Century Aluminum Agrees to $353,557 EPA Penalty Over Hazardous Waste Allegations

A containment building with openings to the outside

A hazardous waste containment building is supposed to keep regulated material inside. At Century Aluminum’s Goose Creek smelter, EPA inspectors observed a small hole and loose metal siding, a roll-up vehicle door that could not fully close, and bent siding that left another gap.

EPA alleged that material identified as K088 hazardous waste had been released through those openings to the environment immediately outside the building. The agency also alleged that waste accumulated at the edges of the roll-up door, preventing it from closing properly.

The order describes the facility as a primary aluminum smelter that turns alumina into marketable aluminum. It says the hazardous waste generated there consists primarily of material identified as SPL, with the waste code K088, along with other wastes carrying ignitability and toxicity codes.

The company’s records became part of EPA’s case

EPA’s allegations reached beyond conditions observed during the compliance evaluation inspection. According to the order, 40 weekly inspection records from January 2023 through March 2024 identified material being tracked out of Containment Building 138.

Another 16 records answered “No” when asking whether the building’s roof and walls were free of damage. EPA said it found no record showing that those identified conditions were promptly repaired. The company also failed to provide inspection records for 34 weeks during the same general period, according to the agency.

Why maintenance failures became permit allegations

Century Aluminum had notified South Carolina that the facility operated as a large quantity generator of hazardous waste and a small quantity handler of universal waste. Generator rules can allow waste to be accumulated without a hazardous waste storage permit, but only when specified operating conditions are met.

EPA’s legal theory was that the company lost the benefit of those conditional permit exemptions when it allegedly failed to keep containers closed, maintain containment barriers, conduct inspections and satisfy other safeguards. The agency therefore characterized several counts as storage of hazardous waste without a permit or interim status.

The case extended from industrial waste to broken lamps

The containment building was the most serious physical issue described in the order, but it was not the only one. EPA also alleged a series of container, labeling and emergency planning failures across the facility.

These requirements are not interchangeable paperwork. Closed lamp containers are intended to prevent breakage or release. Labels identify the waste and its hazards. Accumulation dates establish how long waste has remained on site. A quick reference guide gives emergency responders concise facility information before a fire, explosion or hazardous release.

What the order establishes, and what it does not

The settlement establishes the penalty, the company’s obligations and the final disposition of this EPA proceeding. It does not establish the disputed factual allegations through a contested hearing.

Century Aluminum agreed to the penalty, waived its right to contest the allegations in this proceeding and waived an appeal, while neither admitting nor denying the factual allegations.

• The company consented to a civil penalty of $353,557, payable within 30 days of the effective date.
• It admitted EPA’s jurisdiction over the subject matter of the proceeding.
• It neither admitted nor denied the factual allegations presented in the order.
• It waived the right to contest the alleged violations and the right to appeal the final order.
• It certified, to the best of its knowledge, that it was currently in compliance with the relevant requirements and that all alleged violations had been corrected.
• The agreement resolves federal civil penalty liability only for the violations and facts specifically alleged in the order.

The supplied order does not detail the repair work, provide cleanup quantities, report environmental sampling results, or identify a supplemental environmental project. It also does not document a separate company explanation for why the cited conditions occurred.

The human stakes are real, but the documented effects are limited

Hazardous waste containment and emergency planning rules exist to limit releases and make incidents easier to manage. In this case, EPA alleged that hazardous material reached the environment directly outside a building and that waste was tracked out repeatedly. The order also identifies waste streams associated with ignitability and toxicity hazards, including chromium, lead, mercury and methyl ethyl ketone.

Still, the document does not establish that any worker, responder or nearby resident was injured or exposed. It does not quantify contamination beyond the facility’s containment area or describe damage to groundwater, surface water or neighboring property. Those limits matter. The record supports concern about failed controls and alleged releases, not claims of a documented public health disaster.

A compliance system can fail before an inspector arrives

The sharpest part of EPA’s case is the pattern. Inspectors described physical openings and waste handling problems, but the order also points to records that had already identified material tracking and structural damage. Other weeks had no inspection record at all.

Century Aluminum did not admit those factual allegations. It did, however, accept a six-figure penalty, waive a challenge and certify that the alleged violations had been corrected. The unresolved question is not simply whether one door or one container was open. It is why repeated warning entries, alleged structural defects and missing inspections were allowed to coexist within a system designed to keep hazardous waste contained.