EPA v. CONOCO

Case summary

NATURE OF CASE CONOCO CHEMICALS COMPANY (CONOCO) OWNS AND OPERATES A PLANT IN OKLAHOMA CITY, OKLAHOMA WHICH MANUFACTURES POLYVINYL CHLORIDE (PVC) ONLY BY THE SUSPENSION PROCESS. THE PVC PLANT REPORTEDLY FIRST STARTED OPERATION IN APRIL OF 1971 AND SUBSEQUENTLY HAS COMPLETED TWO SEPARATE EXPANSIONS TO DATE. THIS SUIT IS REQUESTED PURSUANT TO SECTION 113(B)(3) AND (B)(4) OF THE CLEAN AIR ACT. CAUSE OF ACTION FROM APRIL 5,1978 THROUGH MARCH 23,1980, CONOCO'S OKLAHOMA CITY CHEMICAL (PVC) PLANT IDENTIFIED A TOTAL OF 6 VINYL CHLORIDE (VC) DISCHARGES FOR A 166,000 POUNDS OF VC DISCHARGED. CONOCO CHARECTERIZES THESE DISCHARGES AS EMERGENCIES , AN EXCEPTION ALLOWED BY APPLICABLE NESHAP REGULATIONS, TO THE NO DISCHARGE BAN ON THE DISCHARGE OF THIS HAZARDOUS AIR POLLUTANT. REGION 6 DISAGREES, AND VIEWS THEM AS PREVENTABLE DISCHARGES WHICH ARE PROHIBITED. FIVE OF THESE DISCHARGES OF VC WERE REPORTED BY CONOCO AS EMERGENCIES UNDER 40 CFR 61.65(A). REGION 6 FIRST INITIATED INVESTIGATION OF THESE 5 DISCHARGES BY ISSUING A LETTER TO THE OKLAHOMA CITY FACILITY UNDER SECTION 114 OF THE CLEAN AIR ACT, DATED MAY 12, 1981. CONOCO RESPONDED BY LETTER DATED SEPTEMBER 15,1981, AND IDENTIFIED A SIXTH VC DISCHARGE WHICH HAD OCCURRED ON APRIL 5, 1978, AND HAD NOT BEEN REPORTED PREVIOUSLY. FOR THE PURPOSE OF THIS REPORT, IT IS RECOMMENDED THAT WE PURSUE ENFORCEMENT ACTION ON ALL 6 OF THE VC DISCHARGES. WE ALSO RECOMMEND THAT THE ENFORCEMENT ACTION INCLUDE THE FAILURE OF CONOCO TO REPORT (WITHIN 10 DAYS) THE APRIL 5, 1978 DISCHARGE WHICH WAS FIRST IDENTIFIED OVER 3 YEARS LATER ON SEPTEMBER 15, 1981 IN THEIR RESPONSE TO THE SECTION 114 REQUEST OF REGION 6. RESOURCE REQUIREMENT THIS CASE SHOULD INVOLVE NO EXTRAORDINARY RESOURCE REQUIREMENT. ISSUES OF NATIONAL OR PRECEDENTIAL SIGNIFICANCE IT WOULD BE POOR PRECEDENCE TO ALLOW CONOCO TO ESTABLISH NO LEGAL RESPONSIBILITY FOR NEGLIGENT EMPLOYEE ERROR AND MECHANICAL FAILURE WHICH CAUSED VC DISCHARGES, CONSIDERING THE LARGE QUANTITY OF VC DISCHARGED. IT WOULD BE A SERIOUS MISTAKE FOR THE AGENCY TO IGNORE THE FAILURE OF CONOCO TO REPORT A SIGNIFICANT DISCHARGE FOR OVER 3 YEARS. THE APPLICABILITY OF 40 CFR 61.65(A) IS ALSO BEING QUESTIONED. CONOCO HAS STATED THAT 61.65(A) APPLIES TO RELIEF VALVES ON EQUIPMENT IN VINYL CHLORIDE (VC) SERVICE, BUT THAT THEY DO NOT BELIEVE THE LANGUAGE OF THIS STANDARD APPLIES TO VC DISCHARGES SOLELY FROM RUPTURE DISKS. THE INTENT OF 61.65(A) IS CONSIDERED BY REGION 6 TO BE APPLICABLE TO RELIEF DISCHARGES OF VC AND THEREFORE, TO ANY SAFETY RELIEF DEVICE ON EQUIPMENT IN VC SERVICE, EXCLUDING MANUAL VENT VALVES WHICH ARE COVERED BY OTHER STANDARDS. JUSTIFICATION THE CONOCO FACILITY HAS BEEN THE BIGGEST DISCHARGER OF VC IN THE LOCAL AREA. THIS PARTICULAR POLLUTANT IS KNOWN TO CAUSE LIVER CANCER. FURTHER, HEADQUARTERS HAS PREVIOUSLY DETERMINED THAT ADMINISTRATIVE ORDERS ARE NOT SUFFICIENT FOR NESHAP VIOLATIONS.

Defendants (1)

• CONOCO, INC.Named in complaintNamed in settlement

Facilities (1)

• GEORGIA GULF CHEMICALS & VINYLS L.L.C.

  5200 SOUTHEAST 59TH STREET, OKLAHOMA CITY, OK, 731354536

  Registry ID: 110000454062

Statutes cited

• CAA 112 — Hazardous Air Pollutants

Enforcement conclusions (1)

• CONOCO, INC.entered 1985-08-21

  Primary law: CAA

  Federal penalty: $125,000

Timeline (8 milestones)

• 1983-03-31Referred To Headquarters
• 1983-06-10Referred To Dept Of Justice
• 1983-08-05Referred TO U.S. Attorney
• 1983-08-10Complaint Filed With Court
• 1985-08-21Final Order Lodged
• 1985-08-21Final Order Entered
• 1985-08-21Concluded
• 1990-10-23Enforcement Action Closed