Exxon Settles Pollution Case With Feds by Upgrading 8 Plants
Exxon Mobil settled air pollution violations with the Trump administration by paying a $2.5 million civil penalty and promising to spend $300 million…
October 31, 2017 at 03:38 PM
7 minute read
Exxon Mobil settled air pollution violations with the Trump administration by paying a $2.5 million civil penalty and promising to spend $300 million on pollution-control technology at several plants along the Gulf Coast.
Federal officials said Tuesday that the settlement will prevent thousands of tons of future pollution, including cancer-causing benzene, from eight petrochemical plants in Texas and Louisiana.
Some environmentalists attacked the settlement as insufficient punishment for years of violations by the giant oil company, while others said it addressed excess burning or flaring of gas, a key pollution problem at Exxon plants.
The deal settles allegations that Exxon violated the federal Clean Air Act by releasing excess harmful pollution after modifying flaring systems at five plants in Texas and three in Louisiana. The allegations date back more than a decade.
Exxon said it will install and increase efficiency of the flaring systems and monitor for benzene outside four of the plants.
The Justice Department and the state of Colorado announced a smaller settlement over pollution charges against Denver-based PDC Energy Inc. The company will spend about $20 million to upgrade equipment and pay a $2.5 million civil penalty to the federal government and Colorado. Up to $1 million of the state's share can be forgiven if the company performs certain environmental projects.
Patrick Traylor, a former energy industry lawyer hired by new EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt, said the settlements show that the Trump administration will enforce environmental laws “with prudence and with excellence.”
Traylor said the deals bring “two very well-respected companies” back into compliance with environmental laws. “Now they can continue their work of driving economic growth,” he said.
Environmentalists said the civil penalty against Exxon was far too small size given the duration and seriousness of the violations of the federal Clean Air Act.
“The fossil-fueled Trump administration letting Exxon Mobil off the hook with a slap of the wrist,” said Lindsay Meiman of 350.org, an environmental group that emphasizes lower emissions of greenhouse gases. She said the deal would embolden Exxon and other companies to continue to pollute.
However, the director of a group that successfully sued Exxon praised the deal — even while calling the $2.5 million penalty “weak” — because it forced Exxon to spend $300 million on reducing pollution.
“This enforcement case was in the works for many, many years” before the Trump administration, said Luke Metzger of Environment Texas. “It's a very good settlement” that addresses issues his group raised in a lawsuit over Exxon's refinery complex in Baytown, Texas, including excessive flaring of natural gas and inadequate monitoring of emissions.
In April, a federal judge ordered Exxon to pay the government nearly $20 million after Environment Texas and the Sierra Club sued over the release of tons of pollutants at Baytown. Exxon is appealing the ruling.
Exxon spokesman Aaron Stryk said in a statement that the company “worked closely” with EPA “to address concerns about flaring and opportunities to improve flaring efficiency at our U.S. chemical sites.” He said the $300 million investment would increase flare efficiency at the petrochemical plants, among the biggest in the world.
The plants are in Baytown, Beaumont and Mont Belvieu, Texas, and Baton Rouge, Louisiana. As part of the settlement, Exxon will spend $1 million to plant trees in Baytown.
Exxon Mobil Corp., based in Irving, Texas, reported last week that it has earned $11.3 billion so far in 2017, an 84 percent increase over the same period last year.
Federal officials said Tuesday that the settlement will prevent thousands of tons of future pollution, including cancer-causing benzene, from eight petrochemical plants in Texas and Louisiana.
Some environmentalists attacked the settlement as insufficient punishment for years of violations by the giant oil company, while others said it addressed excess burning or flaring of gas, a key pollution problem at Exxon plants.
The deal settles allegations that Exxon violated the federal Clean Air Act by releasing excess harmful pollution after modifying flaring systems at five plants in Texas and three in Louisiana. The allegations date back more than a decade.
Exxon said it will install and increase efficiency of the flaring systems and monitor for benzene outside four of the plants.
The Justice Department and the state of Colorado announced a smaller settlement over pollution charges against Denver-based PDC Energy Inc. The company will spend about $20 million to upgrade equipment and pay a $2.5 million civil penalty to the federal government and Colorado. Up to $1 million of the state's share can be forgiven if the company performs certain environmental projects.
Patrick Traylor, a former energy industry lawyer hired by new EPA Administrator Scott Pruitt, said the settlements show that the Trump administration will enforce environmental laws “with prudence and with excellence.”
Traylor said the deals bring “two very well-respected companies” back into compliance with environmental laws. “Now they can continue their work of driving economic growth,” he said.
Environmentalists said the civil penalty against Exxon was far too small size given the duration and seriousness of the violations of the federal Clean Air Act.
“The fossil-fueled Trump administration letting
However, the director of a group that successfully sued Exxon praised the deal — even while calling the $2.5 million penalty “weak” — because it forced Exxon to spend $300 million on reducing pollution.
“This enforcement case was in the works for many, many years” before the Trump administration, said Luke Metzger of Environment Texas. “It's a very good settlement” that addresses issues his group raised in a lawsuit over Exxon's refinery complex in Baytown, Texas, including excessive flaring of natural gas and inadequate monitoring of emissions.
In April, a federal judge ordered Exxon to pay the government nearly $20 million after Environment Texas and the Sierra Club sued over the release of tons of pollutants at Baytown. Exxon is appealing the ruling.
Exxon spokesman Aaron Stryk said in a statement that the company “worked closely” with EPA “to address concerns about flaring and opportunities to improve flaring efficiency at our U.S. chemical sites.” He said the $300 million investment would increase flare efficiency at the petrochemical plants, among the biggest in the world.
The plants are in Baytown, Beaumont and Mont Belvieu, Texas, and Baton Rouge, Louisiana. As part of the settlement, Exxon will spend $1 million to plant trees in Baytown.
This content has been archived. It is available through our partners, LexisNexis® and Bloomberg Law.
To view this content, please continue to their sites.
Not a Lexis Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
Not a Bloomberg Law Subscriber?
Subscribe Now
NOT FOR REPRINT
© 2024 ALM Global, LLC, All Rights Reserved. Request academic re-use from www.copyright.com. All other uses, submit a request to [email protected]. For more information visit Asset & Logo Licensing.
You Might Like
View AllHomegrown Texas Law Firms Expanded Outside the Lone Star State in 2024 As Out-of-State Firms Moved In
5 minute readEnergy Lawyers Working in Texas Expect Strong Demand to Continue in 2025 Across Energy Sector
6 minute readHouston Offshore Energy Firm Challenges Bonding Rule by Suing Insurers
4 minute readFreeport LNG Explosion: Zachary Industrial Evades $400M Damages Claim in Bankruptcy Court
2 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Tuesday Newspaper
- 2Judicial Ethics Opinion 24-85
- 3Decision of the Day: Administrative Court Finds Prevailing Wage Law Applies to Workers Who Cleaned NYC Subways During Pandemic
- 4Trailblazing Broward Judge Retires; Legacy Includes Bush v. Gore
- 5Federal Judge Named in Lawsuit Over Underage Drinking Party at His California Home
Who Got The Work
Michael G. Bongiorno, Andrew Scott Dulberg and Elizabeth E. Driscoll from Wilmer Cutler Pickering Hale and Dorr have stepped in to represent Symbotic Inc., an A.I.-enabled technology platform that focuses on increasing supply chain efficiency, and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The case, filed Oct. 2 in Massachusetts District Court by the Brown Law Firm on behalf of Stephen Austen, accuses certain officers and directors of misleading investors in regard to Symbotic's potential for margin growth by failing to disclose that the company was not equipped to timely deploy its systems or manage expenses through project delays. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Nathaniel M. Gorton, is 1:24-cv-12522, Austen v. Cohen et al.
Who Got The Work
Edmund Polubinski and Marie Killmond of Davis Polk & Wardwell have entered appearances for data platform software development company MongoDB and other defendants in a pending shareholder derivative lawsuit. The action, filed Oct. 7 in New York Southern District Court by the Brown Law Firm, accuses the company's directors and/or officers of falsely expressing confidence in the company’s restructuring of its sales incentive plan and downplaying the severity of decreases in its upfront commitments. The case is 1:24-cv-07594, Roy v. Ittycheria et al.
Who Got The Work
Amy O. Bruchs and Kurt F. Ellison of Michael Best & Friedrich have entered appearances for Epic Systems Corp. in a pending employment discrimination lawsuit. The suit was filed Sept. 7 in Wisconsin Western District Court by Levine Eisberner LLC and Siri & Glimstad on behalf of a project manager who claims that he was wrongfully terminated after applying for a religious exemption to the defendant's COVID-19 vaccine mandate. The case, assigned to U.S. Magistrate Judge Anita Marie Boor, is 3:24-cv-00630, Secker, Nathan v. Epic Systems Corporation.
Who Got The Work
David X. Sullivan, Thomas J. Finn and Gregory A. Hall from McCarter & English have entered appearances for Sunrun Installation Services in a pending civil rights lawsuit. The complaint was filed Sept. 4 in Connecticut District Court by attorney Robert M. Berke on behalf of former employee George Edward Steins, who was arrested and charged with employing an unregistered home improvement salesperson. The complaint alleges that had Sunrun informed the Connecticut Department of Consumer Protection that the plaintiff's employment had ended in 2017 and that he no longer held Sunrun's home improvement contractor license, he would not have been hit with charges, which were dismissed in May 2024. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Jeffrey A. Meyer, is 3:24-cv-01423, Steins v. Sunrun, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Greenberg Traurig shareholder Joshua L. Raskin has entered an appearance for boohoo.com UK Ltd. in a pending patent infringement lawsuit. The suit, filed Sept. 3 in Texas Eastern District Court by Rozier Hardt McDonough on behalf of Alto Dynamics, asserts five patents related to an online shopping platform. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Rodney Gilstrap, is 2:24-cv-00719, Alto Dynamics, LLC v. boohoo.com UK Limited.
Featured Firms
Law Offices of Gary Martin Hays & Associates, P.C.
(470) 294-1674
Law Offices of Mark E. Salomone
(857) 444-6468
Smith & Hassler
(713) 739-1250