15 Jun 2006

The Expert Report for Shushufindi-4 Affirms that the Site was Not Within the Scope of the Texpet Remedial Action Plan and Conditions at the Site are the Responsibility of Petroecudor

QUITO, Ecuador, June 15, 2006 – The Shushufindi-4 judicial site inspection confirm that this site was not part of the government-approved Remedial Action Plan (RAP) conducted by Texpet, and Petroecuador has yet to remediate the four former pits present at Shushufindi-4. The inspection, conducted on July 27, 2005, was undertaken as part of an environmental suit filed against Chevron Corporation.

The main conclusions of the Shushufindi 4 (SSF-4) Judicial Inspection are detailed in the report and are summarized as follows:

  • The SSF-4 well site was not within the scope of the Texpet remediation program and Texpet was never required to conduct remedial activity at this site. Environmental conditions at this site are the sole responsibility of Petroecuador, which has yet to remediate the four former pits present at this site Rather, a local resident reports that he himself has attempted to cover these pits with soil, after waiting for Petroecuador to take action.
  • Although the former pits have not been remediated, soil samples collected around the perimeter of the site and analyzed for petroleum related hydrocarbons demonstrate that petroleum materials have not migrated from the site. Hydrocarbons were not detected in any of these perimeter soil samples and metals were at levels below relevant evaluation criteria and in the normal range observed in natural soils. The evaluation criteria used in this inspection are the same or stricter than the Ecuadorian criteria in place at the time of the Petroecuador-Texpet Consortium.
  • Sampling and testing of water samples collected from local streams and water wells indicate that petroleum-related hydrocarbons and metals are not migrating to local water supplies. However the same water samples were found to contain high levels of coliform bacteria, demonstrating that the water is contaminated with human and/or animal waste. Similarly, samples of the only water supply well in the area contained bacterial contamination that could represent a health risk to people consuming the water, a fact that plaintiffs' lawyers and experts choose not to acknowledge.

Back to top