EPA v. DANNENBAUM PAINT COMPANY

Case summary

THIS CASE, WHICH INVOLVES A VIOLATION OF SECTION 114 OF THE CLEAN AIR ACT (THE ACT ), STEMS FROM AN ENFORCEMENT INITIATIVE BY EPA REGION 9 INVOLVING THE REGULATION IN VARIOUS CALIFORNIA AIR QUALITY MANAGEMENT DISTRICTS OF THE AMOUNT OF VOLATILE ORGANIC COMPOUNDS ( VOCS ) IN ARCHITEC- TURAL COATINGS. VOCS, WHEN EMITTED INTO THE ATMOSPHERE, REACT WITH SUNLIGHT TO FORM OZONE POLLUTION OR SMOG. THE FEDRALLY-ENFORCEABLE STATE IMPLEMENTATION PLAN ( SIP ) FOR CALIFORNIA CONTAINS RULES IN APPROXIMATELY TWENTY AIR POLLUTION CONTROL DISTRICT WHICH PROHIBIT THE SALE OR USE OF NON-FLAT NON-SPECIALTY ARCHITECTURAL COATINGS WITH A VOC CONTENT IN EXCESS OF 250 GRAMS PER LITER ( GPL ). A COMPLETE LIST OF THE RELEVANT DISTRICT RULES AND THEIR EFFECTIVE DATES IS INCLUDED AS ATTACHMENT A. IN MAY 1987, EPA REGION 9 SENT INFORMATION DEMANDS, PURSUANT TO SECTION 114 OF THE ACT, 42 U.S.C. 7414, TO APPROXIMATELY 65 COATING MANUFACTURERS WHO MARKET ARCHITEC- TRURAL COATINGS IN CALIFORNIA. ROY ANDERSON PAINT COMPANY ( ANDERSON ) WAS AMONG THOSE MANUFACTURERS WHO RECEIVED INFORMATION DEMANDS. ANDERSON'S RESPONSE TO THE INFORMATION DEMAND DEMONSTRATED THAT IT WAS IN VIOLATION OF THE ARCHITEC TURAL COATING RULE IN THE BAY AREA AIR QUALITY MANAGEMENT DISTRICT ( BAAQMD ). BASED ON THE RESPONSES TO THE INFORMATION DEMANDS, IN JUNE 1987, EPA REGION 9 ISSUED NOTICES OF VIOLATION ( NOVS ) TO APPROXIMATELY 40 OF THE ORIGINAL 65 MANUFACTURERS, INCLUD- ING ANDERSON, FOR VIOLATIONS OF THE ARCHITECTURAL COATING RULES IN THE VARIOUS AIR POLLUTION CONTROL DISTRICTS IN CALIFORNIA. EPA REGION 9 ALSO ISSUED A SECOND INFORMATION DEMAND PURSUANT TO SECTION 114 TO THOSE MANUFACTURERS WHO HAD RECEIVED NOVS. ANDERSON RECEIVED THIS SECOND INFORMA- TION DEMAND, BUT FAILED TO RESPOND AS REQUIRED.

Defendants (1)

• DANNENBAUM PAINT COMPANYNamed in complaint

Facilities (1)

• ROY ANDERSON PAINT CO

  645 TEXAS STREET, SAN FRANCISCO, CA, 94107

  Registry ID: 110010595588

Statutes cited

• CAA 114 — Record keeping, Inspection, Information Request

Enforcement conclusions (1)

• **PROPOSED SETTLEMENT**

  Primary law: CAA

Timeline (7 milestones)

• 1987-12-30Referred To Dept Of Justice
• 1988-05-02Referred TO U.S. Attorney
• 1988-06-10Complaint Filed With Court
• 1988-11-01Concluded
• 1988-11-01Enforcement Action Closed
• 1988-11-01Final Order Lodged
• 1988-11-01Final Order Entered