5 ms·

From the thread TLDR; EPA discovered that Apple was: - illegally treating hazardous waste - illegally transporting hazardous waste to disposal facilities - i

From the thread TLDR; EPA discovered that Apple was: - illegally treating hazardous waste - illegally transporting hazardous waste to disposal facilities - illegally dumping hazardous waste into the ambient air outside the facility (into the apartment windows) - leaving stockpiles of extremely dangerous chemicals unattended on weekends

vlovich123 2y ago
And they were accidentally tipped off about the inspection when it should have been a complete surprise. I feel like stuff like this should be capable of piercing the corporate veil so that people involved could be criminally prosecuted. As-is, Apple is incentivized to just keep this kind of behavior in their ranks because it’s just the cost of doing business as they usually get away with this kind of stuff.
- hanniabu 2y ago
  I worked at a Colgate manufacturing plant and we were given about a week heads up when the FDA would come do an inspection, we would know the exact day about 3 days before, and we would have about a 4hr heads up when they'll arrive. The way the plant operates normally and when they're there is night and day. We will shut down lines and clean for whole shifts leading up to it and when they're there we'll double the staff to have a whole shifts worth of people just constantly cleaning while the others work. We'll also slow down the lines to make sure things run smoothly and do more quality checks.
  - vlovich123 2y ago
    According to the mastodon post this situation is a bit different because it was a (whistleblower?) complaint and thus it was supposed to be a surprise vs typically announced inspections.
    - walterbell 2y ago
      How many inspectors use Apple devices?
    - hanniabu 2y ago
      Point still stand though, the heads up makes the inspections mostly pointless
doe_eyes 2y ago
I read the report, and while the practices are inexcusably shoddy, I am struggling to see anything to substantiate the poster's core claim that Apple was handling "extremely dangerous" chemicals at the site and that they could've harmed a person living a good distance away. For example, violation #6 appears to be about a tank holding diluted solvents such as isopropyl alcohol, acetone, and NMP. And the violation is that they labeled it as "CA-133" waste while it should be also labeled as "D001" waste because it's flammable. That's shitty, but I don't see how that could've poisoned someone from afar. You don't want to huff these solvents, but they are common and have modest toxicity. Or, take violation #2: a bucket labeled "adhesive liquids and tape", which should've been closed but wasn't. Violation #3 is that a bucket labeled "silicone" has been on the site for more than 90 days. And on, and on. Don't get me wrong, if you're operating in a location like that, you should do everything by the book, so I hope Apple gets in enough trouble to notice - but I see a pretty sharp disconnect between the Mastodon thread and the report.
- insaneirish 2y ago
  Bingo.
Aloisius 2y ago
> - illegally dumping hazardous waste into the ambient air outside the facility (into the apartment windows) The EPA report appears to imply the opposite. Apple's potential violation was not for their air exhaust system, but rather for using an activated carbon filter because they had not declared it in their permit application.
PROgrammerTHREE 2y ago
this is all editorialized, none of that is in the report

vlovich123 2y ago

And they were accidentally tipped off about the inspection when it should have been a complete surprise. I feel like stuff like this should be capable of piercing the corporate veil so that people involved could be criminally prosecuted. As-is, Apple is incentivized to just keep this kind of behavior in their ranks because it’s just the cost of doing business as they usually get away with this kind of stuff.

hanniabu 2y ago
I worked at a Colgate manufacturing plant and we were given about a week heads up when the FDA would come do an inspection, we would know the exact day about 3 days before, and we would have about a 4hr heads up when they'll arrive. The way the plant operates normally and when they're there is night and day. We will shut down lines and clean for whole shifts leading up to it and when they're there we'll double the staff to have a whole shifts worth of people just constantly cleaning while the others work. We'll also slow down the lines to make sure things run smoothly and do more quality checks.
- vlovich123 2y ago
  According to the mastodon post this situation is a bit different because it was a (whistleblower?) complaint and thus it was supposed to be a surprise vs typically announced inspections.
  - walterbell 2y ago
    How many inspectors use Apple devices?
  - hanniabu 2y ago
    Point still stand though, the heads up makes the inspections mostly pointless

doe_eyes 2y ago

I read the report, and while the practices are inexcusably shoddy, I am struggling to see anything to substantiate the poster's core claim that Apple was handling "extremely dangerous" chemicals at the site and that they could've harmed a person living a good distance away. For example, violation #6 appears to be about a tank holding diluted solvents such as isopropyl alcohol, acetone, and NMP. And the violation is that they labeled it as "CA-133" waste while it should be also labeled as "D001" waste because it's flammable. That's shitty, but I don't see how that could've poisoned someone from afar. You don't want to huff these solvents, but they are common and have modest toxicity. Or, take violation #2: a bucket labeled "adhesive liquids and tape", which should've been closed but wasn't. Violation #3 is that a bucket labeled "silicone" has been on the site for more than 90 days. And on, and on. Don't get me wrong, if you're operating in a location like that, you should do everything by the book, so I hope Apple gets in enough trouble to notice - but I see a pretty sharp disconnect between the Mastodon thread and the report.

insaneirish 2y ago
Bingo.

Aloisius 2y ago

> - illegally dumping hazardous waste into the ambient air outside the facility (into the apartment windows) The EPA report appears to imply the opposite. Apple's potential violation was not for their air exhaust system, but rather for using an activated carbon filter because they had not declared it in their permit application.

PROgrammerTHREE 2y ago

this is all editorialized, none of that is in the report