|
|
|
Uploaded: Monday, February 4, 2013, 4:49 PM
Attorney General accuses BP and Arco of environmental violations
|
California Attorney General Kamala Harris and district attorneys from seven counties across the state filed suit Monday alleging that BP and Arco have engaged in environmental violations at more than 780 gas stations in the state.
The lawsuit, filed in Alameda County Superior Court, alleges that BP West Coast Products, BP Products North America, Inc., and Atlantic Richfield Company have violated state laws governing hazardous materials and hazardous waste by failing to properly inspect and maintain underground tanks used to store gasoline for retail sale at gas stations in California.
Arco is a subsidiary of BP, which is headquartered in London.
Alameda County District Attorney Nancy O'Malley and prosecutors from six other counties joined Harris in filing the suit.
The suit claims that since October 2006, the BP companies and ARCO have improperly monitored, inspected and maintained the underground storage
tanks.
It alleges that the oil companies tampered with or disabled leak detection devices and failed to test secondary containment systems, conduct monthly inspections, train employees on proper protocol, and maintain operational alarm systems, among other violations.
The suit says inspectors from the Alameda County Department of Environmental Health obtained documents that showed BP officials instructed
their service stations in Alameda County to maintain gasoline leak detection sensors at a height contrary to California law.
The suit alleges that this resulted in leak detection sensors at multiple ARCO stations in the county to be positioned so they were unable to detect a fuel leak at the earliest possible opportunity.
The lawsuit also claims that the defendants improperly handled and disposed of hazardous wastes and materials associated with the underground storage tanks at retail gas stations throughout the state.
The suit says a statewide investigation found violations of hazardous materials and hazardous waste laws and regulations at gas stations in 37 counties across the state, including 28 gas stations in Alameda County.
O'Malley said in a statement, "The laws that regulate proper handling and storage of hazardous materials are not trivial. They exist to protect the precious and finite public resource that is a clean and safe environment."
She said, "When a fuel leak occurs it can contaminate the soil and groundwater for decades. We will not tolerate the dangerous and irresponsible practice of cutting corners on environmental regulations."
BP officials could not immediately be reached for comment.— Bay City News Service Are you receiving Express, our free daily e-mail edition? See a sample and sign-up for Express.
|
|
| Comments
|
Posted by Dave, a resident of San Ramon, on Feb 5, 2013 at 3:34 pm "The suit alleges that this resulted in leak detection sensors at multiple ARCO stations in the county to be positioned so they were unable to detect a fuel leak at the earliest possible opportunity."
According to ABC 7 news, these sensors are to be installed underground next to the tanks. They were found at several gas stations one or two inches under the lid at the access port.
My question: Who inspected these tanks while under construction. If the contractor made a mistake AND it was not picked up by the building inspector, why is thsi ARCO/BP's fault?
I just don't want to see gas going up higher AND I would like to see the reponsible party take repsonsibility for their actions!
|
|
Posted by Anne, a resident of San Ramon, on Feb 6, 2013 at 11:12 pm Our gas prices and taxes go up when the fuel leaks into the soil and groundwater and then needs to be cleaned up. Cleanups cost several hundreds of thousands of dollars. These gas station owners know better. These laws have been in effect for many years.
|
|
Posted by Dave, a resident of San Ramon, on Feb 7, 2013 at 7:05 am Anne, you are missing my point. A building inspector for either a city or county was apointed to 'sign off' all phases of construction. They do this to 'protect' the public. Why is the inspector not being held accoutable???
The same thing has happened in residential construction, cities and counties are sending out unqualified inspectors and the consumer ends up paying for the mistakes of the contractor, because the inpsectors, assigned to protect the public, have let us down.
|
|
|
| |
|
Send this story
Print this story
