Corporate Misconduct Accountability Project
Arrow Pipeline, LLC · EPA Administrative Consent Agreement and Settlement
Arrow Pipeline Paid $450K After Polluting Tribal Lands in North Dakota
EPA found the company violated Clean Air Act rules at seven compressor stations on the Fort Berthold Indian Reservation, allowing toxic emissions to escape for months while ignoring required safety checks.
HIGH SEVERITY
TL;DR
Arrow Pipeline operated seven natural gas compressor stations on tribal lands in North Dakota while systematically violating Clean Air Act permits. EPA inspectors found visible smoke pouring from a flare, recorded toxic hydrocarbon emissions escaping from storage tanks, and documented months of failures to monitor engine pollution controls. The company skipped required pressure checks, ignored out-of-range readings, and allowed emissions to vent directly into the air instead of capturing them. Arrow agreed to pay $450,000 to settle the violations.
These violations put tribal communities at risk while the company continued profitable operations.
$450,000
Civil penalty Arrow Pipeline agreed to pay
7
Compressor stations with documented violations
14
Individual engine units cited for pressure drop violations
60+
Total instances of monthly monitoring failures
The Allegations: A Breakdown
Core Allegations
What they did · 8 points
| 01 | EPA inspectors observed continuous visible smoke flowing from a flare at Compressor Station 2 for a full minute during testing on June 15, 2023. The permit required the flare to operate with no visible smoke emissions. Continuous smoke indicates incomplete combustion and elevated releases of particulate matter and toxic compounds. | high |
| 02 | Inspectors recorded hydrocarbon emissions escaping from the tops of natural gas condensate storage tanks at Compressor Station 2 and Compressor Station 7 using infrared cameras. Arrow Pipeline failed to route these emissions through closed-vent systems to capture and control them as required by both permits. | high |
| 03 | Arrow Pipeline failed to measure the pressure drop across engine catalysts during performance testing at two engines in 2022, violating permit requirements. These measurements are essential to verify that pollution control equipment is working properly. | high |
| 04 | The company operated 14 different engine units at five compressor stations with pressure drops exceeding the permitted range by more than 2 inches of water for months at a time. Pressure drop readings outside the allowed range indicate failing pollution control equipment that allows higher emissions. | high |
| 05 | Arrow Pipeline failed to take required corrective action or shut down engines when pressure drop readings exceeded permit limits. Company data showed violations continuing for months across multiple stations without remediation. | high |
| 06 | The company failed to conduct or maintain records of required monthly pressure drop measurements for multiple engines at Compressor Stations 2 and 7. These monitoring gaps prevented regulators from confirming compliance and detecting ongoing violations. | medium |
| 07 | Arrow Pipeline failed to ensure that tank covers and openings formed continuous impermeable barriers at multiple stations. The company allowed thief hatches, pressure relief valves, and other openings to release hydrocarbon emissions directly into the atmosphere instead of capturing them. | high |
| 08 | At Compressor Station 7, engine unit 760 operated with excessive pressure drop readings for seven months between September 2022 and June 2023. The permit required the company to investigate and fix the problem or stop operating the engine. | high |
Regulatory Failures
How oversight broke down · 5 points
| 01 | EPA issued the Title V operating permit for Compressor Stations 1 through 6 on May 10, 2021. The permit included detailed requirements for monitoring pressure drops, controlling tank emissions, and operating flares without visible smoke. Arrow Pipeline violated these requirements within months of the permit becoming effective. | high |
| 02 | The violations occurred more than one year before EPA initiated this enforcement proceeding. EPA and the Department of Justice jointly determined that administrative penalty assessment was appropriate despite the significant time gap between violations and enforcement. | medium |
| 03 | EPA did not issue a Notice of Violation until June 6, 2024, nearly two years after some of the earliest documented violations in September 2022. The agency sent inspection reports to Arrow Pipeline in September 2023 but formal enforcement action took an additional nine months. | medium |
| 04 | The permits required Arrow Pipeline to follow manufacturer maintenance schedules and procedures to minimize hydrocarbon emissions from tanks. The company violated these requirements but continued operations until EPA inspectors documented the failures during a site visit. | medium |
| 05 | Arrow Pipeline operated under prior organizational ownership during the time violations occurred. The company transferred to new ownership before November 3, 2023, potentially complicating accountability and enforcement. | low |
Profit Over People
The economic incentives behind noncompliance · 5 points
| 01 | Every time an engine showed a pressure drop reading out of compliance, the permit required immediate corrective action that could mean shutting down the engine temporarily or investing in repairs. Shutting down an engine reduces throughput and translates to lost revenue for the duration. | high |
| 02 | Arrow Pipeline kept multiple engines running for months while pressure drop readings exceeded permitted limits. The company avoided the operational downtime and repair costs associated with fixing the pollution control equipment. | high |
| 03 | Installing and maintaining robust emissions control equipment on storage tanks costs money. Each pressure relief valve, thief hatch, and gasket must be carefully installed and periodically replaced to prevent leaks. Arrow Pipeline allowed these systems to fail rather than invest in proper maintenance. | high |
| 04 | The $450,000 civil penalty represents the cost of noncompliance. If the company saved more than this amount by avoiding shutdowns, maintenance costs, and staff hours during the violation period, the financial incentive favored continued noncompliance. | high |
| 05 | Ongoing compliance programs demand training staff to perform frequent visual or infrared inspections, detect leaks, and fix them promptly. Arrow Pipeline operated seven compressor stations without implementing these programs effectively. | medium |
Public Health and Safety
The human cost of violations · 6 points
| 01 | The violations allowed higher emissions of volatile organic compounds, nitrogen oxides, and other dangerous pollutants than permitted under federal law. These pollutants pose known threats to public health including respiratory issues and aggravation of asthma. | high |
| 02 | Compressor engines require catalytic converters to remove harmful pollutants, similar to car engines. Arrow Pipeline allowed these pollution control devices to operate improperly for extended periods, resulting in elevated emissions into the air. | high |
| 03 | Continuous visible smoke from the flare at Compressor Station 2 indicates incomplete combustion leading to higher outputs of particulate matter, black carbon, hydrocarbons, and other dangerous compounds. Complete combustion would produce mainly carbon dioxide and water. | high |
| 04 | The hydrocarbon emissions recorded by EPA infrared cameras at two compressor stations represent direct, avoidable releases into the atmosphere. These fugitive emissions expose nearby communities to toxic volatile organic compounds. | high |
| 05 | The compressor stations operate on the Fort Berthold Indian Reservation. Local residents and tribal members living near these facilities face degraded air quality and potential health complications from the elevated pollution levels. | high |
| 06 | Arrow Pipeline failed to ensure that catalyst inlet temperatures were measured during performance tests. Without this data, the company could not verify that pollution control equipment was operating at conditions necessary to effectively reduce emissions. | medium |
Community Impact
Who bears the cost · 4 points
| 01 | EPA provided a copy of the Notice of Violation to the MHA Nation on June 6, 2024. The violations occurred on the Fort Berthold Indian Reservation, meaning the tribal nation bore the environmental and health impacts of Arrow Pipeline’s noncompliance. | high |
| 02 | Communities near the compressor stations may have suffered respiratory issues, aggravation of asthma, and other health complications from elevated levels of fugitive hydrocarbons and other pollutants. These negative health impacts are not reflected in the company’s financial statements. | high |
| 03 | The cost of corporate misdeeds is effectively shifted onto the community. While Arrow Pipeline profited from continuing operations without proper emissions controls, local residents faced the dangers to public health from degraded air quality. | high |
| 04 | Tribal communities facing socioeconomic challenges lack resources to secure expensive lawyers or commission their own environmental studies to challenge well-funded corporations. The fight against corporate pollution often feels stacked against these communities. | medium |
Corporate Accountability Failures
Systemic breakdowns in oversight · 6 points
| 01 | Arrow Pipeline neither admits nor denies the factual allegations in the consent agreement. The company admitted jurisdictional facts and agreed to pay the penalty without admitting wrongdoing, a common pattern that allows companies to settle without accepting responsibility. | medium |
| 02 | The company operated under prior organizational ownership during the violation period. This ownership change before enforcement action creates a scapegoat scenario where current leadership can distance itself from the wrongdoing. | medium |
| 03 | By the time EPA issued the Notice of Violation in June 2024, many of the violations had occurred 18 to 24 months earlier. During this gap, the facility continued profitable operations without penalty. | medium |
| 04 | The consent agreement acknowledges this constitutes an enforcement action for purposes of considering the company’s compliance history in any subsequent enforcement actions. The settlement creates a record but does not guarantee changed behavior. | low |
| 05 | Arrow Pipeline waived any right to judicial or administrative review of the final order. The company agreed not to challenge the authority of EPA to bring civil action in federal court to compel compliance and seek additional penalties for noncompliance. | low |
| 06 | The agreement requires Arrow Pipeline to pay the penalty within 30 days after the final order is filed. If the company fails to pay on time, EPA is authorized to recover interest, handling charges, and late payment penalties, but only after the damage has already occurred. | low |
Exploiting Delay
How time worked in the company’s favor · 4 points
| 01 | The earliest documented violations occurred in September 2022. EPA did not inspect the facilities until June 15, 2023, allowing at least nine months of noncompliance to continue unchecked. | medium |
| 02 | EPA sent inspection reports to Arrow Pipeline in September 2023 but did not issue a formal Notice of Violation until June 2024. This nine-month gap between inspection findings and enforcement action allowed continued operations. | medium |
| 03 | The consent agreement was not filed until November 22, 2024, more than two years after the first documented violations. The extended timeline meant the company harvested benefits of noncompliance long before facing consequences. | medium |
| 04 | Arrow Pipeline failed to maintain required records for pressure drop measurements at multiple engines. Without complete data, regulators faced challenges proving the full extent and duration of violations, potentially limiting the scope of enforcement. | medium |
The Bottom Line
What this case reveals · 5 points
| 01 | Arrow Pipeline systematically failed to comply with Clean Air Act permit requirements at seven compressor stations over a period of at least 18 months. The violations were not isolated incidents but a pattern spanning multiple facilities and violation types. | high |
| 02 | The $450,000 penalty must be weighed against the potential revenue from avoiding repeated shutdowns, maintenance costs, and compliance expenses during the violation period. If monetary benefits exceeded the fine, the economic incentive favored noncompliance. | high |
| 03 | The consent agreement resolves only the company’s liability for federal civil penalties for the violations specifically alleged. It does not prevent EPA from taking action for other violations or future noncompliance. | medium |
| 04 | Penalties paid under this agreement are not deductible for federal tax purposes under Internal Revenue Code section 162. The company cannot reduce its tax burden by writing off the cost of environmental violations. | low |
| 05 | The agreement does not relieve Arrow Pipeline of the duty to comply with all applicable provisions of the Clean Air Act and other federal, state, or local laws going forward. Future violations remain subject to enforcement. | medium |
Timeline of Events
May 2021
EPA issues Title V Permit for Compressor Stations 1-6 with effective date of May 10, 2021
January 2022
Arrow Pipeline conducts incomplete performance test at Station 5 engine 562, failing to measure pressure drop
May 2022
Arrow Pipeline conducts incomplete performance test at Station 1 engine 162, failing to measure pressure drop
September 2022
Earliest documented pressure drop violations begin at multiple stations
June 15, 2023
EPA inspectors conduct site visits at Compressor Stations 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, and 7
June 15, 2023
EPA observes continuous visible smoke from flare at Station 2 during one-minute observation
June 15, 2023
EPA records hydrocarbon emissions from storage tanks at Stations 2 and 7 using infrared camera
September 21, 2023
EPA sends inspection reports to Arrow Pipeline via email
November 3, 2023
Arrow Pipeline transfers to new ownership
June 6, 2024
EPA issues Notice of Violation to Arrow Pipeline and provides copy to MHA Nation
November 22, 2024
Consent Agreement and Final Order filed with Regional Hearing Clerk
Direct Quotes from the Legal Record
QUOTE 1
Visible smoke from flare
allegations
“During the inspection, EPA inspectors observed smoke from the flare located at Compressor Station 2 and conducted EPA Reference Method 22 testing from 11:21 AM to 11:22 AM. Continuous smoke was observed for the full minute.”
💡 Continuous visible smoke indicates the flare was releasing elevated levels of toxic pollutants instead of properly combusting them
QUOTE 2
Hydrocarbon emissions captured on camera
allegations
“During the inspection, EPA inspectors observed and recorded hydrocarbon emissions from the top of natural gas condensate storage tanks at Compressor Station 2 and Compressor Station 7 with a Forward Looking Infrared (FLIR) camera.”
💡 Visual evidence confirmed the company was releasing toxic volatile organic compounds directly into the air
QUOTE 3
Failure to measure pollution controls
allegations
“Respondent failed to measure the pressure drop across each catalyst when it conducted performance testing for engine unit 162 at Compressor Station 1 in May 2022, and engine unit 562 at Compressor Station 5 in January 2022.”
💡 Without measuring pressure drop, the company could not verify that pollution control equipment was working properly
QUOTE 4
Operating engines out of compliance for months
allegations
“Respondent failed to maintain pressure drop across the catalyst bed at multiple engines at Compressor Stations 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5 to within 2 inches of water from the baseline pressure drop reading taken during the most recent performance test”
💡 Excessive pressure drop indicates failing pollution control equipment that allows higher emissions of dangerous pollutants
QUOTE 5
Longest single violation period
allegations
“Compressor Station 3, engine unit 360 in October, November, and December of 2022 and in January, February March, April, May and June of 2023”
💡 This single engine operated out of compliance for nine consecutive months without required corrective action
QUOTE 6
Missing monitoring records
regulatory
“Respondent failed to monitor and/or maintain records for engine pressure drop across each catalyst bed for engine unit 260 at Compressor Station 2 in April and June of 2023, and engine unit 263 at Compressor Station 3 in April, May, and June of 2023.”
💡 Failing to keep required records prevents regulators from detecting ongoing violations and holding companies accountable
QUOTE 7
Tank emission control failures
allegations
“Respondent failed to properly route working, breathing, and flashing losses through a closed-vent system at Compressor Station 2”
💡 Routing tank emissions through closed systems prevents toxic hydrocarbons from escaping into the air breathed by nearby communities
QUOTE 8
Purpose of Clean Air Act
health
“The Act’s purpose is to protect and enhance the quality of the Nation’s air resources so as to promote the public health and welfare and the productive capacity of its population.”
💡 Arrow Pipeline’s violations directly undermined the fundamental purpose of federal environmental law
QUOTE 9
Required corrective action
profit
“if the pressure drop exceeds 2 inches of water from the baseline pressure drop reading taken during the most recent performance test, Respondent shall take corrective action to address the problem or cease operating the engine”
💡 The permit required the company to fix problems or shut down, but Arrow kept engines running out of compliance for months
QUOTE 10
Enforcement despite time gap
regulatory
“The EPA and the United States Department of Justice jointly determined this matter, although it involves alleged violations that occurred more than one year before the initiation of this proceeding, is appropriate for an administrative penalty assessment”
💡 The significant delay between violations and enforcement allowed the company to profit from noncompliance for years
QUOTE 11
Prior ownership at time of violations
accountability
“On the date of the EPA inspection of Compressor Stations 1, 2, 3, 4, 5, and 7 on June 15, 2023, at all times prior to November 3, 2023, and with respect to all allegations stated in section V of this Agreement, Respondent was under prior organizational ownership.”
💡 The ownership change creates opportunities to avoid full accountability by blaming previous management
QUOTE 12
Pattern across multiple stations
conclusion
“Based on the EPA’s inspection on June 15, 2023, and data provided by Respondent, the EPA alleges the following Title V Permit violations at Compressor Stations 1, 2, 3, 4, and 5”
💡 The violations spanned five stations, showing this was a systemic compliance failure, not isolated incidents
QUOTE 13
Required good air pollution control practices
allegations
“at all times, including during startup, shutdown and malfunction, Respondent shall maintain and operate any affected facility including air pollution control and monitoring equipment in a manner consistent with good air pollution control practices for minimizing emissions”
💡 Arrow Pipeline violated this basic requirement to minimize emissions at all times
QUOTE 14
Settlement does not admit wrongdoing
accountability
“Respondent neither admits nor denies the factual allegations stated in section V of this Agreement”
💡 The company settled for $450,000 without admitting the violations occurred, a standard pattern that limits accountability
QUOTE 15
Penalties not tax deductible
conclusion
“Penalties, interest, and other charges paid pursuant to this Agreement shall not be deductible for purposes of federal taxes.”
💡 The company cannot reduce its tax burden by writing off the cost of environmental violations
Frequently Asked Questions
What did Arrow Pipeline do wrong?
Arrow Pipeline violated Clean Air Act permits at seven natural gas compressor stations on tribal lands in North Dakota. EPA inspectors found visible smoke pouring from a flare, recorded toxic hydrocarbon emissions escaping from storage tanks, and documented months of failures to monitor engine pollution controls. The company skipped required pressure checks, ignored out-of-range readings that indicated failing equipment, and allowed emissions to vent directly into the air instead of capturing them.
How long did the violations continue?
The documented violations span at least 18 months from September 2022 through June 2023. Some individual engine units operated out of compliance for nine consecutive months without required corrective action. EPA did not issue a Notice of Violation until June 2024, nearly two years after the earliest violations.
What pollutants were released?
The violations allowed higher emissions of volatile organic compounds (VOCs), nitrogen oxides, and other dangerous pollutants. These chemicals pose known threats to public health including respiratory issues and aggravation of asthma. Continuous visible smoke from a flare indicates releases of particulate matter, black carbon, and other toxic compounds from incomplete combustion.
Who was harmed by these violations?
The compressor stations operate on the Fort Berthold Indian Reservation. Local residents and tribal members of the MHA Nation living near these facilities faced degraded air quality and potential health complications from elevated pollution levels. Communities bear the health and environmental costs while the company profited from avoiding compliance expenses.
How much did Arrow Pipeline pay?
Arrow Pipeline agreed to pay a $450,000 civil penalty to settle the violations. The company did not admit wrongdoing as part of the settlement. If the company saved more than $450,000 by avoiding shutdowns, repairs, and compliance costs during the violation period, the penalty may not deter future violations.
Why did it take so long to catch these violations?
EPA inspected the facilities in June 2023, but many violations had been occurring since September 2022. The agency sent inspection reports in September 2023 but did not issue a formal Notice of Violation until June 2024. The consent agreement was not filed until November 2024. This extended timeline allowed the company to continue profitable operations for years before facing consequences.
What was Arrow Pipeline required to do under its permits?
The permits required Arrow to monitor pressure drop across engine catalysts monthly, maintain readings within 2 inches of baseline, take corrective action or shut down engines that exceeded limits, route tank emissions through closed-vent systems, operate flares without visible smoke, and keep detailed records of all measurements and corrective actions.
Did Arrow Pipeline admit the violations?
No. The consent agreement states that Arrow Pipeline neither admits nor denies the factual allegations. The company admitted only jurisdictional facts and agreed to pay the penalty without admitting wrongdoing. This is a common pattern in settlements that allows companies to avoid accepting responsibility.
Can Arrow Pipeline be penalized again for the same violations?
The consent agreement resolves only the company’s liability for federal civil penalties for the specific violations alleged in this case. It does not prevent EPA from taking action for other violations or future noncompliance. The agreement acknowledges this constitutes an enforcement action that will be part of the company’s compliance history.
What can people do if they live near these facilities?
Community members can request copies of inspection reports and compliance data from EPA under the Freedom of Information Act. They can report visible emissions, odors, or health concerns to EPA Region 8 and tribal environmental offices. People experiencing health issues should document symptoms and seek medical attention. Community groups can organize to demand stronger oversight and advocate for more frequent inspections and higher penalties for violations.
sauces:
https://www.epa.gov/newsreleases/epa-resolves-arrow-pipeline-air-pollution-violations-north-dakota
Arrow is owned by Crestwood Equity Partners LP
💡 Explore Corporate Misconduct by Category
Corporations harm people every day — from wage theft to pollution. Learn more by exploring key areas of injustice.
- 💀 Product Safety Violations — When companies risk lives for profit.
- 🌿 Environmental Violations — Pollution, ecological collapse, and unchecked greed.
- 💼 Labor Exploitation — Wage theft, worker abuse, and unsafe conditions.
- 🛡️ Data Breaches & Privacy Abuses — Misuse and mishandling of personal information.
- 💵 Financial Fraud & Corruption — Lies, scams, and executive impunity.
