|
The US EPA announced a finalized federal enforcement action (including a $261,283 fine & federal consent agreement) against Apple Inc over this unpermitted semiconductor manufacturing facility, next to thousands of homes and a playground, in Santa Clara, California. The US EPA has now published the legal documents and the case docket for their RCRA ("Resource Conservation and Recovery Act" federal hazardous waste management) enforcement action taken against Apple Inc over Apple's Santa Clara semiconductor manufacturing facility at 3250 Scott Blvd. The Consent Agreement and Final Order was signed and finalized as Case. No. RCRA-09-2026-0006, dated Oct. 27 2025.
In the Matter of Apple, Inc., U.S. EPA Docket No. RCRA-09-2026-0006, Consent Agreement and Final Order (EPA Region IX Oct. 27, 2025) The Agreement & Order determined Apple was generating, treating, storing, and disposing of federally regulated hazardous waste at 3250 Scott Blvd without federally required permits (¶ 27, 43, 53); was unlawfully venting "solvent exhaust...directly to the atmosphere" (¶ 47); was unlawfully asserting, without analysis, that its federally regulated hazardous waste was not federally regulated hazardous waste (¶ 31-33, 36-38); generated more than 1,000kg of federally regulated hazardous waste per month (¶ 28), yet abandoned that waste on weekends and holidays and did not monitor, inspect, or document that waste as required (¶ 60-61); stored federally regulated hazardous waste onsite without required labels or information, or even closing the containers (¶ 52, 53, 56-57). The Agreement and Order explains this enforcement action arose out of my "Tip and Complaint" to the US EPA in June 2023 regarding Apple's operations at this facility, and that Apple was informed the inspection (and resulting enforcement action was due to my complaints to the EPA). (¶ 12-13). Note: I specifically asked EPA to tell Apple that I was the one who sent them. (view the June 12 2023 Complaint as a PDF or in DropBox with attachments). The Agreement and Order states the enforcement action was based on inspection findings documented in a Notice of Violation and Requests for Information dated April 30 2024 (view the report as a PDF, or a larger PDF with attachments, or on Dropbox with all attachments and additional records) (¶ 15-16) and Nov. 6 2024 (¶ 17); and a Notice of Potential Enforcement Action sent June 26 2025 (¶ 19). (view the PDF). The enforcement action is based only on violations of the RCRA identified during EPA inspections on August 17-18 2023 and January 16 2024. The Agreement & Order specifically preserved jurisdiction for my Citizen Suit to continue to prosecute Apple and other defendants over violations of other federal environmental laws at this facility and any other violations of the RCRA not expressly settled at this facility. The Agreement and Order only settles liability regarding financial penalties for the specific violations identified by EPA on the specific inspection dates noted, but still allows me to still seek injunctive relief or other equitable relief, or for the DOJ to seek criminal sanctions, even for these same violations. (¶ 80-82). The Agreement and Order also still allows me to seek penalties for additional RCRA violations identified in the Citizen Suit if in addition to the ones EPA identified during its inspections. (¶ 74). In the consent agreement, Apple does not admit or deny any "specific factual allegations" but does "waive any right to contest the allegations and its right to appeal" (¶ 69) and "waives any rights or defenses... for this matter to be resolved in federal court" (¶ 70) if filed by the EPA (¶ 83). Apple certified "under penalty of law to EPA" that "to the best of [its] knowledge and belief formed after reasonably inquiry of individuals immediately responsible for compliance at this Facility" that "it has taken steps necessary to comply with RCRA... for the specific violations at the Facility alleged in the [Agreement & Order]." (¶ 71-72). Critically, this means that the US EPA is closing this matter by taking Apple's word for it that Apple resolved these violations. While its important that US EPA took this enforcement action, the Agreement and Order makes no factual finding the violations are actually resolved or that Apple changed its practices in such a way to prevent violations from re-occurring. This makes my pending environmental Citizen Suit even more critical. The Consent Agreement & Final Order contains seven counts, grouping hundreds of individual violations under specific types of RCRA violations including:
Apple is concurrently facing citations for violations of air pollution laws, with open cases filed by the Bay Area Air Quality Management District (BAAQMD) in Aug.-Sept. 2024 complaining Apple was operating the facility without required air permits, venting the solvent waste tank to the atmosphere without abatement, and exhausting unlawful amounts of nitric oxide and nitrogen dioxide into the ambient air. (view the citations here). As noted, the RCRA violations cited by US EPA at 3250 Scott Blvd in this case included a 1,700 gallon solvent waste tank that did not have required permits, that was managing federally regulated hazardous waste but which Apple claimed was not federally reregulated hazardous waste, and Apple was venting the hazardous waste solvent exhaust to the atmosphere (where the apartment windows and fresh air intakes are located) without abatement of the pollution and without air pollution permits. The April 2024 EPA report notes Apple claimed it was operating this tank (unlawfully) since 2017. OCT. 27 2025 US EPA ENFORCEMENT ACTION Docket: In re Apple, Inc., US EPA Docket No. RCRA-09-2026-0006 (Oct. 27, 2025) Filing: Consent Agreement and Final Order, In re Apple, Inc., EPA Docket No. RCRA-09-2026-0006 (Region 9, Oct. 27, 2025) Citation: In the Matter of Apple, Inc., U.S. EPA Docket No. RCRA-09-2026-0006, Consent Agreement and Final Order (EPA Region IX Oct. 27, 2025) Reference: US EPA resources with information about RCRA (commonly pronounced as "rick-rah"): Overview; History; Compliance. ENVIRONMENTAL CITIZEN SUIT (SEPT. 2025 - ONGOING). Gjovik v. Apple Inc., Santa Clara, Khalil Jenab, et al., No. 5:25-cv-07360 (N.D. Cal. Sept. 2, 2025-) Free, public access to the Citizen Suit case docket is available on CourtListener here: https://www.courtlistener.com/docket/71272728/gjovik-v-apple-inc/ 2016 CALIFORNIA DTSC CONSENT AGREEMENT
In 2016, Apple entered a hazardous waste Consent Agreement with the California EPA over hazardous waste violations at two different Apple facilities in Cupertino and Sunnyvale. The agreement was for at least five years and covered all Apple hazardous waste activities in California. The agreement similarly found that Apple was violating hazardous waste laws under both federal and state laws including many of the same issues at 3250 Scott Blvd including operating without required permits, failing to properly label and mark hazardous waste, and unlawfully transporting hazardous waste without required manifests or records (including unlawfully exporting hazardous waste to other countries). DTSC fined Apple $450,000. View the 2016 Complaint, Settlement Agreement, and Announcement. In 2016, Apple's environmental team told Reuters that "This matter involves an oversight in filing paperwork... We've worked... to ensure that going forward we have the proper permits for our current site. As we do with all our facilities, we followed our stringent set of health and safety standards, which go well beyond legal requirements." (See, California EPA says settled with Apple on hazardous waste claims). The Consent Agreement could only be terminated if Apple demonstrated compliance with hazardous waste laws at all of its facilities. At the time Apple was able to obtain a termination of the agreement in 2020, Apple was admittedly in violation of federal hazardous waste laws at 3250 Scott Blvd. If the 2017-2025 RCRA violations had been identified and reported, those violations likely would have prevented the termination of the 2016-2020 California EPA Consent Agreement. Please feel free to contact me with any questions or requests for information. -Ashley
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorUpdates from Ashley Gjovik about her whistleblower battle against Apple Inc. Archives
November 2025
Categories
All
|
||||
RSS Feed