This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?
SHELLOIL CO:MPANY,EQUILON ENTERPRISES, LLC d/b/ a Shell Oil Products, US, a Corporation, CONOCOPHILLIPSCOMPANY,WRB REFININGLP, CONOCOPHILLIPSWRB PARTNERLLC, and CENOVUSGPCO LLC, Defendants.
) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )
Case No. ----Jury Trial Demanded
Now complaining comes the Plaintiff, VILLAGE OF ROXANA, ILLINOIS, by its counsel, and
of the Defendants
SHELLOIL COMPANY;EQUILONENTERPRISES,LLC, d/b/ a
Shell Oil Products,
US; CONOCOPHILLIPSCOMPANY;WRB REFINING LPi CONOCOPHILLIPS
WRB PARTNERLLC; and CENOVUSGPCO LLC, for its cause of action states:
This is an action brought seeking compensation judgment
by the Village of Roxana, Illinois ("Roxana" for environmental of Defendants' pollution caused
the "Village"), Defendants
and a declaratory Discharge
under the Illinois
Water Pollutant 2. 1,500 people, encompasses
Act, 415 ILCS 25/0.01 et seq.
Roxana, located in Madison County, Illinois, is a village of approximately with 655 households, and 436 families residing in it. The Village
6.8 square miles. A majority pollution
of the land in Roxana is taken
up by the Wood River oil refinery, The Wood River oil refinery,
Case No. _
from which is the subject of this action. pipelines, is referred to hereafter
along with its associated
as the "Refinery." 3. The conduct complained
in this Complaint
consists of trespass,
nuisance, unjust enrichment, and water pollution resulting from releases of benzene, volatile organic compounds, and other hydrocarbons to the water, land, and air in the Village by Defendants who manufactured, stored, and transported benzene and other hydrocarbons at the Refinery and its associated pipelines from 1918 through present date. 4. Contantinationof the groundwater has occurred as the result of releases
and spills of petroleum products from leaking pipes and storage tanks, transfer of product, equipment failures, and ruptures, as well as from the leaching of compounds from contaminated soils and sediments or infiltration from surface water
The impact of on-site waste disposal activities has contributed to
groundwater contamination. 5. Because of the extensive use of groundwater in the area including by the
operators of the Refinery, the vulnerable nature of the local groundwater resource, and the close proximity of wells to areas of contantination, drinking water in Roxana is potentially at risk. Moreover, volatile products in groundwater have penetrated into homes through seepage, cracks, or drains, and result in high contaminant
concentrations in indoor air. 6. Surface water contamination has occurred as the result of spills and other
releases as well as through the planned discharge of treated and untreated wastewater to receiving streams, including the Cahokia Diversion Channel and the Mississippi River. 7. Soil contamination exists as the result of spills and leaks, movement of
contantinated soil as the result of surface runoff, and the settling-out of contaminated dusts. Spills and surface runoff may have contantinated soil accessible to the public. Contantination of the food chain is a possibility through surface deposition of airborne
Case No. _ , Page2of37
contaminants. 8. Releases have also resulted in airborne emissions as a result of direct
releases to the air, volatilization from contaminated soils and water, and entrainment from contaminated soils as airborne dusts. Outdoor air has shown high contaminant concentrations. 9. Refinery's A large number of chemicals are released to the air as a result of the day-to-day operations. These substances include aromatic solvents, aromatic other
chlorinated solvents, alcohols and ethers, acids, phenolics, polynuclear hydrocarbons, aliphatic hydrocarbons, aldehydes,
corrosives, metals, and
miscellaneous compounds. 10. The current operator of the Refinery continues to conduct its operation so
as to release these substances in excessive levels into the air of the Village of Roxana, exposing inhabitants, workers, and visitors to the nuisance and mechanical irritant effects of these chemicals. In some individuals, repeated exposure to these substances may contribute to dust overloading of the lungs. The very young, the elderly, or those with pre-existing respiratory conditions are at the greatest risk for this hazard.
Plaintiff Roxana is a municipality incorporated under the laws of the State
of illinois with its place of governmental activity within the State of Illinois. The Village is the owner of certain property within the Village limits. 12. Defendant Shell Oil Company ("Shell Oil") is a corporation organized and
existing under the laws of the State of Delaware with its principal place of business in the State of Texas. At various times relevant to the claims asserted herein, Shell Oil owned and/ or operated the Refinery (including its pipelines or certain of its pipelines). 13. Defendant Equilon Enterprises, LLC ("Equilon") d/b/ a Shell Oil Products
US ("SOPUS") is a company organized and existing under the laws of the State of Delaware with its principal place of business in the State of Texas.
Equilon is a
subsidiary of Shell Oil. At various times relevant to the claims asserted herein, Equilon owned and/ or operated the Refinery, und~~ its own name or using the name Shell Oil Products US. At the present time, Equilon maintains an ownership interest in, and continues to operate and control, the Refinery and/ or associated pipelines by way of easement in and around the Village. 14. Defendant ConocoPhillips Company ("Conoco") is a corporation
organized and existing under the laws of the State of Delaware with its principal place of business in the State of Texas. Conoco is the current operator of the Refinery. 15. Defendant WRB Refining LP is a limited partnership organized and
existing under the laws of the State of Delaware with its principal place of business in the State of Texas. WRB Refining LP is a joint venture entity owned by ConocoPhillips Company and Cenovus Energy Inc., of Alberta, Canada. owner of the Refinery and associated pipelines." 16. Defendant ConocoPhillips WRB Partner LLC is an entity organized and WRB Refining LP is a part-
existing under the laws of the State of Delaware with its principal place of business in the State of Texas. ConocoPhillips WRB Partner LLC is the Conoco entity which acts as a general partner and as managing partner in WRB Refining LP. 17. Defendants Conoco and/ or ConocoPhi11ips WRB Partner LLC are part-
owner of the Refinery and the pipelines. With respect to the Refinery, Conoco and/ or ConocoPhillips WRB Partner LLC is the successor to Toscopetro Corporation, which previously owned an interest in the Refinery and the pipelines. 18. Defendant Cenovus GPCO LLC is an entity organized and existing under
the laws of the State of Delaware, with its principal place of business in the State of LP is, was, or at times has also been known as WRB Refining LLC. On information and belief, WRB Refining LP is the denomination of the current joint venture and of the facility owner as described above and, to the extent WRB Refining LLC was at any time the denomination of the joint venture or the owner of the facility described herein, WRB Refining LP is its successor in this regard.
Case No. _ . Page4of37
1 WRB Refining
Texas. Cenovus GPCO LLC is the Cenovus Energy Inc. entity which acts as a general partner in WRB Refining LP and holds a 5~.percent ownership interest in the Refinery and associated pipelines. 19. Defendants WRB Refining" LP, ConocoPhillips WRB Partner LLC, and
Cenovus GPCO LLC are sometimes referred to herein, collectively, as "WRB." 20. Together, Shell Oil, Equilon, Conoco, and WRB are referred to as
"Defendants." From at least 1918 until present, Defendants at separate or overlapping times engaged in petroleum processing, and the production of oil and gas at the Refinery.
History of the Roxana Refinery 21. According to Shell Oil company history, the Royal Dutch/Shell Group By
founded Roxana Petroleum in 1912 to buy oil product properties in Oklahoma.
1916, Royal Dutch Shell, through Roxana Petroleum, had decided to build a refinery to process and sell oil from Oklahoma. 22. Shell purchased a 172-acre tract of farmland in Madison County, Illinois,
for the site of its Refinery. The site was selected because of its prime location between the Mississippi River and railroad lines. (The Village and the Refinery are part of the American Bottoms, which is the eastern flood plain of the Mississippi River. The American Bottoms has a two percent slope toward the river and stretches up to nine miles between the river and a nearly continuous, 200-300 foot high, 80-mile long bluff.) Oil would be transported to the Refinery from Oklahoma through one or more
pipelines that were constructed Simultaneously with the Refinery. 23. On April 21, 1917, Shell began building the Refinery, known then as "Shell
Oil's Wood River Manufacturing Complex." Oil began flowing through the pipelines on July 31, 1918. The Refinery began processing crude oil in September 1918. During the first year of operation, the Refinery'S two units processed nearly 2.2 million barrels
Case No. _ PageS of 37
of Oklahoma crude, turning out 66 million gallons of fuel oil, 13 million gallons of kerosene and 11 million gallons of gasoline. construction. 24. Even before the Refinery began operations, the surrounding town was By 1919, a third unit was under
planned. A full page ad in the Edwardsville Intelligencer newspaper on August 16,1917 depicted a plat of the Original Town of Roxana and encouraged investors to purchase real estate in "Roxana: The New Refinery Town." The Village of Roxana, which was formed around the Refinery, was incorporated with the lllinois Secretary of State on May 10, 1921. 25. In the 1930s, extensive experimentation with solvent extraction began. By
the late 1960s, the facility had the capacity to handle 200,000barrels per day. In 1990, the plant's capacity exceeded 285,000 barrels per day, and produced gasoline, aviation fuel, home heating oil, liquid petroleum gas, aviation turbine fuel, industrial fuel oil, asphalt, solvents, lubricating oil, and chemicals including benzene, tertiary amylene, acetone, and elemental sulfur. In the 1990's, Shell Oil processing units included distillation, catalytic cracking, catalytic reforming, sulfur recovery and benzene extraction. 26. The Refinery is currently capable of refining 306,000 barrels of crude oil
per day. The Refinery's wastewater is treated and the effluent is discharged to the Mississippi River. 27. The Refinery currently consists of several different plants located on a
number of tracts in the Village, indexed with the Madison County Treasurer under numerous parcel numbers. It occupies area south of Madison St. to the west of Route
111 (the "Southwest Property"), an area running north of Madison St. up to Eighth Street on both sides of Route 111 (the "West Property" and the "Main Property," as subdivided by Route Ill/Old Edwardsville Road), and area east of Chaffer Ave
running north of Eighth Street up to Tydeman Street (the "North Property"). The west boundary of the Refinery between Eighth Street and Rand Avenue adjoins the Village'S
CaseNo. _ . Page 6 of37
Public Works Yard, property owned and operated by the Village. The area west of the Refinery's North Property, between Eight~. Street and Tydeman Street, is residential. This area includes streets, alleys, and rights-of-way that are owned by the Village. Roxana High School is located approximately two-tenths of a mile north of the northern boundary of the Refinery. 28. underground During the 94 years of oil refining, numerous large storage tanks and pipelines were installed, used and maintained by Defendants to
manufacture, store, and transport oil and oil byproducts.
Some of these tanks are less
than 150 feet from the property lines of platted residential lots of the Village of Roxana. 29. hundred Defendants have reaped enormous profits during these nearly one
years of oil and gas processing at the Refinery. Oil bypro ducts were
manufactured, used, stored and distributed by Defendants who intentionally, willfully and wantonly, and/ or negligently failed to take appropriate measures to store and/ or dispose safely of the toxic materials or maintain the tanks and pipelines which stored and carried said toxic materials. Benzene and Other Toxic Substances 30. Benzene, also sometimes called benzol, is an organic chemical compound
that is a natural constituent of crude petroleum. Benzene is a colorless and highly flammable liquid with a sweet smell. The U.S. Department of Health and Human Services (DHHS) classifies benzene as a human carcinogen. Long-term exposure to excessive levels of benzene in the air causes leukemia, a potentially fatal cancer of the blood-forming organs, in susceptible individuals. In particular, exposure to benzene leukaemia (AML &
can cause acute myeloid leukemia or acute non-lymphocytic ANLL). 31.
Four chemical processes contribute to industrial benzene production: and steam
catalytic reforming, toluene hydrodealkylation, toluene disproportionation,
cracking. According to the ATSDR Toxicological Profile for benzene, between 1978 and
Case No. _ . Page7of37
1981, catalytic reformats accounted for approximately 44-50% of the total Ll.S benzene production. 32. Until World War II, most benzene was produced as a by-product of coke
production (or "coke-oven light oil") in. the steel industry. However, in the 1950s, increased demand for benzene, especially from the growing polymers industry,
necessitated the production of benzene from petroleum. Today, most benzene comes from the petrochemical industry, with only a small fraction being produced from coal. 33. Prior to the 1920s, benzene was frequently used as an industrial solvent, metal. As its toxicity became obvious, benzene was
especially for degreasing
supplanted by other solvents, especially toluene (methyl benzene), which has similar physical properties but is not as carcinogenic. 34. As a gasoline additive, benzene increases the octane rating and reduces
knocking. In the 1950's, tetraethyl lead replaced benzene as the most widely-used antiknock additive, but with the global phase-out of leaded gasoline, benzene has made a comeback as a gasoline additive in some nations. In the United States, concern over its negative health effects and the possibility of benzene's entering the groundwater have led to stringent regulation of gasoline IS benzene content with limits typically around 1%. 35. The petrochemical industry has been aware of the hazards of benzene and
benzene-containing products for more than eighty years. In a 1926 "Final Report of the Committee Chemical and Rubber Sections" - National Safety Council on Benzol, the authors wrote: "The most characteristic pathological effect of benzol is perhaps its destructive influence upon the cells of the blood and the blood- forming organs." Thus, industry knew by the mid-to-late 1920s that benzene caused destruction of the bloodforming organs. 36. Shell Oil was aware of these hazards, in part through its research arm, the
Emeryville Research Center of Shell Development Company in Emeryville, California
CaseNo. _ . Page 8 of 37
Shell Oil operated Shell Development from 1926 until 1966.
The major research arm of Shell Oil, Shell Development was one of a small number of large, pre-eminent private chemical research facilities on the West Coast. other projects, Shell Development compiled research on the safety of benzene. 37. In 1943, Shell Development circulated a compendium of papers by various Among its
authors, including papers entitled "Regarding Benzene including Noxious Gases and the Principles of Respiration Influencing Their Action" by Henderson and Haggard of the Chemical Catalog Company, Inc.; "Industrial Poisons in the United States II by Alice Hamilton, M.D.; "The Essentials of Occupational Diseases" by Reed and Harcourt; and "Occupational Diseases - Diagnosis, Medicolegal Aspects and Treatment" by R. T. Johnson, M.D. of the W.B Saunders Company, etc. This compendium clearly illustrated that Shell was following the scientific literature on benzene (benzol) in early 1943 and was aware of the association of benzene exposures with damage to the blood-forming organs at that time. 38. For example, the Henderson and Haggard paper noted that "prolonged
inhalation leads to subacute and chronic poisoning directed particularly against the hematopoietic system. II The paper further notes: "The effects of chronic benzene
poisoning upon the blood are three: a decrease of red blood cells, resulting in profound anemia; a diminution of the substances concerned in clotting, resulting in hemorrhages; and a loss of white blood cells and of the substances concerned in defending the
body against bacteria, resulting in liability to infection. There is considerable variation in susceptibility to chronic benzene poisoning; young persons of both sexes and particularly pregnant females show the greatest susceptibility. II The Reed and Harcourt paper noted: "In the case of chronic benzol poisoning in which small doses are absorbed over periods of days, weeks or months, the action on the tissue is still due to its solvent action, but in this chronic form the action is exerted chiefly on the marrow of the long bones disturbing the reticulo-endothelial system therein contained. These lesions to the
CaseNo. _ Page 9 of37
bone marrow lead to a destruction of the red blood cells, the white blood cells, and the blood platelets, together with a prolongatio.~ of both the coagulation and clotting of the blood.
39. language 40. School
Other papers in the Shell Development regarding
the chronic effects of benzene on the blood-forming
A 1943 report by Dr. M. H. Soley of the University of California Medical Shell Development advised that chronic benzene poisoning was
by the symptoms associated with the variable blood changes that may may be listed as follows: Polycythemia Leucemia or leucemoid blood exposure advised pictures, or anemia, Eosinophilia,
These blood changes or Leucopenia, or microcytosis,
... indeed, prolonged Dr. Soley further
at low concentrations
may be the most dangerous. exposure to any concentration susceptibility of individuals
that "[w]hile prolonged
of Benzene is dangerous, there is a marked variation of so that some, for unknown
resistant while others are quite susceptible. 41.
In 1948, the American Petroleum Institute (API) stated that "it is generally
considered that the only absolutely safe concentration for benzene is zero." 42. In a 1950 internal Shell Development memo from C.H. Hines, M.D. Industry," Dr.
entitled "Certain Problems of Environmental
Cancer in the Petroleum
Hines advised Shell: 1IInonly relatively few instances can the origin of environmental cancer be traced to contact with well defined chemical agents possessing established carcinogenic amines. . .. qualities.
Among such compounds in a table entitled
are arsenic, benzol, and aromatic Recognized Showing and Suspected the Organs or
Carcinogenic Agents Encountered Systems Chiefly
Affected," benzol and benzol derivatives were listed as recognized in the oil industry affected the blood-
and suspected carcinogenic agent encountered
forming organs. Thus, Shell had classified and was aware that benzol and benzol
CaseNo. _ Page 10 of37
derivatives were recognized and suspected carcinogenic agents primarily affecting the blood forming organs. 43. Nonetheless, despite this knowledge, during the course of oil
manufacturing, storage and transportation, Defendants have chosen to emphasize and elevate their own profits over the interest of the health and safety of the residents of Roxana by intentionally, willfully or negligently failing to contain the oil and oil byproducts within the storage tanks and pipelines associated with the Refinery so as not to pose a risk of danger to the residents of Roxana. 44. Benzene is not the only dangerous chemical released by Defendants from
the Refinery. Other chemicals involved include ethylbenzene, toluene, and n-hexane. 45. Ethylbenzene is found naturally in oil. Exposure to high levels of
ethylbenzene in the air for short periods can cause eye and throat irritation. Exposure to higher levels can result in vertigo and dizziness. In animals, exposure to very high
levels of ethylbenzene can cause death; exposure to relatively low concentrations of ethylbenzene for several days to weeks has been shown to result in potentially irreversible damage to the inner ear and hearing of animals. Such low-level exposure has also been shown to cause kidney damage in animals. An increase in kidney tumors in rats and lung and liver tumors in mice were found after they were exposed to ethylbenzene in air for two years. The International Agency for Research on Cancer (an expert group that is part of the World Health Organization) has determined that longterm exposure to ethylbenzene may cause cancer in humans. 46. Toluene is a clear, colorless liquid with a distinctive smell; its smell can be
detected at a concentration of 8 parts of toluene per million parts of air (ppm) and its taste in water can be detected at a concentration of between 0.04 and 1 ppm. 47. A serious health concern is that toluene may have an effect on the brain.
Toluene can cause headaches and sleepiness, and can impair the ability to think clearly. This effect depends on the amount, the length of exposure, genetic susceptibility and
Case No. _ Page 11 of 37
age. Low to moderate, day-after-day
exposure can cause tiredness,
confusion, weakness, drunken-type actions, memory loss, nausea, and loss of appetite. These symptoms usually disappear when exposure is stopped. Some hearing and color vision loss may remain after long-term daily exposure to toluene. 48. N-Hexane is a chemical made from crude oil. Pure n-hexane is a colorless
liquid with a slightly disagreeable odor. It evaporates very easily into the air and dissolves only slightly in water. N-Hexane is highly flanunable, and its vapors can be explosive. Breathing air containing high concentrations of n-hexane can cause nerve disorders. When rats are exposed to n-hexane in the air, they show signs of damage to their nervous systems very similar to those seen in people who became ill after workplace exposure to n-hexane. As in people, these effects in rats depend on the concentrations of n-hexane in air and how long exposure lasts. At very high levels of nhexane in air, signs of damage to sperm-forming cells in male rats have occurred. Damage to the lungs occurred in rabbits and mice. People have rarely been exposed to these high levels of n-hexane, so it is not known if these effects would occur in people. The History of Toxic Substance Releases from the Refinery in Roxana 49. From 1918 to present, during the operation of the Refinery by Shell Oil,
and Equilon and their predecessors in interest, by Cenovus, and by Conoco and WRB and their predecessors in interest, there have been numerous leaks of the pipelines and tanks at the Refinery which contain benzene, volatile organic compounds and other hydrocarbons, which leaks have contaminated and continue to contaminate the
Refinery and have migrated to and continue to migrate to property and waters located within the Village of Roxana. 50. Full information on all of the leaks, spills, and other releases from the
Refinery is not available and it may be impossible to gather much information about releases from the earliest period of the Refinery's operations. Data on tank and pipeline leaks are reported from the northern portion of the refinery as far back as the midCase No. _ Page 12 of 37
1950s. This suggests on-going releases of benzene-hydrocarbon years. 51.
products for over 50
Data that is available from the last 25 years show that Defendants have chemicals from
been responsible for numerous leaks of benzene and other hazardous the Refinery and its pipelines into the water, land, and air in Roxana. 52.
In 1986, an unknown quantity of benzene spilled from one of Defendants' portion of the Village in a commercial! industrial
pipelines in the extreme southwestern
area just west of the intersection of Rand and Highway 111 53. On December 29, 1987, 4,900 pounds of benzene were released from a
ruptured distillation unit pipe at the Refinery. 54. On February 16, 1989, 7,500 pounds of benzene, 2,000 pounds of hydrogen of methyl mercaptan were released from pressure release
sulfide, and 300 pounds
valves of a distilling unit at the Refinery. 55. On March 10, 1989, 30,000 pounds of benzene were released from a
ruptured pipe in the benzene extraction unit of the Refinery. 56. On June 14, 1989, 370 tons (7,000 pounds per hour) of catalyst dust were
released during a 105-hour attempt to start-up catalytic cracking unit number 1 at the Refinery. The aluminum silicate catalyst is used to break longer-chain hydrocarbons
into shorter-chain hydrocarbons
and is contaminated by trace metals which are present
in the petroleum. Trace metal contaminants include nickel and vanadium. 57. From 1988 to 1989, there were approximately 100 releases of excessive
sulfur dioxide emissions occasions. 58.
from the sulfuric acid plant at the Refinery on various
On August 13-18, 1989, 64 tons of aluminum silicate catalyst was released
from the catalytic cracking unit at the Refinery. The release was a result of an out-ofservice pollution control device. 59.
18, 1989, an unknown
of sulfur dioxide was
Page 13 of 37
released as a result of a fire at the Sulfur Recovery Unit at the Refinery. 60. On December 4, 1989,3,700 pounds of hydrocarbons including hydrogen
sulfide and benzene were released into the air from a pressure release valve at the Saturates Gas Plant at the Refinery. 61. On December 7-8, 1989, 2,800 pounds of hydrocarbons were released into
the air from the Saturates Gas Plant. 62. On December II, 1989, 300 pounds of sulfur dioxide were released in a
fire at the Sulfur Recovery Unit at the Refinery. 63.
On December 16, 1989, 294,000 gallons of gasoline were spilled when a
transport pipeline at the Refinery ruptured. 64.
On December 17, 1989, 4,000 pounds of hydrocarbons were released into
the air from the Saturates Gas Plant at the Refinery. 65. On December 21-22, 1989, 600 pounds of sulfur dioxide and 500 pounds of
hydrogen sulfide were released into the air during equipment failure at the Sulfur Recovery Unit at the Refinery. 66. On December 21, 1989, 11,000 pounds of hydrocarbons were released into
the air from a pressure release valve at the Saturates Gas Plant at the Refinery. 67. On January 30, 1990, 800 gallons of crude oil were spilled from a ruptured
10-inch oil pipeline at the Refinery. 68.
On February 19, 1990, 672,000 gallons of crude oil were released from a
ruptured pipeline at the Refinery. 69. On August 4,2006, light gas oil leaked or was spilled from the Refinery's
pipeline system near the intersection of Rand Avenue and Illinois Route 111. On August 9, 2006, gasoline was leaked or spilled from the Refinery's pipeline system near the site of the August 4 release. 70. There have been numerous and other releases and spills from the Refinery
and its pipelines.
Case No. _ Page 14 of 37
In addition, continuous releases from valves, storage tanks, loading docks,
surface water, and processes, including wa~tewater treatment, occur during day-to-day plant operations. 72. Defendants' releases and spills of petroleum products from leaking pipes
and storage tanks, transfer of product, equipment failures, and fires have contaminated and continue to contaminate the ground of the Village. 73. Defendants' releases of volatile organic compounds ("VOCS"), petroleum
hydrocarbons, hydrogen sulfide, methyl mercaptan, sulfur dioxide, and aluminum silicate catalyst have contaminated and continue to contaminate the air. 74. Defendants also engage in extensive groundwater any benzene in the groundwater This groundwater pumping at the
Refinery site. groundwater
would follow the
gradient to the west.
pumping, however, pulls
groundwater towards the Refinery pumping centers, back to the northeast and under the southern portion of the Village, including the Public Works Yard. Defendants'
groundwater pumping thus has spread the contaminants released from the Refinery in unnatural dispersion patterns and resulted in greater contamination in certain areas than would otherwise have occurred through natural flow of water containing these chemicals. Defendants engage in this extensive groundwater pumping at the Refinery in support of the Refinery's commercial operations. 75. Since 1986, as part of the federal Emergency Planning and Community
Right-to-Know Act, the u.S. Environmental Protection Agency ("EPA") and the states are required to collect data annually on releases and transfers of certain toxic chemicals from industrial facilities and make the data available to the public through the "Toxics Release Inventory" ("TRI"). Certain facilities, including the Refinery, are required to report releases annually to the TRI. In 1990, the Pollution Prevention Act expanded the scope of information that facilities must report.
The TRI identifies priority chemicals for which industries must estimate
_ Page 15 of 37
the amount they release into the environment. Releases of these priority chemicals are estimated for air, water, land and off-site disposal. The amount released is estimated by direct reading or monitoring, mass balance calculations, published emission factors for various equipment or processes, or best engineering judgment. 77. The TRIs for air releases at the Refinery show that since 1988, the
Defendants reported releases of 13,249,271.86 pounds of volatile organic compounds into the air of the Village. This includes 3.8 million pounds of benzene alone. It also includes 2.9 million pounds of toluene, 1.5 million pounds of n-hexane, 998,000 pounds of cyc1ohexane, 934,000 pounds of ethylbenzene, 882,000 pounds of propylene, 467,000 pounds of ethylene, as well as reportable releases of 11 other chemicals. 78. The sheer number of releases of toxic chemicals into the environment in
the past 25 years suggests that Defendants have overseen, allowed, and ignored or failed to remedy maintenance. systemic problems with pipeline and Refinery operation and
Moreover, pursuant to a settlement with the United States government,
Shell Oil is required to monitor its pipelines and implement spill prevention programs on pipelines in seven states, including Illinois. Nonetheless, spills and releases of toxic chemicals, including spills and releases in Roxana, continue to persist. Testing and Testing Results 79. Shell Oil and Equilon have hired an engineering firm, URS Corporation and analysis of benzene and other toxic
CURS"), to carry out an investigation
contaminants in the area of the Refinery. The investigation has been carried out with the cooperation of Defendant Conoco. The investigation has focused on measuring
concentrations of benzene and other contaminants in groundwater, soil, and soil vapor. Initially, the investigation focused on measurements at points either inside the Refinery perimeter, or generally in the area between the 1986 benzene spill and the western edge of the Refinery's North Property (sometimes referred to as the "west fenceline"). This area includes the Village's Public Works Yard.
CaseNo. _ Page 16 of37
that the available
highest benzene concentrations extending between
generally. in a band on the order of 200 feet wide This area generally
the 1986 release point and the refinery.
underlies the Village Public Works yard .:. [and] [t]he core area of impact widens closer to the refinery, consistent with groundwater flow toward pumping centers on the
[Refinery] North and Main properties.
in the core area have
been identified in the hundreds to thousands of ppm." 81. The full extent of impact to the groundwater expanded was unknown, however. to include parts In
2009, Shell Oil and Equilon
residential portion of the village, in the area generally bounded by Illinois Route 111 and the west fenceline. Some investigation inside the Refinery property was ongoing as well. 82. groundwater The expanded investigation collected and tested data from existing
profiling locations as well as from two new monitoring wells. In addition, points at 16 vapor-monitoring locations (VMP-1
URS installed 64 vapor-monitoring
through -16). The purpose of the vapor-monitoring
points is to detect and measure soil
vapors - that is, chemicals in the soil that vaporize into the air. 83. The results of URS's efforts were set out in a document known as the
Dissolved Phase Groundwater Investigation and P-60 Free Phase Product Delineation Report, dated February 18, 2010 (hereafter, the "February 2010 URS Report"). 2010 URS Report contamination, assessed testing results for groundwater The February soil phase
soil vapor contamination,
and the presence of light, non-aqueous
liquid (LNAPL) product.
(LNAPL refers to substances that are relatively insoluble in
water and are less dense than water. LNAPLs, such as oil, tend to spread across the surface of the water table and form a layer on top of the water table.) 84. URS determined that two distinct groundwater plumes exist: (a) a
dissolved benzene plume located primarily beneath the Public Works Yard; and (b) a
Case No. _ Page 17 of 37
dissolved phase hydrocarbon plume located within the Refinery and extending west into the residential portion of the Village ~ short distance. URS indicated that benzene concentrations in the contaminated area beneath the Public Works Yard had been identified in the hundreds to approximately 1,100parts per million (ppm). 85. With respect to soil contamination, the February 2010 URS Report data
showed concentrations of benzene exceeding applicable criteria in soil samples at several locations outside the Refinery perimeter. 86. With respect to soil vapors, the February 2010 URS Report did not find a
current risk from existing soil vapor concentrations, but identified specific areas for follow-up. This follow-up was to include testing from additional sampling points to be installed which would identify vapor issues in structures with basements and with subslab construction, with particular focus on the building near the northeast corner of the Public Works Yard, as well as in the residential portion of the Village, between Third and Fourth Streets. 87. As of the February 2010 URS Report, no LNAPL had been detected
outside of the Refinery perimeter within the Village. 88. Based on recommendations contained in the February 2010 URS Report to
more closely evaluate the potential for vapor intrusion near occupied structures, an additional four vapor monitoring points were installed, developed, and sampled at three new vapor monitoring locations (VMP-17 through -19) in the Spring/Summer 2010, and the results were documented in the Addendum to February 2010 Report Supplemental Investigation Activities, dated September 20, 2010. 89. In addition, in the fall of 2010, URS installed additional monitoring wells
outside the perimeter of the Refinery property, in order to detect and measure groundwater contamination. 90. The monitoring wells and the vapor monitoring points show extensive
groundwater plumes of contaminants.
Case No. _ Page 18 of 37
On November 30,2010, DRS submitted its Soil Vapor Sampling Report for
the Third Quarter of 2010 (hereafter, the "November 2010 DRS Report"). The November 2010 DRS Report again found two distinct but commingled groundwater plumes, a
dissolved phase benzene plume located primarily beneath the Public Works Yard and a dissolved phase hydrocarbon plume. This time, however, the November 2010 DRS
Report also noted the existence of an apparent third plume: "In addition, the edge of a Light Non-Aqueous Phase Liquid (LNAPL) plume has been observed in certain areas near the west fenceline within the confines of the WRR. The primary LNAPL plume is located further east in the refinery." 92. DRS indicates that the dissolved phase benzene plume appears to be
associated with the 1986 spill described above. According to the November 2010 DRS Report, the path of the plume from this spill has been affected by Defendants' groundwater pumping which has caused an unnatural distribution of the benzene from the spill. As a result of the groundwater pumping, the benzene groundwater plume
now sits under the Southern portion of the Village, including the Public Works Yard; it now extends between the 1986 benzene release location and the Refinery, with the area of impact widening closer to the Refinery. 93. As determined by DRS in 2010, the then-current contours of the benzene
groundwater plume were shown on the following map:
Page 19 of 37
,.,. .-<.«A.!I..... !II _ =
, ••• -01'.
_j -~n .. lll~~ ~
Page 20 of 37
According to URS, releases of petroleum products at the Refinery have
also resulted in a dissolved phase groun?:water plume which now lies beneath the Refinery and along the west fenceline, extending at some locations approximately 200 feet outside the Refinery perimeter beneath the eastern edge of the residential portion of the Village. 95. The second plume is primarily located further east within the perimeter of
the Refinery, though URS has determined that the edge of that plume extends across the west fenceline and into the residential portion of the Village. 96. Thus, at least two primary sources have caused the contamination URS
has observed: (a) benzene from the pipeline spill area south/ southwest of Roxana; and
(b) spills of petroleum products and/or
benzene from the Refinery to the east.
Moreover, the contamination in the vicinity of the Public Works Yard appears to be coming both from the pipeline spill as well as from the Refinery's Main Property and/ or the southwest comer of the Refinery's North Property. 97. The November 2010 URS Report showed the levels of contamination Benzene concentrations from
detected by the vapor monitoring points at that time.
locations within the Village ranged from an estimated 0.0079 mg/ m3 (VMP-1-8.5) to 28 mg/m3 (VMP-4-12) in the upper samples «15 feet bgs). Benzene concentrations from the deeper samples (>15 ft bgs) range from an estimated 0.013 mg/ m3 (VMP-8-23.5) to an estimated 490 mg/ m3 (VMP-4-23.5). The results of screening for samples collected in the Village against residential screening criterion indicate that the vapors in the upper 15 feet are less than residential screening criterion (41 mg/m3). Four of the sample points with the soil vapor ports below 15 feet exceeded the residential screening criterion during this sampling event. Benzene concentrations from locations within the Public Works Yard ranged from 0.0086 mg/m3 (VMP-17-5) to 52 mg/m3 (VMP-14-11.5) in the upper samples «15 feet bgs). Benzene concentrations from the deeper samples (>15 ft bgs) range from an estimated 0.019 mg/ m3 (VMP-10-20) to 37,000 mg/m3
Case No. _ Page 21 of 37
(VMP-14-20).The results of screening for samples collected in the Public Works Yard indicate that the vapor concentrations .. in the upper 15 feet were less than
commercial/ industrial screening criterion (300 mg/ m3) during this sampling event. Two of the sample points with the soil vapor ports below 15 feet exceeded the commercial/ industrial screening criterion. 98. Subsequent quarterly reports for groundwater and soil vapor testing in of benzene exceed the limits
the Village test area confirm that concentrations
promulgated by the illinois Pollution Control Board for residentia1limits in numerous locations. Some of these levels in the residential area of the Village of Roxana are more than two thousand times the maximum levels (or 200,000 percent of those limits) for benzene as promulgated by the Illinois Pollution Control Board. 99. URS's groundwater monitoring report for the first quarter of 2011,
released April 14, 2011, disclosed that URS had detected LNAPL in testing at the intersection of 3rd Street and Chaffer Street. This, apparently, was the first time LNAPL had been detected outside the Refinery perimeter. Groundwater testing recounted in the same quarterly report also disclosed that URS detected benzene concentrations which exceeded the screening criterion in the "MW_6 well cluster," a location to the south of the Public Works Yard, where benzene had not previously been detected. 100. Soil vapor sampling for the first quarter of 2011, released in June 2011,
detected benzene concentrations within the Public Works Yard more than 14,000 times the allowable limit. 101. Test results from groundwater monitoring wells for the second quarter of
2011, released July IS, 2011, showed benzene contamination on the site of the Public Works Yard in amounts up to 26,000 times the allowable limit (or 2.6 million percent) established by the illinois Pollution Control Board. groundwater monitoring wells demonstrated The results also disclosed that in excess of
applicable screening criteria in wells denominated MW-1, MW-3, and MW-5. Benzene
CaseNo. _ Page 22 of37
had not previously been detected in monitoring well MW-1 (between Sixth and Seventh Streets, in the residential portion of the Village): benzene concentrations previously detected in wells MW-3 and MW-5 (south of Seventh Street, along Route 111) had been below applicable screening criteria. 102. The test results from DRS also show benzene contamination at the site of
the alleys between Second and Third Streets, between Third and Fourth Streets, between Fourth and Fifth Streets, between Fifth and Sixth Streets, between Sixth and Seventh Streets, and between Seventh and Eighth Streets. Each of these alleys is owned by the Village. 103. The existence of the groundwater plumes was not known to the Village,
nor could it have been known through the exercise of reasonable diligence, prior to the release of the DRS reports outlined above. DRS is still in the process of delineating the exact contours of the plumes, particularly to the north. Further, the plumes are, by
definition, fluid and dynamic in nature, as is evidenced by (a) their susceptibility to Defendants' groundwater pumping, referenced in the DRS reports; (b) the fact that the LNAPL plume appears to have migrated onto Village property, in the residential portion of the Village, outside the Refinery'S perimeter for the first time in early 2011; (c) the presence, as of 2Q2011, of benzene in a concentration exceeding applicable criteria at well MW-1, where it had not previously been detected; and (d) the presence, as of 2Q2011, of benzene in concentrations exceeding applicable criteria at wells MW-3 and MW-5, where it had previously been measured below the applicable screening criteria. 104. The levels of contamination detected by the vapor monitoring ports also
were not known to the Village, nor could they have been known through the exercise of reasonable diligence, prior to the release of the URS reports outlined above, when DRS reported the results of the vapor monitoring testing.
Page 23 of 37
Impact on Waters In addition to the groundwater contamination, certain surface waters with benzene and/ or
within the Village of Roxana are or may 'also be contaminated
other toxic chemicals spilled, leaked, or otherwise discharged by Defendants. 106. Edwardsville A running water drainage ditch or watercourse flows south along Old The waters in
Route 111 (the "Refinery Drainage Ditch").
the Refinery Drainage Ditch are contaminated itself, from the groundwater, 107.
directly or indirectly from the Refinery
and/ or from storm water runoff as described below.
The Refinery Drainage Ditch passes through the Village. It flows adjacent and the Refinery's at the southern
to and along the eastern edge of the Refinery's West Property Southwest Property.
After exiting the Village's southern boundary,
edge of the Refinery's Southwest Property, the Refinery Drainage Ditch continues to flow south until it discharges into the Cahokia Diversion Channel and, ultimately, into the Mississippi River. 108. The Village of Roxana's Water Treatment Facility ("Roxana Water
Treatment Facility") is located at 6954 lllinois Route 111, South Roxana, Illinois, which is at the intersection of Route 111 and the Cahokia Diversion Channel. wellheads deriving water from an aquifer of unconsolidated gravel formation. Unconsolidated It consists of four
and unconfined sand and
and unconfined sand and gravel formation aquifers movement.
are highly permeable and highly susceptible to groundwater 109.
The Roxana Water Treatment Facility provides all of the drinking water
for the Village of Roxana and for the Village of South Roxana; it provides some of the drinking water for the Village of Hartford, and it provides all of the Refinery's own
domestic" water supply. 110. Before it empties into the Cahokia Diversion Channel, the Refinery
Drainage Ditch passes within several hundred Facility.
feet of the Roxana Water Treatment
page 24 of 37
Defendants have discharged and continue to discharge oil, oil byproducts,
benzene, or other pollutants directly into the Refinery Drainage Ditch. 112. On the Refinery's Southwest Property, within the corporate boundaries of
the Village of Roxana, Defendants maintain an open detention basin of water (the "Southwest Property Detention Basin"). This standing body of runoff water is adjacent to the Refinery Drainage Ditch. The Southwest Property Detention Basin is
contaminated with oil, oil byproducts, benzene, or other pollutants discharged from the Refinery and these contaminants seep or migrate directly into the Refinery Drainage Ditch. 113. Within the study area in which URS found benzene contamination, the These storm water drains divert rain and To the extent there is topsoil
village streets have storm water drains.
surface water into the Refinery Drainage Ditch.
contamination in this area, these pollutants may divert into the Refinery Drainage Ditch. 114. Contaminated groundwater within the Village seeps or otherwise
migrates into the Refinery Drainage Ditch. 115. All pollutants in the waters of the Refinery Drainage Ditch pass within
close proximity of the Water Treatment Facility, as described above. 116. As well, excessive storm water discharge from the Refinery property has
been diverted to Grassy Lake, which is located in South Roxana, between the Village of Roxana and the Roxana Water Treatment Facility, and immediately across Route 111 from the Refinery drainage ditch. 117. Smith Lake sits on Refinery property within the Village of Roxana limits
and is or may be contaminated with oil or other pollutants discharged from the Refinery. Smith Lake has naturally occurring wildlife.
It is or may be used for
purposes of recreation or navigation. 118.
Conoco owns a sma111ake or body of surface water located southeast of
_ Page 25 of 37
the interchange between Interstate 255 and Illinois Route 143, to the north of Old Alton - Edwardsville Road (hereafter "Conoco Lake"). corporate limits. Conoco Lake is within Roxana
Conoco Lake is or may be used for purposes of recreation or On information and belief, Defendants
navigation, including boating and fishfng.
historically pumped water from the Refinery property into Conoco Lake, but have now ceased this pumping. Conoco Lake is or may be contaminated with oil or other
pollutants discharged from the Refinery. 119. The Village of Roxana owns a two-acre detention basin on Village
property just to the east of Roxana High School (the "Village Detention Basin"). The Village Detention Basin is within Roxana corporate limits. It holds runoff waters from village streets. Defendants have discharged oil or other pollutants from the Refinery, directly or indirectly, into these waters. The Village Detention Basin is or may be used for recreation. The Effects of Contamination 120. Nearly 210 platted residential lots and parcels of property owned by
private residents and the Village of Roxana, including the Public Works Yard, are contaminated with benzene, or other petroleum byproducts, caused by Defendants. 121. In addition, streets, alleys, sidewalks, and other rights-of way owned by
the Village have been contaminated with benzene, or other petroleum byproducts, caused by Defendants. 122. The Village owns the rights of way, streets, alleys and sidewalks which
are contaminated with benzene or other petroleum bypro ducts. The Village owns the Roxana Public Works Yard property. 123. The contamination of the Village, the groundwater, and its property has
reduced or destroyed the value of property in the Village and depressed the residential tax base available to the Village from these properties. 124.
The contamination of the Village, the groundwater, and its property has
_ Page 26 of 37
caused great economic loss to Roxana, including loss of opportunity, residential tax base. 125. The contamination of the Village, the groundwater,
and its property
endangers the health of every resident of-Roxana. 126. Contamination of the groundwater will likely remain for years to come,
with the Village suffering the effects of that contamination. 127. Surface water and groundwater contamination have led, or will lead, to
further pollution of waters within the village limits of Roxana. These waters include, but are not limited to, the groundwater, the Refinery Drainage Ditch, Smith Lake, and Conoco Lake.
CLAIMS FOR RELIEF
Trespass 128. Plaintiff repeats and re-alleges each and every allegation set forth in
paragraphs 1 through 127 as if fully set forth herein. 129. Defendants had and have a duty to use reasonable care in their operation
of the Refinery, including in the manufacture, handling, maintenance, storage and transport of benzene and other toxic chemicals, to prevent the spill, discharge, leak, or other escape of benzene and other toxic chemicals (or later remediate such spills) and to prevent same from contaminating the property of others (or later remediate such contamination), including that of the Village of Roxana. 130. Defendants breached the aforesaid duty, failing to use reasonable care to
ensure that benzene and other toxic chemicals would not be spilled, discharged, leaked, or otherwise escape during operation of the Refinery. 131. Defendants' failure to take steps to ensure that toxic chemicals, including
benzene, from the Refinery would not trespass onto the property of the Village, was wrongful.
Case No. _ Page 27 of37
As a direct and proximate result of Defendants
wanton, or negligent conduct, toxic chemicals from the Refinery, including benzene, have contaminated Roxana, including and continue to contaminate Village streets, Village property alleys, owned by the Village of rights-of-way, the
and the Public Works Yard. Each time toxic chemicals found and continue to find their way onto the
property of the Village, a separate trespass occurred or occurs. 134. groundwater groundwater The toxic chemicals that trespass and have trespassed into the
remain and have remained there, so that the ongoing contamination
is the result both of trespasses that occurred during the Refinery's many
toxic substance releases including, but not limited to, those described above, as well as during new trespasses continuing to occur now and in the future. Damages from
trespasses both historical and ongoing continue to accrue and will continue to accrue for many years to corne, independent 135. Defendants' of any fresh trespasses that may occur. and property of the
ongoing trespasses on the groundwater
Village of Roxana, are intentional, willful and wanton, and/ or negligent, and wrongful. 136. The trespasses on the Village's property have interfered with the Village's including by causing a diminution of value to the property
use of its property,
belonging to the Village. 137. The trespasses on the Village's property have caused economic loss to the
Village, including through reducing or destroying the value of property in the Village and depressing the residential tax base available to the Village. 138. The trespasses on the Village's property have endangered the health of the
residents of Roxana. Wherefore, the Village of Roxana prays this Court enters judgment and against Defendants, jointly and severally, to award compensatory in its favor
damages in an
amount in excess of $50,000.00, plus costs incurred in bringing this suit, and to grant
Case No. _ .Page 28 of 37
such other and further relief as this Court deems appropriate.
Public Nuisance 139. Plaintiff repeats and re-alleges each and every allegation set forth in
paragraphs 1 through 138 as if fully set forth herein. 140. The residents of and visitors to the Village of Roxana have a public right
to the use of the Village's streets, alleys, and other premises for recreational and commercial purposes. The residents of and visitors to the Village of Roxana also have other rights to public health and public safety. 141. By continuing to allowing spills, discharges, leaks, or other escapes of
benzene and other toxic contaminants into the Village, Defendants have substantially and unreasonably interfered with these rights of the general public. 142. Because the contaminants remain in the groundwater, the damages from
the nuisance are ongoing, continue to accrue, and will continue to accrue for many years to come, independent of whether the nuisance itself continues. 143. The injuries described herein to the Village resulting from Defendants'
nuisance were proximately caused by Defendants' conduct and were the direct and foreseeable consequence of Defendants' failure properly to manufacture, handle,
maintain, store and transport the benzene and other toxic chemicals at the Refinery. Wherefore, the Village of Roxana prays this Court enters judgment in its favor and against Defendants, jointly and severally, to award compensatory damages in an amount in excess of $50,000.00, plus costs incurred in bringing this suit, and to grant such other and further relief as this Court deems appropriate.
Private Nuisance 144. Plaintiff repeats and re-alleges each and every allegation set forth in
paragraphs 1 through 143 as if fully set forth herein.
CaseNo. _ Page 29 of 37
Benzene and other toxic chemicals continue to, and have in the past,
spilled, discharged, leaked or otherwise escaped from the Refinery and invaded the property of the Village of Roxana, contaminating Village property including Village streets, Village alleys, Village rights-of-way, the groundwater, and the Public Works Yard. 146. The invasions of the Village'S property are the direct and proximate result
intentional, willful and wanton, or negligent conduct in failing to
prevent (or later to remediate) the spill, discharge, leak, or other escape of benzene and other toxic chemicals and to prevent same from contaminating the property of others (or later to remediate such contamination), including that of the Village of Roxana. 147. The invasions of the Village'S property are substantial inasmuch as the
benzene has contaminated multiple Village streets, Village alleys, Village rights-of-way, the groundwater, and the Public Works Yard, and inasmuch as this contamination is extensive and, at various points, many thousands of times greater than the allowable limits for such contamination as promulgated by the Illinois Pollution Control Board. 148. The invasions of the Village's property are unreasonable inasmuch as the
reach and extent of the damage done to the Village as measured against any utility (Of, more accurately, against the total lack of utility) in the nuisance weighs in favor of the Village's interests. 149. Because the contaminants remain in the groundwater, the damages from
the nuisance are ongoing, continue to accrue, and will continue to accrue for many years to come, independent of whether the nuisance itself continues. Wherefore, the Village of Roxana prays this Court enters judgment in its favor and against Defendants, jointly and severally, to award compensatory damages in an amount in excess of $50,000.00, plus costs incurred in bringing this suit, and to grant such other and further relief as this Court deems appropriate.
Page 30 of 37
Unjust Enrichment 150. Plaintiff repeats and re-alleges each and every allegation set forth in
paragraphs 1 through 149 as if fully set forth herein. 151. During the many years when Defendants contaminated the streets, alleys, and other property of the Village of Roxana, Defendants
were reaping enormous profits from their operations at the Refinery, including their manufacture, handling, maintenance, storage and transport of benzene and other toxic chemicals. 152. The operations conducted at the Refinery can be performed in a manner
that will not cause harm to nearby property and health of nearby residents. 153. Plaintiff has suffered the adverse consequences of Defendants' pollution,
including reduced property value, depressed tax base, interference with the rights of public health and public safety, and other effects of the pollution proximately flowing from contamination of Plaintiff's property. 154. In furtherance of and to the great benefit of their own profits and
enrichment from operation of the Refinery, Defendants have chosen and continue to choose not to allocate the necessary resources for the implementation of proper
equipment, technology, improvements, and processes to ensure their operations would not and will not cause damage to others. Additionally, Defendants have chosen and continue to choose not to allocate the necessary resources to perform the requisite maintenance and inspections to prevent or discover releases of the toxic chemicals used in the operations at the Refinery. Defendants also have chosen and continue to choose not to allocate the resources necessary to remediate any and all known spills, discharges, leaks, or other escapes of benzene and other toxic chemicals or to remediate contamination caused to the property of others, including that of the Village of Roxana. 155.
suffered by Plaintiff are related
.Page 31 of 37
enrichment of Defendants, as Defendants chose to maximize their own enrichment in lieu of protecting against damage they mig~~cause or remediating damage they already have caused. 156. intentional, Defendants owed and owe negligent,
duty to adjacent landowners to refrain from conduct that causes damage to
or willful and wanton
neighboring property and jeopardizes the health of others. 157. Defendants violated the common law maxim of "sic utere tuo ut alienum
non laedas" (so use your own as not to injure another's property) by their intentional,
willful and wanton, or negligent conduct that caused toxic chemicals to migrate from their property and contaminate the properties surrounding the Refinery. 158. There was and is no justification for Defendants' conduct, for Defendants'
failure to remediate the damage they have caused, or for Defendants' decision to pursue profits and enriclunent at the expense of the injury caused to the Village. 159. The damage caused to Plaintiff's property is horrific and will not be
adequately compensated by the ordinary measure of damage to real property. 160. The difference in the value of this real property in its pristine condition
and its value when contaminated by toxic chemicals, when measured against the vastly disproportionate overall harm caused and the immense profits realized by the
Defendants at the expense of the Village of Roxana, renders any remedy at law inadequate to right this wrong. 161. The deliberate business decisions made by Defendants described herein
have forced the citizens of Roxana incur the costs of Defendants' operations in the form of toxic chemical pollution. 162. The immense profits and wealth acquired by the Defendants at the
expense of contaminating the Village and threatening the health of its unknowing residents reflect an unjust enrichment which has inured to the great benefit of Defendants.
Case No. _ ,Page 32 of 37
In fairness and equity, Defendants should disgorge the profits by which
they have been enriched at the Village's exp~nse. Wherefore, the Village of Roxana prays this Court enters judgment in its favor and against Defendants, jointly and severally, to award the equitable remedy of disgorgement of Defendants' unjust enrichment, in an amount in excess of $50,000.00, plus costs incurred in bringing this suit, and to grant such other and further relief as this Court deems appropriate.
Declaratory Judgment - Illinois Water Pollutant Discharge Act (415 ILCS 25/0.01 et seq.) 164. Plaintiff repeats and re-alleges each and every allegation set forth in
paragraphs 1 through 163 as if fully set forth herein. 165. Defendants discharged and continue to discharge oil in quantities which
exceed the standards adopted by the Pollution Control Board, and discharged and continue to discharge other pollutants directly or indirectly into the waters of the State of Illinois, in violation of the Illinois Water Pollutant Discharge Act ("IWPDA"), 415 ILCS 25/0.01 et seq. 166. Such waters exist within the Village of Roxana's territorial limits,
including but not limited to the Refinery Drainage Ditch, the Southwest Property Detention Basin, Smith Lake, Conoco Lake, and the Village Detention Basin, as well as the Village's groundwater. 167. Defendants have discharged and continue to discharge oil or other The Refinery
pollutants directly or indirectly into the Refinery Drainage Ditch. Drainage Ditch is "waters" of Illinois under the meaning of the IWPDA. 168.
Defendants' discharge of oil or other pollutants into the Refinery Drainage
Ditch has been direct and indirect, from the Refinery itself, from the Southwest Property Detention Basin, by way of groundwater seepage or migration, storm water runoff, or
Case No. _ Page 33 of37
otherwise. 169. The Refinery Drainage Ditch. ~ows through Village property adjacent to feet of the Roxana Water
the Refinery and, ultimately, within several hundred Treatment Facility. 170.
The Roxana Water Treatment Facility provides the complete or partial
water supply for the Village of Roxana, for the Village of South Roxana, and for the Village of Hartford, along with domestic" water for the Refinery itself.
Accordingly, waters of the Refinery Drainage Ditch are or may be used for
purposes of providing a water supply for a city, town, or village, including the Village of Roxana. 172. The Southwest Property Detention Basin itself constitutes "waters" within
the meaning of the IWPDA. Defendants have discharged and continue to discharge oil or other pollutants directly or indirectly into the Southwest Property Detention Basin. These pollutants reach the Refinery Drainage Ditch and, ultimately, pass within several hundred feet of the Roxana Water Treatment Facility. 173. Smith Lake constitutes "waters" within the meaning of the IWPDA.
Smith Lake is within the Village of Roxana and is or may be used for purposes of recreation or navigation. Defendants have discharged and continue to discharge oil or other pollutants, directly or indirectly, into Smith Lake. 174. Conoco Lake constitutes "waters" within the meaning of the IWPDA.
Conoco Lake is within the Village of Roxana and is or may be used for purposes of recreation, including boating and fishing, or navigation. Defendants have discharged
and continue to discharge oil or other pollutants, directly or indirectly, into Conoco Lake. 175. The Village Detention Basin constitutes "waters" within the meaning of
the IWPDA. It is within the Village of Roxana and is or may be used for purposes of recreation. Defendants have discharged oil or other pollutants, directly or indirectly,
Case No. _ Page 34 of37
into the Village Detention Basin. 176. Defendants have discharge~ and continue to discharge oil or other The groundwater
pollutants, directly or indirectly, into the Village's groundwater.
itself is polluted and also has led or will lead to pollution of the other waters within the Village's limits. The Village's groundwater is or may be used for purposes of providing a water supply for a city, town, or village, including the Village of Roxana. 177. As the owners or operators of the facility from which discharges of oil or
other pollutants were or are made, directly or indirectly, Defendants are liable under the IWPDA, 415 ILCS 25/0.01 et seq., to the Village of Roxana for the actual costs incurred for the removal of such oil or other pollutants, including the costs of all actions as may be necessary to minimize damage to the public health or welfare resulting from such discharges. 178. To the extent the Village incurs costs for the removal of the oil or other
pollutants from the waters aforesaid, and/ or for taking such other action as may be necessary to minimize damage to the public health or welfare resulting from these pollutants, the Village seeks a declaratory judgment, pursuant to 735 ILCS 5/2-701, that Defendants are liable for all such costs, along with reasonable attorneys' fees, court costs and other expenses of litigation, as allowed under the IWPDA. Wherefore, the Village of Roxana prays this Court enters a declaratory judgment in its favor and against Defendants, that the Village is entitled to recover from Defendants all costs of removal of Defendants' pollutants from its waters as aforesaid, all costs of such other actions as may be necessary to minimize damage to the public health or welfare resulting from these pollutants, attorneys' fees, court costs and other expenses of litigation, and to grant such other and further relief as this Court deems appropriate.
Page 35 of 37
Dated: March 20, 2012
[ames E. Schrempf #02507196 firstname.lastname@example.org Village Attorney 307 Henry Street, Suite 415 Alton, Illinois 62002 618-465-2311 (Phone) 618-456-2318 (Fax)
DEMAND FOR JURY TRIAL
Plaintiff demands trial by jury for all causes herein so triable. Dated: March 20, 2012 Respectfully submitted,
I ames E. Schrempf #025071 email@example.com Village Attorney 307 Henry Street, Suite 415 Alton, Illinois 62002 618-465-2311 (Phone) 618-456-2318 (Fax)
rage 36 of 37
Derek Y. Brandt #6228895 firstname.lastname@example.org G. Michael Stewart #6230339 email@example.com Jo Anna Pollock #6273491 firstname.lastname@example.org
SIMMONS BROWDER GIANARIS ANGELIDES & BARNERD LLC
One Court Street Alton, illinois 62002 618-259-2222 (Phone) 618-259-2251 (Fax) Melissa K. Sims #6231297 email@example.com
K. SIMS LAW OFFICE
1611 Fifth Street Peru, illinois 61356 815-224-2030 (Phone) 815-224-2900 (Fax) Paul J. Hanly, Jr.* firstname.lastname@example.org Jayne Conroy" email@example.com Andrea Bierstein* firstname.lastname@example.org
HANLY CONROY BIERSTEIN SHERIDAN FISHER & HAyES LLP
112 Madison Avenue New York, New York 10016 212-784-6400 (Phone) 212-784-6420 (Fax)
* Pro hac vice application
to be submitted
Page 37 of 37
This action might not be possible to undo. Are you sure you want to continue?
We've moved you to where you read on your other device.
Get the full title to continue reading from where you left off, or restart the preview.