Opinion ID: 700931
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Excessive Fines Argument

Text: 15 The Defendants also claim that the civil penalty of $1.5 million for their RCRA violations is excessive and thus violative of the Eighth Amendment. The Eighth Amendment states that [e]xcessive bail shall not be required, nor excessive fines imposed, nor cruel and unusual punishments inflicted. U.S. Const. amend. VIII. 16 The district court noted that prior case law had delineated a set of factors that aid a court in determining whether it is appropriate to impose a RCRA civil penalty and if so, how much. J.A. at 145-46; see United States EPA v. Environmental Waste Control, Inc. (EWC), 710 F.Supp. 1172, 1242-45 (N.D.Ind.1989), aff'd, 917 F.2d 327 (7th Cir.1990), cert. denied, 499 U.S. 975 (1991); T & S Brass & Bronze Works, Inc., 681 F.Supp. at 322. Moreover, the court recognized that RCRA provided for a civil penalty in amount not to exceed $25,000 for each day of violation, 42 U.S.C. Sec. 6928(g). J.A. at 145. After applying these factors to this case, the district court determined that a civil penalty of $1,500,000, which was less than $400 per day of violation, was appropriate. J.A. at 146. The district court noted that the Defendants had raised an Excessive Fines Clause defense to the penalty, and after comparing the amount of this penalty with the civil penalties imposed in other environmental cases, the court determined that the penalty was not excessive. J.A. at 147-48; see also EWC, 710 F.Supp. at 1245 (imposing RCRA civil penalty of $2,000 per day for total of $2,778,000 when penalties totalling over $60,000,000 could have been rendered); T & S Brass, 681 F.Supp. at 322 (imposing RCRA civil penalty of $1,000 per day for total of $194,000 when penalties totalling $4,850,000 could have been rendered). 17 Assuming without holding that a RCRA civil penalty is subject to the Excessive Fines Clause, see Austin v. United States, 113 S.Ct. 2801, 2805-06 (1993); Browning-Ferris Indus. of Vermont, Inc. v. Kelco Disposal, Inc., 492 U.S. 257, 266-68 (1989), and recognizing that a reviewing court should afford deference to legislative judgments concerning appropriate sanctions for the conduct at issue, see Browning-Ferris Indus., 492 U.S. at 281 (Brennan, J., concurring); id. at 301 (O'Connor, J., concurring in part and dissenting in part), we conclude that the district court did not impose an excessive civil penalty on the Defendants for their RCRA violations. Given that the Defendants were potentially in violation of RCRA for over 3,900 days and given that a maximum statutory penalty would have totalled over $90,000,000 dollars, we do not think the district court's $1,500,000 civil penalty was excessive.