New Warehouse for Synergy & RES

Synergy Environmental, Inc.
Brink Young

October 9, 2015

At the beginning of this month, Synergy Environmental, Inc. & Remediation Equipment & Services, LLC moved into a new 6000 Square Foot warehouse in Royersford, Pennsylvania. The warehouse, located on 5th Street will provide additional space for building treatment systems. The added space will allow for the building of multiple systems/trailers at any given time. This will greatly increase the capabilities of RES.

The building will also house Synergy’s Groundwater Division, setting up a larger space for all field activities moving forward.

Gary Sheridan and Mitch Moss called the new space “Refreshing” and stated “The new warehouse will give RES unlimited capabilities to build treatment systems”.

The new location also provides adequate space for the refurbished trailers and systems that are available for rent, resale or lease. Currently we have an inventory of 13 Systems all with various sizes/capacities and technologies. Please call us with your needs, as these systems can be leased or purchased at very attractive rates.

2016 is looking like a great year for both Synergy & RES

Mitch Moss is Director of RES, can be contacted at 484-369-2021. Gary Sheridan is the Operations Manager, can be contacted at 484-369-2015.

Click here to see more pictures of the warehouse

EPA Issues New Rules for Underground Storage Tanks

Frost Brown Todd LLC
Philip J. Schworer and Joseph M. Reidy

October 13, 2015

See EPA UST Links at the end of this article

EPA has issued new rules for the installation, operation, and maintenance of underground storage tanks (USTs).  The changes include:

– removing previous deferrals for certain USTs
– establishing new construction requirements for newly installed UST systems
– adding new notification requirements
– strengthening operator training procedures
– imposing regular equipment testing and inspections
– creating a “safe harbor” when using established codes of practice

Previously Deferred USTs

USTs that stored fuel for emergency power generators, were constructed in the field, or were part of an airport fuel hydrant system were previously exempted from some or all of the EPA’s requirements. With the new rule, owners and operators of USTs that store fuel for emergency power generators will need to install and operate release detection. Owners and operators of field constructed tanks and fuel hydrant systems must follow the requirements for release reporting, response and investigation, closure, financial responsibility and notification.

Continue Reading

The Broadening Scope Of Pollution Legal Liability Insurance

Anderson Kill
Peter A. Halprin

October 13, 2015

Originally published by Risk Management Magazine, August 2015.

From the early 1990s through the early years of this century, pollution legal liability (PLL) insurance policies were increasingly specialized. The policies were marked by detailed underwriting and tight targeting of specific types of policyholders. Then as now, the scope of such coverage often depended on the definition of “pollution conditions” (sometimes called a “pollution event”). Today, however, the trend is toward a broadening of the phrase.

A typical PLL policy will provide coverage for liabilities as a result of a “pollution condition.” In the early days of such policies, “pollution conditions” were defined as:

The discharges, dispersal release or escape of smoke, vapors, soot, fumes, acids, alkalis, toxic
chemicals, liquids or gases, waste materials or other irritants, contaminants or pollution into
or upon land, the atmosphere or any watercourse of body of water, which results in bodily
injury or property damage.

In more recent years, in some policies, the definition has expanded to include express reference to things like “hazardous substances, petroleum hydrocarbons, low-level radioactive materials, medical waste and waste materials.”

Continue Reading

No Good Deed Goes Unpunished

Weil Gotshal & Manges LLP
Adam S. Tolin

October 8, 2015

Sometimes the plaintiffs’ bar cannot help themselves, even if a corporate entity tries to do the right thing.  In Missouri, Phillips 66 (Phillips) attempted to remediate contamination to an underground well, demolished homes to fix the problem, and provided free bottled water to neighboring homeowners until the problem was rectified.  What did they get for their troubles?  Why, a class action lawsuit, of course!  Fortunately, the 8th Circuit recently reversed class certification on grounds that the class was not uniformly injured, and probably not even injured at all.  Smith v. ConocoPhillips Pipe Line Co., 2015 WL 5332450 (8th Cir. Sept. 15, 2015).

The facts are far more defense friendly than we are accustomed to seeing.  Phillip owns a petroleum products pipeline which runs through the town of West Alton, Missouri. After a leak in the line was discovered in 1963, its source was repaired, but the contamination at the leak site was not remediated. In 2002 contaminants from the leak were discovered in a family residence in West Alton.  Phillips purchased and demolished this property, as well as others affected by the leak. In cooperation with the Missouri Department of Natural Resources, Phillips fenced in the area around the leak site and set up monitoring wells to track any spread of pollutants. For five years, Philips provided precautionary bottled water for household use for residents nearby. While groundwater under the property owned by Phillips is contaminated, the surrounding properties have tested clean.  Happy ending?  Well, not quite.

Continue Reading