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
© 2025 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 AllO'Melveny, White & Case, Skadden Beef Up in Texas With Energy, Real Estate Lateral Partner Hires
5 minute readIn Novel Oil and Gas Feud, 5th Circuit Gives Choice of Arbitration Venue
4 minute readNo Two Wildfires Alike: Lawyers Take Different Legal Strategies in California
5 minute readEnergy Lawyers Field Client Questions as Trump Issues Executive Orders on Industry Funding, Oversight
6 minute readTrending Stories
- 1Morgan Lewis Says Global Clients Are Noticing ‘Expanded Capacity’ After Kramer Merger in Paris
- 2'Reverse Robin Hood': Capital One Swarmed With Class Actions Alleging Theft of Influencer Commissions in January
- 3Hawaii wildfire victims spared from testifying after last-minute deal over $4B settlement
- 4How We Won It: Latham Secures Back-to-Back ITC Patent Wins for California Companies
- 5Meta agrees to pay $25 million to settle lawsuit from Trump after Jan. 6 suspension
Who Got The Work
J. Brugh Lower of Gibbons has entered an appearance for industrial equipment supplier Devco Corporation in a pending trademark infringement lawsuit. The suit, accusing the defendant of selling knock-off Graco products, was filed Dec. 18 in New Jersey District Court by Rivkin Radler on behalf of Graco Inc. and Graco Minnesota. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Zahid N. Quraishi, is 3:24-cv-11294, Graco Inc. et al v. Devco Corporation.
Who Got The Work
Rebecca Maller-Stein and Kent A. Yalowitz of Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer have entered their appearances for Hanaco Venture Capital and its executives, Lior Prosor and David Frankel, in a pending securities lawsuit. The action, filed on Dec. 24 in New York Southern District Court by Zell, Aron & Co. on behalf of Goldeneye Advisors, accuses the defendants of negligently and fraudulently managing the plaintiff's $1 million investment. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Vernon S. Broderick, is 1:24-cv-09918, Goldeneye Advisors, LLC v. Hanaco Venture Capital, Ltd. et al.
Who Got The Work
Attorneys from A&O Shearman has stepped in as defense counsel for Toronto-Dominion Bank and other defendants in a pending securities class action. The suit, filed Dec. 11 in New York Southern District Court by Bleichmar Fonti & Auld, accuses the defendants of concealing the bank's 'pervasive' deficiencies in regards to its compliance with the Bank Secrecy Act and the quality of its anti-money laundering controls. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Arun Subramanian, is 1:24-cv-09445, Gonzalez v. The Toronto-Dominion Bank et al.
Who Got The Work
Crown Castle International, a Pennsylvania company providing shared communications infrastructure, has turned to Luke D. Wolf of Gordon Rees Scully Mansukhani to fend off a pending breach-of-contract lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 25 in Michigan Eastern District Court by Hooper Hathaway PC on behalf of The Town Residences LLC, accuses Crown Castle of failing to transfer approximately $30,000 in utility payments from T-Mobile in breach of a roof-top lease and assignment agreement. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Susan K. Declercq, is 2:24-cv-13131, The Town Residences LLC v. T-Mobile US, Inc. et al.
Who Got The Work
Wilfred P. Coronato and Daniel M. Schwartz of McCarter & English have stepped in as defense counsel to Electrolux Home Products Inc. in a pending product liability lawsuit. The court action, filed Nov. 26 in New York Eastern District Court by Poulos Lopiccolo PC and Nagel Rice LLP on behalf of David Stern, alleges that the defendant's refrigerators’ drawers and shelving repeatedly break and fall apart within months after purchase. The case, assigned to U.S. District Judge Joan M. Azrack, is 2:24-cv-08204, Stern v. Electrolux Home Products, Inc.
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