In a case where EPA documents a downstream standard violation at a proprietary terminal that is served only by a proprietary pipeline that receives gasoline only from a proprietary refinery, the company that owns the refinery, pipeline and terminal (Refiner A) would be presumptively liable for the violation. The quality assurance defense element would not be a factor in such a case because Refiner A would not be able to establish the first defense element that it did not cause the violation (no other party could have cause a standard violation under such a scenario).
If EPA documents a downstream standard violation at a facility downstream from Refiner A's terminal, e.g., at a retail outlet supplied by this terminal, Refiner A would be presumptively liable for the violation. In such a case, Refiner A could establish the did-not-cause defense element through test results from the terminal showing that all gasoline dispensed met all applicable standards. In addition, because of the unique proprietary refinery-pipeline-terminal scenario, Refiner A could meet the quality assurance program defense element using test results from the refinery and terminal, with no tests collected from the pipeline itself, provided the tests are designed to monitor the various types of violations that could occur during pipeline movements.(7/1/94)
This question and answer is posted at http://www.epa.gov/otaq/regs/fuels/rfg/qa/420r03009.pdf. The original was posted in the Q&A posted on 7/1/94 which can found at http://www.epa.gov/otaq/rfg_qa.htm" See Question ID 3857 for RFG (Taken from the first question on http://www.epa.gov/otaq/regs/fuels/rfg/qa/420r03009.pdf)
If RFG is shipped from a refinery to a terminal through a proprietary pipeline system, may the pipeline rely on the refinery and terminal test results to satisfy the quality assurance defense element?
Have more questions? Submit a request