EPA v. CHRYSLER CORP/WARREN

Case summary

BRIEF SYNOPSIS OF THE CASE CHRYSLER CORPORATION OWNS AND OPERATES A NUMBER OF LARGE INDUSTRIAL FACILITIES WHICH ARE SUBJECT TO THE CATE- GORICAL PRETREATMENT STANDARDS FOR ELECTROPLATING, BECAUSE THEY CONTAIN ELECTROPLATING OPERATIONS AND DISCHARGE WASTE- WATER TO PUBLICLY OWNED TREATMENT WORKS (POTW'S). ONE OF THESE PLANTS IS THE WARREN TRUCK ASSEMBLY PLANT, WHICH IS USED FOR THE ASSEMBLY OF LIGHT-DUTY TRUCKS FROM PARTS MANU- FACTURED ELSEWHERE. THE WARREN PLANT IS DESIGNED TO PRODUCE 59 JOBS PER HOUR, AND EMPLOYS APPROXIMATELY 2,500 PEOPLE. CHRYSLER HAS SUBMITTED BASELINE MONITORING REPORTS AND OTHER DOCUMENTS CONCERNING THE WARREN TRUCK ASSEMBLY PLANT WHICH INDICATE THAT THE PLANT IS EXCEEDING THE ELECTROPLAT- ING PRETREATMENT STANDARDS FOR NICKEL, ZINC, LEAD, AND TOTAL METALS BY SIGNIFICANT AMOUNTS, AND WILL CONTINUE TO DO SO UNTIL ITS WASTEWATER TREATMENT SYSTEM IS COMPLETED ON JANU- ARY 1, 1986. REGION V BELIEVES THAT CHRYSLER'S FAILURE TO ACHIEVE COMPLIANCE RESULTS FROM ITS FAILURE TO TAKE APPRO- PRIATE ACTION FOR ALMOST A YEAR AFTER IT BECAME CLEAR THAT THE ELECTROPLATING STANDARDS WOULD APPLY TO ITS FACILITIES. COMPLIANCE SCHEDULES SUBMITTED BY CHRYSLER INDICATE THAT IT WILL MISS THE COMPLIANCE DATE BY ALMOST 18 MONTHS. FEDERAL ENFORCEMENT IS APPROPRIATE IN THESE CASES, BE- CAUSE MICHIGAN'S APPROVED PRETREATMENT PROGRAM WAS RECENTLY REMANDED TO EPA, AND BECAUSE MICHIGAN PRESENTLY DOES NOT HAVE AUTHORITY TO ENFORCE CATEGORICAL PRETREATMENT STAN- DARDS. MOREOVER, FEDERAL ENFORCEMENT IS NECESSARY TO ENSURE CONSISTENCY WITH MAJOR COMPETITORS. MICHIGAN IS SUPPORTIVE OF EPA'S EFFORTS TO TAKE ENFORCEMENT ACTIONS AGAINST MAJOR NONCOMPLYING FACILITIES LIKE GENERAL MOTORS AND CHRYSLER. AS YOU ARE AWARE, REGION V PREVIOUSLY PREPARED PRE- TREATMENT REFERRALS AGAINST GENERAL MOTORS CORPORATION. VIGOROUS PROSECUTION OF AN ENFORCEMENT ACTION AGAINST CHRYS- LER IS NECESSARY TO CONVEY THE MESSAGE THAT EPA INTENDS TO CARRY OUT ITS PRETREATMENT PROGRAM. REGION V WILL COMMIT SUFFICIENT RESOURCES TO OBTAIN AN ENVIRONMENTALLY BENEFICIAL RESOLUTION OF THIS MATTERR. DUE TO THE LARGE EXTENT OF THE SAMPLING PROGRAM WHICH MAY BE NECESSARY, REGION V MAY PROB- ABLY NEED TO ENLIST THE ASSISTANCE OF THE NATIONAL ENFORCEME MENT INVESTIGATIONS CENTER (NEIC), PERHAPS AS EARLY AS AUGUST 1984. CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS REFERRAL OF THIS MATTER IS NECESSARY TO ENSURE CONSIS- TENT COMPLIANCE WITH PRETREATMENT STANDARDS BY CHRYSLER AND OTHER INDUSTRIAL DISCHARGERS.

Defendants (1)

• CHRYSLER CORPORATIONNamed in complaint

Facilities (4)

• DAIMLER CHRYSLER CORPORATION WARREN TRUCK ASSEMBLY PLANT 1

  21500 MOUND ROAD, WARREN, MI, 48091

  Registry ID: 110000405393

• DAIMLER CHRYSLER CORPORATION WARREN TRUCK ASSEMBLY PLANT 1

  21500 MOUND ROAD, WARREN, MI, 48091

  Registry ID: 110000405393

• DAIMLER CHRYSLER CORPORATION WARREN TRUCK ASSEMBLY PLANT 1

  21500 MOUND ROAD, WARREN, MI, 48091

  Registry ID: 110000405393

• DAIMLER CHRYSLER CORPORATION WARREN TRUCK ASSEMBLY PLANT 1

  21500 MOUND ROAD, WARREN, MI, 48091

  Registry ID: 110000405393

Statutes cited

• CWA 301/307 — Effluent Limitations - NPDES Toxic & Pretreatment Effluent Standards
• CWA 318 — Aquiculture

Timeline (5 milestones)

• 1984-08-14Referred To Headquarters
• 1984-09-12Referred To Dept Of Justice
• 1985-04-04Complaint Filed With Court
• 1985-05-31Enforcement Action Closed
• 1985-05-31Concluded