D.C. Circuit Rejects Challenge to CERCLA Site Listing

On July 8, 2022, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit (D.C. Circuit) rejected a challenge to the listing of a groundwater contamination plume on the National Priorities List (NPL). The decision in Daikin Applied Americas, Inc. v. EPA reaffirms the difficulty that attends challenging NPL listings as well as the wide latitude Congress granted the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) to define the scope of Superfund sites during the listing process. (more…)

,

Sixth Circuit: Long-Litigated Superfund Claims Barred by Statute of Limitations

On April 25, 2022, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Sixth Circuit addressed the application of the statute of limitations under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA or Superfund) in Georgia-Pacific Consumer Products LP et al. v. NCR Corp. NCR is the latest in a long line of cases stemming from PCB contamination related to carbonless copy paper manufacturing and recycling. In NCR, the court concluded that the claims of Georgia Pacific (GP) against NCR, International Paper, and Weyerhaeuser for costs stemming from a series of administrative settlements and court judgments were barred by CERCLA’s statute of limitations. (more…)

,

EPA Proposes to Adopt New American Society for Testing and Materials Standard, Including PFAS, for CERCLA Phase I All Appropriate Inquiry

On March 14, 2022, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) issued a proposed and direct final rule, which adopts the E1527-21 standard issued by the American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM), for All Appropriate Inquiries (AAI) required under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA). (more…)

, ,

Supreme Court Addresses What Triggers a Contribution Claim Under CERCLA

On May 25, 2021, the U.S. Supreme Court issued a unanimous opinion in a case addressing whether a settlement agreement resolving Clean Water Act (CWA) liability can ripen a cause of action for contribution action under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA or Superfund). For companies crafting settlement language related to environmental contamination or preparing to file contribution claims, Guam v. United States provides an important consideration regarding what potential liabilities to include or leave out.

(more…)

,

House Introduces PFAS Action Act of 2021

On Tuesday, April 13, Reps. Debbie Dingell and Fred Upton, both D-Mich., introduced the PFAS Action Act of 2021, seeking further regulation of per- and polyfluorinated substances (PFAS). Most notably, the bill would require the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to take action to address two PFAS chemicals — PFOA and PFOS — through a number of regulatory provisions: designating PFOA and PFOS as hazardous substances under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act, designating PFOA and PFOS as hazardous air pollutants under the Clean Air Act, and requiring EPA to establish national drinking water standards for PFOA and PFOS. (more…)

, , , , ,

Supreme Court Agrees to Take Up CERCLA Suit Against U.S. Government

On January 8, 2021, the U.S. Supreme Court took up a Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) dispute involving the territory of Guam and the United States. At issue in Guam v. United States is who must pay for cleanup costs associated with a landfill formerly operated by the U.S. Navy, into which the Navy deposited spent munitions, chemicals, and other waste. Although Guam asked EPA to address the landfill under CERCLA, the agency proceeded under the Clean Water Act (CWA) instead, and in 2004, Guam entered into a consent decree under the CWA under which the territory agreed to close and remediate the landfill.

(more…)

, ,

Third Circuit Limits CERCLA Liability Shield

On September 8, 2020, in New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection (NJDEP), et al. v. American Thermoplastics Corp., et al., the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit limited the liability shield a potentially responsible party (PRP) receives when it settles a cost recovery action with a state under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA). The court held that “a settling-PRP is protected only insofar as a consent decree and a contribution action address the same matters. In effect, our decision encourages a PRP to settle with both the relevant State and Federal Governments.”

(more…)

,