Skip to main content
07-1987-0016JudicialClosedFY 1987· Region 07

EPA v. FORD-CLAYCOMO

Litigated No Penalty

Case summary

NOTICE OF VIOLATION. FORD RESPONDED TO EPA'S NOV BY STATING THAT ITS ALTERNATE COMPLIANCE PLAN FOR COMPLIANCE WITH THE VOC REGULATION FOR AUTO COATING HAD BEEN APPROVED BY MISSOURI. FORD ARGUES THAT THEY ARE THEREFORE IN COMPLIANCE WITH THE SIP. THE REGION'S POSITION IS THAT FORD HAS NOT DEMONSTRA- TED COMPLIANCE WITH THE ALTERNATE PLAN, AND IT IS NOT PART OF THE SIP UNTIL APPROVED BY EPA. A RECENT CASE IN OHIO (U.S. V. DIVERSITECH) INDICATES THAT ALTERNATE PLANS APPROVED BY A STATE BECAME PART OF THE SIP UPON STATE APPROVAL. OECM IS CONSIDERING WHETHER TO REQUEST HEARING. THIS IS A CLEAN AIR ACT CASE WHICH ALLEGES FORD MOTOR COMPANY IS IN VIOLATION OF THE MISSOURI STATE IMPLEMENTATION PLAN (SIP) FOR VOCS (10 CSR 10-2.230) AT ITS KANSAS CITY ASSEMBLY PLANT. THIS PLANT HAS BOTH A TRUCK AND A CAR ASSEMBLY LINE AND PAINT BOOTHS FOR EACH, WHEREIN SOLVENTS EVAPORATE RELEASING VOCS. CALCULATIONS OF PRODUCTION DATA SUBMITTED BY FORD SHOWS VIOLATIONS OF THE VOC EMISSION LIMITS. FORD HAD SUBMITTED TO THE STATE AGENCY, PURSUANT TO THE REGULATION, AN ALTERNATE COMPLIANCE PLAN (ACP) WHICH ALLOWS FORDS TO BUBBLE ITS EMISSIONS FROM CERTAIN POINTS ON THE TWO POINT LINES. THE ACP DOES NOT COVER ALL REGULA- TED EMISSIONS FROM THE PLANT. ONE MAIN ISSUE IN THE CASE IS THE SIP. FORD PRESENTED CERTAIN DATA TO EPA TO GAIN APPROV- AL AND LATER CLAIMED DIFFERENT DATA IN ITS ACP APPLICATION TO THE STATE. ANOTHER ISSUE IS WHETHER OR NOT THE ACP IS REALLY AN ALTERNATE EMISSION LIMIT (AEL). EPA CAN SHOW IT IS AN AEL AND THEREFORE, IT SHOULD HAVE BEEN SUBMITTED TO EPA FOR APPROVAL AS A SIP REVISION, AND FORD'S PLAN, THEREFORE DOES NOT MEET THE REQUIREMENTS OF THE MISSOURI REGULATION TO BE CLASSIFIED AS AN ACP. EPA CAN ALSO SHOW FORD IS IN VIOLATION OF ITS SO-CALLED ACP LIMITS. THIS CASE HAS BEEN THROUGH THE WRITTEN DISCOVERY AND DEPOSITON DIS- COVERY STAGE. BOTH PARTIES ARE PREPARING DISPOSITIVE MOTIONS TO THE COURT AT THIS TIME (1/90).

Defendants (1)

  • FORD-CLAYCOMONamed in complaint

Facilities (2)

  • FORD MOTOR COMPANY KANSAS CITY ASSEMBLY PLANT

    8121 HIGHWAY 69, CLAYCOMO, MO, 641190009

    Registry ID: 110017435783

  • FORD MOTOR COMPANY KANSAS CITY ASSEMBLY PLANT

    8121 HIGHWAY 69, CLAYCOMO, MO, 641190009

    Registry ID: 110017435783

Statutes cited

  • CAA 114Record keeping, Inspection, Information Request
  • CAA 110Implementation Plan for National Primary and Secondary Ambient Air Quality Standards

Enforcement conclusions (1)

  • **PROPOSED SETTLEMENT**

    Primary law: CAA

Timeline (7 milestones)

  • 1987-06-05Enforcement Action Data Entered
  • 1988-06-02Referred To Dept Of Justice
  • 1988-10-04Complaint Filed With Court
  • 1990-09-28Final Order Lodged
  • 1990-09-28Final Order Entered
  • 1990-09-28Concluded
  • 1990-09-28Enforcement Action Closed

Case metadata

EPA activity ID
42856
Case number
07-1987-0016
DOJ docket
90-5-2-1-1197
Lead agency
EPA
HQ division
AIR
Branch
ATP
EPA region
07
Multimedia
No
Voluntary self-disclosure
No
Primary statute
Record keeping, Inspection, Information Request

Sourced verbatim from EPA ECHO Enforcement Case Report for case 07-1987-0016 . Bulk data: ICIS-FEC download summary.

This is legal information, not legal advice. Laws vary by jurisdiction and change frequently. Always verify current law with official sources and consult a licensed attorney in your jurisdiction for advice on your specific situation.