Evonik to pay pollution fine to Ohio EPA

March 2010
Rubber & Plastics News;3/22/2010, Vol. 39 Issue 17, p12
Trade Publication
The article reports that Evonik Degussa Engineering Carbons Corp. has agreed to pay the Ohio Environmental Protection Agency a 34,310 dollars fine for violating state and federal air pollution control laws at its carbon black facility in Belpre, Ohio. The company operates four carbon black production emissions units and several additional units for storing, collecting, transferring and loading the material at the site, located in southern Ohio along the Ohio River.


Related Articles

  • Carbon black producers submit REACH dossier to ECHA.  // Paintindia;Jul2009, Vol. 59 Issue 7, p157 

    The article reports on the submission of Registration, Evaluation, Authorisation and Restriction (REACH) data by a consortium of carbon black producers to the European Chemicals Agency (ECHA) in Helsinki, Finland in June 2009. The consortium includes Evonik Degussa GmbH, Cancarb Ltd., Cabort...

  • Pollution exclusion upheld for individual harm.  // Business Insurance;08/25/97, Vol. 31 Issue 34, p31 

    Cites a ruling by a federal appeals court in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, which stated that the absolute pollution exclusion when a pollutant harms an individual even if the substances were not released into the environment. Reference to injuries sustained by two employees of Faddis Concrete...

  • Rumpke Reaches Settles with Ohio, Will Pay $98K Fine for Air Pollution Violations.  // Solid Waste Report;3/31/2010, Vol. 41 Issue 6, p6 

    The article reports that the Rumpke Consolidated Cos. Inc. will pay a penalty for air pollution violations connected to high temperatures in some of the site's gas recovery wells as part of a settlement with the Ohio Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). According to the Ohio EPA, the landfill...

  • Unintended pollution clearly excluded: Court. Schachner, Michael // Business Insurance;1/23/95, Vol. 29 Issue 4, p2 

    Reports on a Connecticut Supreme Court ruling concerning the absolute pollution exclusion in the standard post-1985 commercial general liability policy. Details of the pro-insurer ruling of the Connecticut Supreme Court; `Heyman Associates No.1 versus Insurance Co. of Pennsylvania; Significance...

  • Ohio Firms Agree to Penalties For Alleged Asbestos Violations.  // Hazardous Waste/Superfund Alert;9/21/2010, Vol. 32 Issue 16, p3 

    The article reports on the announcement of Ohio Environmental Protection Agency (OHIO EPA) that two companies have agreed to pay for 16,250 dollars penalties to settle alleged asbestos violations involving work at the former Masonic Temple in Columbus.

  • City of Elyria, Madden Brothers Agree to Penalty in Ohio Case.  // Solid Waste Report;12/5/2011, Vol. 42 Issue 21, p4 

    The article reports that the City of Elyria and Madden Brothers Inc. agreed to pay 36,848 U.S. dollars in penalty to the Ohio Environmental Protection Agency (Ohio EPA) in settlement of alleged environmental violations at a composting facility located in Garden Street Landfill in Elyria.

  • Ruling may increase U.K. asbestos claims. Aldred, Carolyn // Business Insurance;11/27/95, Vol. 29 Issue 48, p31 

    Reports that a ruling in the British High Court may result to a spate of asbestos-related claims in the region. Award of compensation to victims of mesothelioma, a cancer due to residence's proximity to an asbestos manufacturing facility; Precedence set by the judgment; Increase in deaths...

  • POLLUTION: PRECEDENT AND PROSPECT. Humpstone, Charles Cheney // Foreign Affairs;Jan1972, Vol. 50 Issue 2, p325 

    This article examines pollution problems and its international dimensions. To eliminate all forms of pollution would be expensive, and would require curtailing pleasures or profits to which we have become accustomed. But advocacy of this approach does not raise a new issue; it continues a...

  • Fined for air pollution.  // Crain's Detroit Business;03/31/97, Vol. 13 Issue 13, p18 

    Reports that Aeroquip Corporation is being sued by the Michigan Department of Environmental Quality for releasing volatile chemicals into the air. Other allegations brought against Aeroquip.


Read the Article


Sorry, but this item is not currently available from your library.

Try another library?
Sign out of this library

Other Topics