An official website of the United States government.

This is not the current EPA website. To navigate to the current EPA website, please go to This website is historical material reflecting the EPA website as it existed on January 19, 2021. This website is no longer updated and links to external websites and some internal pages may not work. More information »


Motiva and BP Questions and Answers

1. What are the violations these settlements resolve?

The actions involve a consolidation of alleged violations of various fuel standards set forth in Section 211 of the Clean Air Act, 42 U.S.C. § 7545 and the regulations promulgated there under at 40 C.F.R. Part 80. With respect to both BP and Shell there were alleged violations of the volatile organic compound and oxygen standards for reformulated gasoline and the reid vapor pressure standard for conventional gasoline, at retail outlets, terminals and refineries. In addition, it is alleged that BP violated the detergent regulations by not properly additizing gasoline at some of its terminals, and the annual NOx standard at its Yorktown Refinery. A summary of the violations is attached.

2. Who are the Respondents?

BP Settlement: BP Products North America Inc is a Maryland corporation operating in the United States. BP is a refiner, terminal operator, distributor and retailer of petroleum products.

Motiva/Equilon Settlement: Motiva Enterprises LLC and Equilon Enterprises LLC, d/b/a Shell Oil Products US, are both Delaware limited liability companies operating in the United States. Motiva and Equilon are refiners, terminal operators, distributors and retailers of petroleum products.

Top of page

3. What is the penalty the companies must pay?

BP Settlement: BP will pay $900,000.

Motiva/Equilon Settlement: Motiva and Equilon together will pay $600,000.

4. What other efforts will the Respondents perform?

BP and Motiva/Equilon have performed substantial efforts to remedy the violations and to prevent recurrence of the same or similar violations. Efforts to remedy the violations included efforts such as stopping sales of contaminated product, replacing contaminated product with complying product and testing and sampling to determine the scope of an alleged violation. Efforts to prevent recurrence of violations include actions such as discovering and correcting the cause or causes of an alleged violation, implementing or requiring testing and sampling programs, and making technical changes to correct a process or failure in equipment that led to an alleged violation.

Top of page

5. Were some of the violations self-reported?

In both of the cases some of the violations were self-reported. Consideration was given in settling the cases that Respondents reported some of the violations. Self-reporting of violations allows for a quicker response to the violations and performance of remedial efforts.

6. How are these settlements environmentally beneficial?

These actions serve as a strong deterrent to these companies and to other similarly situated companies, that EPA is very serious about enforcing the fuels regulations. Noncomplying fuel, when distributed, can have negative impact on health and the quality of air in a large geographic area. In general, fuel that does not comply can cause increases in NOx, hydrocarbons, carbon monoxide and other air toxics. EPA is concerned about maintaining the quality of the fuel distributed in the United States.

Top of page