The statutes in question set up a comprehensive scheme of unemployment compensation, the costs of which are defrayed by contributions required to be made by employers to a state unemployment compensation fund. [p312] The contributions are a specified percentage of the wages payable annually by each employer for his employees' services in the state. The assessment and collection of the contributions and the fund are administered by appellees. Section 14(c) of the Act (Wash.Rev.Stat., 1941 Supp., § 9998-114c) authorizes appellee Commissioner to issue an order and notice of assessment of delinquent contributions upon prescribed personal service of the notice upon the employer if found within the state, or, if not so found, by mailing the notice to the employer by registered mail at his last known address. That section also authorizes the Commissioner to collect the assessment by distraint if it is not paid within ten days after service of the notice. By §§ 14e and 6b, the order of assessment may be administratively reviewed by an appeal tribunal within the office of unemployment upon petition of the employer, and this determination is, by § 6i, made subject to judicial review on questions of law by the state Superior Court, with further right of appeal in the state Supreme Court, as in other civil cases.
The motion was heard on evidence and a stipulation of facts by the appeal tribunal, which denied the motion [p313] and ruled that appellee Commissioner was entitled to recover the unpaid contributions. That action was affirmed by the Commissioner; both the Superior Court and the Supreme Court affirmed. 22 Wash.2d 146, 154 P.2d 801. Appellant in each of these courts assailed the statute as applied, as a violation of the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment, and as imposing a constitutionally prohibited burden on interstate commerce. The cause comes here on appeal under § 237(a) of the Judicial Code, 28 U.S.C. § 344(a), appellant assigning as error that the challenged statutes, as applied, infringe the due process clause of the Fourteenth Amendment and the commerce clause.
Appellant has no office in Washington, and makes no contracts either for sale or purchase of merchandise there. It maintains no stock of merchandise in that state, and makes there no deliveries of goods in intrastate commerce. During the years from 1937 to 1940, now in question, appellant employed eleven to thirteen salesmen under direct supervision and control of sales managers located in St. Louis. These salesmen resided in Washington; their principal activities were confined to that state, and they were compensated by commissions based upon the amount of their sales. The commissions for each year totaled more than $31,000. Appellant supplies its salesmen with a line of samples, each consisting of one shoe of a pair, which [p314] they display to prospective purchasers. On occasion, they rent permanent sample rooms, for exhibiting samples, in business buildings, or rent rooms in hotels or business buildings temporarily for that purpose. The cost of such rentals is reimbursed by appellant.
The Supreme Court of Washington was of opinion that the regular and systematic solicitation of orders in the state by appellant's salesmen, resulting in a continuous flow of appellant's product into the state, was sufficient to constitute doing business in the state so as to make appellant amenable to suit in its courts. But it was also of opinion that there were sufficient additional activities shown to bring the case within the rule, frequently stated, that solicitation within a state by the agents of a foreign corporation plus some additional activities there are sufficient to render the corporation amenable to suit brought in the courts of the state to enforce an obligation arising out of its activities there. International Harvester Co. v. Kentucky, 234 U.S. 579, 587; People's Tobacco Co. v. American Tobacco Co., 246 U.S. 79, 87; Frene v. Louisville Cement Co., 77 U.S.App.D.C. 129, 134 F.2d 511, 516. The court found such additional activities in the salesmen's display of samples sometimes in permanent display rooms, and the salesmen's residence within the state, continued over a period of years, all resulting in a [p315] substantial volume of merchandise regularly shipped by appellant to purchasers within the state. The court also held that the statute, as applied, did not invade the constitutional power of Congress to regulate interstate commerce, and did not impose a prohibited burden on such commerce.
No person required under a State law to make payments to an unemployment fund shall be relieved from compliance therewith on the ground that he is engaged in interstate or foreign commerce, or that the State law does not distinguish between employees engaged in interstate or foreign commerce and those engaged in intrastate commerce.
It is no longer debatable that Congress, in the exercise of the commerce power, may authorize the states, in specified ways, to regulate interstate commerce or impose burdens upon it. Kentucky Whip & Collar Co. v. Illinois Central R. Co., 299 U.S. 334; Perkins v. Pennsylvania, 314 U.S. 586; Standard Dredging Corp. v. Murphy, 319 U.S. 306, 308; Hooven & Allison Co. v. Evatt, 324 U.S. 652, 679; Southern Pacific Co. v. Arizona, 325 U.S. 761, 769.
Appellant also insists that its activities within the state were not sufficient to manifest its "presence" there, and that, in its absence, the state courts were without jurisdiction, that, consequently, it was a denial of due process for the state to subject appellant to suit. It refers to those cases in which it was said that the mere solicitation of orders for the purchase of goods within a state, to be accepted without the state and filled by shipment of the purchased goods interstate, does not render the corporation seller amenable to suit within the state. See Green v. Chicago, B. & Q. R. Co., 205 U.S. 530, 533; International Harvester Co. v. Kentucky, supra, 586-587; Philadelphia [p316] & Reading R. Co. v. McKibbin, 243 U.S. 264, 268; People's Tobacco Co. v. American Tobacco Co., supra, 87. And appellant further argues that, since it was not present within the state, it is a denial of due process to subject it to taxation or other money exaction. It thus denies the power of the state to lay the tax or to subject appellant to a suit for its collection.
Since the corporate personality is a fiction, although a fiction intended to be acted upon as though it were a fact, Klein v. Board of Supervisors, 282 U.S. 19, 24, it is clear that, unlike an individual, its "presence" without, as well as within, the state of its origin can be manifested only by activities carried on in its behalf by those who are authorized to act for it. To say that the corporation is so far "present" there as to satisfy due process requirements, for purposes of taxation or the maintenance of suits against it in the courts of the state, is to beg the question to be decided. For the terms "present" or "presence" are [p317] used merely to symbolize those activities of the corporation's agent within the state which courts will deem to be sufficient to satisfy the demands of due process. L. Hand, J., in Hutchinson v. Chase & Gilbert, 45 F.2d 139, 141. Those demands may be met by such contacts of the corporation with the state of the forum as make it reasonable, in the context of our federal system of government, to require the corporation to defend the particular suit which is brought there. An "estimate of the inconveniences" which would result to the corporation from a trial away from its "home" or principal place of business is relevant in this connection. Hutchinson v. Chase & Gilbert, supra, 141.
While it has been held, in cases on which appellant relies, that continuous activity of some sorts within a state is not enough to support the demand that the corporation be amenable to suits unrelated to that activity, Old Wayne Life Assn. v. McDonough, supra; Green v. Chicago, B. & Q. R. Co., supra; Simon v. Southern R. Co., 236 U.S. 115; People's Tobacco Co. v. American Tobacco Co., supra; cf. Davis v. Farmers Co-operative Co., 262 U.S. 312, 317, there have been instances in which the continuous corporate operations within a state were thought so substantial and of such a nature as to justify suit against it on causes of action arising from dealings entirely distinct from those activities. See Missouri, K. & T. R. Co. v. Reynolds, 255 U.S. 565; Tauza v. Susquehanna Coal Co., 220 N.Y. 259, 115 N.E. 915; cf. St. Louis S.W. R. Co. v. Alexander, supra.
Finally, although the commission of some single or occasional acts of the corporate agent in a state sufficient to impose an obligation or liability on the corporation has not been thought to confer upon the state authority to enforce it, Rosenberg Bros. & Co. v. Curtis Brown Co., 260 U.S. 516, other such acts, because of their nature and quality and the circumstances of their commission, may be deemed sufficient to render the corporation liable to suit. Cf. Kane v. New Jersey, 242 U.S. 160; Hess v. Pawloski, supra; Young v. Masci, supra. True, some of the decisions holding the corporation amenable to suit have been supported by resort to the legal fiction that it has given its consent to service and suit, consent being implied from its presence in the state through the acts of its authorized agents. Lafayette Insurance Co. v. French, 18 How. 404, 407; St. Clair v. Cox, supra, 356; Commercial Mutual Co. v. Davis, supra, 254; Washington v. Superior Court, 289 U.S. 361, 364-365. But, more realistically, it may be said that those authorized acts were of such a nature as to justify the fiction. Smolik v. Philadelphia & [p319] Reading Co., 222 F. 148, 151. Henderson, The Position of Foreign Corporations in American Constitutional Law, 94-95.
It is evident that the criteria by which we mark the boundary line between those activities which justify the subjection of a corporation to suit and those which do not cannot be simply mechanical or quantitative. The test is not merely, as has sometimes been suggested, whether the activity, which the corporation has seen fit to procure through its agents in another state, is a little more or a little less. St. Louis S.W. R. Co. v. Alexander, supra, 228; International Harvester Co. v. Kentucky, supra, 587. Whether due process is satisfied must depend, rather, upon the quality and nature of the activity in relation to the fair and orderly administration of the laws which it was the purpose of the due process clause to insure. That clause does not contemplate that a state may make binding a judgment in personam against an individual or corporate defendant with which the state has no contacts, ties, or relations. Cf. Pennoyer v. Neff, supra; Minnesota Commercial Assn. v. Benn, 261 U.S. 140.
We are likewise unable to conclude that the service of the process within the state upon an agent whose activities establish appellant's "presence" there was not sufficient notice of the suit, or that the suit was so unrelated to those activities as to make the agent an inappropriate vehicle for communicating the notice. It is enough that appellant has established such contacts with the state that the particular form of substituted service adopted there gives reasonable assurance that the notice will be actual. Connecticut Mutual Co. v. Spratley, supra, 618, 619; Board of Trade v. Hammond Elevator Co., 198 U.S. 424, 437-438; Commercial Mutual Co. v. Davis, supra, 254-255. Cf. Riverside Mills v. Menefee, 237 U.S. 189, 194, 195; see Knowles v. Gaslight & Coke Co., 19 Wall. 58, 61; McDonald v. Mabee, supra; Milliken v. Meyer, supra. Nor can we say that the mailing of the notice of suit to appellant by registered mail at its home office was not reasonably calculated to apprise appellant of the suit. Compare Hess v. Pawloski, supra, with McDonald v. Mabee, supra, [p321] 92, and Wuchter v. Pizzutti, 276 U.S. 13, 19, 24; cf. Becquet v. MacCarthy, 2 B. & Ad. 951; Maubourquet v. Wyse, 1 Ir.Rep.C.L. 471. See Washington v. Superior Court, supra, 365.
Only a word need be said of appellant's liability for the demanded contributions to the state unemployment fund. The Supreme Court of Washington, construing and applying the statute, has held that it imposes a tax on the privilege of employing appellant's salesmen within the state measured by a percentage of the wages, here, the commissions payable to the salesmen. This construction we accept for purposes of determining the constitutional validity of the statute. The right to employ labor has been deemed an appropriate subject of taxation in this country and England, both before and since the adoption of the Constitution. Steward Machine Co. v. Davis, 301 U.S. 548, 579, et seq. And such a tax imposed upon the employer for unemployment benefits is within the constitutional power of the states. Carmichael v. Southern Coal Co., 301 U.S. 495, 508, et seq.
Appellant having rendered itself amenable to suit upon obligations arising out of the activities of its salesmen in Washington, the state may maintain the present suit in personam to collect the tax laid upon the exercise of the privilege of employing appellant's salesmen within the state. For Washington has made one of those activities which, taken together, establish appellant's "presence" there for purposes of suit the taxable event by which the state brings appellant within the reach of its taxing power. The state thus has constitutional power to lay the tax and to subject appellant to a suit to recover it. The activities which establish its "presence" subject it alike to taxation by the state and to suit to recover the tax. Equitable Life Society v. Pennsylvania, 238 U.S. 143, 146; cf. International Harvester Co. v. Department of Taxation, 322 U.S. 435, 442, et seq.; Hoopeston Canning Co. v. Cullen, [p322] supra, 316-319; see General Trading Co. v. Tax Comm'n, 322 U.S. 335.


§ 247-2 License required; fee; expiration.
§ 247-4 License required; fee; expiration.
§ 247-7 Violations; penalties; enforcement.
Entertainment establishments — See Ch. 115.
Editor's Note: This ordinance also renumbered former §§ 247-1 and 247-6 as §§ 247-2 and 247-7, respectively.
Any person, firm or corporation desirous of operating a victualer house between the hours of 6:00 a.m. and 2:00 am. shall first obtain a license in accordance with § 158-6.
The fee for such license shall be as specified in Chapter 121, Fee Schedule.
All such licenses shall be issued by the Town Clerk pursuant to § 158-6 upon approval of proper authorities as specified in § 158-3.
Pursuant to RIGL 5-24-1, any person, firm or corporation desirous of operating a victualler house between the hours of 2:00 a.m. and 6:00 a.m. shall first obtain a license in accordance with § 158-2.
Any application for a license or renewal of same shall not be approved until notice of the application is advertised once a week for three successive weeks in a newspaper of general circulation in the town and a public hearing is held before the Licensing Board. The notice shall contain the name of the applicant, the location for which the license is required, the date, time and place of the hearing, and shall state that remonstrants are entitled to be heard. The expense of such advertising shall be borne by the applicant.
All such licenses are granted subject to prior approval of proper authorities as specified in § 158-3.
Any person who shall violate any provision of this chapter shall be guilty of an offense against the Town, punishable as provided in Chapter 1, Article II, General Penalty.
All members of the Police Department are authorized to enforce the provisions of this chapter.


On August 30, 2016, the Boykin court affirmed a sentence imposed on a defendant convicted of two counts of possession of a firearm in furtherance of a racketeering and narcotics conspiracy in violation of 18 U.S.C. § 924(c). At trial, the district court instructed the jury that the first § 924(c) charge was connected to the racketeering conspiracy, while the second § 924(c) charge was connected to the narcotics conspiracy. The court did not, however, instruct the jury to find whether the defendant possessed the firearms relating to each conspiracy at different times. At sentencing, however, the district court found that each instance of firearm possession constituted a separate “conviction” under 18 U.S.C. § 924(c), triggering the enhanced mandatory minimum penalty applicable to “second or subsequent conviction[s]” under that statute. The district court therefore sentenced the defendant to five years imprisonment for the first § 924(c) conviction, and to twenty-five years imprisonment for the second § 924(c) conviction, with the sentences to run consecutively (as required by Section 924(c)).
The defendant challenged the sentence on appeal, contending that Alleyne’s holding that any fact that enhances a mandatory minimum sentence must be found by a jury required that a jury determine that the two instances in which he illegally possessed firearms in furtherance of the racketeering and narcotics conspiracies, constituting the two violations of § 924(c), occurred at different times. The Second Circuit rejected this argument, citing to Alleyne’s observation that it was not disturbing the doctrine that the fact of a conviction may be found by the court.
In light of the decision in Boykin, it is clear that any expansion of Alleyne to abrogate the fact-of-conviction exception contained in Apprendi will not come from the Second Circuit. Whether the Sixth Amendment requires juries to make findings as to the fact of a defendant’s prior conviction is a question that will be revisited, if at all, by the U.S. Supreme Court.


text:
Length (km) This section is 60 km of a total fault length of 257 km.
References Bard, E., Hamelin, B., Fairbanks, R.G., and Zindler, A., 1990, Calibration of the C-14 timescale over the past 30,000 years using mass spectrometric U-Th ages from Barbados corals: Nature, v. 345, p. 405-410.
Brady, R.H., III, 1986, Cenozoic geology of the northern Avawatz Mountains in relation to the intersection of the Garlock and Death Valley fault zones, San Bernardino County, California: Davis, University of California, unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, 292 p., 2 pls., scale 1:24,000.
Burchfiel, B.C., Hodges, K.V., and Royden, L.H., 1987, Geology of Panamint Valley-Saline Valley pull-apart system, California—Palinspastic evidence for low-angle geometry of a Neogene range-bounding fault: Journal of Geophysical Research, v. 92, no. B10, p. 10,422-10,426.
Burke, D.B., 1979, Log of a trench in the Garlock fault zone, Fremont Valley, California: U.S. Geological Survey Miscellaneous Field Studies Map MF-1028, 1 sheet, scale 1:125,000.
Carr, M.D., Harris, A.G., Poole, F.G., and Fleck, R.J., 1993, Stratigraphy and structure of Paleozoic outer continental margin rocks in Pilot Knob Valley, north central Mojave Desert, California: U.S. Geological Survey Bulletin 2015, 33 p.
Carter, B.A., 1980, Quaternary displacement on the Garlock fault, California, in Fife, D.L., and Brown, A.R., eds., Geology and mineral wealth of the California desert: South Coast Geological Society, Santa Ana, California, p. 457-466.
Carter, J.N., Luyendyk, B.P., and Terres, R.R., 1987, Neogene clockwise tectonic rotation of the eastern Transverse Ranges, California, suggested by paleomagnetic vectors: Geological Society of America Bulletin, v. 98, p. 199-206.
Clark, M.M., 1973, Map showing recently active breaks along the Garlock and associated faults, California: U.S. Geological Survey Miscellaneous Geologic Investigations I-741, 3 sheets, scale 1:24,000.
Clark, M.M., and Lajoie, K.R., 1974, Holocene behavior of the Garlock fault: Geological Society of America, Abstracts with Programs, v. 6, p. 156-157.
Clark, M.M., Harms, K.H., Lienkaemper, J.J., Harwood, D.S., Lajoie, K.R., Matti, J.C., Perkins, J.A., Rymer, M.J., Sarna-Wojcicki, A.M., Sharp, R.V., Sims, J.D., Tinsley, J.C., III, and Ziony, J.I., 1984, Preliminary slip rate table and map of late Quaternary faults of California: U.S. Geological Survey Open-File Report 84-106, 12 p., 5 plates, scale 1:1,000,000.
Davis, G.A., and Burchfiel, B.C., 1973, Garlock fault—An intracontinental transform structure, southern California: Geological Society of America Bulletin, v. 84, p. 1407-1422.
Dawson, T.E., 2000, A 7000 year record of paleoearthquakes on the central Garlock fault, near El Paso Peaks, California: San Diego State University, unpublished M.S. thesis, 90 p.
Dokka, R.K., and Travis, C.J., 1990, Late Cenozoic strike-slip faulting in the Mojave Desert, California: Tectonics, v. 9, p. 311-340.
Hamilton, W.B., and Myers, W.B., 1966, Cenozoic tectonics of the western United States: Reviews of Geophysics, v. 4, p. 509-549.
Hill, M.L., and Dibblee, T.W., Jr., 1953, San Andreas, Garlock, and Big Pine faults, California: Geological Society of America Bulletin, v. 64, p. 443–458.
Jones, C.J., 1987, Is extension in Death Valley accommodated by thinning of the mantle lithosphere beneath the Sierra Nevada, California?: Tectonics, v. 6, p. 449-473.
LaViolette, J.W., 1981, Holocene and late Pleistocene displacement history of the western Garlock fault: Long Beach, California State University, unpublished M.S. thesis, 72 p.
Louie, J.N., Allen, C.R., Johnson, P.C., Haase, P.C., and Cohn, S.N., 1985, Fault slip in southern California: Bulletin of the Seismological Society of America, v. 75, no. 3, p. 811-833.
McGill, S.F., 1993, Late Quaternary slip rate of the Owl Lake fault and maximum age of the latest event on the easternmost Garlock fault, S. California: Geological Society of America Abstracts with Programs, v. 25, no. 5, p. 118.
McGill, S.F., 1994, Preliminary slip rate and recurrence interval for the western Garlock fault system near Lone Tree Canyon, California: Geological Society of America Abstracts with Programs, v. 26, no. 2, p. 72.
McGill, S.F., 1994, Holocene slip rate of the easternmost Garlock, fault, Avawatz Mountains, California, in Reynolds, J., ed., Abstracts from proceedings—The 1994 Desert research symposium: Quarterly of San Bernardino County Museum Association, v. 41, no. 3, p. 24.
McGill, S.F., 1994, Neotectonics of the easternmost Garlock fault in the Avawatz Mountains, in Reynolds, R., ed., Off limits in the Mojave Desert: San Bernardino County Museum Association Special Publication 94-1, p. 96-100.
McGill, S.F., 1999, Slip-rate studies of the Garlock and Owl Lake faults: U.S. Geological Survey National Earthquake Hazards Reduction Program, Annual Summaries v. 40, Contract no. 1434-92-G-2210, 6 p., (electronic version on line at http://erp-web.er.usgs.gov/).
McGill, S.F., and others, in preparation, Slip rate of the western Garlock fault, rate of soil development, and paleoclimatic implications at a site near Lone Tree Canyon, Mojave Desert, California: Unpublished manuscript in preparation, 18 p.
McGill, S.F., and Rockwell, T.R., 1998, Ages of late Holocene earthquakes on the central Garlock fault near El Paso Peaks, California: Journal of Geophysical Research, v. 103, no. B4, p. 7265-7279.
McGill, S.F., and Sieh, K., 1991, Surficial offsets on the central and eastern Garlock Fault associated with prehistoric earthquakes: Journal of Geophysical Research, v. 96, p. 21,587-21,621.
McGill, S.F., and Sieh, K., 1993, Holocene slip rate of the central Garlock fault in southeastern Searles Valley, California: Journal of Geophysical Research, v. 98, p. 14,217-14,231.
McGill, S.H.F., 1992, Paleoseismology and neotectonics of the central and eastern Garlock fault, California: Pasadena, California Institute of Technology, unpublished Ph.D. dissertation, 235 p.
Minster, J.B., and Jordan, T.H., 1987, Vector constraints on western U.S. deformation from space geodesy, neotectonics, and pl. motion: Journal of Geophysical Research, v. 92, p. 4798.
Muehlberger, W.R., 1954, Geology of the Quail Mountains, San Bernardino County: California Division of Mines Bulletin 170, Geology of Southern California Map Sheet 16, scale 1:48,000.
Petersen, M.D., Bryant, W.A., Cramer, C.H., Cao, T., Reichle, M.S., Frankel, A.D., Lienkaemper, J.J., McCrory, P.A., and Schwartz, D.P., 1996, Probabilistic seismic hazard assessment for the State of California: California Department of Conservation, Division of Mines and Geology Open-File Report 96-08 (also U.S. Geological Open-File Report 96-706), 33 p.
Rodgers, D.A., 1979, Vertical deformation, stress accumulation and secondary faulting in the vicinity of the Transverse Ranges of southern California: California Division of Mines and Geology Bulletin 203, p. 74.
Roquemore, G.R., Smith, P.E., and Banks, E.W., 1982, Holocene earthquake activity of the eastern Garlock Fault in Christmas Canyon, San Bernardino County, California: Geological Society of America Abstracts with Programs, v. 14, no. 4, p. 228.
Smith, G.I., 1962, Large lateral displacement on the Garlock fault, California, as measured from offset dike swarm: American Association of Petroleum Geologists Bulletin, v. 46, p. 85-104.
Smith, G.I., and Ketner, K.B., 1970, Lateral displacement on the Garlock fault, southeastern California, suggested by offset sections of similar metasedimentary rocks: U.S. Geological Survey Professional Paper 700-D, p. 1-9.
Smith, G.I., Troxel, B.W., Gray, C.H., Jr., and von Huene, R., 1968, Geologic reconnaissance of the Slate Range, San Bernardino and Inyo Counties, California: [California] Division of Mines and Geology Special Report 96, 1 sheet, scale 1:62,500.
Snay, R.A., and Cline, M.W., 1980, Crustal movement investigations at Tejon Ranch, California: National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration Technical Report 87.
Spencer, J.E., 1990, Geologic map of southern Avawatz Mountains, northeastern Mojave Desert region, San Bernardino County, California: U.S. Geological Survey Miscellaneous Field Studies Map MF-2117, 1 sheet, scale 1:24,000.
Stroud, J.R., and McGill, S.F., 1994, Neotectonic activity on a thrust fault in the northeastern Avawatz Mountains, California: Geological Society of America Abstracts with Programs, v. 26, no. 2, p. 97.
Stroud, J.R., and McGill, S.F., 1994, Late Quaternary activity on a thrust fault in the northeastern Avawatz Mountains, Mojave Desert, California: San Bernardino County Museum Association Quarterly, v. 41, no. 3, p. 30-31.
Troxel, B.W., and Butler, P.R., 1979, Tertiary and Quaternary fault history of the intersection of the Garlock and Death Valley fault zone, southern Death Valley, California: Unpublished report submitted to U.S. Geological Survey, Menlo Park, California, 29 p.
Troxel, B.W., Wright, L.A., and Jahns, R.H., 1972, Evidence for differential displacement along the Garlock fault zone, California: Geological Society of America Abstracts with Programs, v. 5, p. 250.
Wells, S.G., McFadden, L.D., and Dohrenwend, J.C., 1987, Influence of late Quaternary climatic changes on geomorphic and pedogenic processes on a desert piedmont, eastern Mojave Desert, California: Quaternary Research, v. 27, p. 130-146.

matches: v. v. v. v. v. v. v. v. v. v. v. v. v. v. v. v. v. v. v. v. v. v. v. v.


Researchers at New York University (NYU) recently developed a new method for simultaneous measurement of 71 inorganic elements in liquids — including groundwater. The method, utilizing sequential inductively coupled plasma-mass spectrometry, makes element testing much faster, more efficient, and more comprehensive than was possible in the past.
The NYU researchers studied samples of liquid from a variety of sources worldwide, including tap water from a New York City suburb, snow from Italy and Croatia, rain from Brazil and Pakistan, lake water from Switzerland and Croatia, and seawater from Japan and Brazil. Testing each sample results in a distinct elemental pattern, creating a “fingerprint” that can help differentiate between substances or trace a liquid back to its environmental origin.
The method—developed by researchers at the isotope laboratory of NYU College of Dentistry and described in the journal RSC Advances, published by the Royal Society of Chemistry—may be used to explore and understand the distribution of inorganic elements beyond the few that are typically measured. It has implications for fields such as nutrition, ecology and climate science, and environmental health.
An analytical technique called inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometry (ICP-MS) is used to measure elements. Historically, ICP-MS instruments have measured elements sequentially, or one by one, but a new type of ICP‐MS instrument at NYU College of Dentistry and roughly two dozen other places around the world has the potential to measure the complete range of inorganic elements all at once.
“Because of this new method, our mass spectrometer can simultaneously measure all inorganic elements from lithium to uranium. We’re able to measure the elements in far less time, at far less expense, using far less material,” said Timothy Bromage, professor of biomaterials and of basic science and craniofacial biology at NYU College of Dentistry and the study’s senior author.
This technological advancement may help to fill gaps in our understanding of element distributions and concentrations in substances like water. For instance, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency monitors and sets maximum concentration limits for 19 elements in drinking water considered to be health risks, yet many elements known to have health consequences—such as lithium or tin—are neither monitored nor regulated.
“The elemental mapping of concentration levels in bottled and tap water could help to increase our understanding of ‘normal’ concentration levels of most elements in water,” said Bromage.
Bromage and his colleagues designed a method for using simultaneous ICP-MS to detect 71 elements of the inorganic spectrum involving a specific set of calibration and internal standards. The method, for which they have a patent pending, routinely detects elements in seconds to several minutes and in samples as small as 1 to 4 milliliters.
In each sample, Bromage and his team found a distinct “fingerprint” or elemental pattern, suggesting that samples can be recognized and differentiated by these patterns. The elemental content of water, for example, typically reflects its natural environment, so understanding the elemental composition can tell us if water had its origins from a source with volcanic rock versus limestone, an alkaline rock.
Since the 2013 call for a review in the regulatory gaps surrounding the ability for enforcement on mismanagement of excess soils in Ontario, the Ministry of Environment (now called Ministry of Environment, Conservation and Parks – MECP) has tirelessly worked towards a proposed Excess Soil Regulatory package for Ontario. The efforts have included an unprecedented process of stakeholder listening sessions, consultations and engagement group meetings and inter-Ministerial reviews over the past 5 years.
The proposed Excess Soil Regulatory Package was formed through 2 separate postings on the Environmental Bill of Rights (EBR) and is reportedly ready for Cabinet Approval. Further, the regulatory package is formulated with general overall acceptance by the construction and development industry in Ontario as well as the supporting industries (i.e., legal, consulting, laboratories) and municipalities. It is generally agreed that the proposed Regulation outlines possible opportunities for beneficial reuse with sustainable considerations (examples would be reduced truck traffic and reduced greenhouse gases creation).
We are coming to understand that the current Conservative Provincial Government is strongly opposed to a majority of initiatives created by the previous Liberal Government. The Conservatives are in favour of the red-tape reduction, streamlining operations and fiscal responsibility. In fact, there is now a Deputy Minister of Red Tape and Regulatory Burden Reduction in the Ontario Cabinet. His job is to make Ontario “Open for Business.” Any new Regulation such as those being reviewed by MECP could certainly be viewed as counter-productive in terms of red-tape reduction. However, with the release of the Made-in- Ontario Environment Plan on November 29, 2018, it appears that Excess Soil Regulation will be enacted in some form in the not-to-distant future. There will no doubt be some changes to the proposed Regulatory package, but it is good to see that Regulation will proceed.
To date, one of the biggest challenges that the enforcement regime of the Environment Ministry had was the gap in how excess soil (impacted with contaminants or not) could be classified as a “waste material” if it’s not managed properly or if it’s illegally dumped. We have all seen the extensive media coverage of a number of illegal dump sites, innocent property owners mislead on the quality of the fill they are accepting, and private air-fields who have capitalized on the regulatory gaps in Ontario where excess soil is concerned. Enforcement against illegal dumping or misrepresentation of the soil quality is not clear or easily achieved under the current Environmental Protection Act and regulations such as Regulation 347 (Waste Management). Minor amendments to Regulation 153/04 (Brownfields Regulation) have also been proposed to assist in streamlining and simplifying filing of Records of Site Condition and redevelopment of Brownfield properties. Further definitions of soil, waste and inert fill are also forthcoming in the new proposed Excess Soil Regulatory package.
One of the main benefits of the proposed Excess Soil Regulation is the clarity it provides in the expectations of appropriate management of excess soil along with the steps that would be followed to provide the level of certainty that the public would expect. It puts a heavy onus on the generator of the excess soil (or the source site) to assess the quality against a set of new standards. The Standards were developed as a subset of the O. Reg. 153/04 Brownfield Standards, aimed at assisting in identifying acceptable and beneficial re-use of the excess soil.
Beneficial reuse of excess soil has a strong consideration for soil quality in terms of chemical testing to assess for contaminants; however, Ontario soils are highly variable with respect to the geotechnical quality for engineered reuse (i.e., silt, clay, sands, gravels and poor quality mixed fill). Recovered excess soil may require some screening/grading to classify the geotechnical qualities prior to identifying an appropriate engineered and beneficial reuse. Market-based solutions and opportunities for excess soil supply and demand services are sure to be identified as creative Ontarians have historically shown innovation in finding geotechnical solutions for excess soil. The new regulatory package allows for this to happen to the benefit of both sender and receiver parties. Increasingly, clients are also choosing to avoid moving soils by employing methods to limit or even eliminate the amount of soils that have to be moved from a poor fill site with things like landscaped architectural features or ground improvement to treat soils in place.
Another benefit of the proposed excess soil regulation is the placement of the responsibility to ensure and “certify” the quality of the excess soil and the appropriate handling and re-use of the material by the source site or generator. This requires a shift in the thinking around management of any excess soil materials to be assessed and pre-planned at the beginning of a project, versus at the last minute and left to the excavation contractor, as has historically been done. The shift in thinking and pre-planning may take time, but with the assistance of the “Qualified Person” community in Ontario, the planning can be simplified. The industry is already starting to shift to a more responsible management of excess soils, with the knowledge of potential Regulatory changes. The proposed Excess Soil Regulatory package has a well-defined transition period of two full years to be fully enacted, giving the construction and development industry time to become used to the shift in thinking and pre-planning as well as the procurement groups to ensure that the appropriate assessment and characterization activities are completed.
The benefits of many aspects of the proposed Excess Soil Regulatory package are clear and are desired in Ontario. The business community has hoped that the current Conservative Government in Ontario understands that the Excess Soil Regulatory package has been requested by the citizens of Ontario, and formulated through an exhaustive consultation and engagement of the various stakeholders in the Province. It has also been hoped that the current Provincial Government sees the value in many aspects of the proposed regulatory package for management of excess soils. With reference to Excess Soil Regulation in the Environment Plan, it certainly appears that the current Provincial Government does see the value. Further, the complimentary minor amendments to the soil and waste definitions are needed as are the proposed amendments to the Brownfield Regulation.
Since the June 2018 election, the construction and development industries in Ontario have been patiently waiting for clarity on how the current Provincial Government plans to proceed. It is clear that this new legislative change will help to make Ontario open for business and it appears that the current Provincial Government agrees. We will now see what changes to the proposed Regulatory Package will be made, hopefully, sooner than later.
This article was first published in the Geosolv website.
Grant Walsom, P.Eng., is a Partner at XCG Consulting Limited and recognized as a Qualified Person in Ontario under the Record of Site Condition Regulation (O. Reg. 153/04). He proudly serves on the Board of Directors at the Ontario Environment Industry Association (ONEIA) and the Canadian Brownfields Network (CBN). Grant can be reached at grant.walsom@xcg.com.
http://hazmatmag.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/12/excess-soil-1.jpg 882 1330 hazzmatt1 http://hazmatmag.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/01/hazmat-logo.jpg hazzmatt12018-12-27 11:17:052018-12-27 11:17:12Is Ontario “Open for Business” when it comes to Excess Soil Management?
The unintentional release of toxic chemicals can pose a wide range of physical, health and environmental hazards. And when it comes to the storage, handling or transport of hazardous materials (HazMat), safety is paramount.
The US Environmental Protection Agency (U.S. EPA) defines HazMat as any substance that is potentially harmful to human health or the environment.
While there are a multitude of precautions that industries will take to stay safe, in the event of accidental spillage due to a road traffic accident or as the result of an industrial incident, highly trained HazMat crews will be called on to mitigate the threat.
In this article, we explore eight of the most common hazardous materials that first responders are likely to encounter in the event of an industrial accident or road transport incident.
Refrigerated carbon dioxide is a colorless, odorless, non-flammable gas used to chill or freeze food products as part of the process of transport to market.
Although non-toxic, when carbon dioxide displaces oxygen in confined spaces the carbon dioxide vapors can cause headache, nausea, dizziness or asphyxiation. And when carbon dioxide comes into contact with skin it can also cause severe burns.
When responding to incidents where C02 is stored, firefighters need to be alert to the possibility of leakages. A low oxygen meter should be used to determine that an area is safe for occupancy.
Chlorine is a key component in the production of key industrial and consumer products including the vast majority of pharmaceutical production and virtually all crop protection chemicals.
It is a highly reactive and volatile substance, particularly when in the presence of heat, and is considered to be among the most dangerous of hazardous materials.
Chlorine is classified as both a Toxic Inhalation Hazard (TIH) and a Poison Inhalation Hazard (PIH).
Both the transport and storage of consumer fireworks pose a high fire risk. In the United Kingdom (UK), the physical movement (transfer) of explosives from one place to another (excluding those moved within a site) requires a Recipient Competent Authority (RCA) document.
According to the UK’s Health and Safety Executive (HSE) a license is required from an appropriate licensing authority in order to be able to store explosives, however depending on their hazard type certain quantities of explosives can be kept for a short time without the need for a license.
In the US, the Consumer Product Safety Commission (CPSC) has issued mandatory safety regulations for fireworks devices that are regulated under the Federal Hazardous Substances Act.
Typical gasoline contains approximately 150 different chemicals including benzene, toluene, ethylbenzene and xylene.
The highly flammable nature of gasoline, the ease with which it evaporates and its explosive potential in air, makes it a high exposure risk. Gasoline exposure can occur through the breathing of gasoline vapours, via the drinking of contaminated water or by coming into contact with contaminated soil.
Gasoline should only be stored in approved containers and must not be handled near any ignition source.
A refrigerated liquid, Argon is most commonly used in the production of fluorescent light bulbs and in welding.
Argon is classed as neither flammable nor toxic, however it can cause significant tissue damage if it comes into contact with skin and it can be extremely harmful if inhaled. To avoid sudden releases Argon is transported in upright cylinders.
Sulfuric acid (also known as “battery acid”, “hydrgen sulfate” and “oil of vitriol”) is one of the most important compounds in the chemical industry. The annual production of sulfuric acid worldwide has been predicted to hit 260 million tonnes by the end of 2018.
It is a highly corrosive substance which is destructive to skin, eyes, teeth and lungs. Severe exposure can be fatal.
Propylene is a volatile, flammable gas used as a crucial product in the petrochemical, packaging and plastics industries.
It is often used in the place of propane in high-velocity oxygen fuel (HVOF) processes. Propylene gas poses a fire hazard when it is handled in the vicinity of any equipment capable of causing ignition.
Comprising a combination of propane and butane, LPG is commonly used as both a fuel (to heat vehicles and appliances) and as a refrigerant. Its mixture of hydrocarbon gases poses a major fire risk which means it must be stored in pressured vessels.
Toxic chemicals can pose a wide range of potential health and physical hazards to those employees operating within industrial plants and to the personnel charged with handling or transporting these substances. And as such they are heavily regulated.
In the rare case of accidental release, the knowledge of HazMat crews can provide life-saving assistance in identifying the threat, containing the area and mitigating the effects of the incident.
This article was first published on the Argon Electronics website.
Steven Pike is the Founder and Managing Director of Argon Electronics, a leader in the development and manufacture of Chemical, Biological, Radiological and Nuclear (CBRN) and hazardous material (HazMat) detector simulators.
He is interested in liaising with CBRN professionals and detector manufacturers to develop training simulators as well as CBRN trainers and exercise planners to enhance their capability and improve the quality of CBRN and Hazmat training.
http://hazmatmag.com/wp-content/uploads/2018/11/pike.jpg 500 500 hazzmatt1 http://hazmatmag.com/wp-content/uploads/2017/01/hazmat-logo.jpg hazzmatt12018-12-27 10:04:262018-12-27 10:04:29What are the most common HazMat threats for first responders?
On December 10, 2018, GFL Environmental Inc. was sentenced after pleading guilty in the Ontario Court of Justice to violating federal environmental legislation. The company was fined $300,000.
The charges were laid January 2017 after inspectors determined that GFL had supplied tetrachloroethylene, also known as PERC, to nine dry cleaning operations in Toronto, Newmarket, Scarborough, Mississauga, Waterloo, London and Cambridge that had not adhered to containment measures required by law. According to an indictment filed with the court at that time, infractions noted by enforcement officers included inadequate wastewater containment systems and floor drain plugs that were not resistant to PERC.
The company, along with president and CEO Patrick Dovigi, vice-president of sales and marketing John Petlichkovski, and Louie Servos, identified as a GFL employee, were each charged with 16 counts under the Canadian Environmental Protection Act, 1999, according to the indictment.
The resolution presented in court on December 10th saw GFL pleading guilty to two counts. The remaining charges were withdrawn at the request of the Crown.
After an investigation led by Environment and Climate Change Canada enforcement officers, charges were laid and GFL Environmental Inc. pleaded guilty to two counts of contravening the Tetrachloroethylene (Use in Dry Cleaning and Reporting Requirements) Regulations (SOR 203/79) under the Canadian Environmental Protection Act, 1999 for selling tetrachloroethylene, commonly referred to as “PERC” to owners or operators of dry-cleaning facilities that did not meet regulatory standards.
GFL was fined $150,000 for each offence; the minimum fine for a first-time offender is $100,000. The Canadian Environmental Protection Act, 1999 allows courts to fine offenders up to a maximum of $4 million.
SOR 203/79 prohibits anyone from selling tetrachloroethylene to dry cleaners unless the dry-cleaning facility is compliant with the equipment specifications set out in the Regulations, which aim to reduce releases into the environment.
The Regulations are unique in that in places the onus of the seller of “PERC” to ensure that the buyer (typically dry cleaning facilities) have the proper equipment and training to prevent the release of PERC into the environment.
Tetrachloroethylene, used commercially since the early 1900s, has been an important chlorinated solvent worldwide. Tetrachloroethylene is a colourless, volatile liquid with an ether-like odour. It is also commonly referred to as perchloroethylene or PERC.
The most important routes of exposure to tetrachloroethylene for the general public are ingesting contaminated water and inhaling ambient air. Improper disposal and releases from dry cleaning facilities and landfills can lead to groundwater contamination and potential environmental exposures.
PERC is a dense non-aqueous phase liquid (DNAPL), meaning that it is only slightly soluble and more dense than water. When released in the subsurface, it will migrate downward, adsorbing into soil particles, slightly dissolving into groundwater, and eventually making its way to bedrock where it will pool and continue to dissolve into the groundwater. As a result, PERC is very difficult to remediate from the subsurface.
As a result of this conviction, GFL Environmental Inc. will be added to the Environmental Offenders Registry.
The $300,000 fine will be directed to the Environmental Damages Fund. The Environmental Damages Fund (EDF) is a specified purpose account, administered by Environment Canada, to provide a mechanism for directing funds received as a result of fines, court orders, and voluntary payments to priority projects that will benefit our natural environment. The Environmental Damages Fund (EDF) follows the Polluter Pays Principle to help ensure that those who cause environmental damage or harm to wildlife take responsibility for their actions.
While regulations exist to guide HazMat training requirements for first responders, the reality is that many personnel still don’t consider themselves to be adequately skilled in the use of their equipment.
Sometimes it’s because there simply isn’t enough time to carry out regular and structured training programmes. Sometimes this lack of preparedness comes as the result of budget cuts where training is one of the first things to go.
So says, independent CBRN consultant and subject matter expert, Debra Robinson in a white paper she has written which explores the subject of keeping first responders safe.
As Debra explains, it’s not enough for a department to simply purchase a full array of safety and monitoring equipment.
“Responders need to be thoroughly knowledgeable about the capabilities, limitations and applications and be proficient in the use of each piece of equipment, and that takes a great deal of training,” she says.
It would seem too that smaller fire departments are often the ones losing out, with many volunteers not always being crystal clear on what their training requirements even entail.
“Large city or larger communities with paid fire departments are far better off than the smaller departments. Some 70-80% of fire departments across the United States are manned by volunteers and many struggle to find volunteers to provide the services, let alone complete the requisite training,” she says.
For those departments that do have training coordinators and solid programs in place,there is still the challenge of trying to deliver equipment training that provides the most realistic learning experience possible whilst also guaranteeing personnel safety.
As Debra points out,the equipment that is used to detect, identify and measure hazardous materials can often involve significant risk, even in the presumed safety of a training environment.
Some trainers may still defer to more traditional HazMat training methods – such as the use of powerful simulants that closely mimic the properties of chemical materials. But many of these simulants can be hazardous in their own right,even in the smallest and most controlled of quantities.
In recent years, Debra explains, there’s been more of a move towards the use of training simulators which rely on specific frequencies and technologies to replicate the effects of actual, chemical, radiological and biological materials.
Simulators have developed a strong reputation for their abilities to facilitate hands-on training that can simply not be achieved with live agent training methods. Live agents by their nature carry an extreme level of inherent risk – something that is eliminated through the use of simulator equipment.
As Debra highlights, having the opportunity for some “serious hands-on time with the equipment” is another major plus for trainees, where repetition is the key to successful learning.
As Debra argues, it can be easy for political or government leaders to dismiss the need for investment in CBRNe and HazMat training – and particularly when budgets are tight. Bu the risk to communities from chemical, biological or radiological threat is very real. While this may come in the form of terrorist threats, there is also the much greater risk of hazardous materials that exist in our communities’industrial plants, hospitals and businesses.
Debra Robinson is founder of 2o8 Consulting & Solutions, based in Lincoln, Nebraska. She provides consulting and SME services in chemical, biological, radiological, and nuclear (CBRN) and Emergency Management preparedness across a diverse range of platforms and industries.
This article was first published in Argon Electronics website.
Steven Pike is the Founder and Managing Director of Argon Electronics, a world leader in the development and manufacture of Chemical, Biological, Radiological and Nuclear (CBRN) and hazardous material (HazMat) detector simulators.
What happens when one company acquires the assets of another, then—many years later—receives a demand to participate in the clean-up of a contaminated site based on the acquired company’s long-ago shipment of materials to the site?
As a general rule, the buyer of assets in an asset acquisition does not automatically assume the liabilities of the seller. However, under the doctrine of successor liability, a claimant may be able to seek recovery from the purchaser of assets for liabilities that were not assumed as part of an acquisition. This claim may be employed in cases involving environmental liabilities, especially when the original party is defunct or remediation costs are greater than the original entity’s ability to pay for the cleanup.
Courts have taken different positions on whether state law or federal common law governs the determination of successor liability for claims under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (“CERCLA”), known also as Superfund. This distinction may have little practical effect because federal common law follows the traditional state law formulation. Notably, though, when evaluating successor liability under federal law, and specifically environmental laws like CERCLA, the doctrine may be more liberally applied because of policy concerns about contamination.
(1) the successor expressly or impliedly agrees to assume the liabilities; (2) a de facto merger or consolidation occurs; (3) the successor is a mere continuation of the predecessor; or (4) the transfer to the successor corporation is a fraudulent attempt to escape liability.
K.C.1986 Ltd. P’ship v. Reade Mfg., 472 F.3d 1009, 1021 (8th Cir. 2007) (citing United States v. Mex. Feed & Seed, Co., Inc., 980 F.2d 478, 487 (8th Cir. 1992)). A fifth exception, the substantial continuity exception, is a broader standard, but most circuit courts do not apply it in CERCLA cases.
Exception 1, express or implied assumption, must be analyzed in terms of the specific asset agreement in question. Exception 4, fraud, is generally employed in circumstances where the acquired company shifts its assets to avoid exposure to another entity.
Given the high stakes that can be involved with CERCLA cleanups, assessing prospects for applying the successor liability doctrine could be an important part of the liability analysis.
 See, e.g., James T. O’Reilly, Superfund and Brownfields Cleanup § 8:16, at 360 (2017-2018 ed.) [hereinafter O’Reilly] (“Mergers, sales of assets, and changing corporate names does not remove potential CERCLA liability.”).
 See O’Reilly § 8:16; see also, e.g., In re Acushnet River & New Bedford Harbor Proceedings re Alleged PCB Pollution, 712 F. Supp. 1010, 1013-19 (D. Mass. 1989) (in the CERCLA context, concluding that successor liability applied where there would be “manifest injustice” if one of the companies could “contract away” liability for PCB contamination).
 See Action Mfg. Co. v. Simon Wrecking Co., 387 F. Supp. 2d 439, 452 (E.D. Pa. 2005).
 See, e.g., Eagle Pac. Ins. Co. v. Christensen Motor Yacht Corp., 934 P.2d 715, 721 (Wash. Ct. App. 1997). This exception is rarely used. Restatement (Third) of Torts:Prod. Liab. § 12 cmt. e (Am. Law Inst. 1998).
 See, e.g., Oman Int’l Fin. Ltd. v. Hoiyong Gems Corp., 616 F. Supp. 351, 361-62 (D.R.I. 1985).
 Asarco, LLC v. Union Pac. R.R. Co., No. 2:12-CV-00283-EJL-REB, 2017 WL 639628, at *18 (D. Idaho Feb. 16, 2017).
 United States v. Mex. Feed & Seed Co., 980 F.2d 478, 487 (8th Cir. 1992) (quoting Tucker v. Paxson Mach. Co., 645 F.2d 620, 626 (8th Cir. 1981)).
This article was first published on the Cohen & Grigsby website.
Julie counsels and represents clients in a range of environmental and litigation matters. She assists clients with day-to-day environmental compliance concerns and provides enforcement defense counseling, particularly with solid waste and groundwater issues. Her extensive background in CERCLA matters includes serving as legal counsel for clients involved in remediation initiatives at complex Superfund sites as well as litigating cases through multiple phases, including discovery, allocation negotiations, and alternative dispute resolution. Julie’s litigation practice encompasses not only environmental matters, but also insurance coverage actions and other commercial and business disputes.
Englobe Corp. (“Englobe”), a Canadian-based company specializing in Soils, Material and Environmental Engineering, with an established network of more than 55 offices and 30 laboratories across Canada, recently acquired DST Group Inc. (“DST”). DST is a consulting engineering firm founded over 60 years ago with more than 165 employees and nine offices across Ontario and Western Canada. By joining forces, Englobe and DST increase their footprints with 14 offices and 350 staff in Ontario and nearly 160 staff across six offices in Western Canada.
Both companies will be well positioned to offer complementary services and expertise to each other’s clients in both geographical areas, including municipalities, provincial and federal governments, and private sector clients.
“DST shares the same important values as Englobe – focusing on our employees, offering innovative solutions to our clients and emphasizing high-quality project management. We are very happy to have found a partner in Englobe with whom we can build upon our mutual strengths and provide exciting new opportunities to both employees and clients. Our enhanced service offering in the regions will benefit clients nationwide,” says Maurice Graveline, former CEO of DST and new Vice President Operations Ontario at Englobe.
In November, Englobe Corp eacquired McIntosh Lalani Engineering Ltd, a Calgary-based consulting engineering business specializing in geotechnical engineering and materials testing services. McIntosh Lalani, established in 1997, will continue to operate under its existing name.
Englobe is backed by ONCAP, the mid-market investment arm of Canadian private equity firm Onex Corp. ONCAP invested in 2006 and later partnered in Englobe’s acquisitions and go-private deal in 2011.
About Englobe Corp. and DST, a division of Englobe Corp.
The Canadian National Capital Commission recently award contracts to a number of environmental consulting firms to conduct environmental assessment of contaminated sites in Ottawa. A number of firms were awarded contracts of $833,333 for providing contaminated site assessment services. The firms were DST Consulting Engineers Inc., Geofirma Engineering Ltd., GHD Ltd., Golder Associates Ltd., SNC-Lavelin Inc., and Terrapex Environmental Ltd.
Provide long-term management strategies for complex contaminated sites.
The NCC has a number of development and rehabilitation projects underway in Ottawa including the redevelopment of LeBreton Flats, a property just west of Parliament Hill in Ottawa. The property is contaminated from historical industrial activity and must be remediated before it can be redeveloped into a commercial and residential community.
In the past, the NCC spent $6.7 million to decontaminate the soil on a 5.7-hectare site. The process involved removing and remediating 110,000 cubic metres of soil.
With the current area awaiting remediation being just over three times that size at 21 hectares, RendezVous LeBreton, the development company that is partnering with the NCC to develop the site, has a considerably larger and undoubtedly more expensive amount of soil to remediate.
As of the Spring of 2018, the total cost of the soil decontamination at LeBreton Flats is undetermined at this time, but is estimated to be around $170 million, according to RendezVous LeBreton Group.
Environment and Climate Change Canada, along with Health Canada, published the Prohibition of Asbestos and Products Containing Asbestos Regulations in the Canada Gazette, Part II on October 17, 2018.
These new regulations apply to any person who manufactures, imports, sells or uses asbestos or products containing asbestos.
In addition to these regulations, the existing Export of Substances on the Export Control List Regulations (ESECLR) and Schedule 3 to the Canadian Environmental Protection Act, 1999 were amended to prohibit exports of asbestos, with a limited number of exceptions. These provisions ensure that Canada continues to meet its export obligations under international conventions, including the Rotterdam Convention. The regulations and related amendments to the ESECLR come into force on December 30, 2018.
This article is republished and first appeared on the Manning Environmental Law website.
Paul Manning is the principal of Manning Environmental Law and an environmental law specialist certified by the Law Society of Upper Canada. Paul has been selected as one of the world’s leading Environmental Lawyers by Who’s Who Legal: 2016.
Paul advises clients on a wide range of environmental law issues and represents them as counsel before tribunals and the courts. His practice focuses on environmental, energy, planning and Aboriginal law.
Paul holds a Masters degree in Environmental Law and obtained an accreditation in the UK as an expert in Planning Law. He is on the Executive Committee of the National Environmental, Energy and Resources Law Section of the Canadian Bar Association. Paul has a special interest in renewable energy and climate change regulation and holds a Certificate in Carbon Finance from the University of Toronto.
The Ontario Ministry of Environment, Conservation, and Parks (MOECP) publishes publishes an annual report on environmental penalties issued in the previous calendar year for certain land or water violations for companies subject to the Municipal Industrial Strategy for Abatement (MISA) Regulations. Companies subject to the MISA Regulations belong to one of the nine industrial sectors found in the Effluent Monitoring and Effluent Limits (EMEL) regulations. The summary report for 2017 was published in the Spring of 2018.
Under the MISA Regulations, environmental penalties can range from $1,000 per day for less serious violations such as failure to submit a quarterly report under the MISA Regulations to $100,000 per day for the most serious violations, including a spill with a significant impact.
not less than $100,000 and not more than $10,000,000 on each subsequent conviction.
In the past, Ontario Environment Ministry would publish a more comprehensive environmental enforcement report that covered all penalties, fines and convictions.
In a 2011 blog, Diane Saxe, Ontario’s former Environmental Commissioner and former partner at Siskinds Law Firm, wrote that a typical year, the Ontario Environment launches about 150 to 175 prosecutions. About 75% of them are resolved by guilty pleas; about 5% are acquitted at trial; about 10% are convicted of something at trial; about 10% are withdrawn.
As the end of the calendar year approaches, the staff at Hazmat Management Magazine thought it would be useful to review some of the more significant environmental convictions related to contaminated property. That summary can be found below.
In the Spring, an Ontario-based consulting firm that provides environmental, geotechnical, and hydrogeological consulting services was convicted when an employee falsified Environment Ministry Letters of Acknowledgement to Records of Site Conditions (RSCs) for two properties.
An RSC is a statement on the environmental condition of a property and is typically a requirement by a municipality if a contaminated property is remediated and a redevelopment is proposed that involves a more sensitive land use (i.e., from industrial to residential). The environmental consultant that performed the environmental site investigation at the site (a Phase I ESA and possibly a Phase II ESA) submits an RSC to the Environment Ministry. The Environment Ministry issues an acknowledgement of the RSC.
The offences occurred in the Spring of 2014 and winter of 2015. When the Consulting firm realized one of its employees had issued falsified documents related to the RSCs it immediately informed the affected owners of the related properties. In the Fall of 2015, an owner/developer of another construction project in the Greater Toronto Area notified the ministry of concerns relating to their RSC submissions of which the consulting firm in question was involved. At that time, the Environment Ministry commenced an audit and investigations.
The consulting firm was found guilty of one violation under the Environmental Protection Act (EPA), was fined $35,000 plus a Victim Fine Surcharge (VFS) of $8,750, and was given 30 days to pay. On the same date, former employee was found guilty of two violations under the EPA, was fined $15,000 plus a VFS of $3,750, and was given 18 months to pay.
In the winter, a Muskoka homeowner was convicted for discharging fuel and other petroleum hydrocarbon into a water well which can impair the quality of the water. He was fined $30,000 plus a victim surcharge with 6 months to pay .
The conviction stems from an incident that occurred in the spring of 2016. On May 16, 2016, the homeowner of a cottage on Lake of Bays poured heating fuel oil down a neighbor’s well, damaging the quality of the water in the well. The incident was referred to the Environment Ministry’s investigations and Enforcement branch, resulted in charges and one conviction through a guilty plea.
In the winter, a homeowner in Guelph was convicted of failing to apply with two provincial officers orders issued under the environmental protection act (EPA) . The homeowner was fined $3,000 plus a victim fine surcharge of $750 and was given 15 days to pay the fine .
The violation occurred in 2013 when the homeowner bought a residential property in Guelph , which earlier had been contaminated with oil fuel from a historic spill at the property . In the December of 2014, the homeowner put the residence up for sale. The Environment Ministry subsequently received a complaint that the house was up for sale but had not been adequately remediated.
During the course of its investigations, the Environment Ministry found the previous owner had claimed the property had been remediated but discovered that no remediation had been conducted. An Order was issued by the Environment Ministry for all documentation related to any remediation at the property to be submitted. Despite providing an extension on a submission date, the not information was provided to the Environment Ministry.
The incident was referred to the ministry’s Investigations and Enforcement Branch, resulting in charges and the conviction against the property owner.
In the winter, a business located in the County of Essex and its owner was convicted of three offences under the Environmental Protection Act( EPA) and was also fined $30,000 for discharging dust that cause and was likely to cause an adverse effect, and being deposited at a property that is not allowed nor an approved waste disposal site.
A business owner in Essex County accepted 189 truckloads of construction waste in 2014 despite the fact that property was not approved as a waste disposal site.
In 2015, the business owner was operating a farm tractor to turn soil at the site. The operation resulted in the release of plumes of dust which adversely affected nearby residents and their properties . The incident was referred to the Environment Ministry’s Investigations Branch.


Contracts for health care: best value contracting.
Recurring reports and publication of certain data.
Administration of Defense Health Agency and military medical treatment facilities.
Medical and dental care for members and certain former members.
Medical and dental care: members on duty other than active duty for a period of more than 30 days.
Medical and dental care: Academy cadets and midshipmen; members of, and designated applicants for membership in, Senior ROTC.
Medical care: authority to provide a wig.
Certain primary and preventive health care services.
Medical care: certain Reserves who served in Southwest Asia during the Persian Gulf Conflict.
Medical tracking system for members deployed overseas.
Medical and dental care: medal of honor recipients; dependents.
Reimbursement for certain travel expenses.
Notification to Congress of hospitalization of combat wounded members.
Mental health assessments for members of the armed forces deployed in support of a contingency operation.
Annual mental health assessments for members of the armed forces.
Provision of hyperbaric oxygen therapy for certain members.
Medical and dental care for dependents: general rule.
Dental insurance plan: certain retirees and their surviving spouses and other dependents.
TRICARE program: TRICARE Reserve Select coverage for members of the Selected Reserve.
TRICARE program: TRICARE Retired Reserve coverage for certain members of the Retired Reserve who are qualified for a non-regular retirement but are not yet age 60.
TRICARE program: extension of coverage for certain members of the National Guard and dependents during certain disaster response duty.
Medical care for dependents: authorized care in facilities of uniformed services.
Access to military medical treatment facilities and other facilities.
Medical and dental care for dependents: charges.
Provision of food to certain members and dependents not receiving inpatient care in military medical treatment facilities.
Contracts for medical care for spouses and children: plans.
TRICARE program: treatment of refunds and other amounts collected.
Procedures for charging fees for care provided to civilians; retention and use of fees collected.
Provisional coverage for emerging services and supplies.
Contracts for medical care for spouses and children: election of facilities.
Contracts for medical care for spouses and children: review and adjustment of payments.
Contracts for health care: advisory committees.
Contracts for medical care for spouses and children: additional hospitalization.
Medical and dental care from another executive department: reimbursement.
Contracts for health benefits for certain members, former members, and their dependents.
Certain former spouses: extension of period of eligibility for health benefits.
Prohibition against requiring retired members to receive health care solely through the Department of Defense.
Programing facilities for certain members, former members, and their dependents in construction projects of the uniformed services.
Air evacuation patients: furnished subsistence.
Defense of certain suits arising out of medical malpractice.
Identifying and treating drug and alcohol dependence.
Commanding officer and supervisor referrals of members for mental health evaluations.
Studies and demonstration projects relating to delivery of health and medical care.
Persons entering the armed forces: baseline health data.
Licensure requirement for health-care professionals.
Continuing medical education requirements: system for monitoring physician compliance.
Health care services incurred on behalf of covered beneficiaries: collection from third-party payers.
Medical care: members held as captives and their dependents.
TRICARE program: contractor payment of certain claims.
TRICARE program: facilitation of processing of claims.
TRICARE program: waiver of certain deductibles.
TRICARE program: beneficiary counseling and assistance coordinators.
TRICARE program: referrals and preauthorizations under TRICARE Prime.
TRICARE program: waiver of recoupment of erroneous payments caused by administrative error.
Military-civilian health services partnership program.
Contracts for medical care for retirees, dependents, and survivors: alternative delivery of health care.
TRICARE Prime: automatic enrollments; payment options.
TRICARE program: relationship with employer-sponsored group health plans.
TRICARE program: notice of change to benefits.
Incentives for participation in cost-effective health care plans.
Resource allocation methods: capitation or diagnosis-related groups.
Confidentiality of medical quality assurance records: qualified immunity for participants.
Contracts for medical and dental care: State and local preemption.
Sharing of health-care resources with the Department of Veterans Affairs.
Submittal of claims: standard form; time limits.
Notice of use of an investigational new drug or a drug unapproved for its applied use.
Health care coverage through Federal Employees Health Benefits program: demonstration project.
Organ and tissue donor program.
Anthrax vaccine immunization program; procedures for exemptions and monitoring reactions.
Notification of certain individuals regarding options for enrollment under Medicare part B.
TRICARE program: extension of dependent coverage.
2018- Pub. L. 115–232, div. A, title X, §1081(a)(13), Aug. 13, 2018, 132 Stat. 1984 , inserted period at end of item 1077a.
2017- Pub. L. 115–91, div. A, title VII, §703(a)(2), Dec. 12, 2017, 131 Stat. 1435 , added item 1074o.
2016- Pub. L. 114–328, div. A, title VII, §§702(a)(2), 703(a)(2), 704(b), 711(b), 728(b)(2), Dec. 23, 2016, 130 Stat. 2195 , 2198, 2201, 2214, 2234, added items 1073c, 1073d, 1076f, and 1077a, and substituted "Recurring reports and publication of certain data" for "Recurring reports" in item 1073b.
Pub. L. 114–328, div. A, title VII, §§701(a)(2), (b)(2), (j)(2), (k), Dec. 23, 2016, 130 Stat. 2184 , 2185, 2192, 2193, applicable with respect to the provision of health care under the TRICARE program beginning on Jan. 1, 2018, added items 1075 and 1075a and substituted "TRICARE Reserve Select" for "TRICARE Standard" in item 1076d, "TRICARE Retired Reserve" for "TRICARE Standard" in item 1076e, "TRICARE program" for "CHAMPUS" in item 1079a, and "and preauthorizations under TRICARE Prime" for "for specialty health care" in item 1095f.
2015- Pub. L. 114–92, div. A, title VII, §711(b), Nov. 25, 2015, 129 Stat. 864 , added item 1095g.
2014- Pub. L. 113–291, div. A, title VII, §§701(a)(2), 704(b), 711(b), Dec. 19, 2014, 128 Stat. 3408 , 3413, 3414, added items 1074n, 1079c, and 1097d.
2011- Pub. L. 112–81, div. A, title VII, §§702(a)(2), 704(b), 711(a)(2), Dec. 31, 2011, 125 Stat. 1471 , 1473, 1476, added items 1074m, 1078b, and 1090a.
Pub. L. 111–383, div. A, title VII, §702(a)(2), Jan. 7, 2011, 124 Stat. 4245 , added item 1110b.
2009- Pub. L. 111–84, div. A, title VII, §§705(b), 707(b), Oct. 28, 2009, 123 Stat. 2375 , 2376, added items 1076e and 1110a.
2008- Pub. L. 110–181, div. A, title XVI, §1617(b), Jan. 28, 2008, 122 Stat. 449 , as amended by Pub. L. 110–417, [div. A], title X, §1061(b)(14), Oct. 14, 2008, 122 Stat. 4613 , added item 1074l.
2006- Pub. L. 109–364, div. A, title VII, §707(b), Oct. 17, 2006, 120 Stat. 2284 , added item 1097c.
Pub. L. 109–364, div. A, title VII, §706(e), Oct. 17, 2006, 120 Stat. 2282 , struck out item 1076b "TRICARE program: TRICARE Standard coverage for members of the Selected Reserve" and substituted "TRICARE program: TRICARE Standard coverage for members of the Selected Reserve" for "TRICARE program: coverage for members of reserve components who commit to continued service in the Selected Reserve after release from active duty in support of a contingency operation" in item 1076d, effective Oct. 1, 2007.
Pub. L. 109–163, div. A, title VII, §§701(f)(2), 702(a)(2), Jan. 6, 2006, 119 Stat. 3340 , 3342, substituted "TRICARE program: TRICARE Standard coverage for members of the Selected Reserve" for "TRICARE program: coverage for members of the Ready Reserve" in item 1076b and "TRICARE program: coverage for members of reserve components who commit to continued service in the Selected Reserve after release from active duty in support of a contingency operation" for "TRICARE program: coverage for members of reserve components who commit to continued service in the Selected Reserve after release from active duty" in item 1076d.
2004- Pub. L. 108–375, div. A, title V, §555(a)(2), title VI, §607(a)(2), title VII, §§701(a)(2), 733(a)(2), 739(a)(2), title X, §1084(d)(7), Oct. 28, 2004, 118 Stat. 1914 , 1946, 1981, 1998, 2002, 2061, added items 1073b, 1074b, 1076d, and 1092a, reenacted item 1076b without change, and struck out item 1075 "Officers and certain enlisted members: subsistence charges".
2003- Pub. L. 108–136, div. A, title XVI, §1603(b)(2), Nov. 24, 2003, 117 Stat. 1690 , added item 1107a.
Pub. L. 108–106, title I, §1115(b), Nov. 6, 2003, 117 Stat. 1218 , added item 1076b.
2001- Pub. L. 107–107, div. A, title VII, §§701(a)(2), (f)(2), 731(b), 732(a)(2), 736(c)(2), title X, §1048(a)(10), Dec. 28, 2001, 115 Stat. 1158 , 1161, 1169, 1173, 1223, struck out item 1074b "Transitional medical and dental care: members on active duty in support of contingency operations", transferred item 1074i to appear after item 1074h, and added items 1074j, 1074k, 1079b, and 1086b.
2000- Pub. L. 106–398, §1 [[div. A], title VII, §§706(a)(2), 728(a)(2), 751(b)(2), 758(b)], Oct. 30, 2000, 114 Stat. 1654 , 1654A-175, 1654A-189, 1654A-194, 1654A-200, added items 1074h, 1074i, 1095f, and 1110.
1999- Pub. L. 106–65, div. A, title VII, §§701(a)(2), 711(b), 713(a)(2), 714(b), 715(a)(2), 716(a)(2), 722(b), Oct. 5, 1999, 113 Stat. 680 , 687, 689-691, 695, added items 1073a, 1074g, 1076a, 1095c, 1095d, 1095e, and 1097b and struck out former items 1076a "Dependents' dental program" and 1076b "Selected Reserve dental insurance".
1998- Pub. L. 105–261, div. A, title VII, §§711(b), 712(a)(2), 721(a)(2), 734(b)(2), 741(b)(2), Oct. 17, 1998, 112 Stat. 2058 , 2059, 2065, 2073, 2074, added items 1094a, 1095b, 1097a, 1108, and 1109.
1997- Pub. L. 105–85, div. A, title VII, §§738(b), 764(b), 765(a)(2), 766(b), Nov. 18, 1997, 111 Stat. 1815 , 1826-1828, added items 1074e, 1074f, 1106, and 1107 and struck out former item 1106 "Submittal of claims under CHAMPUS".
1996- Pub. L. 104–201, div. A, title VII, §§701(a)(2)(B), 703(a)(2), 733(a)(2), Sept. 23, 1996, 110 Stat. 2587 , 2590, 2598, substituted "Certain primary and preventive health care services" for "Primary and preventive health care services for women" in item 1074d and added items 1076c and 1079a.
Pub. L. 104–106, div. A, title VII, §§705(a)(2), 735(d)(2), 738(b)(2), Feb. 10, 1996, 110 Stat. 373 , 383, added item 1076b and substituted "Performance of abortions: restrictions" for "Restriction on use of funds for abortions" in item 1093 and "Defense Health Program Account" for "Military Health Care Account" in item 1100.
1993- Pub. L. 103–160, div. A, title VII, §§701(a)(2), 712(a)(2), 714(b)(2), 716(a)(2), Nov. 30, 1993, 107 Stat. 1686 , 1689, 1690, 1692, added item 1074d, substituted "Personal services contracts" for "Contracts for direct health care providers" in item 1091 and "Resource allocation methods: capitation or diagnosis-related groups" for "Diagnosis-related groups" in item 1101, added item 1105, and struck out former item 1105 "Issuance of nonavailability of health care statements".
1992- Pub. L. 102–484, div. D, title XLIV, §4408(a)(2), Oct. 23, 1992, 106 Stat. 2712 , added item 1078a.
1991- Pub. L. 102–190, div. A, title VI, §640(b), title VII, §§715(b), 716(a)(2), Dec. 5, 1991, 105 Stat. 1385 , 1403, 1404, added item 1074b, redesignated former item 1074b as 1074c, and added items 1105 and 1106.
1990- Pub. L. 101–510, div. A, title VII, §713(d)(2)[(3)], Nov. 5, 1990, 104 Stat. 1584 , substituted "Health care services incurred on behalf of covered beneficiaries: collection from third-party payers" for "Collection from third-party payers of reasonable inpatient hospital care costs incurred on behalf of retirees and dependents" in item 1095.
1989- Pub. L. 101–189, div. A, title VII, §§722(b), 731(b)(2), Nov. 29, 1989, 103 Stat. 1478 , 1482, added items 1086a and 1104.
1987- Pub. L. 100–180, div. A, title VII, §725(a)(2), Dec. 4, 1987, 101 Stat. 1116 , added item 1103.
Pub. L. 100–26, §7(e)(2), Apr. 21, 1987, 101 Stat. 281 , redesignated item 1095 "Medical care: members held as captives and their dependents" as item 1095a.
1986- Pub. L. 99–661, div. A, title VI, §604(a)(2), title VII, §§701(a)(2), 705(a)(2), Nov. 14, 1986, 100 Stat. 3875 , 3897, 3904 substituted "active duty for a period of more than 30 days" for "active duty; injuries, diseases, and illnesses incident to duty" in item 1074a and added items 1096 to 1102.
Pub. L. 99–399, title VIII, §801(c)(2), Aug. 27, 1986, 100 Stat. 886 , added item 1095 "Medical care: members held as captives and their dependents".
Pub. L. 99–272, title II, §2001(a)(2), Apr. 7, 1986, 100 Stat. 101 , added item 1095 "Collection from third-party payers of reasonable inpatient hospital care costs incurred on behalf of retirees and dependents".
1985- Pub. L. 99–145, title VI, §§651(a)(2), 653(a)(2), Nov. 8, 1985, 99 Stat. 656 , 658, added items 1076a and 1094.
1984- Pub. L. 98–525, title VI, §631(a)(2), title XIV, §1401(e)(2)(B), (5)(B), Oct. 19, 1984, 98 Stat. 2543 , 2616, 2618, substituted in item 1074a "Medical and dental care: members on duty other than active duty; injuries, diseases, and illnesses incident to duty" for "Medical and dental care for members of the uniformed services for injuries incurred or aggravated while traveling to and from inactive duty training" and added items 1074b and 1093.
1983- Pub. L. 98–94, title IX, §§932(a)(2), 933(a)(2), title X, §1012(a)(2), title XII, §1268(5)(B), Sept. 24, 1983, 97 Stat. 650 , 651, 665, 706, added items 1074a, 1091, and 1092, and struck out "; reports" at end of item 1081.
1982- Pub. L. 97–295, §1(15)(B), Oct. 12, 1982, 96 Stat. 1290 , added item 1090.
1980- Pub. L. 96–513, title V, §511(34)(D), Dec. 12, 1980, 94 Stat. 2923 , in items 1071 and 1073 substituted "this chapter" for "sections 1071–1087 of this title", and in item 1086 substituted "benefits" for "care".
1976- Pub. L. 94–464, §1(b), Oct. 8, 1976, 90 Stat. 1986 , added item 1089.
1970- Pub. L. 91–481, §2(2), Oct. 21, 1970, 84 Stat. 1082 , added item 1088.
1966- Pub. L. 89–614, §2(9), Sept. 30, 1966, 80 Stat. 866 , substituted "1087" for "1085" in items 1071 and 1073, "Medical care" and "authorized care in facilities of uniformed services" for "Medical and dental care" and "specific inclusions and exclusions" in item 1077, "Contracts for health care" for "Contracts for medical care for spouses and children" in item 1082, and added items 1086 and 1087.
1965- Pub. L. 89–264, §2, Oct. 19, 1965, 79 Stat. 989 , substituted "executive department" for "uniformed service" in item 1085.
1958- Pub. L. 85–861, §1(25)(A), (C), Sept. 2, 1958, 72 Stat. 1445 , 1450, substituted "Medical and Dental Care" for "Voting by Members of Armed Forces" in heading of chapter, and substituted items 1071 to 1085 for former items 1071 to 1086.