Advertisement

May 24, 2013

Oil Company Pleads Guilty to Clean Air Act and Obstruction Crimes in Louisiana

WASHINGTON — Pelican Refining Company LLC, pleaded guilty today to felony violations of the Clean Air Act and to obstruction of justice charges in federal court in Lafayette, La., announced Stephanie A. Finley, U.S. attorney for the Western District of Louisiana and Ignacia S. Moreno, assistant attorney General of the Environment and Natural Resources Division of the Department of Justice, and Cynthia Giles, assistant administrator for the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency’s Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance.

“Facilities that operate in our backyards have a responsibility to follow our nation's environmental laws, like the Clean Air Act, which is designed to protect the air we breathe and the local environment,” said Cynthia Giles, assistant administrator for EPA’s Office of Enforcement and Compliance Assurance. “Today’s guilty plea shows that businesses that choose to ignore these critical safeguards and put their employees and the public at risk will face serious consequences.”

“Pelican had demonstrated a manifest disregard for accepted practices that are designed to protect human health and the environment,” said Assistant Attorney General Moreno. “Today, Pelican faces significant penalties for its egregious violations of its Clean Air Act permit and for submitting false information to state officials.”

If the court sentences according to the terms in today’s plea agreement, Pelican will pay $12 million in criminal penalties, including $2 million in community service payments that will go toward various environmental projects in Louisiana, including air pollution monitoring. It would mark the largest ever criminal fine in Louisiana for violations of the Clean Air Act. Pelican would also be banned from future refinery operations unless and until it implements an environmental compliance plan, which includes external auditing by independent firms and oversight by a court appointed monitor.

In pleading guilty, officials of Pelican, headquartered in Houston and operating a refinery in Lake Charles, La., admitted that the company had violated numerous aspects of its permit to operate. The violations were discovered during a March 2006 inspection by the Louisiana Department of Environmental Quality (LDEQ) and the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), which identified numerous unsafe operating conditions. Pelican also pleaded guilty to obstruction of justice for submitting materially false deviation reports to LDEQ, the agency that administers the federal Clean Air Act in Louisiana.

Pelican has admitted to the following:

• Pelican had no company budget, no environmental department and no environmental manager;

• In order to comply with a permit issued under the Clean Air Act, the refinery was required to use certain key pollution prevention equipment, but that equipment was either not functioning, poorly maintained, improperly installed, improperly placed into service and/or improperly calibrated;

• It was a routine practice for over a year to use an emergency flare gun to re-light the flare tower at the refinery which was designed to burn off toxic gasses and provide for the safe combustion of potentially explosive chemicals; because the pilot light was not functioning properly, employees would take turns trying to shoot the flare gun to relight the explosive gasses;

• Sour crude oil was stored in a tank that was not properly placed into service and remained in the tank after the roof sank;

• A caustic scrubber designed to remove hydrogen sulfide from emissions was bypassed; and

• A continuous emission monitoring system (CEMS) designed to measure the hydrogen sulfide levels in refinery emissions was not working properly.

Byron Hamilton, the Pelican vice-president who oversaw operations at the Lake Charles refinery since 2005 from an office in Houston pleaded guilty on July 6, 2011, to negligently placing persons in imminent danger of death and serious bodily injury as a result of negligent releases at the refinery. Hamilton faces up to one year in prison and a $200,000 fine for each of the two Clean Air Act counts.

The government’s investigation of the Pelican Refinery is continuing. Under the Crime Victims’ Rights Act, crime victims are afforded certain statutory rights, including the opportunity to attend all public hearings and provide input to the prosecution. Any person adversely impacted is encouraged to learn more about the case and the Crime Victims’ Rights Act or you may contact the Victim Witness Coordinator for the U.S. Attorney’s Office, Western District of Louisiana.

The criminal investigation is being conducted by the EPA Criminal Investigation Division in Baton Rouge and the Louisiana State Police, with assistance from the Louisiana Department of Environmental Quality. The case is being prosecuted by U.S. Attorney Stephanie Finley, Richard A. Udell, Senior Trial Attorney of the Environmental Crimes Section of the Environment and Natural Resources Division of the U.S. Department of Justice, Trial Attorney Christopher Hale with the Environmental Crimes Section.

More information on EPA’s criminal enforcement program: http://www.epa.gov/compliance/criminal/index.html

Photos: http://www.epa.gov/compliance/criminal/investigations/pelican-exhibits.pdf

More information about the Victim Witness Protection Act: http://www.justice.gov/usao/law/vicwit/index.html  

Department of Energy - © Copyright 2012

About the Author

The Department of Energy (DOE) has one of the richest and most diverse histories in the Federal Government. Although only in existence for a quarter century, the Department traces its lineage to the Manhattan Project and beyond.

DOE supports museums and historic facilities across the country dedicated to displaying and interpreting the history of the Department and its scientific and technological missions. Public tours are also available at some of the Department's sites.

Owning some of the twentieth century's most historically significant physical properties,...

202-586-5000

Boost: AJAX core statistics

Legal Disclaimer

You are responsible for reading, understanding and agreeing to the National Law Review's (NLR’s) and the National Law Forum LLC's  Terms of Use and Privacy Policy before using the National Law Review website. The National Law Review is a free to use, no-log in database of legal and business articles. The content and links on www.NatLawReview.com are intended for general information purposes only. Any legal analysis, legislative updates or other content and links should not be construed as legal or professional advice or a substitute for such advice. No attorney-client or confidential relationship is formed by the transmission of information between you and the National Law Review website or any of the law firms, attorneys or other professionals or organizations who include content on the National Law Review website. If you require legal or professional advice, kindly contact an attorney or other suitable professional advisor.  

Some states have laws and ethical rules regarding solicitation and advertisement practices by attorneys and/or other professionals. NLR does not accept advertising from attorneys or law firms. The National Law Review is not a law firm nor is www.NatLawReview.com  intended to be an advertisement or a referral service for attorneys and/or other professionals. The NLR does not wish, nor does it intend, to solicit the business of anyone or to refer anyone to an attorney or other professional.  NLR does not answer legal questions nor will we refer you to an attorney or other professional if you request such information from us. 

Under certain state laws the following statements may be required on this website and we have included them in order to be in full compliance with these rules. The choice of a lawyer or other professional is an important decision and should not be based solely upon advertisements. Attorney Advertising Notice: Prior results do not guarantee a similar outcome. Statement in compliance with Texas Rules of Professional Conduct. Unless otherwise noted, attorneys are not certified by the Texas Board of Legal Specialization, nor can NLR attest to the accuracy of any notation of Legal Specialization or other Professional Credentials.