found in soil samples from
boring CP-SB-21, installed next to CP-SB07 (2016 Phase II ESA) in the Plating Room. Hexavalent chromium was reported at levels above the residential screening level in two soil samples from boring CP-SB-21 and in one soil sample from boring CP-SB-29, which was also located in the Plating Room.
17. Mr. Oviatt claims that, prior to October 16, 2023, he had limited awareness of the Director’s efforts
to seek or evaluate compliance through the aforementioned inspections, compliance assistance visits, and warning letter.
18. On October 17, 2023, the Director sent Mr. Oviatt a letter (DSHW-2023-209111) indicating (1) the Facility had not closed in accordance with Utah Admin. Code R315-262-17(a)(8)(iii) or (iv);
(2) the Facility must be managed in accordance with all applicable standards of Utah Admin. Code R315-262, R315-263, R315-264, and R315-268; and (3) that if Mr. Oviatt, as a responsible party, could not remove or decontaminate contaminated soils and wastes, the Facility would be required to close as a landfill. Additionally, this letter requested Mr. Oviatt provide the Director with a plan and
schedule for closing and cleaning up the residue from spills at the Facility by November 30, 2023.
19. On November 21, 2023, Mr. Oviatt’s legal counsel requested an extension of time to develop a plan and schedule for closing and cleaning up the residue from spills at the Facility (DSHW-2023-212111). On November 30, 2023, the Director granted this request (DSHW-2023-212229).
20. On November 30, 2023, the Director requested additional information from Mr. Oviatt (DSHW-2023-212229), including (1) the quantity of potentially contaminated demolition debris and potentially contaminated soils and residues that had been removed from the site; (2) documentation
of how the potentially contaminated demolition debris, residues, and soil were managed; (3) documentation of the waste determination for each waste stream; (4) documentation of the locations of where the potentially contaminated demolition debris, residues, and soil were disposed of; and (5) documentation of who performed the demolition work for Mr. Oviatt.

Page 4 of 10
21. On December 8, 2023, Mr. Oviatt’s legal counsel responded to the Director’s request for additional information on behalf of Mr. Oviatt (DSHW-2023-212626).
22. On January 5, 2024, Wasatch Environmental, Inc. (Wasatch), Mr. Oviatt’s environmental consultant, submitted a proposed Work Plan and Schedule on behalf of Mr. Oviatt, which outlined a plan and a schedule for closing and cleaning the Facility as requested by the Director (DSHW-2024-004169).
23. On January 26, 2024, Wasatch provided the Director with a data gap analysis (DSHW-2024-004407) based on review of several assessments and investigations completed by Terracon. The data gap analysis concluded that onsite contaminant sources of trichloroethylene (TCE), hexavalent chromium, and cyanide are likely, which was consistent with the 2016 Phase II ESA and the 2023 Phase II ESA.
a. Wasatch submitted this data gap analysis according to the Work Plan and Schedule requested by the Director to cleanup and close the Facility.
b. The data gap analysis described an inground concrete structure (sump or oil/water separator) that was reportedly connected to the wastewater treatment system prior to discharge to the sanitary sewer. The data gap analysis acknowledged the need to inspect and remove and dispose of the contents of the structure if necessary.
c. Because the 2023 Phase II ESA reported that multiple wall wipe samples exceeded both the Operational and Non-Operational Areas reporting limits for chromium, lead, sodium hydroxide, sulfuric acid, and hexavalent chromium, Wasatch proposed collecting additional wipe samples of the walls. The data gap analysis states that the results of the wipe sampling
will be evaluated to determine if the building interior has been cleaned and is safe to be occupied by tenants. 24. As of the Effective Date of this SCO, the Facility has not closed in accordance with Utah Admin.
Code R315-262-17(a)(8)(iii) or (iv).
25. Under Utah Admin. Code R315-262-11, “[a] person who generates a solid waste, as defined in Section R315-261-2, shall make an accurate determination as to whether that waste is a hazardous waste in order to ensure wastes are properly managed according to applicable regulations.” Under
Utah Admin. Code R315-262-11(a), “[t]he hazardous waste determination for each solid waste shall be made at the point of waste generation, before any dilution, mixing, or other alteration of the waste occurs, and at any time in the course of its management that it has, or may have, changed its properties as a result of exposure to the environment or other factors that may change the properties
of the waste such that the hazardous classification of the waste may change.”
a. On January 4, 2022, inspectors observed a Conex shipping container at the Facility. Joseph Broschinsky previously told the inspectors that hazardous waste had been stored in the shipping container prior to being picked up for disposal. Inside the shipping container, inspectors observed staining, discoloration, and debris that indicated waste was stored and
potentially spilled in the shipping container.
b. On March 14, 2023, Mr. Oviatt hired an excavation company, SH Excavation, LLC (SH), to dispose of the shipping container. According to the December 8, 2023, response, SH disposed of the shipping container as non-hazardous waste at Construction Waste
Management, a construction and demolition debris landfill in Salt Lake City.
c. Mr. Oviatt failed to make a hazardous waste determination prior to disposing of the shipping container.

Page 5 of 10
d. Spills and releases of listed hazardous wastes onto the concrete floor were documented in previous Division inspections.
i. A Division inspection report dated March 8, 2007 (DSHW-2007-004731),
documented the use of a floor drain and sump in the Plating Room to convey spent cyanide plating bath solutions from the Plating Room to the wastewater treatment system.
ii. A Division inspection report dated August 4, 2020 (DSHW-2020-012342),
documented spilled hazardous waste paint stripper (F002, F005, D001) on the concrete floor in the Plating Room. These findings were documented in the Warning Letter dated September 1, 2020.
iii. During the June 22, 2021, compliance assistance visit, inspectors observed liquid, wet sludge, and piles of dried sludge on the concrete floor in the Plating Room.
e. On March 14, 2023, Mr. Oviatt hired SH to demolish and remove the concrete floor in the Plating Room and Racking Room.
f. Mr. Oviatt failed to make a hazardous waste determination prior to disposing of the concrete floor from the Plating Room and Racking Room.
26. Under Utah Admin. Code R315-262-17(a)(8)(ii)(C), “[a] large quantity generator may request additional time to clean close, but it shall notify the Director using EPA Form 8700-12 within 75 days after the date provided in Subsection R315-262-17(a)(8)(ii)(A) to request an extension and provide an explanation as to why the additional time is required.”
a. Mr. Oviatt did not request an extension to meet the closure performance standards of
Utah Admin. Code R315-262-17(a)(8)(iii) to close the Facility and has not met those closure performance standards.
27. Under Utah Admin. Code R315-262-17(a)(8)(iii)(A)(II), a large quantity generator shall 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 structure and equipment contaminated with waste, unless Subsection R315-261-3(d) applies.”
a. The 2016 Phase II ESA and the 2023 Phase II ESA reported contamination in the structures
(e.g., floors, walls, oil/water separator, etc.) and soil under the concrete floor in the Plating Room.
b. Mr. Oviatt has not properly removed or decontaminated all contaminated structures (e.g., floors, walls, oil/water separator, etc.) and contaminated soil at the Facility.
28. Under Utah Admin. Code R315-262-17(a)(8)(iii)(A)(III), “[a]ny hazardous waste generated in the
process of closing either the generator's facility or unit(s) accumulating hazardous waste shall be managed 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.”
a. On March 14, 2023, Mr. Oviatt hired SH to remove and dispose of the concrete floor from the Plating Room and Racking Room that was contaminated with listed and characteristic hazardous wastes. Mr. Oviatt, despite having been provided with the 2016 Phase II ESA report showing contamination in the soil under the concrete floor in the Plating Room, failed
to make a hazardous waste determination. According to the December 8, 2023, response, Mr. Oviatt contracted with SH to take three dump truck loads of contaminated concrete to Concrete Recycling, Inc., a concrete recycling facility.

Page 6 of 10
b. On March 14, 2023, Mr. Oviatt hired SH to dispose of a contaminated shipping container in which listed and characteristic hazardous wastes were stored and spilled. According to the December 8, 2023, response, Mr. Oviatt contracted with SH to dispose of the shipping
container as non-hazardous waste at Construction Waste Management, a construction and demolition debris landfill in Salt Lake City.
c. Mr. Oviatt failed to manage hazardous waste in the process of closing the Facility in accordance with the applicable standards of Utah Admin. Code R315-262, R315-263,
R315-265, and R315-268.
29. Under Utah Admin. Code R315-262-10(a)(3) “[a] generator shall not transport, offer its hazardous waste for transport, or otherwise cause its hazardous waste to be sent to a facility that is not a designated facility, as defined in Section R315-260-10, or not otherwise authorized to receive the
generator's hazardous waste.”
a. On March 14, 2023, Mr. Oviatt hired SH to dispose of a contaminated shipping container in which listed and characteristic hazardous wastes were stored and spilled. Mr. Oviatt contracted with SH to transport the shipping container to Construction Waste Management, a
construction and demolition debris landfill in Salt Lake City, for disposal as non-hazardous waste.
b. On March 14, 2023, Mr. Oviatt hired SH to remove and dispose of the concrete floor from the Plating Room and Racking Room that was contaminated with listed and characteristic
hazardous wastes. Mr. Oviatt contracted with SH to transport three dump truck loads of
contaminated concrete to Concrete Recycling, Inc., a concrete recycling facility.
c. Mr. Oviatt transported, offered for transport, or otherwise caused hazardous waste to be sent to a facility that is not a designated facility or otherwise authorized to receive hazardous waste.
30. In accordance with the Civil Penalty Policy, Utah Admin. Code R315-102 et seq., which considers factors such as the gravity of the violations, the extent of deviation from the Rules, the potential for harm to human health and the environment, good faith efforts to comply, and other factors, the Director calculated and proposed a penalty based on the alleged violations. DETERMINATION OF VIOLATIONS 31. In accordance with Utah Code Section 19-6-101 et seq., and based on the foregoing FINDINGS,
Matt Oviatt has violated provisions of the Act and the Rules. Specifically, Matt Oviatt has violated the following: Violation 1: Utah Admin. Code R315-262-11 for failing to make an accurate hazardous waste determination on a contaminated shipping container and on the concrete floor contaminated with listed and characteristic hazardous waste. See Finding 25. Violation 2: Utah Admin. Code R315-262-17(a)(8)(ii)(C) for failing 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. See Finding 26. Violation 3: Utah Admin. Code R315-262-17(a)(8)(iii)(A)(II) for failing 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.” See Finding 27.

Page 7 of 10
Violation 4: Utah Admin. Code R315-262-17(a)(8)(iii)(A)(III) for failing 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.”
See Finding 28.
Violation 5: Utah Admin. Code R315-262-10(a)(3) for offering hazardous waste for transport, or otherwise causing hazardous waste to be sent to a facility that is not a designated facility, and not otherwise authorized to receive hazardous waste. See Finding 29.

Page 8 of 10
STIPULATION AND CONSENT ORDER
32. This SCO has been negotiated in good faith and the parties now wish to fully resolve the violations contained herein without further administrative or judicial proceedings. 33. In full settlement of the violations contained herein, Matt Oviatt shall:
a. Pay a penalty of $43,160.00, and payment shall be made as follows:
i. A cash payment of $31,200.00 shall be made on or before 30 days after the Effective Date of this SCO. Payment shall be made to the State of Utah, Department of Environmental Quality, c/o Director, Utah Division of Waste Management and Radiation Control, P.O. Box 144880, Salt Lake City, Utah 84114-4880; and
ii. The remaining penalty amount of $11,960.00 may be deferred and waived by the Director if Matt Oviatt closes the Facility in accordance with Paragraphs 33.e.i. through 33.e.ii. and complies with Paragraph 33.f. of this SCO.
b. On or before 30 days after the Effective Date of this SCO, file with the Director an EPA
Form 8700-12 that updates the name and contact information for the Facility.
c. On or before 30 days after the Effective Date of this SCO and prior to closing the Facility pursuant to Paragraphs 33.e.i. through 33.e.ii. of this SCO, notify the Director of planned closure using EPA Form 8700-12 in accordance with Utah Admin. Code
R315-262-17(a)(8)(ii)(A).
d. On or before 30 days after the Effective Date of this SCO, submit to the Director a DWMRC Environmental Cleanup Program Application for Project Oversight.
e. On or before 18 months after the Effective Date of this SCO:
i. Properly decontaminate or remove and manage the Facility’s contaminated structures
as hazardous waste (e.g., floors, walls, oil/water separator, etc.) and dispose of such structures at a permitted hazardous waste treatment, storage, and disposal facility; and
ii. Close the facility under Utah Admin. Code R315-101-1 through -13. Closure under Utah Admin. Code R315-101-1 through -13 will be protective of human health and
the environment, and the Facility will be closed in a manner that (a) minimizes the need for further maintenance, and (b) controls, minimizes, or eliminates, to the extent necessary to protect human health and the environment, post-closure escape of hazardous waste, hazardous constituents, leachate, contaminated runoff, or hazardous waste decomposition products to the ground or surface waters or to the atmosphere.
f. On or before 30 days after completing closure pursuant to Paragraphs 33.e.i. through 33.e.ii. of this SCO, use EPA Form 8700-12 to notify the Director that the Facility completed closure pursuant to Utah Admin. Code R315-101-1 through -13.

Page 9 of 10
EFFECTIVE DATE 34. This SCO shall become effective upon the date of execution by the Director (Effective Date).
EFFECT OF CONSENT ORDER
35. For the purpose of this SCO, the parties agree and stipulate to the above-stated facts. The obligations in this SCO apply to and are binding upon the Division of Waste Management and Radiation Control and upon Matt Oviatt and any of Matt Oviatt’s successors, assigns, or other entities or persons otherwise bound by law.
36. The stipulations contained herein are for the purposes of settlement and shall not be considered admissions by any party and shall not be used by any person related or unrelated to this SCO for purposes other than determining the basis of this SCO. Nothing contained herein shall be deemed to constitute a waiver by the State of Utah of its right to initiate enforcement action, including civil
penalties, against Matt Oviatt in the event of future non-compliance with this SCO, with the Act, or the Rules; nor shall the State of Utah be precluded in any way from taking appropriate action should such a situation arise again at the Facility. However, entry into this SCO shall relieve Matt Oviatt of all liability for violations which arose or could have arisen with respect to the allegations contained herein.
37. As of the Effective Date, this SCO will be a final, non-appealable administrative order subject to the civil enforcement provisions of Utah Code Section 63G-4-501 et seq. and other applicable law, including Utah Code Section 19-6-112.
PUBLIC PARTICIPATION 38. This SCO shall be subject to public notice and comment for a period of at least 30 days
(Comment Period) in accordance with Utah Admin. Code R315-124-34. The Director reserves the right to withdraw or withhold its consent if any comment received during the Comment Period discloses facts or considerations indicating the SCO is inappropriate, improper, or inadequate. SIGNATORY
39. Matt Oviatt certifies that he is authorized to enter into, sign, and execute this SCO and shall be legally bound by the terms hereof upon such signature.
Pursuant to the Utah Solid and Hazardous Waste Act, Utah Code Section 19-6-101 et seq., In the Matter of Matt Oviatt, Owner, Former Crown Plating Facility, the parties hereto mutually agree and consent to STIPULATION AND CONSENT ORDER No. 2402031 as evidenced below:

Page 10 of 10
Matt Oviatt, Owner Former Crown Plating Facility

__________________________ Matt Oviatt Date:______________________
THE STATE OF UTAH DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY DIVISION OF WASTE MANAGEMENT
AND RADIATION CONTROL
__________________________ Douglas J. Hansen, Director Date:______________________

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