Petroleum storage facility and environmental incidents:

9 Months Ended

Sep. 30, 2011

Petroleum Storage Facility [Abstract]

Petroleum storage facility and environmental incidents:

7. Petroleum storage facility and environmental incidents:

Pipeline rupture (2011):

On August 31, 2011, while excavating in connection with the construction of a highway for the Rhode Island Department of Transportation (RIDOT), Cardi Corporation (Cardi) ruptured an underground pipeline controlled and used by the Company for the transportation of Ultra Low Sulfur Diesel (ULSD) from the Wilkesbarre Pier to its Petroleum Storage Facility. At the time, the Company was receiving product from a barge and, as a result of the rupture, approximately 70,000 gallons of ULSD were discharged. Pursuant to the Company’s Emergency Response Plan, representatives of the Company took control of the spill site and coordinated the response of various governmental agencies as well as private contractors. Approximately 56,000 gallons of spilled diesel were recovered. On September 6, 2011, the Company turned over the responsibility for the clean-up to Cardi.

The Company notified the required government agencies and its insurance carriers of the rupture.

Management’s present estimate of the total cost incurred by the Company in responding to the emergency and repairing the pipeline is $355,000, which has been presented as a separate line item within petroleum storage facility expenses on the accompanying consolidated statements of income and retained earnings for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2011. The Company believes that it has no liability with respect to the discharge and has asserted a claim against Cardi and RIDOT for the costs and other damages incurred by the Company. However, the Company has determined that no receivable can be recorded at this time.

ULSD incident (2011):

In March 2011, management learned that, during the normal receipt of product from a barge, No. 2 heating oil (high sulfur heating oil) was accidentally pumped into one of the Company’s ULSD petroleum storage tanks (Tank 67), resulting in a mixture with a sulfur content in excess of that allowed by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). The Company notified Global of the incident.

Global informed the Company that it had contacted its customers that received the mixture and commenced a sampling and testing program with certain of its customers to determine (1) if any product should be removed and replaced with conforming product or (2) if the product need only be treated to meet the EPA requirements. On August 21, 2011, Global asserted a claim against the Company of $132,000 for damages incurred by Global arising out of the incident, which is included in petroleum storage facility operating expenses on the accompanying consolidated statements of income and retained earnings for the three and nine months ended September 30, 2011.

The Company has notified its insurance carriers of the incident. The Company’s deductibles under its primary insurance policy and its umbrella policy are $1,000 and $10,000, respectively. To date, the Company has not received any response to its notifications. Accordingly, the Company has determined that no receivable can be recorded at this time.

Environmental incident (2010):

On August 30, 2010, during a regular facility inspection of the Terminal, a release of petroleum-contaminated water was discovered from the tank bottom of one of the Company’s 150,000 barrel tanks (Tank 153). The Company notified the Rhode Island Department of Environmental Management (RIDEM), the EPA and the United States Coast Guard. It also notified its insurance carriers of the release and the damage to the tank.

The tank was emptied of product and the cleaning of the tank bottom was completed in September 2010. The petroleum-contaminated water released from the tank was contained on the secondary containment liner under the tank bottom, preventing contamination of the groundwater. The Company engaged an outside engineering firm to inspect the tank bottom to determine the cause and location of the release, as well as the extent of the required repairs. The findings of the inspection indicated that aggressive corrosion from inside the tank occurred, causing two holes in the immediate vicinity of the observed release, as well as several other holes or potential holes in other areas of the tank bottom. The report indicated that the corrosion was caused by microbial contamination, which was affirmed by a corrosion specialist.

The total cost of the cleanup, inspection and repair of the tank was $533,000, all of which was recorded as an expense at December 31, 2010. The tank was placed back in service in February 2011. In June 2011, Global paid the Company $458,000 which is recorded in petroleum storage facility revenues, reimbursement of tank repairs on the accompanying consolidated statements of income and retained earnings for the nine months ended September 30, 2011 due to the contractual nature of the reimbursement. The difference relates to the $75,000 cost of epoxy coating the bottom of Tank 153 which the Company paid.

The testing of certain of the Company’s other tanks revealed the presence of corrosive microbial contaminants in Tanks 151 and 32. Both tanks were treated with a biocide and continue to be monitored and treated as necessary. Since Tank 32 had been inspected in June 2010, the Company believes that the contaminants have not affected the integrity of this tank bottom. However, since Tank 151 had not been inspected since construction in 2006, the Company took this tank out of service in February 2011. The tank was emptied of product, and an inspection of the tank bottom revealed minor corrosion. The Company completed the repairs recommended by the inspectors and applied an epoxy coating to the bottom of Tank 151 at a cost of $50,000, which has been included in petroleum storage facility expenses, operating on the accompanying consolidated statement of income and retained earnings for the nine months ended September 30, 2011. The tank was back in service in May 2011. Exclusive of the epoxy coating, the total cost of cleanup, inspection and repair of Tank 151 was $37,000 which Global paid the Company in September 2011 and is recorded in petroleum storage facility revenues, reimbursement of tank repairs on the accompanying consolidated statements of income and retained earnings for nine months ended September 30, 2011.

Tank repairs related to this environmental incident have been presented as a separate line item within petroleum storage facility expenses on the accompanying consolidated statements of income and retained earnings. Routine tank repairs continue to be included with petroleum storage facility operating expenses on the accompanying consolidated statements of income and retained earnings.

Environmental incident (2002):

In 2002, during testing of monitoring wells at the Terminal, the Company’s consulting engineer discovered free floating phase product in a groundwater monitoring well located on that portion of the Terminal purchased in 2000. Laboratory analysis indicated that the product was gasoline, which is not a product the Company ever stored at the Terminal. The Company commenced an environmental investigation and analysis, the results of which indicate that the gasoline did not come from the Terminal. The Company notified RIDEM. RIDEM subsequently identified Power Test Realty Partnership (Power Test), the owner of an adjacent parcel, as a potentially responsible party for the contamination. Getty Properties Corp. is the general partner of Power Test. Power Test challenged that determination and, after an administrative hearing, on October 20, 2008, a RIDEM Hearing Officer determined that Power Test is responsible for the discharge of the petroleum product under the Rhode Island Oil Pollution Control Act, R.I.G.L. Section 46-12.5.1-3 and Rule 6(a) and 12(b) of the Oil Pollution Control Regulations. The RIDEM Decision and Order requires Power Test to remediate the contamination as directed by RIDEM and remanded the proposed penalty to RIDEM for recalculation. In November 2008, Power Test appealed the decision to the Rhode Island Superior Court. In addition, in November 2008, Power Test sought, and received, a stay of the Decision and Order of the Hearing Officer pending a clarification by RIDEM of the amount of the proposed penalty. On October 2, 2009, RIDEM issued a recalculated administrative penalty, and, subsequently, the RIDEM Hearing Officer issued a recommended amended decision, which was affirmed as a final decision by the RIDEM Director on December 23, 2009. On January 20, 2010, Power Test appealed that decision to Superior Court. On September 1, 2011, the Superior Court affirmed the decision of the RIDEM Director.

In April 2009, the Company sued Power Test and Getty Properties Corp. in the Rhode Island Superior Court seeking remediation of the site or, in the alternative, the cost of the remediation. On May 1, 2009, Power Test and Getty Properties Corp. removed the action to the United States District Court for the District of Rhode Island. On May 22, 2009, Power Test and Getty Properties Corp. answered the Complaint and filed a Counterclaim against Dunellen, LLC and Capital Terminal Company alleging that Dunellen, LLC and Capital Terminal Company are responsible for the contamination. Getty Properties Corp. and Power Test have joined Getty Petroleum Marketing, Inc., the tenant under a long-term lease with Getty Properties Corp. of the adjacent property, as a defendant. The Company has amended its Complaint to add Getty Petroleum Marketing, Inc. as a defendant.

The parties are now engaged in discovery. There can be no assurance that the Company will prevail in this litigation.

Since January 2003, the Company has not incurred significant costs in connection with this matter, other than ongoing litigation costs, and is unable to determine the costs it might incur to remedy the situation, as well as any costs to investigate, defend and seek reimbursement from the responsible party with respect to this contamination.

Environmental remediation (1994):

In 1994, a leak was discovered in a 25,000 barrel storage tank at the Terminal which allowed the escape of a small amount of fuel oil. All required notices were made to RIDEM. In 2000, the tank was demolished and testing of the groundwater indicated that there was no large pooling of contaminants. In 2001, RIDEM approved a plan pursuant to which the Company installed a passive system consisting of three wells and commenced monitoring the wells.

In 2003, RIDEM decided that the passive monitoring system previously approved was not sufficient and required the Company to design an active remediation system for the removal of product from the contaminated site. The Company and its consulting engineers began the pre-design testing of the site in the fourth quarter of 2004. The consulting engineers estimated a total cost of $200,000 to design, install and operate the system, which was accrued in 2004. Through 2006, the Company had expended $119,000 and has not incurred any additional costs since then. In May 2011, RIDEM accepted the Site Investigation Report as amended which the Company had submitted in 2005. RIDEM has instructed the Company to serve notification to all abutters and to review and update the preliminary data and the draft Remedial Action Work Plan for final submission. While the Company and its consulting engineers believe that the proposed active remediation system will correct the situation, it is possible that, upon completion of its review, RIDEM could require the Company to expand remediation efforts, which could result in the Company incurring additional costs in excess of the remaining accrual of $81,000.