Industrial Finishing Company and Director Fined $42,000 for Environmental Protection Act Violations

Table of Contents

1. Content
2. Related Topics

Convicted -Klinec Electric Services and Manufacturing Limited and Pal Klinec

Court Location -Windsor

Description of Offence -

• The convictions against Klinec Electric Services and Manufacturing Limited are for:
  • Failing to comply with the conditions of a ministry approval by failing to submit information to the ministry as required
  • Failing to comply with the conditions of a ministry Order by failing to submit information to the ministry as required
  • Failing to comply with a court Order by failing to submit information to the ministry as required by a ministry Order

• The convictions against Pal Klinec, as an officer or director of the company, are for:
  • Failing to take all reasonable care to prevent the company from contravening a ministry Order
  • Failing to take all reasonable care to prevent the company from contravening a court Order

Date of Offence -During the period beginning on or about November 25, 2020, and ending on or about January 7, 2022.

Date of Conviction - February 29, 2024

Penalty Imposed -

• Klinec Electric Services and Manufacturing Limited was convicted of three violations (counts) under the Environmental Protection Act (EPA), fined $37,000 plus a victim fine surcharge (VFS) of $9,250 and given 30 days to pay.

• Pal Klinec was convicted of two violations offences under the EPA, fined $5,000 plus a VFS of $1,250, and given 30 days to pay.

• As part of sentencing, a court Order was issued to the defendants under Section 190 of the EPA requiring them to, within three months of conviction, submit to the ministry a test protocol for source testing that meets the requirements of the 2008 ministry approval.

Background -

• Klinec Electric Services and Manufacturing Limited operates an industrial manufacturing facility in Windsor, Ontario, that finishes products for the automotive manufacturing sector. Pal Klinec is the sole director and officer of the company.

• In July 2008, the company was issued a ministry approval for multiple sources of discharges to the atmosphere.

• One of the conditions of the approval required the company to, within three months, submit a test protocol to the ministry including pre-test information for source testing.

• Following a ministry inspection in 2011, it was determined that the company had not submitted the test protocol as required. As a result, a ministry Order was issued requiring the company to submit the test protocol by August 2011. The company did not comply with the Order by the deadline.

• Following continued non-compliance with both the 2008 ministry approval and 2011 ministry Order, an investigation was initiated. In June 2014, the company pled guilty to several charges related to the non-compliance.

• As part of the 2014 sentencing, a court Order was issued requiring the company to come into compliance with the ministry Order within six months of conviction.

• In November 2020, the ministry conducted an inspection and determined that the test protocol had still not been submitted to the ministry.

• The ministry's Environmental Investigations and Enforcement Branch investigated and laid charges related to the continued non-compliance which resulted in the convictions.

Related Topics