You are on page 1of 18

I JackSilver,EsquireSBN# 160575

Law Offrce of Jack Silver


2 PostOffice Box 5469
SantaRosa,Califomia 95402-5469
a
J Telephone:(707) 528-8215
Facsimile:(7 07\ 528-8675
4 lhm28843@sbcglobal.net

5 Attorney for Plaintiff


NorthernCalifornia River Watch
6
7
8
T]NITEDSTATESDISTRICTCOURT
9
NORTHERNDISTRICTOF CALIFORNIA
t0

1 l NORTHERNCALIFORNIARIVER CASENO.:
WATCH,a non-profitCorporation,
12 COMPLAINT FOR INJUNCTIVE RELIEF,
CIVIL PENALTIES, RESTITUTION
l3 Plaintiff, AND REMEDIATION

14 fResourceConservation
& Rccoverl,Act
PACIFICLUMBER COMPANY, INC., (RCRA)42 U.S.C.g 6901et scq.l
l5 andDOES l-10, Inclusive,

16 Defendants.
17

l8
19 NOW COMES Plaintiff, NORTHERN CALIFORNIA RIVER WATCI-I (hereafter,"RIVER

2 0 WATCH") by and throughits attorneys,andfor its complaintagainstdefendants,PACIFIC LUMBER


2 1 COMPANY, NC., and DOES 1-10,inclusive(hereafter,
"PACIFIC LUMBER COMPANY"), states

22 as follows:
L) I. INTRODUCTION

24 l. This is a civil suit broughtagainstPACIFIC LUMBER COMPANY under the citizensuit

2 5 enforcementprovisions of the ResourceConservationand RecoveryAct (hereafter,"RCRA"), 42


26 U.S.C.$ 6901et seq.,andCalifornialaw governingtheUndergroundStorageof HazardousSubstances:

2 7 CaliforniaHeath& SafetyCode $ 25280et seq.

28
Complaintfor InjunctiveRelief
NorthernCalif.RiverWatchv PacificLumberCo.
I This complaintseeksrelief for PACIFIC LUMBER COMPANy's dischargeof pollution from

2 their currentor former retail gasolinestationfacilities locatedat l2l Main Street,Scotia,California


a
J (hereaftercollectively,"the Facilities"),into the watersof the Stateof California andthe
United States
n
+ in violation of the above-enumerated
statutesand laws.
5 2. By this ComplaintRIVER WATCH seeks:

6 a. To enjoin PACIFIC LUMBER COMPANY from dischargingpollutants from the

7 Facilities into the ground and surface waters surrounding and downstreamof the

8 Facilities;

9 b, A court orderdirectingPACIFIC LUMBER COMPANY to complywith the substantive

10 and proceduralrequirementsof the aboveenumeratedstatutesand laws:

l1 c. A court order directing PACIFIC LUMBER COMPANY ro pay civil penalries.or

12 establishremediation
projectsin lieuof penalties,for violationsofthc aboveenumerated

l3 statutesand laws; and,

14 d' A courtorderdirectingPACIFICLUMBER COMPANY to reimburseRIVER WATCH

15 for its reasonable


costsof suit,includingattorney'sfees,as allowedunder $ 7002(e)of

l6 RCRA,42 U.S.C.g 6972(e).

t7 II. JURISDICTION
1 8 3. This Court has subjectmatterjurisdictionover all Federalcallsesof actionin this Complainr

1 9 pursuantto RCRA $ 7002(a)&(b),42U.S.C.S 6972 (a)&(b) and 28 U.S.C.$ 1221(an acrio' fbr
2 0 declaratory
andinjunctivereliefarisingundertheConstitutionandlawsofthe UnitedStates).
This Court
2l jurisdictionover all State-based
has supplemental causesof actionin this Complaintpursuantto 2g
--l
)) U.S.C.$ 1367,asthoseclaimsform partofthe samecaseor controversyastheFederalcauses
of action.
.a I
t t l 4. On or aboutFebruary1,2006,RIVERWATCH providedwrittennoticeof pACIFIC LUMBER
I

:,1 COMPANY's violationsof RCRA, andof its intentto file suitagainstPACIFICLUMBER COMpANy

(hereafter,"RCRA Notice") to theAdministratorof theUnited StatesEnvironmentalprotectionAgency

;,1
I
(hereafter,"EPA"), the Administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency - Region IX, the

.) 7, 1I ExecutiveDirectorofthe StateWaterResourcesControlBoard,the ExecutiveDirectorof the California


I
281
Complaintfor InjunctiveRelief
NorthernCalif.RiverWatchv PacificLumberCo.
)
I Integrated
wasteManagement Board,andto PACIFICLUMBER coMpANy, asrequiredby RCRA
2 A trueandcorrectcopyof theRCRANoticeis attached
heretoasExhibitA andfully incorporated
into
a
-l thisComplaint.
A
+ 5. Membersand supporlersof RIVER WATCH residein the vicinity of, derive
livelihoodsfrom.
5 own property near, andlot recreateon, in or near, and/or otherwiseuse, enjoy
and benefit from the
6 affected watershed area and associatednatural resourcesinto which the pACIFIC
LUMBER
7 COMPANY discharges, or by which PACIFIC LUMBER COMPANY's operations adverselyaffecr
8 members'interests,in violation of the above-enumerated
laws or statutes.The health, economic.
9 recreational,
aestheticand environmental
interestsof RIVER WATCH's membersmay be,havebeen.
l 0 are being,and will continueto be adverselyaffectedby PACIFIC LUMBER coMpANy,s
unlawful
l 1 violationsof the above-enumerated lawsor statutes.RIVER WATCH contendsthere cxistsan injury
t 2 in fact to its members,causationof that injury by the conductof PACIFIC LUMBI1R
coMpANy
1 l
I J complainedof herein,and a likelihoodthat the requestedrelief will specilicallyredrcss
rhar ir.j'rr
t 4 RIVER WATCH, throughits members,hasstandingto bringthis action.A copyof thisComplaint
shall
1 5 be providedto the United StatesAttorneyGeneralandthe Administratorof the l1nitedStates
lllrA. and
t 6 the Attorney Generalof California.
I7 III. INTRADISTRICTASSIGNMENT
1 8 6. Thebasisfor assignment
of thiscaseto theNorthernDistrictof Califbrnia,
pursuant
to RCRA
1 9 $ 7002(a)&(b),42 U.S.C. 5 6972 (a)&(b), is the Facilitiesand operationsof pACIF-ICLUMBIIR
20 COMPANY arelocatedin this District,as is the siteof pollutionat issue.
2l IV. PARTIES
22 RIVER WATCH is a 501(c)(3)non-profitpublic benefitcorporationduly organizedunder
the
aa
z) laws of the Stateof California.Its headquarters
arelocatedin Sebastopol,California.RIVER WATCH
1/l
LA is dedicatedto protecting,enhancingandhelpingto restorethe watersofNorthern California,including

2 5 its drinking water sources,ground water, rivers, creeksand tributaries.Many of RIVER wATCH's
2 6 memberslive in areasaffectedby PACIFIC LUMBER COMPANY's pollution. Saidmembershave
an
2 7 interestwhich is or may be adverselyaffectedby PACIFIC LUMBER COMpANy,s violationsas
set
28
Complaintfor InjunctiveRelief
Northern
Calif.RiverWatchv PacificLumberCo.
3
I forth in this Complaint' Said members use the affected watershedfor domestic
water supply,
2 agriculturalwatersupply,recreation,sports,fishing,swimming,hiking, photography,naturewalks
and
a
J the like' Furthermore,the relief soughtwill specificallyredressthe injuries in fact, and the likelihood

4 of future injuries and interferencewith the interestsof RIVER WATCH's members.


5 8. RIVER WATCH is informed and believesand on said information and belief alleees
that
6 defendantPACIFIC LUMBER COMPANY is a corporationwhich is registeredwith the State of
7 California,doing businessin and having a registeredoffice in Scotia,California.
8 9. DefendantsDOES l-10, inclusive,respectively,are persons,partnerships,
corporationsand
9 entities,who are,or were, responsiblefor, or in someway contributedto, the violationswhich are the
l 0 subjectof this Complaint,or are,or were,responsible
for the maintenance,
supervision,
management,
ll operations,
or insurancecoverageof PACIFICLUMBER COMPANY's operationsandthe Facilitics.

1 2 The names,identities,capacities,and functionsof DOES 1-10,inclusive,are presentlyunknownto


1 a
IJ RIVER WATCH. RIVER WATCH shallseekleaveof courtto amendthis Complaintto insertthetrue

t 4 namesof said DOES when the samehavebeenascertained.

l5 V. STATEMENT OF FACTS
t 6 10. PACIFICLUMBER COMPANY hasowned,operatedand,lor
leasedthe Iracilitiesat leastsince
1 7 the 1970'saccordingto informationavailableto RIVER WATCH.
l 8 I l. PACIFIC LUMBER COMPANY has stored large quantities of petroleum productsin

1 9 undergroundstoragetanks (hereafter,"USTs") at the F'acilities. In approximately1989petroleum


2 0 contaminationwas detectedin soil and groundwaterbeneaththe Facilities. Subsequentinvestigation
2l indicatesthe contaminationis attributableto leakagefrom USTs and piping systems,surfacespills

22 and/orpoor maintenanceor operationalpractices.


ZJ 12. RegulatoryAgencieshaveorderedPACIFICLUMBER COMPANY to investigateand remediare

24 petroleumcontaminationat the Facilities following discoveryof petroleumreleases. pACIFIC


2 5 LUMBER COMPANY hasconductedsomeinvestigativework at the Facilitiesin responseto Agencies'
2 6 directives;however, significant levels of petroleumcontaminationremain in soil and sroundwater
2 7 beneathand adiacentto the Facilities.
28
Complaintfor lnjunctiveRelief
NorthernCalif. River Watch v Pacific Lumber Co.
I l3' RegulatoryAgencieshave designatedsurfaceand ground watersin this areaof California
as
2 capableof supportingdomesticsupply,andhaveestablishedmaximumcontaminantlevelsfor petroleum
J constituentsin surfaceand groundwaters.
A
T 14. Benzeneand toluene are known carcinogensand/orreproductivetoxins, and have been
listed
5 chemicalsunder Proposition65 sinceat least 1991. Surfaceand groundwaterat the Facilities
are
6 potentialsourcesof drinking water under applicableRegional Water
Quality Control Board, Water
7 Quality Control Plans (aka Basin Plans).In the course of doing businesspACIFIC LUMBEIT
8 COMPANY hasdischargedbenzeneandtolueneto surfaceand groundwaterat the Facilitieson
a daily
9 basissinceat leastthe late 1980's.

l0 15' PACIFICLIIMBER COMPANY hasusedand/orstoredpetroleumat the F'acilities


in a manner
1 l whichhasallowedsignificantquantitiesofhazardous
petroleumconstituents
to bedischarsed
to soiland
t 2 groundwaterbeneaththe Facilitiesand beneathadjacentproperties.
l 3 16. PACIFICLUMBER COMPANY hasconductedsomesiteinvestigations
andmonitoringwork
l 4 at theFacilities,but no remediation.The contamination
at the Facilitiesremainsunabated.To datc,the
1 5 levelsof TPHg,benzene,toluene,ethylbenzene,
andxylenesremainhigh abovetheallowableMaxirnun.r
1 6 ContaminantLevels(hereafter, 'WeOs')
"MCLs') and/orWaterQualityObjectives(hereafter, lbr saici
1 7 constituents,creatingan imminent and substantialendangerment
to public healthandthe environmcnt.
l8 17. The discharges
by PACIFICLUMBER COMPANY asallegedin the RCRA Notice(Exhibit A)

t 9 havebeenbothknowingandintentional.WhilePACIFICLUMBER COMPANy no longeruses.storcs


20 and sellspetroleumproductsat the Facilities,in the pastit hasused,storedand sold thescproducls.
2 1 which areknown to containbenzene,toluene,TPHg, ethlybenzeneand xylenes,and hasintendedthat
22 suchproductsbe sold to and usedby the public,or usedin its own operations.PACIFIC LSMBER
aa
ZJ COMPANY hasknown of the contamination
at the Facilitiessinceat leastthe late 1980's,and is also
24 awarethat failing to remediatethe pollution allows the contaminationto migrate through soil and
2 5 groundwaterat and adjacentto the Facilities,andto continuallycontaminateand re-contaminateactual
2 6 and potentialsourcesof drinking water.

27
28
Complaintfor InjunctiveRelief
NorthernCalif. River Watchv PacificLumberCo.
I 18. Violations of this and other statutesallegedin this Complaint are a major cause
of the
2 continuing decline in water quality, and a continuing threat to existing and future drinking
water
J suppliesin Northern California.With everydischarge,groundwatersuppliesarecontaminated.
These
/
T dischargescan and must be controlled in order for the groundwatersupply to be returned
as a safe
5 sourceof drinking water.
6 VI. FIRST CLAIM FOR RELIEF

7 violation of 42 u.s.c. $ 6901er seq.,specificaily42 u.s.c. g 6972(a)(t)(A)

8 19' RIVER WATCH incorporatesthe allegationsset forth abovein paragraphsI through l8 a'd

9 Exhibit A asthoughfully setforth herein.RIVER WATCH is informedandbelieves.andbasedon such


l 0 informationand belief alleges:
1 t 20. RCRA $ 7002(a)(l)(A),42U.S.C.$ 6972(a)(l)(A),providesthatanypersonmay commence

1 2 a civil action againstany personor governmentalentity allegedto be in violation of any,pernrit.


1 a
t-l standard,
regulation,condition,requirement,
prohibition,or orderwhich hasbecomeeff'ective
pursuanl
1 A
l + to RCRA. Civil penaltiesmaybe assessed
againstanypersonor entityin violationof suchpermits,etc.
1 5 pursuantto RCRA underthe provisionsof RCRA, 42 U.S.C.I 6928 (a) and 42 U.S.C.g 692g(9).

t 6 21. The Facilities,are regulatedby appropriateRegionalWater Quality Control Boardsand/orthe


1 n
t l Humboldt County Departmentof Health.

l 8 22' The RegionalWaterQuality ControlBoardandlorthe llumboldt CountyDeparlmentof I Iealth

1 9 has imposedremediationand monitoringrequirements


to ensurecompliancewith the RCRA UST
2 0 program.
2l 23. RIVER WATCH is informed and believes,and thereonalleges,that PACIFIC LUMBER

22 COMPANY has failed to comply with the statutoryand regulatoryleak prevention,leak detection.
aa
L.) monitoring,and remediationrequirementsimposedunderRCRA and describedin the RCRA Notice
')A
L1 attachedas Exhibit A.

2 5 24' The continuing failure by PACIFIC LUMBER COMPANY to effecrivelyremediarethe on-

2 6 goingcontaminationat the Facilitieswill ineparablyharmRIVER WATCH andits members,for which

2 7 harm RIVER WATCH and its membershaveno plain, speedyor adequateremedyat law.
28
Complaintfor InjunctiveRelief
NorthernCalif.RiverWatchv PacificLumberCo.
6
I 25. Wherefore,RIVER WATCH praysjudgment againstPACIFIC LUMBER COMPANY as ser

z forth hereafter.
a
J VII. SECOND CLAIM FOR RELIEF
4 Violation of 42 U.S.C. $ 6901et seq.,specifically42 U.S.C.g 6972(a)(1)(B)

5 26. RIVER WATCH incorporatesthe allegationsset forth abovein paragraphs1 through25 and

6 Exhibit A asthoughfully setforth herein.RIVER WATCH is informedandbelieves.andbasedon such


informationand belief alleges:

8 27. RCRA $ 7002(a)(l)(B),42U.S.C.S 6972(a)(1XB),


providesthatanypersonmaycommencc

9 a civil action against any person or governmentalentity including a past or presenrgenerator,


l 0 transporter,owneror operatorof a treatment,storageor disposalfacility who hascontributedto the past
l 1 or presenthandling, storage,treatment,transportation,or disposalof any solid or hazardouswaste
1 2 which may presentan imminent and substantialendangermentto health or to the environment.Civil
I A
IJ penaltiesrnaybe assessed
againstanypersonor entityin violationof this section,undcrthc provisions

t 4 of RCRA, 42 U.S.C.$ 6928(a)and42 U.S.C.$ 6928(9).'flie RCRA UST regulatoryprogramis


l5 adoptedand implementedin Californiaunderthe provisionsgoverningthe lJndergroundStoragcol'

1 6 HazardousSubstances(California Health & SafetyCode $ 25280et seq.).

t 7 28. PACIFIC LUMBER COMPANY owns and hasoperatedthe F'acilitiesat which it hasstored.

1 8 and hastransferred,gasoline,diesel,fuel oil and mixed oils.


1 9 29. US'Is havebeenin placeat the Facilitieswhich have leakedpetroleumchemicalsincluding

2 0 benzene,toluene,TPHg, ethylbenzeneandxylenesinto groundwater;and/orpetroleumproductshave


2 1 beenwashedoff the Facilitiesinto nearbysurfacewaters.
22 30. Petroleumproductsare known to be hazardousto the environment,and if releasedinto the
aa
z) environmentin sufficient quantityposean imminent and substantialrisk of harm.
'lA
LA 3 1. Chemicalswithin thesepetroleumproductssuchasbenzeneandtolueneareknown carcinogens

25 andlorreproductivetoxins,andif releasedinto the environmentin sufficientquantityposean imminent


26 and substantialrisk to public healthandto the environmentin seneral.
27
28
Complaintfor InjunctiveRelief
NorthernCalif. River Watch v PacificLumberCo.
I 32. For purposesof RCRA, petroleumproductsand their constituents:TPHg, benzene,toluene,

2 ethylbenzene
andxylenesare"solid wastes"and"hazardous
wastes"within the meaningof the statute.
)a 33. zuVER WATCH is informed and believes,and thereon alleges,that amountsof petroleum
A
a products and their constituents,TPHg, benzene,toluene, ethylbenzeneand xylenes releasedby

5 PACIFIC LUMBER COMPANY at the Facilitiesare in sufficient quantityto posean imminent and
6 substantialrisk to both the environmentand to humanhealth.
7 34. Continuingactsor failureto actby PACIFICLUMBER COMPANY to address
theseviolarions
8 will irreparablyharm RIVER WATCH andits members,for which harm they haveno plain, speedyor
9 adequateremedyat law.
1 0 35.Wherefore,RIVER WATCH praysjudgmentagainstPACIFICLUMBER COMPANY assetforth
lt hereafter.

12 VIII. RELIEF REQUESTEI)


1 1
IJ NORTHERN CALIFORNIA RIVER WATCH, respectfullyrequeststhis Court sranr rhc

t 4 followingrelief:
1 5 36. DeclarePACIFIC LUMBER COMPANY to haveviolatedandto be in violationof RCRA for

l 6 dischargingpetroleumproductsand constituentsat the Facilitieswhich areknown carcinogensand/or


1 7 reproductivetoxins in sufficientquantityto posean imminent and substantialrisk to healthand to the
l 8 environment,
t 9 37. EnjoinPACIFICLIJMBER COMPANY from discharging
petroleumproductsand constiluenls
2 0 from the Facilities,which petroleumproductsand constituentsposean imminent ancisubstantialrisk
2 1 to healthand the environment;
22 38. Order PACIFIC LUMBER COMPANY to comply with the substantiveand procedural
aa
z) requirementsof RCRA;
.A
LA 39. OrderPACIFIC LUMBER COMPANY to pay civil penalties,pursuantto RCRA provisions,

2 5 including42 U.S.C.S 6928(a) and42U.5.C. $ 6928(g),andlorpay for remediationprojectsto redress


26 harmcausedby PACIFIC LUMBER's violationsof RCRA. Eachof the above-described
violationsof
2 7 RCRA subjectsthe violator to a civil penaltieson a per day per violation basis.Civil penaltiesmay be
28
Complaintfor lnjunctiveRelief
NorthernCalif. RiverWatchv PacificLumberCo.
8
1
I assessed
for violations occurringwithin five (5) yearsprior to the initiation of a citizen enforcement

2 action;
a
J 40. Enter a judgment that PACIFIC LUMBER COMPANY is requiredto pay civil penaltiesand

+ exemplarydamagesaccordingto proof.

5 41. Enter suchpreliminary injunctions,permanentinjunctionsor other orderspursuantto RCRA

6 requiring PACIFIC LUMBER COMPANY to enjoin and abate the nuisanceresulting from the
7 dischargeand releaseof petroleumproductsand constituentsat the Facilities, and the migration of
8 petroleumproductsand constituentsinto soil and groundwatersurroundingthe Facilities.
9 42. ImposeinjunctivereliefrequiringPACIFICLUMBER COMPANY to immediatelyinvestigate,

1 0 accessandcategorizethe
extentof pollutionandimplementthebestavailabletechnologyto remcdiate

l 1 pollutionat the Facilities;


1 2 43. ImposeinjunctivereliefrequiringPACIFICLUMBER COMPANY to immediatelycomnrencc

1 3 completeremediationof the contaminationat and adjacentto the Facilitiesonce the contaminant


t 4 plumeshavebeenadequatelycharacterized.

1 5 44. Award costs(including reasonableattorney,expert,witness,and consultantfees)to RIVER

1 6 WATCI-{ as authorizedby RCRA; and,


1 7 45. Award suchotherrelief as this Courl may deemappropriate.

l8
l 9 DATtsD:Junel, 2006
SILVER
20 Attofney for Plaintiff
NORTHERN CALIFORNIA RIVER WATCFI
21
22
aa
z)

24
25
26
27
28
Complaintfor InjunctiveRelief
Northern Calif. River Watch v Pacific Lumber Co.
Exhibit A
Law Office of JackSilver
P.O. Box 5469 SantaRosa,(lalifon'ria 95402
P h o n e7 0 7 - 5 2 8 - 8 1 7 5 F a x 7 0 7 - 5 2 8 - 8 6 7 5
i.r'arri orec o(a\'ahoo. coni

Via RegisteredMqil - Return Receipt Requested

Februaryl, 2006

RobertManne,Presidentand CEO
The Pacific Lumber Company
125Main Street
Scotia,CA 95565

Re: Notice of Violations and Intent to File Suit under the Resource
Conservationand RecoveryAct

DearMr. Manne:

On behalf of Northern California River Watch ("River Watch") I am providing


statutorynotification to The Pacific Lumber Company ("PALCO") of continuing and
ongoingviolationsof the FederalResourceConservationand RecoveryAct ("RCRA") 42
U.S.C. $ 6901 et seq.,in conjunctionwith the continuingremediationoperationsat the
NorthernCalifornia garageand servicestationsite identified in this Notice.

River Watch herebynotifies PALCO that at the expirationof the appropriatenotice


periodsunderRCRA, River Watch intendsto commencea civil action againstPALCO on
the following grounds:

1. PALCO's useand storageofpetroleumproductsat its garageandgasolinestation


site asidentifiedin this Notice hasand continuesto violate permits,standards,regulations,
conditions,requirementsand/orprohibitionseffectivepursuantto RCRA regardingstorage
of petroleumin undergroundstoragetanks("USTs") [42 U.S.C. $ 6972(a)(t)(a)];

2. PALCO's operationsat the garugeand gasolinestationsite as identified in this


Notice hascausedpetroleumcontaminationof soil and groundwaterwhich presents
an imminentandsubstantialendangermentto humanhealthandthe environmentl42U.S.C.
$ 6e72(a)(1XB)1.
Noticeof ViolationsandIntentto File Suit- RCRA
ThePacificLumberCompany
February1,2006
Page2

PALCO COMPANY GARAGE. SCOTIA, CALIFORNIA

This former Ademar's Chevronservicestationsite is locatedat l2l Main Streetat


theintersection of Main andBridge Streetsin Scotia. The existingCompanyGaragewhich
took over the facility, has historicallybeenutilized for vehicle and equipmentserviceand
repair.A numberof USTswerelocatedat the facilityandinstalledbetween1959 and1975.
Oneofthesewasa12,000gallondieseltank;therestweresmallertanksrangingup to I
,000
gallonsin volume.

On the basis of contaminationinvestigationsconducted in August of 19g9,


groundwaterand soil contaminationwas found adjacentto then existing fuel storagetanks
at variouslocationsthroughoutthe PALCO ScotiaMill site. Following thesefindings
PALCO requested HumboldtCounty'sapprovalto closeasmanyas 13USTsat the facility
By Augustof 1990,3 of the tankshad beenremoved. E,ightotherswere being operatcd
without permitsand were not in compliancewith monitoring requirements.Reportsfrom
consultingengineersat the time indicated"soil and groundwatercontaminationat some
locationsis significant." PALCO's initial UnauthorizedReleaseReportwas filed on or
aboutMay 17,1990. In Juneof 1999a secondUnauthorized ReleaseReportwas filed
which specifiedreleasesdiscoveredon or about June27,1998, and includedgasoline
contamination discoveredduringearliertankclosureactivitiesoccurringin theearlyt 990's.

In June of 1991 a 1,000 gallon tank was removed. The remaining tanks were
removedby at leastOctoberof 1998. Basedupon sitehistories,minimal over-excavation
occurredfollowing the tank removals,followed by back-filling of the excavations.The
excavationsite was then paved over with asphaltandlorconcrete.

Current engineering consultant reports for this site indicate the extent of the
contaminantplume is still being evaluatedto determinethe lateral and vertical extentof
contamination.As ofthe first quartermonitoringreportfor 2005,TPHg contaminantlevels
wereashigh as 13,000ug/l; TPHd levelswereashigh as 900 ug/l; benzenelevelswereas
high as 1,100ugll; toluenewasashigh as73ugll;ethylbenzene wasashigh as 150ug/l; and
xyleneswere as high as 73 ugll. Each of theselevels is far in excessof California,s
Maximum ContaminantLevels for theseconstituents.

At this latedate,over 16yearsfollowing the initial discoveryof contaminationin soil


and groundwaterat this site, PALCO's engineershave failed to do anything more than
monitor the extent of plume migration and pollution levels. No remediation has
commenced, althoughthe consultantshaverecommended the injectionof hydrogenperoxide
at variouslocationsto neutralizethemanypetroleumconstituentsfound in the plume. Such
Noticeof ViolationsandIntentto File Suit- RCRA
ThePacificLumberCompany
February1,2006
Page3

attemptat chemicalremediationis scheduledto commencesometimein 2006. At this point,


however,there is no guaranteethis methodof remediationwill prove effective,given the
tight clay compositionof the areassurroundingthe former UST sites. If this methoddoes
prove effective in some areas,to date there is no provision to remediatethe soil and
groundwaterbeneaththe cementslabsthat were constructedover the excavationsites.

Despiteall of the monitoring done at this site,recordsfound at the RegionalWater


Quality Control Board do not indicatewhethera currentsensitivereceptorsurvey(within
last2 years)hasbeencompleted.Preferentialpathwayshavebeenidentified,but onereport
concludesthat such pathwaysdo not representpotentialconduitsfor the contamination
becausethe utility lines are lessthan 5 feet below groundsurface. Other reportsby the
engineeringconsultants,however,note that groundwaterlevelscan be as high u, j f..t
below groundsurface. Becausesitemonitoringhasbeendeficientover the tast t Oyears,
no one knows how far petroleumconstituentsmay havetraveledfrom the site.

Existingrecordsalsodo not determinewhetherany aquifercontaminationis present


or threatened by the plume. No studiesof aquiferdimensionsseemto have beendone.
River Watch is concernedthe proximity of the Eel River at a distanceof approximately
1,000feet to the west (but which wraps aroundthe site to the south.west, north and
northeast),maymeantheEel Riverhasalreadybeencompromised by PALCO contaminants.
River Watchtakesthe position that adequatemonitoringshouldbe conductedalong the
River itselfto insurethat contaminantsfrom the sitehavenot reachedits banks. In general,
River Watch believesmuch more proactiveremediationmust be conductedto remove
existingthreatsboth to the environmentandto individualswho useand enjoy the E,elRiver.

REGULATORY STANDARDS

Water QualityObjectivesexist in Californiato ensureprotectionof the beneficial


usesof water. Severalbeneficialusesof water exist,and the most stringentwater quality
objectivesfor protectionof all beneficialusesare selectedas the protectivewater quality
criteria.Alternativecleanupandabatementactionsneedto be consideredwhich evaluatethe
feasibilityof, at a minimum: (1) cleanupto backgroundlevels, (2) cleanupto levels
attainablethroughapplicationof bestpracticabletechnology,and (3) cleanupto protective
water quality criteria levels. Existing and potential beneficial uses of area groundwater
includedomestic,agricultural,industrialand municipalwater supply.

TheRegionalWaterQuality ControlBoardhasadopteda WaterQuality Controlplan


("BasinPlan")which designatesall surfaceandgroundwaterwithin theNorth CoastandSan
FranciscoBay regionsascapableof supportingdomesticwatersupply.The RegionalWater
Noticeof ViolationsandIntentto File Suit- RCRA
ThePacificLumberCompany
February1,2006
Page4

QualityControl Board hasadoptedMaximum ContaminantLevels ("MCLs,') and/orWater


QualityObjectives("WQOs") forpetroleumconstituentsin surfaceandgroundwaterwithin
the region of 50 ug/l for TPHg, I ug/l for benzene,150 ug/l for toluene and 5 ug/l
for
MTBE.

Petroleumandpetroleumconstituentshavebeen characterized as"hazardouswaste,,


and "solid waste"within the meaningof RCRA provisions. Accordingly,all regulatory
mandatesapplicableto hazardousor solid wasteapplyto the use,storafeand disposal
of
petroleumandpetroleumconstituents andproducts.

VIOLATIONS OF PERMITS, STANDARDS AND REGULATIONS


42u.S.C.g 6e72(a)(lxA)

BetweenJanuaryof 2001 and January2006 , as well as earlierduring pALCO.s


operationsin the 1990's,ongoingviolationsof RCRA as describedhereinhavc occurrcd.
PALCO has causedor permitted, causesor permits,or threatensto causeor pclnit,
petroleumcontaminants, petroleumconstituents andotherhazardous wasteto bedisciarged
or depositedat the CompanyGaragesitewhereit is, or probablywill be, discharged
into
watersof the Stateand now creates,or threatensto create,a condition of pollution
or
nuisance.The dischargeandthreatened dischargeof suchpetroleumwasteis deleterious to
the beneficialusesof water,and is creatingandthreatensto createa conditionof pollution
and nuisancewhich will continue unless the dischargeand threateneddischarse
is
permanentlyabated.

Provisionsof RCRA govern the use and operationof USTs used for storageof
petroleumproducts(subchapterIX,42U.S.C.$ 6991et seq.).The RCRA UST regulatory
programis adoptedand implementedin Californiaunderthe StateUndergroundStorage
of
HazardousSubstance AccountAct (CaliforniaHealth& SafetyCode OiSZSOet seqj.

Pastor currentviolationsof RCRA authorizethe assessment of civil penalties.The


enforcement provisionsof 42 U.S.C. $$ 692S(a)and 6928(g)providefor penaltieswhen
conditionsof hazatdouswastedisposalhave beenalleged- as River Watch hasallegedin
this Noticewith respectto PALCO's facility. Accordingly,undertheseprovisionsporon,
or entitiesviolating RCRA are subjectto substantialliability to the Uniied Stateson u p.,
day basis.

BetweenJanuaryof 2001 and January2006,as well as during pALCO,s operations


in the 1990's,ongoingviolationsof RCRA asdescribedhereinhaveoccurred. pALCO's
useandstorageofpetroleumat the CompanyGaragesitehaveallowedsignificantquantities
Noticeof ViolationsandIntentto File Suit- RCRA
ThePacificLumberCompany
February1,2006
Page5

ofhazardouspetroleumconstituentsto be releasedor dischargedinto soil and groundwater


in violationof provisionsof the RCRA andCaliforniaUST regulatoryprogramsincluding,
but not limited to, provisionsgoverninggeneraloperatingrequirementsfor USTs, release
detectionandpreventionrequirements, releasereportingandinvestigationrequirements,
and
releaseresponseand correctiveaction requirements.

Specifically,with respectto this site,PALCO is responsible


for the followins statutorv
violations:

1. Failureto preventa release,


in violationof 40 cFR $$ 290.30,
280.31and CaliforniaHealth& SaferyCodeSS25292.1(a)_ (c),
25292.3(a) and (b).

2. Failureto properlydetectand monitorreleases,


in violation ol'
40 CFR $$ 280.40- 280.44and CaliforniaHealth& SafetyCode \ 25292.

3. Failureto properlyreportand keeprecordsof the release,in


violationof 40 cFR $g 280.34,280.50, 280.52,280.53,2g0.63(b)
and CaliforniaHealth& SafetyCode$$ 25289,25293 and25295(a)(l).

4. Failureto takepropercorrectiveaction,in violation of 40 CFR


{i$ 280.53,280.60- 280.66and california Health& Saferycode
g 2s2es(a)(l).

IMMINENT AND SUBSTANTIAL ENDANGERMENT


42 u.s.c. S 6e72(a)(l)(B)

BetweenJanuaryof 2001 andJanuary2006,aswell asearlierin the 1990's, ongoing


violationsof RCRA asdescribedhereinhaveoccurred. PALCO usedand stored,una.uy
continueto useandstore,petroleumproductsatthe CompanyGaragesitein a mannerwhich
hasallowedsignificantquantitiesof hazardouspetroleumconstituentsto be dischargedto
soil and groundwaterbeneathboth the site and adjacentproperties.

Contaminantlevels of TPHg, benzene,toluene,and other petroleumconstituentsin


groundwaterat the site are significantly greaterthan the allowable MCL and,lorWeO for
saidconstituents.Benzene,MTBE, TAME, andTBA areknown or suspectedcarcinogens.
Tolueneis a reproductivetoxin. Ethylbenzene, methanolandxylenearelive toxins. All are
known to harm both plants and animals. In their concentrationsat this sitethesepollutants
Noticeof ViolationsandIntentto File Suit- RCRA
ThePacificLumberCompany
February1,2006
Page6

are creating an imminent and substantial endangermentto public health and the
environment.

The violations allegedin this Notice areknowing and intentionalin that PALCO in
thepasthasused,storedand may havesoldpetroleumproductsat the CompanyGaragesite
which are known to contain hazardoussubstances, and in that PALCO has intendedthat
suchproductsbe soldto andusedby employees or by thepublic. PALCO hasknown of the
contamination at the site sinceat leastJanuaryof 2001, and hasalsoknown that failing to
promptly remediatethe pollution allows the contaminationto migratethrough soil and
groundwaterat and adjacentto the site, andto continuallycontaminateand re-contaminate
actualand potentialsourcesof drinking water in additionto surfacewaters.

Violationsof RCRA of the type allegedhereinare a major causeof the continuing


declinein waterqualityand posea continuingthreatto existingand futuredrinkingrvater
supplies of Northern California. With every discharge,groundwater supplies are
contaminated.Thesedischargescan and mustbe controlledin order fbr the sroundwater
supplyto be returnedto a safe sourceof drinking water.

In additionto the violationsset forth above,this Notice is intendedto cover all


violationsof RCRA evidencedby informationwhichbecomeavailablcto RiverWatchafter
the dateof this Notice, and seeksall penaltiesand otherenforcementprovisionsrelatedto
suchviolations.

River Watch is a non-profit corporationdedicatedto the protectionand enhancement


ofthe watersofthe Stateof Californiaincludingallrivers,creeks,streamsandgroundwater
in NorthernCalifornia. River Watch is organizedunderthe laws of the Stateof California.
Its address
is614l SebastopolAvenue, Suite140,in Sebastopol, California,telephone(707)
874-4372.

The violationsof PALCO as setforth in this Notice affect the health and enjoyment
of membersof River Watch who resideand recreatein the effectedwatershedareas.The
membersof River Watch use the watershedfor domesticwater supply, agriculturalwater
supply,recreation,sports,fishing, swimming, shellfish harvesting,hiking, photography,
naturewalks and the like. Their health, use and enjoymentof this natural resourceare
conditionsspecificallyimpairedby theseviolationsof RCRA.

River Watch has retained legal counsel to representthem in this matter. All
communications
shouldbe addressed to:
Noticeof ViolationsandIntentto File Suit- RCRA
ThePacificLumberCompany
February 1,2006
Page7

JackSilver,Esquire
Law Office of JackSilver
P.O.Box 5469
SantaRosa,CA95402
Tel. (707) s28-8175
Fax (707) 528-8675

RCRA requiresthat 60 days prior to the initiation of an action for violation of a


permit,standard,regulation,condition,requirement, prohibitionor order effectiveunder
RCRA, a private party must give notice of the violation to the allegedviolator. the
Administratorofthe EnvironmentalProtectionAgencyandthe Statein which the violation
is allegedto haveoccurred(42 U.S.C.$ 6972(b)(1)(A)).RCRA alsorequiresthara privare
party provide 90 days prior notice to the allegedviolator, the Administrator of' the
EnvironmentalProtectionAgency and the Statein which the violation is allegedto have
occurredbeforeinitiating an actionfor an imminentandsubstantialendangerment to human
healthor the environment.(42 U.S.C. g 6972(bX2XA)).

River Watchbelievesthis Notice sufficientlystatesthe groundsfor filing suit under


the statutoryand regulatoryprovisions of RCRA as to the site referencedabove. At the
closeof the noticeperiodsor shortly thereafter,River Watch intendsto file suit against
PALCO undertheprovisionsof RCRA for eachof theviolationsallegedin this Noticeand
with respectto the existingconditionsat this site.

Duringthe 90-daynoticeperiod,however,River Watchis willing to discusseffective


remediesfor the violationsreferencedin this Notice. If PALCO wishesto pursuesuch
discussions
in theabsenceof litigation,we would encourage you to initiatesuchdiscussions
immediatelyso that we might be on track to resolvingour issuesbeforethe end of the notice
period. River Watch will not delay the filing of a lawsuit if discussionshave not
commenced by the time the 90-daynoticeperiodends.

Verytruly yours,
,'\ /
/ \ / t /
\rlsoL'gr'-1.)"'-,
JfflkSilver
JS:lhm
Noticeof ViolationsandIntentto File Suit- RCRA
ThePacificLumberCompany
February1,2006
Page8

cc:

NorthernCalifornia River Watch


6741 SebastopolAvenue,Suite 140
Sebastopol,
CA 95472

StephenL. Johnson,Administrator
U.S. EnvironmentalProtectionAgency
Ariel Rios Building
1200Pennsylvania Avenue,N.W.
M a i l C o d e3 2 1 3 A
Washington,D.C. 20460

WayneNastri, RegionalAdministrator
U.S. EnvironmentalProtectionAgency,Region9
75 HawthorneStreet
SanFrancisco,CA 94105

CelesteCanti.i,ExecutiveDirector
StateWater ResourcesControl Board
P. O .B o x 1 0 0
Sacramento, California95812-0100

Mark Leary,ExecutiveDirector
Calif. IntegratedWasteMgmt. Board
1001"I" Street
Sacramento, CA 95814

CapitalCorporateServices,Inc.
RegisteredAgent for
The Pacific Lumber Company
455 CapitolMall Complex#217
Sacramento, CA 95814

You might also like