Corporate Pollution Case Study: The Odom Corporation, Anheuser-Busch, & Their Impact on Public Health

TL;DR: For nearly two decades after a federal deadline, beverage distribution giants The Odom Corporation, its subsidiaries, and Anheuser-Busch Sales of Hawaii, Inc. operated illegal large-capacity cesspools at three of their commercial properties in Hawaii. According to a legal settlement with the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, these companies failed to close the cesspools, which are designed to discharge untreated sanitary waste, including human excreta, into the ground. This action took place in areas where it could endanger underground sources of drinking water, violating the Safe Drinking Water Act. The companies have agreed to pay a $160,000 penalty and finally close the polluting systems, but their prolonged non-compliance raises critical questions about corporate responsibility and the effectiveness of environmental regulations.

Read on to explore the full details of the case and what it reveals about a system that often prioritizes profit over public safety.

---

Introduction

In the pristine landscapes of Hawaii, where the purity of natural resources is paramount, a story of corporate negligence has been quietly unfolding.

For years, major beverage distributors, including subsidiaries of The Odom Corporation and Anheuser-Busch, the titan of the American beer industry, flouted federal law by maintaining banned, high-capacity cesspools at their facilities. These involved the direct disposal of untreated sanitary waste from restrooms into the ground, a practice outlawed precisely because it threatens to contaminate the very water that communities drink.

This case is more than just a dispute over wastewater management. It is an alarming illustration of a systemic failure, where corporate actors operate within a framework of neoliberal capitalism that incentivizes cutting corners and externalizing costs onto the public and the environment.

The settlement reached with the Environmental Protection Agency, while holding the companies financially accountable to a degree, sheds light on a regulatory system that often moves too slowly, allowing harm to persist for years. It is a narrative of delayed justice, where the profits saved by deferring compliance are weighed against the potential, and often unseen, risks to public health.

Inside the Allegations: Corporate Misconduct

The core of the legal action revolves around three commercial properties in Hawaii, all used as beverage warehouses and distribution centers. At each location, the companies operated a large-capacity cesspool (LCC) long after a federal deadline of April 5, 2005, mandated their closure. LCCs are defined as systems that receive sanitary waste from multiple dwellings or non-residential cesspools serving 20 or more people a day, and their potential to pollute drinking water sources led to a federal ban.

The EPA claims that The Odom Corporation and its subsidiaries, Odex Kauai, LLC, Odex Lihue, LLC, and Odex Hilo, LLC, along with Anheuser-Busch Sales of Hawaii, Inc., were the owners or operators of these illegal cesspools.

The companies did not admit to the specific factual allegations but consented to the settlement terms and the penalty. This agreement allows them to resolve the matter without an adjudication of any issue of fact or law, a common outcome in corporate settlements that avoids a public trial and a definitive ruling on their culpability.

The properties in question and the companies associated with them are:

• 3140 Oihana Street, Lihue, HI: This property, owned by Odex Kauai, LLC since at least 2016, features a cesspool collecting wastewater from four restrooms. The EPA alleges this system qualifies as a large-capacity cesspool and, as of the settlement filing, had still not been closed by Odex Kauai and its parent, The Odom Corporation.
• 2955 Waapa Road, Lihue, HI: Anheuser-Busch Sales of Hawaii, Inc. owned this property and operated its cesspool from 1996 until October 29, 2021, when it was sold to Odex Lihue, LLC. The EPA alleges that all three entities—Anheuser-Busch, Odex Lihue, and The Odom Corporation—failed to close the illegal cesspool.
• 16-211 Wiliama Place, Keaau, HI: Similar to the Waapa Road property, Anheuser-Busch owned this site from 1996 to October 29, 2021, before selling it to Odex Hilo, LLC. Again, the EPA alleges all three corporations are responsible for the failure to close the cesspool that serves two restrooms at the beverage warehouse.

To settle the matter, the companies agreed to pay a collective civil penalty of $160,000 and adhere to a strict compliance schedule to finally close the three polluting cesspools.

Timeline of Alleged Non-Compliance

Date	Event	Significance
July 26, 1996	Anheuser-Busch Sales of Hawaii, Inc. acquires properties at 2955 Waapa Road and 16-211 Wiliama Place.	The company becomes the owner and operator of the cesspools at these locations.
April 5, 2000	Ban on construction of new large-capacity cesspools (LCCs) takes effect.	A clear federal signal that these systems are considered a significant environmental threat.
April 5, 2005	Deadline for all existing LCCs to be closed under the Safe Drinking Water Act.	This is the date from which the companies were allegedly in continuous violation of federal law.
“At least 2016”	Odex Kauai, LLC is noted as the owner of the 3140 Oihana Street property.	The Odom Corporation’s subsidiary becomes responsible for a property with an allegedly illegal cesspool.
October 29, 2021	Anheuser-Busch sells the Waapa Road and Wiliama Place properties to Odex Lihue, LLC and Odex Hilo, LLC, respectively.	Ownership changes, but the alleged violations continue, now implicating The Odom Corporation’s subsidiaries as the new owners.
May 13, 2025	A Consent Agreement and Final Order is filed with the EPA.	The companies agree to pay a $160,000 penalty and close the cesspools, resolving the allegations after nearly 20 years of non-compliance.
December 30, 2025	Deadline for The Odom Corporation and its subsidiaries to close the LCC at 3140 Oihana Street.	A legally binding deadline to end one of the ongoing violations.
April 30, 2026	Deadline for The Odom Corporation and its subsidiaries to close the LCCs at 2955 Waapa Road and 16-211 Wiliama Place.	The final deadline to bring all three properties into compliance with a law established over two decades prior.

Regulatory Capture & Loopholes: A System of Inaction

This case is a textbook example of how determined corporate entities can exploit the slow-moving nature of regulatory enforcement.

The law itself was unambiguous: large-capacity cesspools, classified as a type of “Class V injection well,” were prohibited from operation after April 5, 2005. These are not obscure regulations, but foundational rules under the Safe Drinking Water Act, a cornerstone of American public health policy. The federal government, through the EPA, administers this program directly in Hawaii, meaning there was no confusion over jurisdiction.

Yet, for nearly two decades, these evil corporations operated in open defiance of the law.

This prolonged period of non-compliance points to a structural failure in oversight. In a system strained by deregulation and limited resources, regulators often rely on self-reporting or are forced to prioritize the most egregious, large-scale polluters. This creates a landscape where companies can gamble on not being caught, treating potential fines as a mere cost of doing business—a risk worth taking when weighed against the immediate capital expense of compliance.

Furthermore, the settlement itself, while providing a measure of accountability, is a feature of a system that often favors compromise over punishment. By entering into a Consent Agreement, the corporations avoid a public admission of the factual allegations. This legal maneuver allows them to maintain a veneer of plausible deniability, shielding their public image and preventing the case from setting a powerful legal precedent that could embolden other enforcement actions. It is a form of “legal minimalism,” where companies do just enough to resolve a regulatory challenge without fundamentally altering their operational calculus.

Profit-Maximization at All Costs

At the heart of this multi-year violation lies a simple economic calculation, a hallmark of decision-making under neoliberal capitalism.

Closing a large-capacity cesspool is not a simple matter of filling a hole. It requires significant investment in either connecting to a municipal sewer system—if available—or installing a modern, approved wastewater treatment system, such as an Individual Wastewater System (IWS). These are capital-intensive projects that offer no direct return on investment.

By allegedly failing to close these three cesspools for nearly 20 years, the companies effectively deferred these costs, freeing up capital for other, more profitable ventures.

The $160,000 penalty, when spread across three locations and two massive corporate entities over two decades, can be viewed as a rounding error in their operational budgets. It is a brutal example of how the profit-maximization incentive, when unchecked, can lead to decisions that directly contravene public welfare and environmental law.

The logic is brutally simple: it was cheaper to pollute and risk a fine than it was to comply. This mindset is not an aberration but a predictable outcome of an economic system that structurally prioritizes shareholder value and short-term financial gains above all else. The health of Hawaii’s aquifers and the safety of its drinking water became external costs, pushed onto the community while the financial benefits of non-compliance were internalized by the corporations.

Environmental & Public Health Risks

The reason large-capacity cesspools are banned is no mystery. They are rudimentary, and by design, they are polluting. A cesspool is essentially a covered pit that allows raw sanitary waste—defined in the regulations as including human excreta—to leach directly into the surrounding soil. This untreated effluent is a cocktail of contaminants, including bacteria, viruses, nitrates, and other chemical and biological substances.

When these cesspools are “large capacity,” serving commercial facilities with 20 or more people per day, the volume of this discharge becomes a significant threat. The contaminants can migrate through the soil and into underground aquifers, which are the primary source of drinking water for many communities in Hawaii. This is not a theoretical risk; it is the entire basis for the federal UIC (Underground Injection Control) program under the Safe Drinking Water Act.

By allegedly operating these three cesspools for years beyond their legal lifespan, the companies created a prolonged period of unnecessary risk. Every day they remained in operation was another day that untreated waste from their warehouse restrooms flowed into the ground, potentially inching closer to the water supply. The settlement forces the closure of these systems, but it cannot undo the nearly two decades of potential contamination that has already occurred, leaving the public to bear the long-term environmental consequences.

The Economic Fallout

The financial consequences outlined in the settlement document present a telling picture of corporate accountability. The Odom Corporation and Anheuser-Busch are obligated to pay a civil penalty of $160,000, a figure that, while sounding substantial, must be viewed in the context of a nearly 20-year period of alleged non-compliance by major corporations. This penalty does not account for the economic benefit the companies gained by deferring the significant capital costs of wastewater system upgrades for two decades.

The agreement also stipulates financial penalties for future non-compliance, including $300 per day for any delay in closing the cesspools and $100 per day for failure to submit required reports. These penalties act as an enforcement mechanism, yet they underscore the reality that regulatory action often comes after years of inaction. The primary economic impact is not a punishment that fits the crime, but a belated and relatively modest bill for conduct that should have been rectified in 2005.

Exploitation of Workers

While the legal filing centers squarely on environmental violations, the corporate culture that enables such disregard for public safety often extends to its treatment of labor. The document does not contain specific allegations of worker exploitation at the Hawaiian facilities, but the underlying logic of prioritizing profit over people is a common thread in cases of both environmental harm and anti-labor practices. In a system that rewards cost-cutting, investments in both environmental compliance and worker safety can be seen as drags on profitability.

This case, therefore, serves as a powerful proxy for understanding a corporate ethos. When a company is willing to risk contaminating a community’s drinking water to avoid operational expenses, it raises critical questions about its commitment to the well-being of all its stakeholders, including its employees. The systemic pressure to maximize shareholder value creates a race to the bottom that can simultaneously harm communities and exploit workers, two sides of the same devalued coin.

Community Impact: Local Lives Undermined

The most direct and damaging impact on the local communities in Lihue and Keaau is the endangerment of their drinking water sources. For nearly twenty years, residents lived alongside beverage distribution centers that were allegedly discharging untreated human waste into the ground. In an island ecosystem like Hawaii’s, where fresh water is a precious and finite resource drawn from underground aquifers, such contamination poses a direct threat to public health.

This prolonged risk represents a profound betrayal of community trust. Businesses operating within a community have a fundamental social license to not endanger their neighbors. By allegedly violating the Safe Drinking Water Act for so long, the companies undermined the environmental security of the very people they served. The harm is not just potential illness, but the erosion of the sense of safety and the imposition of a hidden environmental threat on an unknowing public.

The PR Machine: Corporate Spin Tactics

One of the most revealing aspects of the settlement is a classic public relations tactic embedded in the legal language: the “neither admit nor deny” clause. The companies explicitly consent to the penalty and the compliance order while simultaneously refusing to admit to the specific factual allegations laid out by the EPA. This is a carefully crafted piece of legal maneuvering designed to control the narrative and mitigate reputational damage.

This strategy allows the corporations to publicly frame the settlement as a pragmatic decision to move on and avoid costly litigation, rather than an admission of wrongdoing. It effectively neutralizes the damning facts of the case, preventing them from being officially recorded as proven. For the public, the message is muddied, transforming clear allegations of endangering public health into a mere legal dispute that has been “resolved.”

Wealth Disparity & Corporate Greed

The $160,000 penalty, when set against the backdrop of the corporate parents involved, highlights the vast asymmetries of power and wealth in our economy. Anheuser-Busch is a subsidiary of the global beverage behemoth Anheuser-Busch InBev, and The Odom Corporation is a major regional distributor. For entities of this scale, the fine amounts to little more than a nuisance, a calculated cost of doing business that pales in comparison to the money saved by flouting the law for two decades.

This dynamic is a driver of wealth disparity.

The profits generated from this kind of operational corner-cutting flow upwards to executives and shareholders, while the risks and costs are borne by the public. When penalties for environmental violations are not substantial enough to create a true economic deterrent, the system implicitly signals that pollution is profitable, allowing corporations to accumulate wealth at the direct expense of community health and environmental integrity.

Corporate Accountability Fails the Public

Ultimately, this case demonstrates the significant shortcomings of our corporate accountability framework. Despite a clear violation of federal law that allegedly persisted for nearly two decades, the resolution falls short of true justice. No individual executive is held accountable, the financial penalty is not proportionate to the duration or severity of the risk created, and the companies are allowed to walk away without ever admitting they did anything wrong.

This outcome is a failure for the public. It suggests that corporations can pollute for years, endanger vital resources like drinking water, and then settle the matter for a modest sum while shielding their reputation. Without more stringent penalties, a commitment to pursuing individual liability, and an end to “no-admit” settlements for egregious violations, the system will continue to fail in its primary duty: to deter corporate misconduct and protect the public from harm.

Pathways for Reform & Consumer Advocacy

The failures exposed in this case point toward clear pathways for meaningful reform. First, civil penalties for environmental violations must be drastically increased to strip away any financial incentive for non-compliance; they should be pegged to a company’s revenue and the duration of the violation. Second, the “neither admit nor deny” clause should be abolished for cases involving significant public health risks or long-term violations, forcing corporations to take public responsibility for their actions.

Furthermore, regulatory agencies like the EPA require more funding and authority for proactive enforcement, rather than relying on reactive measures after years of harm.

For consumers, this case underscores the power of awareness. Supporting businesses with transparent and ethical environmental practices, and advocating for stronger regulatory oversight, are crucial steps in shifting the balance of power from corporations that prioritize profit to communities that demand a safe and healthy environment.

This Is the System Working as Intended

It is tempting to view the Odom and Anheuser-Busch case as a failure of the system—a breakdown in regulatory oversight. However, it is more accurately understood as the system working exactly as it was designed to under the logic of neoliberal capitalism. In this framework, the purpose of a corporation is to maximize profit, and regulations are obstacles to be managed, minimized, or, if possible, ignored.

The decades-long delay in enforcement, the cost-benefit analysis that made pollution the cheaper option, and the settlement that allows for a quiet resolution without an admission of guilt are not bugs; they are features.

This is the predictable result of an ideology that systematically elevates private profit over public good. The case is not an aberration but a perfect snapshot of a system that is functioning as intended, producing outcomes that favor corporate interests even at the risk of poisoning our most essential resources.

Conclusion

The legal settlement between the EPA, The Odom Corporation, and Anheuser-Busch closes a nearly 20-year chapter of alleged environmental negligence in Hawaii. While the agreement forces the closure of three illegal cesspools and imposes a financial penalty, it leaves behind a troubling legacy.

For years, the health of Hawaiian communities was put at risk, their drinking water endangered by corporations that chose to prioritize their bottom line over their legal and ethical obligations.

This case is an important reminder that the laws designed to protect us are only as strong as their enforcement. It illustrates the deep-seated failures in a system of corporate accountability that too often allows for harm to persist, for penalties to be treated as operational costs, and for public responsibility to be artfully dodged.

The real story is not about three cesspools, but about a broader economic and political structure that continues to protect corporations at the expense of our communities and our planet.

Frivolous or Serious Lawsuit?

This case represents a serious and legitimate legal action. The proceeding was brought by the United States Environmental Protection Agency under the authority of the federal Safe Drinking Water Act, one of the nation’s most critical public health laws. The pollution concerns the illegal operation of large-capacity cesspools, a practice banned specifically because it poses a direct threat to underground sources of drinking water by discharging untreated human waste.

The detailed nature of the Consent Agreement, which includes a multi-year compliance schedule with specific deadlines, stipulated financial penalties for failure to comply, and a significant six-figure civil penalty, underscores the gravity of the violations. This was not a frivolous claim, but a necessary enforcement action to address a long-standing public health risk created by corporate negligence.

Please click on this link to learn more about this pollution of clean drinking water in Hawaii: https://yosemite.epa.gov/oa/rhc/epaadmin.nsf/Filings/DB61F4DEF549539D85258C8A0082A92F/$File/The%20Odom%20Corporation%20et%20al%20(UIC-09-2024-0109)%20-%20Filed%20CAFO.pdf

💡 Explore Corporate Misconduct by Category

Corporations harm people every day — from wage theft to pollution. Learn more by exploring key areas of injustice.

• 💀 Product Safety Violations — When companies risk lives for profit.
• 🌿 Environmental Violations — Pollution, ecological collapse, and unchecked greed.
• 💼 Labor Exploitation — Wage theft, worker abuse, and unsafe conditions.
• 🛡️ Data Breaches & Privacy Abuses — Misuse and mishandling of personal information.
• 💵 Financial Fraud & Corruption — Lies, scams, and executive impunity.