ELR Citation: ELR 20785
No(s). CA4-87-312-A (N.D. Tex. Jan 2, 1991)

The court holds that a defense contractor's compliance with a Texas Air Control Board's order concerning volatile organic compound (VOC) emissions at an Air Force production facility is not the equivalent of compliance with the Texas state implementation plan (SIP). The order allowed the defendant to average VOC emissions plantwide to determine whether the emissions complied with the SIP and allowed the defendant to include solvent washings in its calculations of VOCs emitted per gallon of surface coating used. The court holds that the order is inconsistent with the SIP because the SIP requires each distinct surface coating operation to comply with its VOC emission limits. Further, the court finds that solvents are not part of the surface coating applied. The court notes that the board's order would require approval of the Environmental Protection Agency, because it raises the emissions limitations set by the SIP. The court denies summary judgment of the defendant's counterclaim for indemnification, holding that a genuine issue of material fact exists concerning the defendant's entitlement to this relief. Finally, the court orders the defendant to comply with the SIP in its maskant and adhesive prime processes within three years.

[A prior decision in this litigation is published at 18 ELR 21297.]

Counsel for Plaintiff
Linda C. Anderson
Environmental Enforcement Section, Environment and Natural Resources Division
U.S. Department of Justice, Washington DC 20530
(202) 514-2000

Wayne Hughes, Ass't U.S. Attorney
10th and Lamar Streets, No. 310, Fort Worth TX 76102-3674
(817) 334-3291

Ashley Doherty
Environmental Defense Section, Environment and Natural Resources Division
U.S. Department of Justice, Washington DC 20530
(202) 514-2000

Counsel for Defendant
Michael Lowenberg, Antonie Wells Whittier
Akin, Gump, Strauss, Hauer & Feld
4100 First City Center, 1700 Pacific Ave., Dallas TX 75201-4618
(214) 969-2800