Lawsuit to (A) Defendants, (B) EPA, (C) the Texas Commission On
Total Page:16
File Type:pdf, Size:1020Kb
Case 4:10-cv-04969 Document 1 Filed in TXSD on 12/13/10 Page 1 of 30 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF TEXAS HOUSTON DIVISION ___________________________________________ ENVIRONMENT TEXAS CITIZEN LOBBY, INC., and SIERRA CLUB, Plaintiffs, Civil Action No. 4:10-cv-4969 v. EXXONMOBIL CORPORATION, EXXONMOBIL CHEMICAL COMPANY, and EXXONMOBIL REFINING AND SUPPLY COMPANY, Defendants. ___________________________________________ COMPLAINT INTRODUCTION 1. Defendants own and operate an industrial complex in Baytown, Texas (the “Baytown Complex” or “Complex”) consisting of an oil refinery, chemical plant, and olefins plant. It is the largest petroleum and petrochemical complex in the United States. The refinery in the Baytown Complex is the largest refinery in the United States. The Baytown Complex covers approximately 3,400 acres along the Houston Ship Channel, about 25 miles east of Houston. According to the most recent publicly available inventories of air pollution from stationary sources, the Baytown Complex emits more pollutants into the air than any other industrial complex in Harris County. 2. Defendants are violating the federal Clean Air Act (the “CAA” or “Act”). Over the last five years they have emitted more than eight million pounds of pollutants into the atmosphere from the Baytown Complex in excess of legal limits imposed by federal and state Case 4:10-cv-04969 Document 1 Filed in TXSD on 12/13/10 Page 2 of 30 regulations and by Clean Air Act permits issued by the State of Texas. The types of pollutants the Baytown Complex emits are known to cause a variety of problems: for example, some are carcinogenic, some cause and aggravate respiratory and other illnesses, and some contribute to the formation of ground-level ozone, a major constituent of smog. Over the past five years, pollutants that the Baytown Complex has illegally emitted include: sulfur dioxide, carbon monoxide, nitrogen oxides, benzene, 1,3-butadiene, hexane, toluene, hydrogen sulfide, hydrogen chloride, propane, ethylene, butane, and butene. 3. According to the United States Environmental Protection Agency (“EPA”), thousands of people live within a mile of the Baytown Complex; tens of thousands of people live within three miles of the Baytown Complex; and hundreds of thousands of people live within ten miles of the Baytown Complex. 4. Plaintiffs are citizen-based environmental organizations with individual members who live and work close to the Baytown Complex. Plaintiffs’ members breathe, and are exposed in other ways, to more harmful pollutants than they otherwise would be, as a direct result of the Baytown Complex’s excess air emissions that violate the Act. These excess emissions of pollutants have adverse impacts on these individuals’ health, and on their recreational, aesthetic, and other interests. Excess emissions from the Baytown Complex cause and contribute to chest congestion, coughing, fatigue, headaches, itching eyes, and other conditions among Plaintiffs’ members. Plaintiffs’ members worry that the Complex’s excess emissions heighten the risk of cancer. 5. Excess emissions from the Baytown Complex create and contribute to undesirable and noxious odors. Plaintiffs’ members frequently see smoke coming from the Complex, and the Complex’s flares routinely light up the night sky. When the flares rumble during their operation, 2 Case 4:10-cv-04969 Document 1 Filed in TXSD on 12/13/10 Page 3 of 30 Plaintiffs’ members can hear them and some can even feel the vibrations they cause. Plaintiffs’ members who live near the Baytown Complex worry that operational problems at the Complex will cause explosions. 6. Defendants’ violations of the Act harm public health and the environment. However, EPA and the State of Texas have failed to take enforcement actions sufficient to stop Defendants’ ongoing violations of the Act. Section 304(a) of the Clean Air Act, 42 U.S.C. § 7604, authorizes citizens to bring suit in federal court to enforce the Act. This CAA “citizen suit provision” authorizes citizens to obtain an injunction and civil penalties (up to $32,500 per day for each violation of the Act, increasing to $37,500 as of January 12, 2009) against violators. Under the law, such penalties are not paid to plaintiffs, but rather to the United States Treasury or to beneficial mitigation projects that enhance public health or the environment. 7. Defendants’ violations of the Act are set forth in Counts I through VII, below. The violations alleged have a variety of underlying causes. These include, but are not limited to, equipment failures and malfunctions, operational problems, electrical problems, inadequate maintenance, poor record keeping, and other longstanding systemic problems. Plaintiffs are unaware of any actions by the Defendants that have solved, or will solve, these persistent problems, or that will otherwise eliminate similar violations of the Act, in the future. Absent an appropriate order from this Court, Defendants will continue to violate the Act as described in Counts I through VII. 3 Case 4:10-cv-04969 Document 1 Filed in TXSD on 12/13/10 Page 4 of 30 PARTIES Plaintiffs 8. Plaintiffs bring this suit on behalf of their individual members who are adversely affected by the Baytown Complex’s excess emissions of sulfur dioxide, nitrogen oxides, carbon monoxide, volatile organic compounds, benzene, 1,3-butadiene, and other air pollutants in violation of the Act. These violations have deleterious impacts on public health and the environment in the areas where Plaintiffs’ members live, work, and recreate. Plaintiffs are “persons” within the meaning of section 302(e) of the Act, 42 U.S.C. § 7602(e). 9. Plaintiff Environment Texas Citizen Lobby, Inc. (“Environment Texas”) is a Texas corporation. It is a statewide, non-profit, environmental organization that advocates for clean air, clean water, and preservation of Texas’ natural areas, among other issues, on behalf of approximately 5,000 citizen members from across the state of Texas. Among other activities, Environment Texas researches and distributes analytical reports on environmental issues, advocates before legislative and administrative bodies, conducts public education, and pursues public interest litigation on behalf of its members. 10. Plaintiff Sierra Club, a California non-profit corporation with an office in Austin, is the nation’s oldest and largest conservation organization, with approximately 1.3 million members nationwide. The Lone Star Chapter has approximately 24,000 Texas members, including nearly 5,000 members in Harris County, who are dedicated to exploring, enjoying, and protecting Texas’ natural resources and wild places. Sierra Club promotes the responsible use of the earth’s ecosystem and resources, and works to restore the quality of the natural and human environment. In addition to organizing nature outings and public education campaigns, Sierra 4 Case 4:10-cv-04969 Document 1 Filed in TXSD on 12/13/10 Page 5 of 30 Club and its Texas members pursue advocacy and litigation on issues including clean air and clean water, solid waste reduction, and sustainable energy and land use policies. Defendants 11. Defendant ExxonMobil Corporation (“ExxonMobil”) is a multinational oil and gas corporation. ExxonMobil owns and operates the Baytown Complex. Federal Clean Air Act operating permits for the chemical plant (“Baytown Chemical Plant”) and the olefins plant (“Baytown Olefins Plant”) in the Complex are in the name of ExxonMobil. 12. Defendant ExxonMobil Chemical Company (“Exxon Mobil Chemical”) is a wholly owned subsidiary of ExxonMobil. It is one of the largest petrochemical companies in the world. It owns and operates the Baytown Chemical and Olefins Plants. The Baytown Chemical Plant produces more than 7.2 billion pounds of petrochemical products each year. The Baytown Olefins Plant produces 6 billion pounds of ethylene, propylene, and butadiene; it is one of the largest ethylene plants in the world. 13. Defendant ExxonMobil Refining and Supply Company (“ExxonMobil Refining and Supply”) is a wholly owned subsidiary of ExxonMobil. It is the largest global refiner. ExxonMobil Refining and Supply owns and operates the refinery at the Complex (“Baytown Refinery”). The federal Clean Air Act operating permit for the refinery is in the name of ExxonMobil Refining and Supply. 14. The Baytown Refinery, Baytown Chemical Plant and Baytown Olefins Plant are highly integrated in their design and operation. 15. Defendants are “persons” within the meaning of section 302(e) of the Act, 42 U.S.C. § 7602(e). 5 Case 4:10-cv-04969 Document 1 Filed in TXSD on 12/13/10 Page 6 of 30 JURISDICTION, VENUE AND NOTICE 16. This Court has jurisdiction over the subject matter of this action pursuant to section 304(a) of the Act, 33 U.S.C. § 7604(a), and pursuant to 28 U.S.C. § 1331. 17. Venue lies in this District pursuant to section 304(c)(1) of the CAA, 42 U.S.C. § 7604(c)(1), because the Baytown Complex is a stationary source, or a collection of stationary sources, located within this District. 18. Plaintiffs gave notice of the violations alleged in this Complaint more than 60 days prior to commencement of this lawsuit to (a) Defendants, (b) EPA, (c) the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (“TCEQ”), and (d) the Governor of Texas. Notice was provided by letters dated November 30, 2009 (“First Notice Letter,” attached here as Exhibit 1 and incorporated herein), and July 2, 2010 (“Second Notice letter,” attached here as Exhibit 2 and incorporated herein). The notice letters were addressed to Rex Tillerson, President and Chief Executive Officer of ExxonMobil Corporation. The notice letters were also sent to the President of ExxonMobil Chemical Company, the President of ExxonMobil Refining and Supply Company, the Baytown Refinery manager, the Baytown Chemical Plant manager, and the Baytown Olefins Plant manager. Copies of the First and Second Notice letters were sent contemporaneously to the Administrator of EPA, the Regional Administrator for EPA Region VI, the Executive Director of TCEQ, the Governor of Texas, and the registered agents for the Defendants.