The Non-Financial Ledger: What a Missing Logbook Actually Costs

Legal Receipts: What the Federal Documents Actually Say

Every quote below is verbatim from the Consent Agreement and Final Order filed with the EPA Region 5 Regional Hearing Clerk on April 7, 2025, Docket No. CAA-05-2025-0006.

“In its Information Request, EPA requested GMS’s records required to be kept by 40 C.F.R. § 82.156(a)(3). In response, GMS did not provide records of the company name, location of the appliance, date of recovery, and type of refrigerant recovered for each appliance; or the total quantity of refrigerant, by type, recovered from all disposed appliances in each calendar month.” Stipulated Fact 25, Consent Agreement and Final Order, Docket No. CAA-05-2025-0006

• GMS itself admitted to this. The document is a Consent Agreement, which means GMS agreed to the stipulated facts as written. This is not an allegation the company fought.
• The two specific record types absent were: (1) per-appliance identification records (address, date, refrigerant type), and (2) monthly aggregate totals of refrigerant recovered from disposed units. Both have been required since January 1, 2018.
• The absence of these records means there is no federal paper trail showing what happened to any refrigerant GMS removed from disposed appliances during the covered period.

“Respondent failed to retain records of the total quantity of refrigerant, by type, recovered from all disposed appliances in each calendar month. By failing to retain records of the total quantity of refrigerant, by type, recovered from all disposed appliances in each calendar month GMS violated the regulations for the Protection of Stratospheric Ozone, Recycling and Emissions Reduction at 40 C.F.R. § 82.156(a)(3)(ii).” Allegations 30–31, Consent Agreement and Final Order, Docket No. CAA-05-2025-0006

• This is the second of two distinct violations. GMS did not track the running monthly total of refrigerant it pulled from appliances headed for disposal, which is the aggregate data the EPA uses to identify systematic venting or underreporting at the industry level.
• GMS “neither admits nor denies” the allegations section but admits the stipulated facts. In legal terms, the company accepted the financial penalty and walked away without contesting the record on either count.

“GMS owns or is affiliated with the following business entities: Gold Medal Service, LLC; Gold Medal Plumbing, Inc.; Horizon Services Plumbing, Inc.; Horizon Intermediate, LLC; Water Works Plumbing and Heating; and Horizon Services, LLC.” Stipulated Fact 20, Consent Agreement and Final Order, Docket No. CAA-05-2025-0006

• Six affiliated entities means six potential operational units that may have shared technicians, disposal practices, and compliance failures under a single corporate umbrella. The CAFO addresses only Gold Medal Service as the named respondent.
• The affiliated entities are not separately cited in this action. Whether each maintained or failed to maintain the same records is outside the scope of this settlement and therefore unresolved by this proceeding.

“Any violation of this CAFO may result in a civil judicial action for an injunction or civil penalties of up to $121,275 per day per violation, or both, as provided in Section 113(b) of the CAA, 42 U.S.C. § 7413(b).” Section G, Paragraph 52, Consent Agreement and Final Order, Docket No. CAA-05-2025-0006

• The $101,295 settlement amount is a fraction of the per-day penalty ceiling. If GMS violates the terms of the CAFO, the EPA can pursue up to $121,275 per day per violation through federal court, and GMS has already waived its right to challenge the EPA’s authority to do so.
• GMS also waived its right to a jury trial, its right to appeal, and its right to contest the lawfulness of the final order. The company has no remaining procedural options in this matter.

Societal Impact Mapping

Environmental Degradation

The entire legal framework GMS violated exists because untracked refrigerant disposal is a direct pipeline from your neighborhood’s discarded HVAC units to the stratospheric ozone layer.

• Class I and Class II ozone-depleting substances (ODS), the refrigerants covered under 40 C.F.R. Part 82, Subpart F, are among the most potent atmospheric damaging chemicals ever manufactured. Their release depletes the ozone layer, which screens the Earth’s surface from ultraviolet radiation. The Montreal Protocol and the Clean Air Act’s Section 608 framework were built specifically to stop these chemicals from being casually vented.
• The recordkeeping rules GMS violated are the enforcement backbone of the recovery requirement. Without records of what was recovered, from which appliances, on which dates, regulators cannot audit whether technicians recovered refrigerant before cutting lines or simply vented it. The absence of GMS’s records is not a clerical inconvenience. It is a hole in the only verification system that exists for this type of release.
• GMS operates in New Jersey and surrounding areas, a densely populated region where large volumes of commercial and residential HVAC appliances are replaced and disposed of each year. The aggregate potential for untracked ODS releases from a regional company servicing this volume is significant, even if the consent agreement does not quantify individual release events.
• The substitute refrigerants also covered under this framework, including hydrofluorocarbons (HFCs), while less damaging to ozone than their Class I predecessors, are potent greenhouse gases. HFC-410A, for example, has a global warming potential roughly 2,088 times that of carbon dioxide over a 100-year horizon. Untracked disposal of HFC-containing appliances contributes to climate forcing in addition to ozone risk.

Public Health

Ozone layer depletion has direct and documented consequences for the health of human populations, particularly in high-UV regions and among vulnerable groups.

• Stratospheric ozone depletion increases ground-level UV-B radiation exposure. Elevated UV-B exposure is linked to increased rates of skin cancer, including melanoma, cataracts, and suppressed immune system function. The EPA and the World Health Organization both recognize ODS emissions as a public health hazard for exactly this reason.
• The populations least able to protect themselves from increased UV exposure, including outdoor workers, low-income communities with limited access to shade or sunscreen, and elderly individuals, absorb a disproportionate share of the health risk from ozone depletion. These are frequently the same communities where HVAC service companies operate most intensively.
• New Jersey, where GMS is based, has a dense population of outdoor workers in construction, agriculture, and logistics. Any increase in UV-B exposure associated with ODS emissions adds incremental but real health burden to workers who cannot simply move indoors.

Economic Inequality

The financial structure of this enforcement outcome illustrates a recurring pattern: the regulated company absorbs a capped fine, waives all appeals, and resumes operations. The cost of years of non-compliance falls on the commons, not the corporation.

• The $101,295 penalty, while significant for an individual, is a cost-of-business figure for a regional HVAC company with six affiliated entities, the legal resources to negotiate a consent agreement, and the staff to respond to a Section 114 information request. The fine represents a one-time accounting entry. The compliance failure it resolves spanned years.
• Small independent HVAC contractors who do maintain their refrigerant disposal records, at the cost of staff time, compliance software, and training, compete in the same market as GMS. Companies that skip these requirements carry lower operational costs. This is a structural economic advantage won through non-compliance.
• The EPA’s own penalty analysis under Section 113(e) of the CAA credits GMS’s “cooperation and prompt return to compliance” as a mitigating factor in arriving at $101,295. The capacity to cooperate promptly and avoid further litigation is itself a resource advantage that smaller operators may not have.
• GMS’s waiver of jury trial rights, appeal rights, and all challenge mechanisms was a strategic legal choice. Exercising those rights costs money in attorney’s fees and time. The consent agreement structure rewards companies with the legal sophistication to recognize when a negotiated settlement is the cheapest path forward. That sophistication is not equally distributed across the regulated community.

The “Cost of a Life” Metric

The EPA assessed $101,295 to resolve years of missing refrigerant records. Here is what that number means in concrete terms.

What Now? Accountability Doesn’t End With a Fine

GMS paid its penalty and waived every appeal right it had. The EPA case is closed. That does not mean the issue is resolved. Here is where the pressure can still go.

Who Signed Off: Corporate Leadership

The consent agreement was executed on behalf of GMS by a representative whose email address is listed as jtodaro@HorizonServicesInc.com. The document identifies this individual as the authorized representative with legal capacity to bind Gold Medal Service to the CAFO. On the EPA side, the penalty was authorized by Michael D. Harris, Division Director of the Enforcement and Compliance Assurance Division, EPA Region 5, who signed on April 3, 2025. The Final Order was issued by Ann L. Coyle, Regional Judicial Officer, EPA Region 5, on April 7, 2025.

Regulatory Watchlist

These are the bodies with current or potential jurisdiction over GMS, its affiliated entities, and the type of conduct documented in this case.

• U.S. EPA Region 5 (Chicago): The direct enforcing authority for this action. Region 5 covers Illinois, Indiana, Michigan, Minnesota, Ohio, and Wisconsin, but this proceeding originated from a New Jersey operator, demonstrating multi-state coordination capacity. Contact: r5hearingclerk@epa.gov.
• U.S. EPA Air Enforcement and Compliance Assurance Branch: The branch that issued the information request and finding of violation. Email on record: R5airenforcement@epa.gov. This branch can receive tips on refrigerant venting and ODS disposal violations.
• New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection (NJDEP): State-level environmental regulator with independent authority to investigate and penalize violations of New Jersey’s air quality and environmental protection statutes. NJDEP operates independently of the federal EPA consent agreement.
• U.S. Department of Justice, Environment and Natural Resources Division: The DOJ jointly reviewed this matter with the EPA before it was resolved administratively. If GMS violates the CAFO, the EPA may refer the matter to the Attorney General for civil judicial enforcement in federal district court.

What You Can Do: Mutual Aid and Grassroots Resistance

• File a refrigerant venting tip with the EPA: If you are an HVAC technician, a building manager, or a resident who has witnessed a technician cutting refrigerant lines without recovery equipment, you can report it to the EPA at its tips and complaints portal. Anonymous reporting is accepted. The GMS case began with an EPA information request, not a tip, but EPA enforcement priorities are shaped by documented patterns of complaints.
• Demand Section 608 compliance from your HVAC contractor in writing: Before any appliance disposal or service involving refrigerant removal, ask your contractor to confirm in writing that they hold the required technician certification and will maintain the recovery records required under 40 C.F.R. § 82.156(a)(3). Contractors who cannot answer this question are operating in violation of federal law.
• Connect with local environmental justice organizations in New Jersey: Groups like the New Jersey Environmental Justice Alliance and Clean Air Council monitor industrial compliance and advocate for communities carrying disproportionate environmental health burdens. Supporting these organizations builds the local capacity to track corporate compliance failures that federal enforcement alone cannot catch in real time.
• Workers in HVAC: Know your rights and whistleblower protections: Section 322 of the Clean Air Act prohibits employers from retaliating against employees who report CAA violations to the EPA. If your employer pressures you to skip refrigerant recovery or falsify disposal records, you have federal whistleblower protections. Contact OSHA’s Whistleblower Protection Program for guidance.
• Track GMS’s compliance history in subsequent enforcement actions: GMS’s consent agreement acknowledges this proceeding “constitutes an enforcement action for purposes of considering the compliance history of the Respondent(s) in any subsequent enforcement actions.” This is now a permanent part of their record. Any future EPA action against GMS or its six affiliated entities will be weighted against this documented history.