Why You Don’t Have To Worry About Your Site Being Re-contaminated and You Can Clean-up Now

Written by Stephen R. Henshaw, President & CEO of EnviroForensics
As seen in the January 2012 issue of Cleaner & Launderer

Many dry cleaners have expressed their desire to evaluate the soil and groundwater beneath their businesses for the presence of dry cleaning chemicals, but they are concerned that if they go through a cleanup, the property could be re-contaminated down the road.

Relax, the manner in which dry cleaning is conducted today is far more protective of the environment than it was even 30 years ago.  For one, the machines designed and manufactured today are much safer than those of the past.  Secondly, the safeguards employed today, including the installation of spill containment pans beneath machines and automatic shut-offs are protective of the environment.  Finally, good housekeeping practices and the proper storage and disposal of spent solvent and filters today will greatly minimize the potential for spills and releases to enter the environment. Read more »

You Sold Your Business and You’re in the Clear…..Not So Fast

You worked hard to grow your business and you had the good fortune to sell it for a profit.  You had your lawyer look over the sale contract and you even had the buyer indemnify you for future environmental claims, should they ever arise.  You did everything right and now it’s time to relax and enjoy the fruits of your labor.

Several years pass and one day you get a letter in the mail.  The letter is sent “certified” and you have to sign for it.  You open the letter, it’s from the state environmental regulatory department informing you that as a past owner and/or operator of the sold business, you are responsible for groundwater contamination. Read more »

Vapor Intrusion; Who’s DEFAULT is it?

Written by Steve Henshaw in Collaboration with Jeff Carnahan LPG, Senior Project Manager with EnviroForensics. As seen in the March 2011 issue of Cleaner & Launderer.

As most drycleaners know, at some time in the not too distant future, you or someone you know will have to deal with the accidental release of perchloroethylene (Perc) or Stoddard solvent.  Even if the release is decades old and unknown to the current owner/operator, soil and/or groundwater contamination may come to light during a property transaction, a refinance or through the course of standard due diligence investigations.  This finding commonly results in a demand by the state environmental regulatory agency to determine the extent of the contamination and if necessary, remediate the contamination. 

Environmental regulatory agencies often prioritize contaminated sites based on whether or not people may come into contact with, or be exposed to toxic chemicals.  The three primary ways (or pathways) that people can come into contact with these chemicals is by getting contaminated soil or groundwater on their skin, eating and ingesting contaminated soil or groundwater, or by inhaling the chemicals that volatilize from the contaminated soil or groundwater.  If it is determined that one of these potential exposure pathways is complete, it becomes a priority to abate the exposure immediately, even before the extent of the impacts have been fully defined.  Read more »

Flexdar Court Sides With Insureds: Reinforces Kiger; Broadens “Ambiguous” Interpretation of Absolute Pollution Exclusion Language

Written by Justin Gifford, EnviroForensics and PolicyFind General Counsel

The Indiana Court of Appeals’ November opinion in the recent State Automobile Mutual Insurance Co. v Flexdar, Inc. (Ind. App. 2010) comes as good news to business owners like drycleaners who currently or have historically used tetrachlorethene (perc) or petroleum solvents that may have been released into the environment.  The Appellate Court’s decision re-examined the landmark American States Insurance Co. v. Kiger (662 N.E.2d 945, Ind. 1996) as well as its progeny and found for Flexdar, Inc., the insured.  (Kiger established that the absolute pollution exclusion found in many general commercial liability (GCL) policies is ambiguous and, as a result, ineffective in insulating insurers from their duties to defend and/or indemnify their insureds for claims made by the Indiana Department of Environmental Management that the insureds investigate and clean up releases of perc or other substances into soil and groundwater.)  Read more »

Can PERC Releases Be Age Dated and Fingerprinted?

As seen in the May 2010 issue of Cleaner & Launderer
Written by Stephen Henshaw, President and CEO of EnviroForensics

For years parties responsible for the costs associated with environmental investigations and cleanups of Perc contamination have been trying to determine when Perc releases have occurred.  This topic has important ramifications when sites have had a series of dry cleaning operations over time, when different insurance carriers insured dry cleaners and property owners, and when several dry cleaning releases have comingled together from different dry cleaning locations.

So, for the past 15 to 20 years, scientists like Dr. Konrad Banaszak with EnviroForensics, have been trying to figure out how to age date PERC releases.  So, can Perc releases be accurately age dated?  The answer is yes, no and maybe.  Read more »