EPA v. BIOLAB, INCORPORATED

Case summary

THIS WILL BE THE FIRST UIC CASE USING THE NEW PART 22 RULES. TIM CHAPMAN IS CURRENTLY WORKING ON MODEL COMPLAINT LANGUAGE FOR UIC FOR THE NEW PART 22 RULES AND THEREFORE IT MIGHT BE HELPFUL TO HIM AND UIC IF HE WERE ASSIGNED THIS CASE. BIOLAB, INC. IS A SUBSIDIARY OF GREAT LKES CHEMICAL CORP OF WEST LAFAYETTE, INDIANA THIS CASE ALLEGES, IN ONE COUNT, THAT RESPONDENT FAILED TO TIMELY CONDUCT A MECHANICAL INTEGRITY TEST AT ITS CLASS I UNDERGROUND INJECTION WELL. AFTER RECEIPT OF THE APO, OPERATOR CONDUCTED TESTING TO ENSURE THAT THE CEMENT AT THE BASE OF THE CASING SHOE IS ADEQUATE BY CONDUCTING A RADIOACTIVE TRACER SURVEY.

Defendants (1)

• BIOLABNamed in complaintNamed in settlement

Facilities (1)

• BIO-LAB

  1406 E MICHIGAN ST, ADRIAN, MI, 49221

  Registry ID: 110008447724

Statutes cited

• SDWA 1421 — UIC Regulations

Enforcement conclusions (1)

• BIO-LAB, INC.entered 1998-12-21

  Primary law: SDWA

  Federal penalty: $17,000

Timeline (4 milestones)

• 1998-03-26Enforcement Action Data Entered
• 1998-06-18Complaint Filed/Proposed Order
• 1998-12-21Final Order Issued
• 1999-02-18Enforcement Action Closed