United States v. ELM Ridge Exploration Co., Civil Action No. 1:12-cv-02584-REB-KLM
| Decision Date | 08 November 2012 |
| Docket Number | Civil Action No. 1:12-cv-02584-REB-KLM |
| Parties | UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff, v. ELM RIDGE EXPLORATION COMPANY, LLC, Defendant. |
| Court | U.S. District Court — District of Colorado |
I. JURISDICTION AND VENUE ......................................................-2-
II. APPLICABILITY .....................................................-3-
III. DEFINITIONS ..................................................... -4-
IV. CIVIL PENALTY ..................................................... -6-
V. COMPLIANCE REQUIREMENTS ..................................................... -7-
VI. SUPPLEMENTAL ENVIRONMENTAL PROJECT ..................................................... -12-
VII. REPORTING REQUIREMENTS ..................................................... -16-
VIII. STIPULATED PENALTIES ..................................................... -18-
IX. FORCE MAJEURE ..................................................... -21-
X. DISPUTE RESOLUTION .....................................................-24-
XI. INFORMATION COLLECTION AND RETENTION ..................................................... -26-
XII. EFFECT OF SETTLEMENT/RESERVATION OF RIGHTS ..................................................... -28-
XIII. COSTS ..................................................... -30-
XIV. NOTICES ..................................................... -30-
XV. EFFECTIVE DATE ..................................................... -31-
XVI. RETENTION OF JURISDICTION ..................................................... -32-
XVII. MODIFICATION ..................................................... -32-
XVIII. TERMINATION ..................................................... -32-
XIX. PUBLIC PARTICIPATION ..................................................... -33-
XX. SIGNATORIES/SERVICE ..................................................... -34-
XXI. INTEGRATION ..................................................... -34-
XXII. FINAL JUDGMENT ..................................................... -35-
WHEREAS, Plaintiff United States of America, on behalf of the United States Environmental Protection Agency ("EPA"), has filed a complaint in this action concurrently with this Consent Decree, alleging that Defendant Elm Ridge Exploration Company, LLC ("Elm Ridge"), violated Section 112 of the Clean Air Act ("CAA" or "Act"), 42 U.S.C. § 7412, and the regulations promulgated thereunder; and the Act's program for Federal operating permits as set forth at Title V of the Act, 42 U.S.C. § 7661, and the regulations promulgated thereunder.
WHEREAS, at all relevant times to the allegations in the Complaint, EPA has administered the Act's programs for National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants ("NESHAPs"), and federal operating permits under Title V of the Act.
WHEREAS, on March 2, 2012, the Southern Ute Indian Tribe became authorized to prospectively as of that date administer operating permits under Title V of the Act with respect to facilities located on the Southern Ute Indian Reservation.
WHEREAS, the Complaint alleges, inter alia, the Facility is a major source of Hazardous Air Pollutant ("HAP") emissions under Section 112(a)(1) of the Act, 42 U.S.C. § 7412(a)(1), four of the Facility's existing RICE units are subject to Subpart ZZZZ regulations pursuant to 40 C.F.R. § 63.6590(a), and Defendant failed to comply with certain Subpart ZZZZ. requirements at the Facility.
WHEREAS, the Complaint alleges, inter alia, the Facility is a "major source" of HAP emissions, nitrogen oxides, and carbon monoxide, and was considered a "Tart 71 Source" within the meaning of 40 C.F.R. §§ 71.1 and 71.3, subject to the Title V operating permit program set forth in Title V of the Act at 42 U.S.C. § 7661 - 7661f, and that Defendant failed to file an application for Part 71 federal operating permits within 12 months after the Facility became aPart 71 source and failed to comply with certain 40 C.F.R. § 71.9 requirements concerning the facilities. As noted above, the Southern Ute Indian Tribe became authorized prospectively to administer the Part 70 operating permit program as of March 2, 2012. While the Facility is currently considered a Part 70 source, all of the events giving rise to the allegations in the complaint pre-date the Southern Ute Indian Tribe's authorization to administer a Part 70 operating permit program.
WHEREAS, the Parties recognize, and the Court by entering this Consent Decree finds, that this Consent Decree has been negotiated by the Parties in good faith and will avoid litigation between the Parties and that this Consent Decree is fair, reasonable, and in the public interest.
NOW, THEREFORE, before the taking of any testimony, without the adjudication or admission of any issue of fact or law except as provided in Section I, and with the consent of the Parties, IT IS HEREBY ADJUDGED, ORDERED, AND DECREED as follows:
I. JURISDICTION AND VENUE
1. This Court has jurisdiction over the subject matter of this action, pursuant to 28 U.S.C. §§ 1331, 1345, and 1355, and Section 113(b) of the Act, 42 U.S.C. § 7413(b), and over the Parties. Venue lies in this district pursuant to Section 113(b) of the Act, 42 U.S.C. § 7413(b), and 28 U.S.C. § 1391(c), because the alleged violations at issue occurred in this judicial district and Elm Ridge is doing business in this district. For purposes of this Decree, or any action to enforce this Decree, Defendant consents to the Court's jurisdiction over this Decree, any such action, and this Defendant and consents to venue in this judicial district.
2. For purposes of this Consent Decree, Defendant agrees that the Complaint states claims upon which relief may be granted pursuant to Sections 112 and 113 of the Act, 42 U.S.C. §§ 7412, 7413.
II. APPLICABILITY
3. The obligations of this Consent Decree apply to and are binding upon both the United States and the Defendant and any of their respective successors, assigns, or other entities or persons otherwise bound by law.
4. No transfer of ownership or operation of the Facility, whether in compliance with the procedures of this Paragraph or otherwise, shall relieve Defendant of its obligation to ensure that the terms of the Decree are implemented. At least 30 Days prior to such transfer, Defendant shall provide a copy of this Consent Decree to the proposed transferee and shall simultaneously provide written notice of the prospective transfer, together with a copy of the proposed written agreement, to EPA Region 8, the United States Attorney for the District of Colorado, and the United States Department of Justice, in accordance with Section XIV of this Decree (Notices). Any attempt to transfer ownership or operation of the Facility without complying with this Paragraph constitutes a violation of this Decree.
5. Defendant shall provide a copy of this Consent Decree to all officers, employees, and agents whose duties might reasonably include compliance with any provision of this Decree, as well as to any contractor retained to perform work required under this Consent Decree. Defendant shall condition any such contract upon performance of the work in conformity with the terms of this Consent Decree.
6. In any action to enforce this Consent Decree, Defendant shall not raise as a defense the failure by any of its officers, directors, employees, agents, or contractors to take any actions necessary to comply with the provisions of this Consent Decree.
III. DEFINITIONS
7. Terms used in this Consent Decree that are defined in the Act or in regulations promulgated pursuant to the Act shall have the meanings assigned to them in the Act or such regulations, unless otherwise provided in this Decree. Whenever the terms set forth below are used in this Consent Decree, the following definitions shall apply:
a. "Complaint" shall mean the complaint filed by the United States in this action;
b. "Consent Decree" or "Decree" shall mean this Decree and all appendices attached hereto;
c. "Day" shall mean a calendar day unless expressly stated to be a business day. In computing any period of time under this Consent Decree, where the last day would fall on a Saturday, Sunday, or federal holiday, the period shall run until the close of business of the next business day;
d. "Defendant" shall mean Elm Ridge Exploration Company, LLC;
e. "E1" and "E2" shall mean the two (2) site-rated 1, 146 brake horsepower, lean burn Caterpillar G3516 LE RICE, originally installed at the Facility in or around January 1999 and rated at 2 grams per horsepower hour for nitrogen oxides; f. "E3" and "E4" shall mean the two (2) site-rated 1,146 brake horsepower, Caterpillar G3516 LE RICE, originally installed at the Facility in or around February 2000 and rated at 2 grams per horsepower hour for nitrogen oxides;
g. "E5" and "E6" shall mean two (2) site-rated 1,146 brake horsepower, Caterpillar G3516 LE RICE, originally installed at the Facility in or around January 2004;
h. "E7" and "E8" shall mean two (2) site-rated 1,197 brake horsepower, Caterpillar G3516 LE RICE, originally installed at the Facility in or around May 2009;
i. "EPA" shall mean the United States Environmental Protection Agency and any of its successor departments or agencies;
j. "Effective Date" shall have the definition provided in Section XV;
k. "Facility" shall mean the Ignacio Gas Treating Plant, located at 11117 County Road 310, eight miles west of Ignacio, La Plata County, Colorado, within the exterior boundaries of the Southern Ute Indian Reservation, owned and operated by Defendant;
1. "Paragraph" shall mean a portion of this Decree identified by an Arabic numeral;
m. "Parties" shall mean the United States and Defendant;
n. "Reciprocating Internal Combustion Engine" or "RICE" shall mean a stationary, immobile, natural gas-fired reciprocating internal combustion engine used in natural gas compression...
To continue reading
Request your trial