Source: https://cslaterlaw.com/2016/05/05/greenpac-awman-january-24th-2013-cas/
Timestamp: 2019-04-26 00:06:26+00:00

Document:
“Person” means public or private corporations, associations, societies, partnerships, the state, the U. S., and individuals. Navigation Law §172(14).
“Discharge” means any intentional or unintentional action or omission resulting in releasing, spilling, leaking, emptying, emitting or dumping petroleum into the waters of the state or onto lands from which it might flow or drain into said waters. Navigation Law §172(8).
“Waters” means oceans, springs, lakes, streams and bodies of surface or groundwater within boundaries of this state. Navigation Law §172(8).
“Petroleum” means oil or petroleum of any kind. Navigation Law §172(15). This definition includes “hydro carbons” commonly associated with petroleum waste. Henning v. Rando Mach. Corp., 207 A.D.2d 106 (4th Dept. 1994). Navigation Law §181(1) specifically states liability is “strict” and without regard to fault.
Retroactive Liability: Navigation Law liability applies to spills which occurred before the statute was enacted. Navigation Law §190-9; Leone v. Leewood Service Station, 212 A.D.2d 669, 624 N.Y.2d 610, lv. denied, 86 N.Y.2d 709 (2d Dept. 1995).
Navigation Law §173(1): Prohibition: The discharge of petroleum is prohibited.
Nuisance: A nuisance can be either private (involving injury to particular persons) or public (involving injury to the public at large) and is defined as “tortuous conduct that produces unreasonable interference with the use and enjoyment of another’s land.” Some examples of situations in which parties have alleged nuisance include actions to abate or recover damages for odors, actions for contamination of neighboring or community groundwater, and actions for pollution of neighboring landowners’ soil.
Trespass: A trespass is an invasion of the exclusive possession of another’s land. A claim in trespass frequently involves the same conduct as that which prompts a nuisance claim.
Negligence: Negligence is the breach of a legal duty owed to another that causes damages, can give rise to environmental liability where a party demonstrates that another party failed to exercise reasonable care while performing activities that are potentially harmful to the environment, or that a party failed to exercise reasonable care to comply with permit requirements.
Strict Liability: Under the theory of strict liability, liability may be imposed on a party without regard to fault. Specifically, strict liability can be imposed when conduct considered “abnormally dangerous” causes injury. Facility owners or operators may be found strictly liable for contamination where, for example, leaking underground storage tanks have contaminated groundwater.
Damages: Actions brought under common law theories of liability may result in assessment of punitive as well as compensatory damages, particularly when a party demonstrates that the conduct complained of was willful or grossly negligent.
Landowners: Any owner, without regard to fault, who owns the property at the time of discharge, is strictly liable under the Navigation Law if (1) the landowners could have reasonably “expected” petroleum was being used at the property; and (2) the landowner was “ . . . in a position to control the site and source of the discharge (‘the ability to control potential sources of contamination’).” State v. Green, 96 N.Y.2d 403, 729 N.Y.S.2d 420 (2001).
State v. Speonk: Liability imposed solely on tank owners for spill at gas station where tanks were owned by one party and the land by another (where tanks removed before owner purchased).
State v. Green: Liability is properly imposed on the system owner. Leone v. Leewood Service Station, 212 A.D.2d 669, 624 N.Y.S.2d 610, lv. denied, 86 N.Y.2d 709 (2d Dept. 1995).
Non-Owners’ or Operators’ Liability: Under the theory that a person has “caused” a discharge or who has “set in motion the events which resulted in a discharge,” a wide variety of parties have been liable under the Navigation Law for remediation costs. To impose such liability “no proof is required if a specific wrongful act or omission directly caused the spill.” Domermuth Petroleum v. Herzog, 111 A.D.2d 957, 490 N.Y.S.2d 54, 56 (3d Dept. 1985) and State v. Green, supra.
Cases have held tenants, subtenants, tank installers, tank removal companies, delivery companies, third party brokers, and others liable.
Special mention of insurance carriers.
The old subdivision 4 of Section 181 of the Navigation Law has now been repealed and a new subdivision 4 to that section has been added providing innocent parties with a third party defense to liability.
The Navigation Law is a powerful tool and one that lends help to those with knowledge and guts. There is little help in escaping liability to those caught in the web of liability, but it can be strong medicine in making or breaking a deal or softening the hurt of remediation. Know what it can and can’t do – some silver bullets are not what they seem – and you will be able to skillfully manage expectations and your money.

References: §172
 §172
 §172
 §172
 v. 
 §181
 §190
 v. 
 §173
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v. 
 v.