Laserfiche WebLink
.r <br /> I other groundwater reservoirs, the County could immediately activate existing production wells or <br /> 2 add additional production wells to tap the groundwater reservoir. <br /> 3 4. Leaking underground storage tanks ("USTs") and pipelines at a gas station for which <br /> 4 Defendants are and were responsible have damaged some of that groundwater reservoir by <br /> 5 multiple releases of gasoline, documented to have begun as early as 1988. <br /> 6 5. Plaintiff seeks a civil penalty in this case against Defendants. <br /> 7 6. Defendants have had knowledge that the USTs have released gasoline containing benzene <br /> 8 (a known carcinogen) to the environment in 1988 and possibly at other times as well. <br /> 9 7. Defendants have also known since 1988, and possibly earlier, that the gasoline containing <br /> 10 benzene was migrating down through the subsurface soil and laterally in the groundwater. <br /> 11 8. Defendants have not investigated the full extent of the damage to the groundwater, nor <br /> 12 have they cleaned up the contamination. At a minimum this has been ongoing for the past eleven <br /> 13 years when Defendant UNOCAL first reported a release of gasoline to the environment. <br /> 14 9. Rather than clean up the contamination, Defendant sold off its entire gas retailing <br /> 15 business in 5 states, TOSCO for over$1 billion in cash in April 1997. <br /> 16 10. The penalty sought here by the State is to recover all economic advantages realized by the <br /> 17 Defendants since 1988 for failing to investigate the full extent of the damage and cleanup the <br /> 18 contamination. <br /> 19 11. Also, this suit seeks a penalty against Defendant for its high degree of culpability in <br /> 20 failing to investigate and cleanup the contamination in a timely fashion in accordance with good <br /> 21 engineering practices and California law. <br /> 22 12. Defendants are repeat violators nationwide, having paid millions of dollars in penalties <br /> 23 for environmental violations similar to the violations alleged in this Complaint. <br /> 24 13. The prior record of Defendant's noncompliance and penalties is a major aggravating <br /> 25 factor that warrants imposition of the maximum penalty allowed by California law. <br /> 26 14. Also, Plaintiff seeks an injunction ordering the Defendants to promptly satisfy their <br /> 27 nondelegable duties to clean up the contamination which continues to cause irreparable harm to <br /> 28 the groundwater moving under the property in question. <br /> H:\HONE\MYOUNaCASES\UNOCALNCOWLAfN.WPD 2 <br />