An abandoned gas station at 190 Seymour Ave. in Derby poses a threat to the environment, according to the state.
DERBY — Four underground storage tanks at an abandoned gas station at the corner of Hawkins Street and Seymour Avenue pose a threat to groundwater and must be removed, according to testimony provided by an environmental investigator during a court hearing June 23.
When it will happen and who will pay for it is now up to a judge in Hartford, who is expected to issue a decision soon.
The gas station at 190 Seymour Ave. has been closed since around 2010, according to documents and testimony provided by the state Department of Energy and Environmental Protection (DEEP). Underground tanks are heavily regulated — owners can’t simply walk away from them.
The heart of the issue — no one is monitoring the underground gasoline storage tanks, which were installed in February 1990 and are now officially past their life expectancy of 30 years. There is no definitive answer as to whether the tanks are leaking.
The old underground tanks pose a “significant, ongoing potential for harm,” according to testimony provided during the hearing.
The tanks have to be properly closed, the soil has to be tested to see if there’s any contamination, and the tanks have to be removed.
According to the state, the responsibility for all that falls on the shoulders of John Borrelli, the Derby resident who is the gas station’s last owner.
State officials said they have been sending notices of violations to Borrelli for years, but nothing was done. So, DEEP sued Borrelli in June 2020 in civil court in Hartford.
DEEP then filed paperwork asking a judge to fine Borelli and his limited liability company $352,062.50. In addition, DEEP wants Borrelli to pay for the closing and removal of the tanks, which includes hiring a qualified professional to oversee the project and conduct soil sampling.
In terms of a civil fine, a DEEP lawyer pointed out that Borrelli could actually face a penalty of more than $668 million for all the violations at the abandoned gas station.
At a court hearing June 23 in front of Judge Matthew Budzik, DEEP officials said they started issuing violation notices to Borelli back in 2008 before filing a lawsuit last year. Violations were also issued in 2014 and 2017, along with follow-up letters.
During the hearing, Mark Latham, a supervising environmental analyst for DEEP who oversees underground storage tanks, testified Borrelli and his LLC have been in violation of some 11 environmental laws regulating the use and maintenance of the underground tanks, and has been for years. Those alleged violations include everything from failing to pay annual fees on the tanks to failing to maintain a corrosive-protection plan.
Latham testified that the tanks will pose an environmental rish until they are properly closed.
“It’s very important to properly close all of the USTs (underground storage tanks) at this site. There is a significant environmental risk with expired tanks remaining in the ground. This site is located in a G‑A groundwater classification zone with a sizeable threat to drinking water in the area and residential homes that may have volatile contaminants which could be explosive, based on the contents of the tank, in a residential setting,” Latham said.
Johnathan E. Harding, an assistant attorney general representing DEEP in its lawsuit against the gas station owner, followed Latham’s testimony with a question.
“So, if someone had a groundwater well in the area, could product from those tanks leech through the soil and groundwater into their drinking water?” Harding asked.
“Yes,” Latham said.
Harding said the agency is more interested in getting the tanks out of there than hitting Borrelli with a financially crippling civil penalty, even though the agency has the law on its side.
Borelli joined the court hearing June 23 about 20 minutes after it started. He said while DEEP claims he ran the business for three years before closing in 2010, in reality he only ran the gas station for six months. Borelli also said he responded to letters from DEEP.
Borrelli testified that DEEP is just as negligent as he is for the situation. He put a great deal of blame on a single DEEP employee who he said he talked to.
He described a scenario in which he purchased a gas station whose tanks weren’t in compliance.
Borelli said he was unaware of the noncompliance issue until a DEEP employee told him about the situation after he purchased the gas station. Borelli said the DEEP employee told him DEEP alllowed the previous owner to operate the gas station out of compliance because the previous owner was going to get a loan to make the neccessary upgrades.
Borelli said he quickly closed the gas station because he could not afford to make the upgrades. The property has been an albatross for him, and DEEP hasn’t helped.
“They never made no effort to educate me on how to properly close the business,” he said.
Harding asked Borelli whether he did any research on state laws or regulations on underground storage tanks before purchasing the property.
Borelli said he did not do any research nor hire an environmental consultant, but had a lawyer work with him to make sure it was OK to buy the property.
Borelli is representing himself in the civil lawsuit. He said there was no way of knowing the tanks were out of compliance due to the alleged arrangement the prior station owner had with the DEEP official.
“I am willing to try to resolve this situation. I would like to get those tanks out of the ground, but there is no possible way I could come up wth $352,000, and, also come up with another $100,000 to get the tanks out of the ground. It’s ludicrous,” Borelli said.
Harding, the attorney representing the state, said Borelli’s allegations regarding the DEEP official were hearsay. He said it was Borelli’s responsibility to know what he was buying. He also said DEEP has been working with Borelli to address the situation for a decade.
“At no point did the department (DEEP) represent to Mr. Borelli that it was our fault that he purchased the site,” Harding said.
Before the June 23 court hearing ended, Judge Judge Budzik asked Harding about the potential threat to the public from the underground storage tanks.
“I didn’t hear any testimony that the tanks are leaking and, as a result of that, stuff needs to be cleaned up. Is that fair?” the judge asked Harding.
“We don’t know, your honor. The injunctive relief makes clear that the site needs to be properly closed, and that closure procedures will include sampling and monitoring of the site,” Harding said.
Upon further questioning from the judge, Harding said DEEP rather see any money coming from Borelli go toward to removing the tanks, as opposed to a civil penalty that would go to the state.
“The most important thing to us is that the site is cleaned. To be clear, I am not suggesting Mr. Borelli is a bad person or an environmental menace. He’s not,” Harding said.
Judge Budzik said he needed to research the law to find out whether he has any discresion when it comes to potential fines against Borelli. He also said Borelli should be prepared to pay money to close and remove the tanks.
“My general feeling is that Mr Borelli’s limited resources might be better spent on fixing the problem rather than paying penalties,” Judge Budzik said.
Correction: the original version of this story misstated the judge’s name.
