Compliance Assistance and Pollution Prevention in New England

DeMilo & Company, Incorporated

Overview

After more than a decade of battles with state regulators over its failure to properly manage its facility, a Hartford, Connecticut salvage yard, DeMilo & Company, Incorporated, has been sued by the state for allegedly violating numerous state and federal environmental laws and regulations.

DiMilo & Company, Inc.- Sued

At the request of the Connecticut Department of Environmental Protection (CTDEP), state Attorney General Richard Blumenthal is pursuing large civil penalties to be determined by the Court, but not to exceed $25,000 per day for each day of each violation pleaded in the complaint and an admission of responsibility from Demilo & Company, Inc. for the improper storage and disposal of scrap automobile fluids, batteries and tires. The state alleges that the mismanagement of these materials have contaminated the soil at the site and has polluted ground water, storm water, a wetlands, and the nearby Connecticut River.

Two brothers, Frank and Phil DeMilo, purchased the 1.25 acre yard in 1974, and one or both of the brothers have owned and operated the facility since then. Originally, Frank DeMilo was the president of the firm, while Phil served as vice-president. Phil DeMilo took over leadership of the company after his brother’s death in May 2002.

Site Inspection and Violations Dislosed

The salvage yard’s problems with state regulators began in 1987 when the Connecticut Department of Motor Vehicles (CTDMV) suspended the company’s license. CTDMV accused the DeMilo brothers of operating the salvage yard with improper fencing, an inadequate vehicle processing area and inadequate records. Despite the suspension, the DeMilos continued to operate their business without a license for 11 more years before the CTDMV sought an injunction against the company in November 1998. The City of Hartford, however, found that the state license issued to the salvage yard in 1975 was still valid in Hartford because there were not substantive reasons to revoke the license. As a result, the DeMilo brothers were allowed to continue to operate the facility. After another inspection of the yard in April 1999, CTDMV renewed the company’s license in May 1999.

On February 5, 1999 CTDEP’s Waste Bureau conducted a site inspection. As a result of that inspection, the Waste Engineering and Enforcement Division issued Notice of Violation (NOV) #934 to DeMilo on February 25, 1999. Violations included the following:

• Failure to perform hazardous waste determinations;
• Failure to mark all tanks and containers holding recyclable materials;
• Failure to mark all tanks with the words, “used oil”;
• Failure to conduct analyses of used oil;
• Failure to submit notification of used oil fuel marketing activity;
• Failure to store spent lead-acid batteries on an impervious surface and inspect batteries;
• Failure to properly handle or store spent lead-acid batteries;
• Failure to report spills;
• Failure to obtain a permit to operate as a solid waste disposal area;
• Failure to obtain a permit for disposal of hazardous wastes to the ground;
• Failure to obtain a permit for discharge of substances to the ground;
• Failure to register as a discharger of stormwater associated with industrial operations;
• Failure to develop a Stormwater Pollution Prevention Plan; and
• Failure to monitor stormwater.

Subsequently, CTDEP continued to notify DeMilo & Company, Inc. of these violations, but CTDEP did not receive any responses to their notices. In July 2000, CTDEP issued an administrative order to the company regarding the firm’s environmental violations. These alleged violations included the improper storage and/or disposal of gasoline, power steering fluid, brake fluid, transmission fluid, engine oil, coolants, antifreeze, lead acid batteries, scrap tires, lack of container and tank markings, failing to use adequate transporters, and failure to report spills. CTDEP claimed that spills and leaks from these materials contaminated soil and drained into ground water. Additionally, stormwater runoff into the Connecticut River has caused concern for CTDEP.

Demilo & Company, Inc. did not respond to the order deadlines, leading to a series of events that culminated in the CTDEP requesting the state Attorney General’s Office to file a suit against the company during the summer of 2001.

Prevention of Environmental Damage

The environmental damage allegedly caused by the DeMilos’ operation and the civil penalties being faced by the company could have been prevented if the company had cooperated with the state much earlier. Complying with the DMV’s fencing and recordkeeping requirements, as well as following the CTDEP’s requirements for properly handling, labeling, storing or disposing of fluids and waste products from the salvaged cars would have allowed the DeMilos to properly manage their business and run it more efficiently and safely. If the DeMilos had invested in performing work practices such as saving and recycling contaminating fluids and properly storing hazardous materials, they could have kept both the surrounding community and environment safer and healthier. Instead, DeMilo & Company, Inc. might have to pay high environmental penalties as well as the costs of cleaning up the salvage yard. These penalties and cleanup expenses will likely exceed what it would have cost the firm to simply follow basic environmental requirements.