ERP - Environmental Risk Professionals

PCE Migration and Groundwater Contamination

Improper storage and handling of PCE and other dry-cleaning solvents can lead to releases that reach the subsurface soil and groundwater or stormwater systems. Contamination from the dry-cleaning site can migrate to adjacent residential or commercial properties, drinking water sources, and natural resources. Significant cleanup costs, third-party bodily injury and property damage claims, and natural resource damage claims can result.

Leaks and Spills

Leaks can occur from solvent storage containers, dry cleaning machines and equipment, underground or aboveground storage tanks, associated hoses, valves, and piping. Spills can occur from loading machines with PCE or other dry-cleaning chemicals, during loading/unloading of solvent from a delivery truck into a storage tank or from a delivery drum into the equipment, and from overfilling storage tanks or equipment.

Secondary Containment Deficiencies

Insufficient or no secondary containment of storage tanks, equipment, wastewater treatment units, solvent storage, and hazardous waste storage containers can lead to the release of chemicals. Secondary containment must be constructed of leakproof materials impermeable to solvent and cleaning fluids and capable of containing 110% of the largest possible spill.

Loading, Unloading and Transit

Leaks or spills during the loading, unloading, or transporting solvents, chemicals, or wastes sent for disposal can result in environmental liability. Hazardous waste must be labeled, contained, and transported by a licensed and permitted waste hauler. The dry cleaner could become liable for cleanup and third-party claims resulting from a spill during loading, unloading, or transporting dry cleaning chemicals or wastes if the transporter is not properly insured.

Hazardous Waste Management

Hazardous wastes produced by dry cleaning facilities include spent solvent, separator water, cooked powder residues, still bottom residues, spent cartridges, cartridge filters, button/lint trap wastes, and wash water from in-house cleaning of filters. Hazardous wastes are subject to federal and state regulations, and improper storage, labeling, or disposal could result in environmental cleanup and tort liability against the waste generator.

Wastewater

Wastewater generated by dry cleaners may include separator water, vacuum water, boiler blowdown, and wash water. Wastewater leaks or spills can occur from dry cleaning equipment, disposal storage containers, and on-site wastewater treatment units. Dry cleaners may be subject to state and local regulations regarding the discharging and disposal of wastewater. Discharging wastewater containing dry cleaning chemicals into sinks, floor drains, septic systems, and sewer systems can contaminate soil and groundwater. PCE and other chlorinated solvents are denser than water, can settle in sewer lines, and leak through joints and cracks. Due to chlorinated solvents being volatile, they can easily turn from a liquid to a vapor and penetrate the sewer wall. Wastewater containing cleaning solvents or synthetic detergents that enter surface waters can also cause natural resource damage.

Solvents

PCE and other chlorinated solvents are heavier than water and can sink deep into the groundwater and soil, and contamination can persist for a long time. Chlorinated solvents do not easily degrade, are highly volatile, and can travel considerable distances. Even relatively small amounts of these chemicals can cause significant contamination effects. Chlorinated solvents can also cause health risks, such as skin, eye, and respiratory irritation, headaches, dizziness, damage to kidneys and liver, and cancer. Petroleum-based solvents and other dry-cleaning chemicals are less toxic but can still negatively impact the environment.

Air Emissions

Air emissions may occur related to releases of solvent vapors into the atmosphere during the transfer of clothes from the washer to the dryer and the venting of the dryer exhaust airstream. Fugitive emissions may also occur from leaks around machine door gaskets, evaporation from spent filters, solvent spills, open containers, and losses during solvent transfer. Chlorinated solvent and petroleum-based solvent contamination beneath a building can also be a source of vapor intrusion into the building. Air emissions and vapor intrusion can impact indoor air conditions within the dry-cleaning space and adjacent properties or building tenant spaces, resulting in health hazards and third-party bodily injury claims.

Environmental Coverage Can Provide Coverage For

On-site cleanup of new and pre-existing pollution conditions

Off-site cleanup of new and pre-existing pollution conditions

Third-party claims for bodily injury, property damage

Third-party claims for cleanup

Defense of third-party claims

Both sudden and gradual pollution conditions

Business interruption resulting from pollution conditions

Aboveground and underground storage tanks

First and third-party transportation pollution liability

Loading and unloading

Natural resource damage

Civil fines and penalties

Non-owned disposal sites

Emergency response

Claims Scenarios & Examples

Multiple dry cleaners faced cleanup liability at disposal sites as responsible parties for their hazardous waste. One of the cleanup sites was licensed to treat, store and dispose of hazardous waste, including the waste generated by dry cleaners (still bottoms and spent filters). The other site was also once licensed to treat, store and dispose of hazardous waste from dry cleaners. The state where the disposal facilities were located sued dozens of dry cleaners for cleanup cost recovery, alleging that the waste they sent to these facilities caused environmental issues. As generators, dry cleaners that send waste to these facilities are considered responsible parties; therefore, they are considered jointly and severally liable for cleanup. Joint and several liability means that anyone responsible party is legally obligated to pay for any or all of the response costs incurred to address the environmental conditions.

A dry cleaner used petroleum hydrocarbon-based dry cleaning solvents stored in drums on the pavement behind the business. One of the drums was leaking, and the leaked solvent entered a storm drain that discharged to a nearby creek. A passerby noticed a sheen on a nearby creek and reported it to the State. The State traced the leak back to the leaking drum at the dry cleaner. The dry cleaner faced civil fines and cleanup costs to address the release.

A dry-cleaning operation dumped toxic chemicals into the soil and contaminated the water supply for the surrounding area. Even though filters were installed within the water supply system to remove contaminants, it was determined that the pollution from the dry cleaners continued to impact the water quality in the water supply well. Damages of $1.3 million were sought in a lawsuit to cover the cost of constructing and operating a permanent new water supply system to serve the affected area.

Thirty business employees sued the dry-cleaning company across the street from their building. The lawsuit claimed that the dry cleaner negligently contaminated their drinking water. Many of the employees involved in the lawsuit developed cancer and liver disease. These employees had been drinking tap water for years from ground wells, which were tested and shown to be contaminated with PCE concentrations over federal contaminant levels. The chemical was traced back to the dry cleaner.

A dry cleaner in a strip mall installed a fuel oil underground storage tank to power a steam boiler on the property. It was later discovered that while the storage tank itself was intact, the fill and vent pipes associated with the tank had large holes leaking fuel every time it was filled. The real estate owner filed a lawsuit against the owners of the dry cleaner and delivery companies to force them to contribute to the cleanup costs associated with the contamination caused by the fuel oil tank, which surpassed $1 million.

A lawsuit against a dry-cleaning company, accusing it of contaminating groundwater with a solvent it used in the cleaning process, resulted in a $2.18 million settlement. The lawsuit claimed the dry-cleaning business allowed dry-cleaning solvents to migrate to the soil and groundwater under and near the business location. According to the lawsuit, the area was contaminated with PCE. Money from the settlement was divided equally between the county and the state.

A dry cleaner tenant in an upscale shopping center failed to maintain adequate containment for its spent PCE-solvent canisters. The canisters were stored in an exterior trash container, and over time the PCE leaked onto the cracked macadam surface and eventually migrated off-site. The plume traveled with the flow of groundwater beneath nearby houses. Volatile organic compounds in the groundwater plume migrated through vapor intrusion into the indoor air in the residences at levels that posed a health hazard. The residents filed bodily injury and property damage claims against the dry cleaner and the shopping center's owner.

A bank sued the owners of a dry cleaner, holding them responsible for the dry-cleaning chemicals that contaminated the block and its surroundings. The bank owned a house near the cleaners through foreclosure, and it failed to sell the property at its market value because of the polluted groundwater under the house. The suit sought $10,800 for environmental testing on the properties and three counts of damages for nuisance, negligence, and trespassing, each more than $100,000.

Property Types

Dry Cleaners

Environmental Exposures May Include: