Laserfiche WebLink
responsibility, it is imperative that regional boards pursue all available avenues for gathering the <br /> necessary information to proceed to cleanup. This clearly includes requiring that all parties with <br /> potential responsibility participate in investigating the sources and extent of pollution. In this <br /> case, however,evidence gathered pursuant to the earlier investigations does not support <br /> continuing requirements that Chevron investigate and remediate petroleum hydrocarbon <br /> contamination at its former site. <br /> The Chevron station may have had minor surface releases during its operations. Low <br /> detections of hydrocarbons and trace concentrations of toluene and xylene in shallow soil may be <br /> remnants of such releases. However,there is sufficient evidence available in the record to <br /> determine that the magnitude of any possible releases prior to 1972 were minor in nature,did not <br /> materially contribute to the plume, and would not warrant further investigation or remediation. <br /> Under these circumstances,we are unable to conclude that the Regional Board appropriately <br /> named Chevron as a party responsible for the ongoing investigation and remediation of a plume <br /> originating off-site. The State Board has previously found that"it is appropriate and responsible <br /> for a Regional Board to name all parties for which there is reasonable evidence of responsibility, <br /> even in cases of disputed responsibility" in a cleanup order." However, the Regional Board must <br /> show substantial evidence to support naming a party in a cleanup order,and this conclusion may <br /> be applied to later phases of investigation orders where a substantial body of evidence has been <br /> produced." Chevron has complied with earlier stages of an investigation that has produced <br /> evidence showing another party's responsibility for discharges affecting groundwater. This <br /> evidence outweighs the evidence relied upon by the Regional Board to name Chevron in the <br /> letter order. Under these facts, Chevron should not be required to participate in the continuing <br /> investigation and remediation of those discharges." The conclusions of this Order are based <br /> upon the unique facts presented and are not intended to have precedential effect on investigation <br /> or cleanup activities at other sites. <br /> " State Board Order No.WQ 85-7,at p. 11. <br /> 12 See,State Board Order No.WOO 2003-0020,at p.8. <br /> " If Opal Cliffs'continuing investigation and cleanup produces substantial new evidence that the former Chevron <br /> station or any other source has discharged or may have discharged waste that contributes to the need for cleanup at <br /> the site,the Regional Board should require any such entities to participate in appropriate phases of the investigation <br /> and remediation. <br /> 7. <br />