Enforceable Consent Orders

In at least one respect, the EPA s statements about when export notifications are mandatory are inconsistent with a court s statements. EPA has said that the 12(b) notification requirements apply not only to persons who sign a final testing consent agreement under 4 or a consent order under 5, but also to any other person who intends to export any substance covered by those agreements or orders. The EPA often enters into Enforceable Consent Orders (ECAs) rather than carrying out the burdensome rulemaking process... 

Chemical exporters are potentially subject to Section 12(b) of TSCA. EPA s TSCA Section 12(b) export notification requirements apply to chemical substances or mixtures for which data are required under TSCA Section 5(b), an order has been issued under TSCA Section 5, a proposed or final rule has been issued under TSCA Sections 5 or 6, or an action is pending or relief has been granted under TSCA Sections 5 or 7. With regard to Section 4 of TSCA, only those chemical substances or mixtures listed in final TSCA Section 4 test rules and TSCA Section 4 Enforceable Consent Agreements are subject to the export notice requirements under TSCA Section 12(b). Notification of export is generally not required for articles, as provided by 40 CFR section 707.60(b). 

The statute states that 12 applies if the substance presents an unreasonable risk. Export notification requirements are triggered by a finding of unreasonable risk under 6. and also by a test rule under 4 or a consent order under 5. Neither a test rule under 4 nor a consent order under 5 constitutes a finding of unreasonable risk. Therefore, would be statutory defenses to an EPA enforcement based on failure to submit export notifications for substances for export only if the requirement for submitting an export notification were triggered by a test rule under 4 or a consent order under 5. 

Documentation of enforcement proceedings and their dispositions. Resulting Consent Orders may impose continuing obligations on the successor. 

Obtaining employer consent to entry of a court enforcement order under Section 11(b) of the Act. 

In the Crown Court there is no maximum fine. Up to two years imprisonment may be imposed for breach of a prohibition or improvement notice or remedy order or contravening a licence requirement. HSC Enforcement Policy includes a statement that wherever appropriate enforcing authorities should seek disqualification of directors under the Company Directors Disqualification Act 1986. Disqualification is possible on conviction for an indictable offence in connection with the management of a company . In a health and safety context disqualification could follow conviction xmder s. 37 HSW because a company s offence was committed with a director s/manager s consent, connivance or attributable to his neglect (or xmder s. 36 if it is a manager whose default caused the offence of another). 

---