>>>welcome visitor, haven't logged in. Login
Subscribe Now Contact us  
Font Size:  A A A Search “Fabao” Window English 中文 = 简体  繁体
  Favorite   DownLoad   Print
 
Ten Model Cases regarding Judicial Protection of Ecological Environment in the Yangtze River Economic Zone Published by the Supreme People's Court [Effective]
最高人民法院发布10起长江经济带生态环境司法保护典型案例 [现行有效]
【法宝引证码】

Ten Model Cases regarding Judicial Protection of Ecological Environment in the Yangtze River Economic Zone Published by the Supreme People's Court 

最高人民法院发布10起长江经济带生态环境司法保护典型案例

(January 8, 2020) (2020年1月8日)

Table of Contents 目录
1. Case regarding environmental pollution by defendant entity Anhui Aland New Energy Materials Co., Ltd., Lv Shouguo, and other six defendants 一、被告单位安徽亚兰德新能源材料股份有限公司、被告人吕守国等7人污染环境案
2. Case regarding environmental pollution by Yao Duoyou and other thirteen defendants 二、被告人姚多友等14人污染环境案
3. Case regarding environmental pollution by Wang Weifan and other three defendants 三、被告人王维凡等4人污染环境案
4. Case regarding environmental pollution by defendants Wang Chao and Wang Yiping and civil public interest litigation case regarding water pollution (People's Procuratorate of Jinyun County, Zhejiang Province v. defendant entity Jinyun Nanhe Electroplating Factory, Wang Chao, and other three defendants) 四、被告人王超、王益平污染环境案, 浙江省缙云县人民检察院诉被告缙云县南河电镀厂、王超等4人水污染民事公益诉讼案
5. Case regarding environmental pollution by defendant entity Hubei Ruisi Technology Co., Ltd., Wang Xianwen, and other three defendants 五、被告单位湖北瑞锶科技有限公司、被告人王先文等4人污染环境案
6. Case regarding environmental pollution by defendant entities Chengdu Yizheng Environmental Sanitation Engineering Co., Ltd. and Chengdu Chenguang Acrylic Plastic Co., Ltd., Lv Shunti, and other fifteen defendants 六、被告单位成都益正环卫工程有限公司、成都晨光亚克力塑胶有限公司,被告人吕顺体等16人污染环境案
7. Case regarding environmental pollution by Liao Ruoyun and other two defendants 七、被告人廖若云等3人污染环境案
8. Case regarding an administrative penalty for environmental protection (Zizhong Yinshan Hongzhan Industry Co., Ltd. v. former Environmental Protection Bureau of Neijiang City) 八、资中县银山鸿展工业有限责任公司诉原内江市环境保护局环境保护行政处罚案
9. Administrative public interest litigation case regarding negligence in the performance of statutory duties (People's Procuratorate of Yanhe Tujia Autonomous County v. Environmental Protection Bureau of Yanhe Tujia Autonomous County) 九、沿河土家族自治县人民检察院诉沿河土家族自治县环境保护局怠于履行法定职责行政公益诉讼案
10. Case regarding liability of compensation for ecological and environmental damages (People's Government of Jiujiang City v. Jiangxi Zhengpeng Environmental Protection Technology Co., Ltd., Hangzhou Lianxin Construction Materials Co., Ltd., Li De, and other six persons) 十、九江市人民政府诉江西正鹏环保科技有限公司、杭州连新建材有限公司、李德等7人生态环境损害赔偿责任案
1. Case regarding environmental pollution by defendant entity Anhui Aland New Energy Materials Co., Ltd., Lv Shouguo, and other six defendants   一、被告单位安徽亚兰德新能源材料股份有限公司、被告人吕守国等7人污染环境案
[Basic Facts] 【基本案情】
Defendant entity Anhui Aland New Energy Materials Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as “Aland Company”) is a key polluter. Defendant Lv Shouguo is the legal representative, chairman of the board, and general manager of the Company and defendant Ding Houping is the vice general manager of the Company. In 2007, Lv Shouguo and Ding Houping discussed to bury underground pipes for directly discharging the production sewage to the Yangtze River and Ding Houping took charge of the aforesaid work. In the beginning of 2008, Ding Houping arranged employees to bury underground pipes and directly discharged the sewage to the Yangtze River by bypassing the sewage treatment terminal. In case of inspections by the environmental regulatory department, Ding Houping and other persons notified defendant Jin Huajie in advance to help the Company evade the environmental inspection by manipulating the valves of underground pipes and washing the workshop. Knowing that the sewage treatment terminal of the Company did not work for a long term, the special persons for environmental protection of the Company, defendants Wang Yinzhi and Qi Fuchang, falsely prepared data of the online analyzer for total nickel monitoring to cheat the environmental regulatory department. The sewage discharged by Aland Company through underground pipes contained pollutant with such heavy metals as nickel and cobalt, which were toxic substances. From the end of 2007 to May 2017, the Company discharged 482,400 tons of waste water in violation of regulations and 376,300 tons of waste water which exceeded the prescribed standard, causing the quantified amount of ecological and environmental damages of CNY7.53 million. 被告单位安徽亚兰德新能源材料股份有限公司(以下简称亚兰德公司)系重点排污单位,被告人吕守国任公司法定代表人、董事长兼总经理,被告人丁厚平等任公司副总经理。2007年,吕守国、丁厚平商议在公司埋设暗管,将生产污水直接排放到长江,并由丁厚平具体负责。2008年初,丁厚平安排公司人员埋设暗管,将产生的污水绕过污水处理总站通过暗管直接排放到长江。遇有环保监管部门检查,丁厚平等提前通知被告人晋华杰等通过操控暗管阀门、冲洗车间,帮助公司逃避环保检查。被告人王银芝、戚甫长作为公司环保专员,明知公司污水处理总站长期不工作,虚假制作总镍在线等数据,欺骗环保监管部门。亚兰德公司通过暗管排放污水中含有镍、钴等重金属污染物,属于有毒物质。2007年12月底至2017年5月期间,该公司废水违规外排量共计48.24万吨,超标排放废水量为37.63万吨,造成的生态环境损害数额量化结果为753万元。
[Judgment] 【裁判结果】
In the trial of first instance, the People's Court of Jiujiang District, Wuhu City, Anhui Province held that defendant entity Aland Company discharged toxic substances through underground pipes and it was guilty of environmental pollution; as the directly liable person in charge and other directly liable persons, Lv Shouguo and other persons should also be subject to criminal liability for the crime of environmental pollution. Considering that Aland Company has paid the expenses for restoration of the ecological environment and the relevant expenses of CNY7.825 million and in light of the facts, nature, circumstances, and social harms of the crime committed by defendant entity and defendants, the court of first instance entered a judgment that defendant entity Aland Company was guilty of environmental pollution and it should be given a fine of CNY4 million; defendant Lv Shouguo was guilty of environmental pollution and he should be sentenced to a fixed-term imprisonment of two years and six months and concurrently be given a fine of CNY100,000; and Ding Houping and other six defendants were guilty of environmental pollution and they should be sentenced to a fixed-term imprisonment ranging from two years and three months to nine months and concurrently be given a fine ranging from CNY80,000 to 20,000. The Intermediate People's Court of Wuhu City, Anhui Province entered a ruling of second instance to reject the appeal and affirm the original judgment. 安徽省芜湖市鸠江区人民法院一审认为,被告单位亚兰德公司通过暗管排放有毒物质,其行为已构成污染环境罪;被告人吕守国等人作为公司直接负责的主管人员和其他直接责任人员,亦应以污染环境罪追究刑事责任。鉴于亚兰德公司已支付生态环境修复及相关费用782.5万元,综合被告单位和各被告人的犯罪事实、性质、情节和对社会危害程度,一审法院判决被告单位亚兰德公司犯污染环境罪,判处罚金400万元;被告人吕守国犯污染环境罪,判处有期徒刑二年六个月,并处罚金10万元;被告人丁厚平等6人犯污染环境罪,判处有期徒刑二年三个月至九个月不等,并处罚金8万元至2万元不等。安徽省芜湖市中级人民法院二审裁定驳回上诉,维持原判。
[Significance] 【典型意义】
This is a case regarding environmental pollution arising from direct and illegal discharge of toxic substances to the Yangtze River through underground pipes. Aland Company is a key polluter. For the purpose of realizing the criminal intent of the entity, all defendants colluded with each other, secretly discharged waste water containing such heavy metals as nickel and cobalt to the Yangtze River, and provided false data to evade environmental inspections. The aforesaid acts were serious environmental pollution. In this case, while legally affirming that Aland Company was guilty of a crime committed by an entity and given a fine, the people's court separately investigated criminal liabilities of the legal representative of the Company that played the roles of deciding, planning, and instructing the crime committed by the entity, vice general manager, and other principal liable persons, the workshop director and other persons-in-charge that arranged workers to secretly discharge sewage and evade inspection, and the special persons for environmental protection and other liable persons that prepared false monitoring data according to the law. The judgment of this case has specified that after paying the expenses for restoration of the ecological environment and the relevant expenses, the polluter that committed criminal acts of environmental pollution should also assume the corresponding criminal liability and directly liable persons in charge in the crime committed by an entity should also assume the criminal liability. The judgment has fully demonstrated the resolution in severely punishing crimes of environmental pollution, greatly deterred illegal polluters, and educated and warned the relevant practitioners. 本案系通过暗管直接向长江违法排放有毒物质污染环境案件。亚兰德公司作为重点排污单位,为实现单位的犯罪意图,各被告人相互串通,将含镍、钴等重金属的废水偷排至长江,且提供虚假数据应付环保检查,属于严重污染环境行为。本案中,人民法院在依法认定亚兰德公司构成单位犯罪并处罚金的同时,对单位犯罪起决定、策划、指挥等作用的公司法定代表人、副总经理等主要负责人、高级管理人员,对安排工人偷排污水、应付检查的车间主任等分管负责人员,对制造虚假监测数据的环保专员等责任人员,依法分别追究刑事责任。本案判决明确实施污染环境犯罪行为的排污企业在支付生态环境修复及相关费用后仍须承担相应刑事责任,单位犯罪中直接负责的主管人员亦须依法承担刑事责任,充分彰显从严惩治环境污染犯罪的决心,有力威慑违法排污单位并对相关从业人员具有教育警示作用。
2. Case regarding environmental pollution by Yao Duoyou and other thirteen defendants   二、被告人姚多友等14人污染环境案
[Basic Facts] 【基本案情】
For the purpose of seeking illegal profits, Yao Duoyou, Zhu Ziqiang, and other defendants formed Tongxiang Shujie Environmental Protection Technology Services Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as “Shujie Company”) and engaged in the business of illegal disposal of industrial sludge. Yao Duoyou, legal representative of Shujie Company, was responsible for contacting the source of sludge and the dump site and Zhu Ziqiang, a supervisor, participated in contacting the dump site. From March to June 2015, without undergoing formalities for trans-provincial transfer of industrial sludge, Yao Duoyou, alone or in collusion with Zhu Ziqiang and other persons, contacted defendants Zhai Yuhe and Jiang Guohua to purchase 5,540 tons of industrial sludge in total and upon introduction by Tian Siyu and other defendants, they transferred such industrial sludge from Tongxiang City, Zhejiang Province and other places to kilns, sand factories, and pit-ponds in Funing County, Sihong County, and Hai'an County of Jiangsu Province, dumped and discarded such sludge without taking any pollution prevention measure. The aforesaid acts caused environmental pollution and resulted in public and private property losses of over CNY2.86 million in total. It was found upon monitoring that the industrial sludge involved contained mercury, chromium, arsenic, and other toxic heavy metals. 被告人姚多友、竺子强等人为牟取非法利益,成立桐乡市疏洁环保技术服务有限公司(以下简称疏洁公司),从事非法处置工业污泥业务。法定代表人姚多友负责联系污泥来源、倾卸地点,监事竺子强参与联系倾卸地点。2015年3月至6月间,姚多友在未办理跨省转移工业污泥手续的情况下,单独或伙同竺子强等人联系被告人翟玉合、蒋国华等收购工业污泥共计5540吨,经被告人田思玉等人联系从浙江省桐乡市等地运至江苏省阜宁县、泗洪县、海安县的窑厂、砂石厂及坑塘等地,在未采取任何防止污染措施的情况下进行倾卸、丢弃,造成环境污染,致公私财产损失共计286万余元。经检测,涉案工业污泥中含汞、铬、砷等毒害性重金属。
[Judgment] 【裁判结果】
In the trial of first instance, the People's Court of Sucheng District, Suqian City, Jiangsu Province held that for the purpose of seeking illegal profits, Yao Duoyou and other defendants registered and formed Shujie Company with the nature of technical consultation. Without undergoing approval formalities for trans-provincial transport and transfer, they delivered the collected industrial solid waste containing toxic substances to bricks and tiles plants and other enterprises that were incapable of disposing of such waste and under normal production at low prices. Such waste was dumped and discarded in the plants or surrounding land, resulting in consequences of environmental pollution; knowing that Yao Duoyou and other defendants and Shujie Company they formed were incapable of disposing of industrial solid waste, for the purpose of seeking personal gains and earning price differences, Jiang Guohua and other defendants provided Shujie Company with industrial solid waste containing toxic substances and permitted the transfer of such industrial solid waste to places outside Zhejiang Province for dumping and discarding; knowing that the industrial solid waste involved contained toxic substances, for the purpose of seeking illegal profits, Tian Siyu and other defendants still actively helped contact and provide sites and personnel to dump and discard such industrial solid waste and participate in transport, and they were all guilty of environmental pollution. The court of first instance entered a judgment that Yao Duoyou was guilty of environmental pollution and he should be sentenced to a fixed-term imprisonment of five years and six months and currently be given a fine of CNY100,000; Zhu Ziqiang and other twelve defendants were guilty of environmental pollution and they should be sentenced to a fixed-term imprisonment of three years and six months to a fixed-term imprisonment of one year with suspended execution of one year and six months and concurrently be given a fine; Tian Siyu and other defendants should be prohibited from engaging in discharging, dumping, or disposal of pollutants and other relevant activities during the probation period. 江苏省宿迁市宿城区人民法院一审认为,被告人姚多友等人为牟取非法利益,注册成立仅有技术咨询性质的疏洁公司,未经依法办理跨省运输转移审批手续,将收集的含有毒害性物质的工业固体废物,以低价交给不具备处置能力且未正常生产的砖瓦厂等企业,擅自倾卸、丢弃在厂区及其周边土地,导致污染环境后果发生;被告人蒋国华等人明知姚多友等人及其设立的疏洁公司无能力处置工业固体废物,为牟取私利赚取差价,将含有毒害性物质的工业固体废物提供给该公司并放任该批工业固体废物转移至省外倾卸、丢弃;被告人田思玉等人明知涉案工业固体废物含有毒害性物质,为获取不当利益,仍积极帮助联系、提供场地及人员实施倾卸丢弃行为、参与运输,其行为均已构成污染环境罪。一审法院判决被告人姚多友犯污染环境罪,判处有期徒刑五年六个月,并处罚金10万元;被告人竺子强等13人犯污染环境罪,判处有期徒刑三年六个月至有期徒刑一年缓刑一年六个月不等,并处罚金;判决禁止被告人田思玉等人在缓刑考验期内从事排放、倾倒、处置污染物等相关活动。
[Significance] 【典型意义】
This is a case regarding environmental pollution caused by trans-provincial dumping of industrial sludge. Recently, cases regarding trans-provincial illegal dumping of solid waste have occurred occasionally and environmental risks have been increasingly emerging. A majority of such heavy metals as mercury, arsenic, and chromium in industrial sludge and their chemical compounds have such roles of causing cancers, deformities, and mutations. They are of enrichment in the environment and difficult to be degraded. The random stacking without regular disposal may not only seriously damage the ecological environment, but may be more likely to endanger body health and even life safety. Therefore, there are strict legal provisions on the collection, storage, transport, usage, and disposal of industrial solid waste, including trans-provincial transfer and disposal. In this case, for the purpose of seeking illegal profits, as persons who received, introduced, transported, and illegally disposed of the industrial solid waste, Yao Duoyou and other thirteen defendants cooperated with each other and formed an interest chain. With many persons involved, a wide range, and a large amount of industrial solid waste invovled, the ecological environment and body health in the relevant areas within the Yangtze River Economic Zone have been seriously damaged and such defendants should be subject to heavier criminal liabilities. The Minutes of the Symposiums of the Supreme People's Court, the Supreme People's Procuratorate, the Ministry of Public Security, the Ministry of Justice, and the Ministry of Ecology and Environment on Issues concerning the Handling of Criminal Cases of Environmental Pollution issued in February 2019 specified that who committed such crimes of environmental pollution as trans-provincial or city discharging, dumping, and disposal of radioactive waste, waste containing infectious agents, toxic substances, or other harmful substances in the Yangtze River Economic Zone should be given a heavier punishment. The aforesaid specification has further demonstrated the resolution in adhering to the strictest system and rule of law, legally cracking down on the underground industrial chain for illegal business operation of solid waste, and serving and guaranteeing the high-quality development of the Yangtze River Economic Zone. 本案系跨省倾倒工业污泥污染环境案件。近年来,跨省非法倾倒固体废物案件时有发生,环境风险日益凸显。工业污泥中的汞、砷、铬等重金属及其化合物,大多具有致癌、致畸、致突变作用,在环境中具有富集性且难以降解,若不经过正规处置随处堆放,不仅严重损害生态环境,更可能直接危及人体健康甚至生命安全。故法律对工业固体废物的收集、贮存、运输、利用、处置,包括对跨省转移、处置,均有严格规定。本案中,被告人姚多友等14人为牟取非法利益,分别作为工业固体废物的接收人、介绍人、运输人、非法处置人,上下协作、相互结合形成利益链条,涉案人数多、范围广、数量大,对长江经济带相关区域生态环境和人体健康造成严重危害,被从重追究刑事责任。2019年2月“两高三部”《关于办理环境污染刑事案件有关问题座谈会纪要》明确规定,对于在长江经济带区域跨省市排放、倾倒、处置有放射性的废物、含传染病病原体的废物、有毒物质或者其他有害物质的环境污染犯罪行为,依法予以从重处罚,进一步彰显坚持最严格制度、最严密法治,依法打击固体废物非法经营地下产业链条,服务保障长江经济带高质量发展的决心。
3. Case regarding environmental pollution by Wang Weifan and other three defendants   三、我能说我还比较喜欢洗碗吗被告人王维凡等4人污染环境案
[Basic Facts] 【基本案情】
Defendant Wang Weifan is the legal representative, chairman of the board, and general manager of Chongqing Kunlun Chemical Industry Co., Ltd. (hereinafter referred to as “Kunlun Company”), defendant Hu Hai is the director of the Safety and Environmental Protection Department of the Company, defendant Bai Wei is the director of the Equipment and Energy Department of the Company, defendant Deng Qiquan is a worker of the Construction Department of the Company. For the purpose of reducing the enterprise's pollution control costs, Wang Weifan instigated Bai Wei and other persons to build underground pipes, set valves, and connected such underground pipes to the emergency tank and observation well, which were directly connected to the Yangtze River. From April to August 14, 2015, without passing the EIA, Kunlun Company produced ketone and discharged the spent liquor to the emergency tank of the Company through the underground pipes buried in advance. At nights or when it rained, the valve of the emergency tank has been opened for several times and the spent liquor in the tank was directly discharged to the Yangtze River. On the evening of August 14, 2015, when Deng Qiquan opened the valve of the emergency tank to discharge the spent liquor, he was captured on the scene by the public security organ. It was found upon monitoring that such toxic substances as nitrobenzoates, total cyanide, and manganese contained in the spent liquor discharged on that day exceeded the prescribed standard by 1,690 times, 30 times, and 58.5 times. After the case was exposed, Kunlun Company immediately stopped production, underwent formalities for the production of ketone, prepared a pollution control plan, and upgraded and transformed its production line. Wang Weifan and other three persons bought seedlings with the value of CNY186,000 and donated them to the local villagers' committee. 被告人王维凡系重庆昆仑化工有限公司(以下简称昆仑公司)法定代表人、董事长兼总经理,被告人胡海系公司安全环保部部长,被告人白伟系公司设备能源部部长,被告人邓启全系公司基建部工人。为减少企业污染治理成本,王维凡指使白伟等人修建暗管,设置阀门连接至应急池、观察井,并与长江直接连接。2015年4月至8月14日,昆仑公司在未通过环境影响评价的情况下生产对酮,将产生的废液通过事先埋放的暗管排放到公司应急池,并多次在黑夜或下雨时打开应急池阀门,将池中废液直排长江。2015年8月14日晚,邓启全打开应急池阀门排放废液时,被公安机关查获。经监测,当日排放废液中含有毒物质硝基苯类、总氰化物、锰分别超标1690倍、30倍、58.5倍。案发后,昆仑公司立即停止生产,办理生产对酮手续,编制污染治理方案,对生产线进行升级改造。王维凡等4人购买价值18.6 万元的苗木捐赠给公司所在地村委会。
[Judgment] 【裁判结果】
In the trial of first instance, the People's Court of Yubei District, Chongqing Municipality held that Wang Weifan and other three defendants discharged toxic substances through underground pipes in violation of the state regulations and the heavy metal manganese contained in the discharged pollutant exceeded the state standard by more than ten times, which seriously polluted the environment, and they were guilty of environmental pollution. Considering that after the case was exposed, Kunlun Company immediately stopped production, actively made rectification, input funds to transform and upgrade the equipment for discharging pollutants, and effectively solved the problem of pollutant discharge; and the four defendants voluntarily surrendered themselves, actively took effective measures to prevent pollution, and voluntarily bought seedlings, restored the ecological environment, covered the losses, and showed true repentance, the court of first instance entered a judgment that Wang Weifan and other three defendants were guilty of environmental pollution and they should be sentenced to a fixed-term imprisonment ranging from one year to seven months and concurrently be given a fine ranging from CNY100,000 to 20,000. 重庆市渝北区人民法院一审认为,被告人王维凡等4人违反国家规定,通过暗管排放有毒物质,且排放的污染物中重金属锰超过国家标准十倍以上,严重污染环境,其行为均构成污染环境罪。鉴于案发后昆仑公司立即停止生产、积极整改,投入资金改造升级排污设备,有效解决排污问题;4被告人具有自首情节,积极采取有效措施防止污染并自愿购买苗木、修复生态、弥补损失,悔罪表现较好,一审法院判决被告人王维凡等4人犯污染环境罪,判处有期徒刑一年至七个月不等,并处罚金10万元至2万元不等。
[Significance] 【典型意义】
This is a case regarding secret discharge of sewage through underground pipes by an enterprise engaging in production without passing the EIA. Wang Weifan and other three defendants built underground pipes and directly discharged the spent liquor generated in production to the Yangtze River via the emergency tank and observation well at nights or when it rained, and the means were extremely concealed. Based on the charges of the public prosecution organ, the people's court affirmed that Wang Weifan and other three defendants were guilty of environmental pollution and sentenced them to imprisonment. Considering that after the case was exposed, Kunlun Company took the initiative to conduct upgrading and transformation of the production line, underwent the relevant formalities, and obtained a license, Wang Weifan and other three persons bought seedlings and donated them to the local villagers' committee and actively restored the environment, with such repentance showed by them, the people's court gave them lighter punishments. The judgment has fully demonstrated the criminal policy of combining punishment with leniency in the process of strict law enforcement and the concept of restorative justice and is of typical demonstration significance for advancing polluters to consciously assume the social responsibility of environmental protection and adopt green production modes. 本案系企业未经环境影响评价进行生产并通过暗管偷排污水案件。王维凡等4被告人通过修建暗管,利用黑夜或雨天将生产的废液经应急池、观察井后直接排入长江,偷排手段极其隐蔽。人民法院基于公诉机关的指控,依法认定被告人王维凡等4人构成污染环境罪并适用监禁刑,同时,考虑到案发后昆仑公司能够主动对生产线进行升级改造并办理相关手续和许可,王维凡等4人购买苗木捐赠当地村委会,积极修复生态,具有悔罪表现,在量刑上予以从轻处罚,充分彰显宽严相济刑事政策以及修复性司法理念,对于推动排污企业自觉承担生态环境保护社会责任以及采用绿色生产方式,具有典型示范意义。
4. Case regarding environmental pollution by defendants Wang Chao and Wang Yiping and civil public interest litigation case regarding water pollution (People's Procuratorate of Jinyun County, Zhejiang Province v. Jinyun Nanhe Electroplating Factory, Wang Chao, and other three defendants)   四、被告人王超、王益平污染环境案,浙江省缙云县人民检察院诉被告缙云县南河电镀厂、王超等4人水污染民事公益诉讼案
[Basic Facts] 【基本案情】
Defendant Wang Chao is the person in charge of Jinyun Nanhe Electroplating Factory in Zhejiang Province (hereinafter referred to as “Nanhe Electroplating Factory”). In the afternoon of May 23, 2018, Wang Chao arranged Wang Yiping, an employee of Nanhe Electroplating Factory, to discharge raw industrial waste water in the sewage treatment station of the Factory through underground pipes at night. From 21:00 on that night to 03:00 in the morning of May 24, according to instructions of Wang Chao, Wang Yiping directly discharged about 70 tons of industrial waste water including cyanide, copper, chromium, and nickel in the emergency tank of the factory to the Haoxi water areas. It was found upon monitoring that the content of chromium in the discharged pollutant was more than three times of the prescribed standard and the contents of nickel and copper were more than ten times of the prescribed standard. In addition, from August 2017 to January 2018, for the purpose of cutting down costs, Wang Chao delivered the electroplating waste sludge generated in the course of production to others for disposal at a price obviously lower than the normal disposal price at the market or knowing that others were not qualified for disposing of hazardous waste. It was identified by the environmental regulatory department that the waste sludge dumped and stacked in the open space was hazardous waste, weighing 1341.22 tons in total.
......
 被告人王超系浙江省缙云县南河电镀厂(以下简称南河电镀厂)负责人。2018年5月23日下午,王超安排员工王益平,在晚上将该厂污水处理站内未经净化处理的工业废水通过暗管排放。当晚21时起至24日凌晨3时,王益平按照王超指示,将厂房内应急池中含氰化物、铜、铬、镍等成分的约70吨工业废水通过暗管直接排放到厂区外好溪水域。经监测,排放污染物中铬含量超标3倍以上,镍、铜含量超标10倍以上。此外,2017年8月至2018年1月,王超为节约开支,以明显低于市场正常处置价格或明知他人不具备危险废物处理资质的情况下,将生产中产生的电镀废弃污泥交由他人处置,倾倒、堆放至福建省浦城县。经环保监管部门认定,倾倒、堆放于空地的泥状废弃物为危险废物,共1341.22吨。
......

Dear visitor, you are attempting to view a subscription-based section of lawinfochina.com. If you are already a subscriber, please login to enjoy access to our databases. If you are not a subscriber, you can pay for a document through Online Pay and read it immediately after payment.
An entity user can apply for a trial account or contact us for your purchase.
Tel: +86 (10) 82689699, +86 (10) 82668266 ext. 153
Mobile: +86 13311570713
Fax: +86 (10) 82668268
E-mail: info@chinalawinfo.com

 
您好:您现在要进入的是北大法律英文网会员专区。
如您是我们英文用户可直接 登录,进入会员专区查询您所需要的信息;如您还不是我们 的英文用户;您可通过网上支付进行单篇购买,支付成功后即可立即查看本篇内容;
单位用户可申请试用或者来电咨询购买。
Tel: +86 (10) 82689699, +86 (10) 82668266 ext. 153
Mobile: +86 13311570713
Fax: +86 (10) 82668268
E-mail:info@chinalawinfo.com
     
     
Scan QR Code and Read on Mobile
【法宝引证码】        北大法宝en.pkulaw.cn
Message: Please kindly comment on the present translation.
 
Confirmation Code:
Click image to reset code
 
  Translations are by lawinfochina.com, and we retain exclusive copyright over content found on our website except for content we publish as authorized by respective copyright owners or content that is publicly available from government sources.

Due to differences in language, legal systems, and culture, English translations of Chinese law are for reference purposes only. Please use the official Chinese-language versions as the final authority. Lawinfochina.com and its staff will not be directly or indirectly liable for use of materials found on this website.

We welcome your comments and suggestions, which assist us in continuing to improve the quality of our materials as we dynamically expand content.
 
Home | About us | Disclaimer | Chinese