EPA v. CHAMPION INTERNATIONAL CORP.-FT WORTH

Case summary

THIS ACTION HAS BEEN BROUGHT TO REQUIRE CHAMPION INTER- NATIONAL CORPORATION'S DAIRYPAK PLANT TO COMPLY WITH THE VOLATILE ORGANIC COMPOUND (VOC) EMISSION LIMITS AS SPECI- FIED BY THE TEXAS SIP. THE DAIRYPAK PLANT IS IN TARRANT COUNTY WHICH IS DESIGNATED A NONATTAINMENT AREA AND SUBJECT TO THE ADMINISTRATOR'S POST 1982 DATE ENFORCEMENT POLICY. CHAMPION OPERATES SIX FLEXOGRAPHIC PRINTING PRESSES WHICH PRINT CUSTOMERS LOGOS, ADVERTISING AND INGREDIENT LABELLING ON PAPERBOARD MILK AND JUICE CARTONS. CHAMPION USES BOTH WATER-BASED AND SOLVENT-BASED INKS IN ITS OPERATIONS BUT IS TRYING TO RAISE THE USE OF WATER-BASED INKS. *CAUSE OF ACTION* REGULATION V, SECT. 115.201 OF THE TEXAS SIP PROHIBITS THE OPERATION OF ANY FLEXOGRAPHIC PRINTING FACILITY THAT USES SOLVENT-CONTAINING INK UNLESS VOC EMISSIONS ARE LIMIT- ED BY ONE OF THE FOLLOWING METHODS: 1) THE VOLATILE FRACTION OF INK, AS IT IS APPLIED TO THE SUBSTRATE, CONTAINS 25% BY VOLUME OR LESS OF VOLATILE ORGANIC COMPOUND SOLVENT AND 75% BY VOLUME OR MORE OF WATER; 2) THE INK AS IT IS APPLIED TO THE SUBSTRATE, LESS WATER, CONTAINS 60% BY VOLUME OR MORE OF NONVOLATILE MATERIAL; OR 3) A CARBON ADSORPTION OR INCINERATOR SYSTEM IS OPER- ATED TO REDUCE THE VOLATILE ORGANIC COMPOUND EMISSIONS FROM AN EFFECTIVE CAPTURE SYSTEM BY AT LEAST 90% BY WEIGHT. THE DESIGN AND OPERATION OF THE CAPTURE SYSTEM MUST BE CON- SISTENT WITH GOOD ENGINEERING PRACTICE, AND SHALL BE RE- QUIRED TO PROVIDE FOR AN OVERALL REDUCTION OF AT LEAST 60% BY WEIGHT FOR A FLEXOGRAPHIC PRINTING PROCESS. SECT. 115.202 OF REGULATION V PROVIDES FOR AN EXEMPTION FROM THESE REQUIREMENTS IF A FLEXOGRAPHIC FACILITY EMITS, WHEN UNCONTROLLED, LESS THAN 100 TONS PER YEAR OF VOC. BASED UPON DATA FROM DAIRYPAK, FOR THE PERIOD FROM JANUARY THROUGH OCTOBER, 1983 AND EXTRAPOLATING TO THE END OF THE YEAR, THE PLANT EMITTED APPROXIMATELY 131 TONS PER YEAR AND IS THEREFORE NOT EXEMPT FROM THE REQUIREMENT OF SECT. 115.201. CHAMPION DOES NOT MAINTAIN DAILY RECORDS OF INK USAGE AT THE FORT WORTH PLANT BUT KEEPS RECORDS OF INK AND SOLVENT USE ON A MONTHLY BASIS. COMPANY DATA RECEIVED ON 11/28/83 SHOWS THAT THE AVERAGE INK FORMULATION AS APPLIED TO THE SUBSTRATE FOR THE MONTHS OF JAN. THROUGH OCT/83, OVER ALL PRINTING LINES USED DURING THIS TIME PERIOD, WAS 68.5% BY VOLUME OF VOC. THE REGULATION LIMIT FOR VOC CONTENT UNDER THE FIRST MODE OF CONTROLLING VOC'S IS 25%. THE SECOND AL- TERNATE MEANS OF CONTROLLING VOC EMISSIONS REQUIRES THAT, NOT INCLUDING WATER, THE INKS CONTAIN 60% BY VOLUME OF NON- VOLATILE MATERIAL (SOLIDS). THE ACTUAL VOLUME OF NON- VOLATILE MATERIAL (LESS WATER) DURING THIS PERIOD WAS 25.9%. EPA ISSUED A 'NOV' ON 1/30/84 BASED ON THE ABOVE DATA. ON 3/20/84, EPA AND CHAMPION MET TO DISCUSS THE VIOLATION AND ON 5/29/84, EPA ONCE AGAIN REQUESTED INFORMATION RELATING TO COMPLIANCE WITH SECT. 115.201. CHAMPION'S RE- PONSE OF 7/7/84, CONTAINING DATA FROM MARCH AND APRIL, INDICATED A CONTINUING VIOLATION OF SECT.115.201 BY THE DAIRYPAK PLANT MORE THAN 30 DAYS AFTER THE NOV WAS ISSUED. THE DATA SHOWED THAT THE AVERAGE INK FOR MARCH AND APRIL CONTAINED 55.7% VOC AND 31.8% BY VOLUME OF NON-VOLATILE MATERIAL (LESS WATER). DAIRYPAK HAS NOT INSTALLED INCINERATORS OR CARBON ABSORP- TION EQUIPMENT AND SO DOES NOT MEET THE FINAL ALTERNATIVE SET OUT IN THE REGULATIONS FOR CONTROLLING VOC. *STATE INVOLVEMENT* CHAMPION SUBMITTED A COMPLIANCE SCHEDULE TO THE TEXAS AIR CONTROL BOARD ('TACB') AND REQUESTE

Defendants (1)

• CHAMPION INTERNATIONAL CORP.Named in complaintNamed in settlement

Facilities (1)

• DAIRYPAK DIVISION BLUE RIDGE PAPER PROD

  1901 WINDSOR PL., FORT WORTH, TX, 76110

  Registry ID: 110001868701

Statutes cited

• CAA 110 — Implementation Plan for National Primary and Secondary Ambient Air Quality Standards
• CAA 113B — Clean Air Act

Enforcement conclusions (1)

• CHAMPION INTERNATIONAL CORPentered 1987-04-16

  Primary law: CAA

  Federal penalty: $67,500

Timeline (8 milestones)

• 1984-09-28Referred To Headquarters
• 1984-10-30Referred To Dept Of Justice
• 1985-07-03Referred TO U.S. Attorney
• 1985-07-26Complaint Filed With Court
• 1987-04-16Final Order Lodged
• 1987-04-16Final Order Entered
• 1987-04-16Concluded
• 1990-07-03Enforcement Action Closed