Document 2RmJgo3a27myq9pvgEpk91MwL
J100//0095//D61l TTUUEE 1155::0022 FFAAXX 220022 556644 00002233
@ ga00:2
_--
\s~azy/
WASHINGTODN.C,. z0460 UUNNIITTEEDD SSTTAATTEESS EENNVVIIRROONNMMEENNTTAALL PPRROOTTEECCTTIIOONN AAGGEENNCCYY WASHINGTON, D.C. 20460
VIAFACSMILE VIA FACSIMILE Me Jul Hatches, Esq Ms. Julia Hatcher, Esq. Luan de Waki LAAtattttohorrannmeeyy&ss aaWtt LaLtaakwwins 100 Peeyiara Ave, NY 1001 Pennsylvania Ave., N.W. Wasiogion, D.C 200042505 Washington, D.C. 20004-2505
OOCCTT -~99 22Cx011
Couns AcE OFFICE OF ENFORCEMENT AND COMPLIANCE ASSURANCE
EESlE'NJNFFSOOIRRTICCVEEEMMEENNTT
SENSlTlVE
.,. r-
DearMis Hatcher Dear Ms. Hatcher: Asam ideinflatingourdiscasson ts ato, a sein is ee (ich As an aide in facilitating our discussion this afternoon, I am sending this Jetter (which
includes some background formation) an aches. EfFs ooAking forwartd reson includes some background information) and attachments. EPA is looking forward to resolving his mater with Nm fc mane this matter with 3M in a timely manner.
AgArgereeemmeennttffoorrTToox.xiiccSSuubbssttaanccesCCoonnttrronll AAcctt((TSCAA)) CCoommplpiliaanncceAAuduidtit((""AAuuddiitt
AAggrreeeemmeenntt""))
Tn June 1995, 3M ered no a comprehanse Audit Agreement with EPA t be --.In June J999, 3M entered into a comprehensive Audit Agreement with EPA to be conducted under he suspen of theAgnes SePd ly(o SDP, 60 Fed Reg 66co66n77d00u66c((t1e1d9999u55n))daaennrddthttehheeautteserprmimcsseosoftfothfhteehe33MMA/g/EEenPPcAAy'nnseegSgoeotltifi-aadttieesddclAAousududiritet PAAgogrlrieeceeymm(e"enSnttD,, Pcc"oo)mm,mm6i0ittFtiinendgg ttRooeaag.
`ccoommpprreehheennssiivvee aauuddiitt tthhaatt iinncclluuddeedd TTSSCCAA 44,, 55,, 88,, 1122 aanndd 1133.. TThhiiss AAuuddiitt AAggrreeeemmeenntt iinncclluuddeedd
tn once TSCA Aus Au") at M3 jor manucurig clits, The Ad two concurrent TSCA Audits ("Audit") at 3M's major manufacturing facilities. The Audit inode Ty 3 omprehensive compliant manageent sens review oll busines ni included: I) a comprehensive compliance management systems review ofall 3M business units Sich 0 TSCA Madcon, teh wh 10 ove apron 24.2 Separate busines urs 15d subject to TSCAjurisdiction, which was to cover approximately 24-28 separate business units and cies (wih seresertaiv smping) and 3 ovoof he TSCA nominate of 4 cea facilities (with representative sampling) and 2) a review ofthe TSCA nomenclature of all chemical Tencions and polymesaions bomen Tania |, 1954 December 1, 1998 reactions and polymerizations between January 1, 1994 - December 31, 1998.
The Audit was schdud to begin Ape 24,1999 ad nd Apri 24,2000. The Aud The Audit was scheduled to begin April 24, 1999 and end April 24, 2000. The Audit
`AAggrreeeemmeenntt iinncclluuddeedd aa ccllaauussee ffoorr rree--nneeggoottiiaattiinngg aatt tthhee bbeeggiinnnniinngg ooff tthhee 11001*Ji mmoonntthh ffoorr aaddddiittiioonnaall
ccd im, mo to ced 13 moths for ah A Compeion due snd Fil Report doe de needed time, not to exceed 15 months for an Audit completion date and Final Report due date. Sh requested aon um complete the Audi, ahh was extended unl ly 24, 200 3M requested additional time to complete the Audit, which was extended until July 24, 2000. TheFil Repdueodarwtes extended un Septembe24r 2000 The Final Report due date was extended until September 24, 2000
Within 30 dayofdiscovery, 3M sas 0 sb 0 EPA reporof any pote or acs Within 30 days ofdiscovery, 3M ,.,vas to submit to EPA a report of any potential or actual iolaatndothn Aci aken 1 ate. Soom Sarsreport ws0 prov1i ofhe violation and the action taken to mitigate it A six-month status report was to provide a list of the Products ind busines unis reine or TSCA compliance a summary of 41 Aseovered products and business units reviewed for TSCA compliance, a summary of all discovered
sr[e Er -- si lntsmE>I Address (URL) ht!p:f/www.epil.gov
R&eycled/Flecyclable P~nled wit~ Veg&lable Oil Based Inks on Recy;led Papor (Minimum 30% Poslcons1 rneri
179988..000011
EExxhhiibbiitt 11779988
State of Minnesota v. 3M Co.,
Court File No. 27-CV-10-28862
3MA00383888
1100//0099//0011 TT\UTEE 1155::0022 FFAAXX 220022 556644 00002233
SE~ENNNFFSOOIRTRCICEV,EEMMEENNTNT
SENSITIVE
g@o0n03
ions an te acon kee the iio. To Fil Rpt ws be violations, and the actions taken to mitigate the violations. The Final Report was to be Cuma lodge mormon om he moh ot and ope efoto cumulative, including the information from the six-month report and the same type ofinformation ore tt mob: To Fok Report wes edo a Seo for the latter six months. The Final Report was submitted to the Agency on September 24, 2000. Post Penalties
10 was pce, disused nthe SDP, tht he vee EPA tok carmen ction, It was agreed, as discussed in the SDP, that in the event EPA took enforcement action, EPA wonton ne oan a ronson: pee Prahran EPA would not seek gravity-based (i.e., non-economic benefit) penalties from eligible facilities tt hoe it eS. Te woe nr prev oles ec that met the conditions outlined in the SDP. Ifthere was an actual or perceived conflict between i eam reson fe tpv mes oman the SDP and the terms of the Audit Agreement, the terms of the negotiated Agreement would ami oe En a ity sponta 0 prevail. Notwithstanding the Agreement, EPA reserved the right to take any action pursuant to Te ica amp any applicable authority.
IM ged op stud peso cet viltonsepored by M dig the 3M aJso agreed to pay stipulated penalties for certain violations reported by 3M during the ci te Adm opi toe oFhe So de rp oh A Audit that failed to meet the applicable conditions ofthe SDP and the terms of the Audit men Gxt sipelont poi rors. pnlis in soon whe be Agreement. Under the stipulated penalties provisions, penalties for violations were to be cag ts dn oy ton, calculated generally as "per chemical" and as "one-day" rather than "per day" violations.
EEccoonnoommiiccbbeerneeffitt
EA nectar pecan el gets pt of "EPA retains its full discretion to recover any economic benefit gained as a result of on hel 0 5050 (oa et. The ul ren ri noncompliance." 65 Fed. Reg. 19618, 19626 (Audit Policy) The Audit Agreement further eee at yea IH 10 oy on cmsee perl provided included the provision that "EPA may require 3M to pay an 'economic-benefits' penalty, provided a pe acm anes ah hel EP poco nd prior that such penalty is calculated in accordance with then-established EPA policies and procedures or cious econ bnafhe sy oF TSCA logon hed for calculating the economic benefits ofthe type ofTSCA violation involved."
Disclosureess~- SSeeee S Sumumamryom offDDia siscclr loossuuy rreess aannddW DRo AFTr:DRAFT: Wkorkiingn PPaapg peerrss..
FO ---- Pursuant to the negotiated Agreement, 3M submitted a total of35 disclosures, including
eelleevveenn vvoolluunnttaarryy ddiisscclloossuurreess EEPPAA aalllloowweedd ttoo bbee iinncclluuddeedd wwiitthhiinn tthhee ssccooppee oofftthhee AAuuddiitt ffoorr
ees open a (ht Saloon wae mere in non 6 purposes of penalty mitigation (these self-disclosures were not deemed to be "prior violations" for Be ees oe) coo Bo some tn the purposes of the Audit) and 3M's 8(e) Compliance Audit. EPA has determined that ten res wae oto 1 Gomme SDAF Afr es war 1 disclosures warranted no action; that in 11 disclosures the SDP/Audit Agreement terms were met i pao os0 t o svcn A oty- and no gravity-based penalty is to be assessed; that in seven disclosures, no gravity-based re ns ot SS To of como wh tr sro Co EN penalties are to be assessed, but $131,976 of economic benefit is to be recovered (See BEN To) Booms baste fom wt tos se ml oe icp lotion Runs). Economic benefit from two disclosures are still to be determined based on information mary om VE SHpuiad pres ot $5430 20003 NOC rao Pre 1 necessary from 3M. Stipulated penalties total $242,000 - $20,000 NOC violations; Phase 1 Sonnoon mtb $204,000 and Phase 2 - $18,000.
On seen disionres, EPA ding din! main concern fs gel civ, On seven disclosures, EPA is seeking additional information concerning the illegal activity, dics rote mont Ho sons ka ee ako dates ofproductions and amounts. Two disclosures Jack sufricient infonnation to make an mcm a wher SOF eet ot bem BPA eau pond xh assessment as to whether SDP tenns have been met. EPA requests that JM respond to each Soc pean 0 co ntsSr ow cons mh 13 SDP term as it pertains to each individual self-disclosnre so that a determination can be made as
17988..000002
3MA00383889
1100//0089//0011 TTUUEE 1135::0033 FFAAXX 220022 556644 00002233
Q[4J o0 0s4
to
to
whether
whether
the
the
ccoonnddiittiioonnss
hhaavvee
bbeeeenn
mmeet.t.
ENFORCEMENT "r:";"c'JtCi Q1iE"l'1CE!'.\..t"/!Er:-11N\11,T..f SENSITIVE SENSITiVE
the SumTTmhhaeerssyeeoaafssssDeeissssscmmleoensntutsrsewwsiialllnbdbeeDddRiisAsccFuuTssss:eeddWommrookrrieenflgullPlyyapiiennrfslollloowwiinngg sseeccttiioonnss ooff thhiiss ter letter aanndd iinn
the Summary of Disclosures and DRAFT: Working Papers.
TTSSCCAASSeectciont8S(9ie)AAouudndiitt
would continue to focus on FCs whi Phase3 would include non. FC related cheicals. `WWiitthhiinn tthhee llaasstt 33--44 mmoonntthhssoofftthhee AAuuddiitt AAggrreeeemmeenntt ttiimmee ppeerriioodd,, 33MMbbeeggaann aa sseeppaarraattee 33MM.
sTTsttSuSuddCCiiAeAess cc88oo(n(necc))eerCCrnnooiimmnnpggplilFFiaaCCnnsscceeaannAAdduudrrdeieiltltaatt((e"e*dd88cc((ooeem)m) pApAououduudinnitdtd""ss)) ((aa"`ffPttFeeCCrr"sOO")).PP. PPBBTTeeSSffoorrrreeeeqquuttheheseesttFeFeiddinnaaaallllllRR33eeMMpp'oo'srsrttiinnwwffaoaossrrmmddaa~utteeiioooonnnnaanndd
SSeepptteemmbbeerr 2244,, 22000000,, 33MM ssuubbmmiitttteedd tthhiirrttyy--oonnee 88((ce)) FFCC vviioollaattiioonnss ((oonnee ddiisscclloossuurree)) oonn AAuugguusstt 2211,, 22000000.. 33MM aallssoo eexxpprreesssseedd iittss iinntteenntt ttoo ccoonndduucctt ttwwoo mmoorree pphhaasseessooffiittss 88((ee)) AAuudidti.t. PPhhaassee 22
would continue to focus on FCs while Phase 3 would include non-FC related chemicals.
Tes EPA's current understanding hat Phase hasbeen canceled IInn JJuunnee 22000011,, 33MM ssuubbmmiittteedd tthhrreeee aaddddiittiioonnaall FFCC vviioollaattiioonnss uunnddeerr PPhhaassee 22 ((oonnee ddiisscclloossuurree))..
It is EPA' s current understanding that Phase 3 has been canceled.
an EPATTihhneefsoserema58t(i(6eo))nddriiessqcculleoosstsuurcreoesnddcooemnnioonttgmmeteheeettseaalllchooeffmttihhceealtteserrammnssdootffhtethhseee dAAiuusdcdliitosppuoorlleiisccyywebbreeeccaanuuosstee tthheeree wwaass cc`anoAognnErtteeePmemAmppelilnanattftoeecrddomnwwatiiatttiihhoniinnendrtheh"eqesutssieccpsouotlppcaeeotenoodcffetptrhheneeinnoogirriisgtghii"nneaasflelorAAcuhTudediSmittCicAAAagglrsre5eea(emnemed)nevttnhi.teo.lsaeAAtsdisoisnnncsooltdtoeeisdsducrelceoaassrelewidreer,dr, euhtrhneieonAtAguutdhdieittAudi $6,000 for other studies). tAthhgaatrteddeiimdd ennnootttcmmoeneeettatitnthheeedtt"eesrrtmimpssuoolfaftttehhdeepSSeDDnaPPltooierrs"tthhfeeoArAuTuddSiitCt AAAggrre8eee(meme)nevtni.to.la((t$i1o15n5,s,00d00is00clppoeesrredhhuudmmuaarninngsstttuuhddeyy,;Audit
$6,000 for other studies).
Report SwSiainnscceeduttehh,ee E88P((eA) AAaupudrdiiettswwtasosnbbceehgguuudnneaatnnhddesvveiioo$ll3aa(ttii)oonndssiswwceelrroeesuddriiessccelloossaeedddttootoTTtPPhEEisDDpabbteeiffocorurelrtthhceehFFeiimninacalal
iRaprnneoddpvioIistt'rsistoccwnoo.ammspTpodhouuueenn,OddEfssfPwiwAicittohahfiginnrPettoehhlseelutssotccioioonppnceePlourofdefetvtehhtrheeteiAAsoeuunddiai8tnt(dAAeg)Tgrodreeriseeicmmelesoensnhutatrseuusnndddereeterlreartttmhehideen8t8eo(d(eett))hhissastttiipptphauurlltaaifttceeouddlllapporeewncniahanlelgttmiieeeislscafl
disclosed studieres hum studs provision. The Office ofPollution Prevention
disclosed studies are human studies:
and
Toxics
has
determined
that
the
following
self-
s11))uFFdllyuurdroaocthceeh8me1nic1sa1)l9EE9xxp9poossuurreeAAsssseessssmmeennttooffDDeeccaattuurCChheenmsiiccallaannddFFiillmmPPllaanntEEmmplpolyoyeeeess.,
study date 8/11/1999
22)) AAnanlaysliyssis ooffFFCCss iinn SSaammpplleseosoff ChChiillddrerne'sn's SSeerraa,, ssttuuddyy ddaattee 0055//2211//11999999
$174,00PP0hhfaaossreetOOhneneeemsstiiippnuuillantegedd2pp9eesnnaailitciees,s iifnoncclluautddoeet$$a33l00,o,00f0$02000ff4oo,rr00tth0he. tthhPeesseehttwo2o shhuupmmaaunndssttuupddieieenssaaalnnidds for t$tshth1rur7ede4ieee,""0soo0att0rhheefeor$r2rss2ttt2uhu,dde0iir0eees0sm"". arairenein$$g11882,,90000s00t.u.diTTeoost,taafllosrsttiaipptuuolltaaattleeddofpp$eenn2aa0ll4tti,i0ees0s0ffo.orrPtthhheeassseell2f-sddtiiisspcculloloassteeeddd TTpSeSnCCaAAlties58((feeo))r
studies are $222,000.
NNeexxtt SStteeppss UUppoonn rreecceeiipptt ooftf hthee aadddditoionnasl iinnffoormmaattiioonn nneecceessssaarryy ttoo ddeetetrmaiinne wwhheetthheerr ccoonnddiitioonnss
17988..00000033
3MA00383890
1100//0089//0011
:
T"UTUEE 1155::0044 FFAAXX 220022 556644 00002233
CNFORCEMENT SENSITIVE
Bl{olJ o00s5
vwViioeolrlaaettiimoonnesst..foELrLPtPhAAe aadllesssoorigerneqqautueeesdsttvssiotthhlaeetinnoeenccsee,ssEssaaPrrAyy iiwnnfifloolrrdmmeaattetiiroomnnincceoonneccceeormnnioinnmggicpprrbooeddnuueccftittii,ooinnf ddanaatytee,ssfoaarnnddthose
amounts, as noted on the Working Papers chart. Again, EPA does appreciate 3M's willingness to
ccseallfl-mamdeiesacaltlto(s(22el00a22n))d55t6o46c-o4r41r6e4c-otorir4tTsTov1oinonyly6aEtElio4lllnisssa.attl(f22y00o22u)) 5h514a1v.- e-44a1]n66y77.q. uestions concerning this matter, please
Enclosures
ccec:: MMiicchhaaeell NNaasshh,,EEssqq.
Tony Ellis Gerald Stubbs
17988..000004
3MA00383891
oraDRAFT
SEEENNNFFSOOIRTRCICVEEEMMEENNTT
SENSITIVE
ones, 201 October 9, 2001
`Summary of issmadesade teSUEPAAudiArsen Summary ofDisclosures made under the 3M/EPA Audit Agreement
5Diora des 35 Disclosures Made:
+ Nomad 10 No actions warranted
[TPN -- 11 Audit Policy met (No Penalties)
eons Besdiosor 3178p TBD 9 Economic Benefit determinations for$ 131,976 plus TBD Shims $ 14,785 sila $ 27,567 Sioas $ 19,855 er] $ 12,887 $5$ 3,505 Saas $34,315 STD tno ienae pes) $ TBD (two disclosures, one penalty) Shop $ 19,062
3 3 Sipepr fr 202000 ..,
3 Stipulated penalties for $ 242,000
N
i S25 0 0 (OC volts) 0
$ 20,000 (NOC violations)
3 520410030 Pe ~
$204,000 (B(e) Phase 1)
i $0 4 Pe """'
$ 18,000 (8(e) Phase 2)
N
0 N
D+ 2Adntteminsespsortsldtptoloey ~
2 Additional information needed to support audit policy
-<:
t.;..
....
Addon, hereare 7 dares thtarecapa ahveth theAge cin dina rmananconcn he 0..
"...'..
Additionally, there are 1 disclosures that are captured above that the Agency is seeking additional information on concerning the
T emtaciy,tarofproduacntdsimovnmse [?.:
illegal activity, dates of productions and amounts.
..
;..;
:--
......
0
-'er.
0
' c
I
11778988..00000055
3 regs ESENNFSOITRICVEEMENT aT DRAFT: WorkJDi Papers Ses Updated October 92001
Co 7] ico Disclosure
we fnJ[ e eT| Type
oo tm | |i |S SMMD
Date Dllclosure made
2/20/98
Type of
Violation
.5PMN
Proposed Penatty
$40,000
ENFORCEMENT
SENSITIVE
3M Company
DRAFT: Working Papers
Violation corrected?
Yes- Company ceased
Audit Policy CoDdltJom Met?
Yes
Economic Disposition or SlatllS
benefit?
Yes
Company requested and was granted
Ee- e commercial mfg. and submitted a mock PMN fur review (J-98-60)
sileln|SPoreP ente oSnto Sl4,78S
(See Ben report)
enforcement discretion to distribute existing stocks. Although the company did submit a "mock" PMN, the company is subject to the delayed CQR ofsulnitting a PMN.
' SMMD
4/8/99
SLVEA Insufficient Yes - Canpany submitted
Yes
informadon a LVEA, L-99-235.
toddmnine
penalty
(Need dates/
amounts
from 1996
to 1999.)
Yes $27,S67
(See Ben report)
Company did submit a LVEA but is subject to the delayed ~ts ofsubmitting the LVEA.
SMMD 10/27/98 8IUR so
Company omitted two
Yes
No ac:tion chemicals to their 1994
TERA warranted IUR submission (Decatur,
A AL racility and Cordova,
1 TT fe ay || IL facility)
No
The Agency considers the economic benefit
from non-compliance to be de-minimus.
.. cor mms | ve Tt er CSA#!
1116/98 8 IUR/ so
Company submitted their
Yes
No
This discl0$ure was forwarded to Region ll for
i SRira RE es I0> and
8 PAIR Previous
1994 lUR form and PAIR
action on 1211/98. The Region issued a NOD
CSA #2
NOD Issued form fur carbon disulfide
fur the violations on 3/17/99.
i So - ";i
(Tonawanda, NY facility)
"
: Commer Tin see CSA#3
11/24/ 98 8IUR $0
Company omitted one
Yes
No
The Agency considers the economic benefit
and
Noactioo chemical to their 1994
from non-compliance to be dc-minimus.
: SE. CSA#4
warranted IUR submission (Bedford
! foes Park, IL, and St. Paul,
i I}MN)
I
11778988..00000066
. = SENSITIV:E em CSA#5
12110/98 13
rE:1N'JFrU-UHHGtEitMMEENNTT
SENSITIVE
s l,430
2
Company corrected
Insufficicot No
The Agency considers the economic benefit
Improper
negative certification with information
from non-compliance to be de-minimus.
cert. for a
a positive certification.
was provided
CSA#6
iSa Er R&D
product
to sutJDOrt audit poUcy.
12122198 S illegal S62,700
Company stopped illegal
Yes
No
use
use. A PMN 'WllS
subsequently submitted by
The Agency considers the economic benefit from non-compliance to be de-rainimus
another company.
CSA#7
116199
5 SNUN s215,60() Company now e-0mplying
Yes
with SNUR requirements.
llI all CSA#8
4126199 13 False NIA
No violation occurred.
N/A
cert.
f[eSoTfEr e [fess CSA#9 4/29/99 SPMN NIA
No violation occurred.
NIA
rrata SMMD
S/6199 8 IUR s 18,700 Company failed to subm it
Yes
No
The Agency considers the economic benefit
from ncn-<:otnpliance to be de-minimus
NIA
Company submitted a negative cenification
whco none was needed.
Ni A
Chemical is on the TSCA Inventory as ofl994.
No
The Agency considers the econanic benefit
the L994 and 1998 IUR
from non-compliance to be de-minimus
P :Po E ""0"'
e
.... <,,D.,
CSA#lO 5/11/99 13 False NIA
cert.
.N0..,
s ;..;.
~
CSA#ll sn.0199 SSNUN 495,000
....
0..
p ETeRe T form fotonechemical at
the Decatur, AL site)
No Violation occurred.
NIA
NIA
Failed to comply with
Yes
No
R.tD requirements under
40 C.F.R. 721.47
eE R m m R Company submitted a negative certification when none was needed.
The Agency considers the economic benefit from non-compliance to be de-minimus
ti)
~
~
0
"'0 '
,_
0
I or 1798.0007
:
i.'"
.,. D,, "::>'
".-'.
.:
n
.::>. ".....
:i
.....
"''
1:
' "~ '
~
I
SSEEEENNNNFFSOSOIIRTRTICCIVVEEEEMMEENNTT
3
CSA#l2 614199
12(b)
NIA
Company disclosed a
NIA
Fol 30 ven potential 12(b) violation
etd for an export that occurred
ye159 x on May26, 1999 for
ST Cas # 74-87-3
Sl\1MD 618/99
SJUR $18,700
Company omitted one
Yes
chemical to their 1998 IUR submission (Cottage
rr EGaE g Grove, MN)
mm [Yomi | Ya SMMD
6128/99 SPMN Inmfficient Yes - 3M submitted a
Yes
or (Hin To i.uf'onnatioa PMN(P-99-1002}.
mato ddermi.ne
a pcnaltv.
feN~batch
~aDd
amounts
fiom.1996
SMMD
7/22/99
8 (NOC)
to 1999. $20,000
pcacohmmon Company reported two lateNOCs.
| No toe*Repeat = violator moms $20,000 Stip
SMMD
7/22/99 SPMN Insufficient Yes - 3M submitted a
Yes
information PMN (?99-1229)
(0 determine
PCDaltv.
Needbat.cb
dates and
amounts
from 1996
to 1999.
NIA
No Violation occurred. The 12(b) ex.port
jot eh des notification requirement fur this chemical was
nT sunset on 1130194.
No
The Agency considers the econoinic benefit
from non-compliance to be de-minimus.
[iYasns|| S CFoEmmee sntvet Yesses $19,855 pol | e Pts Aosn oeisnc ebeant | (SeeBen m report)
Company requested and was granted enforcement disaction to distribute existing stocks. Although the company did submit a PMN, me company ls subject to the delayed cost ofsubmitting the PMN.
Cory etseisTSAvn NIA
Company had a previous TSCA violation (see
TT)Comprsiats TSCA 97-H-34}. Companysubjectto
et in Ah stipulated penalties per the A;idit Agreement
an Section 3(aXvi).
Yes-
$ 12,887
(See Ben
report)
Company did submit a PMN and but is subject to delayed costs.
117789.80.0000088.
:
i:...,
"0 '
0
....
:0
:n
N
i0
N ~
:~ :,.,
::>
!-0
-<
:;J
2
...
::> ' ::> ::>
.....
-3::>
I
SE EENNFFOORRCCEE,~Ml1iEr-N:-.1 ;i ' "~ t.,;J
SENSITIVE
SMMD
CSA#IJ
CSA#l4 and CSA#l5
SMMD
SMMD
9121/99
9129199 11/4/99
=12117/99
211 0/00
5LVEA
5PMN
s
PMNor
LVEA 5PMN
81UR
4
TTe r, | Insufticient Yes 3M submitted a
Yes
infonnafioD LVEA L99-456 for this
to determine chemical.
1>Cl13ltv.
Needba&cli
amounts
and dates
from 1996 tu 1999.
FTT $480,000 Yes - The chemical was
Yes
RE placed on the TSCA
Eas Inventory by another
TtEe company (deleted)
. See P(deletcd) (NOC
a submitted by (deleted)
5 on 6117/99)
Te = $ 14,300
Company stated that no
Yes
Need to
further manufilcturc
determine if occurred (Final report)
= LVEAor
cTeE PMNwas
submitted.
NI A
Company submitted a
N/A
LYEA but the Agency
determined that the chemical was on the TSCA Inventory
rr (according to company)
Li SJS,700
Company incorrectly
Yes
he reported the wrong CASI#
for a chemical $ubstance
ad to their 1998 IUR
ER (Cot1age Grove, MN)
..
Yes -
|B |ESr eti $ 3,SOS oree | |RESB ER, (secBen
Company requested and was granted enforcement disaction to distribute e.xisting stocks. Although the company did submit a LVEA, the company is subject to the delayed
report)
cost ofsubmitting the LVEA.
oCgnTrrm -- Yes
$34,31,
inre |i. (see Ben
Company requested and was granted enforcement disaction to distribute existing stoclcs. Companyavoided costs ofsubmitting aPMN.
report)
Yes-
Add't info needed
-- Unable to verify ifaLVEA was submitted by
the QODllla!l)'. Need to check 'l\'ith company
andOPPT.
iio Avoidance or delayed costs.
NIA
No Violation OCCUITed.
E EaT s No
The Agency considas the c:conomic benefit
from non-compliance to be: dc-minimus.
17580008 1798.0009
iisz
! d
0
"...',
;::
:<O
0.. "...'.
t:-t."1
;..:i
.....
.0 ,
:r.
0
-' 0
~II:
II:
!;:
SMMD
4124/00 5
SEEENNNFFSOOIRTRICCVEEEMMEENNTT
SENSITIVE
s
5
Nomenclatun: issue of SC't'Cral PMNs; unable to determine ifviolation has occurred..
LT SMMD 5/12/00 S LVEA Insumcient Yes Company submitted
Yes
information a LVEA, L-00248.
todctmnine
penalty,
Needbalch
amountl
aoddates
from 1996
to 2000.
iw Cormier CSA#l6 6/2i00 13
Imufticient Company imported
Yes
[. re re Failure to infonnarion numerous R&D products
ted Ene certify for to determine withcut providing the
R&D
penalty.
neceswy TSCA
I= pk. products Need
certifications to Customs
approx
number of
imoorta
from 1996
to2000.
S~L"1D
6112/00 8 (TUR) $ 56,100
Company incorrectly
Yes
reported the volume
amounts ofthree
Em chemicals for the 1998
ruRreport (Cottage Grove, MN)
Yes $19,062
EIST 3M bas realleSt.ed a com:ction ofinventor.
l.isti!l1.S to reflect intended chemical SDCcics
st copy ir (IC-5854). Need to cbcck with company and OPPT on status ofrequest. in ctsaE Company did submit a LVEA but is subject to the delayed costs ofsubmitting the LYEA.
(Sec Ben report)
i emmy sie No
3M has provided the necessary guidanc.e to
[per persoanel for future R.&D imports requiring
emia. Sopot TSCA certifications. Ne past corrections is
Hl deemed necessary.
No
The Agency considers the economic benefit
from non-compliance to be de-minimus
11778988..00001100
ENFORCEMENT ENFORCEMENT
.
SSEENNSSIITTIIVVEE
.6
EY ET rr Somer CSA# 17 _ BasT | 7
=mme cCmpomsmraes r r ete POST m FINAL sy ERs | REPORT
717/00 3/30/01
S(c)
=
11/20/00
s
(polymer
exemption)
Sl,804,000
Company reported 164 8(c) allegations that were
[EEE not contained central file.
in
the
STBD
Company failed to submit
w exemption notification
requirement,
Yes
No
Economic gains from non-compliance is
unknown.
C=
Yes
No
The Agency considers the economic benefit
from non-compliance to be de-minimus
BTohrPOST
FlNAL
ompmemn e 12n6/00
5 (polymer
$TBD
Company failed to submit
Yes
an exemption notification
REPORT
exemption)
requirement.
No
The Agency considers the economic benefit
from non-<:<>mpliance to be dc-minimus
To wo ee | | TSCA 8(e) a TEE PHASE 1
8/2 1/00
8 (e)
y meos To [re [rena|sBspsmiens mE mro: TSCA8(c) : LBe o s"na [ErEr E PHASEH
6/ 13/01
8 (e)
$TBD Tobe calculated
STBD Toho calculated .
29 animal studies ($6,000) 2 human health ($1 S,000)
No
s 204,ooo
Stipulated penalties
3 animal studies ($6,000)
No
s ts,ooo
*Stipulated
NIA Company did noc meet the terms ofthe audit policy and are subject to the stipulated perialties ofthe JM audit agreement.
' NIA Company did not meet the terms ofthe audit
policy and are subject to the stipulated penalties ofthe 3M audit agreement.
penalties
I i
1779988..00001111