EPA v. William Moskowitz et al.

Case summary

The Site was owned by the Respondent and his wife until they sold it in early 2003. Beginning in or about 1965, Sav-Cote Chemical Laboratories, Inc. (Sav-Cote) started to operate a facility at the Site for the packaging, distribution, and sale of marine paints. For a number of years, the facility was also engaged in the manufacture and mixing of paints for boating, residential and industrial applications. A number of underground storage tanks were located adjacent to the paint manufacturing building in the Site. In response to the release or threatened release of hazardous substances at or from the Site, EPA undertook response actions at the Site pursuant to Section 104 of CERCLA, 42 U.S.C. ' 9604. EPA's response actions included collecting and analyzing soil samples, and excavating and disposing of buried drums, underground and above-ground storage tanks and other contaminated materials found at the Site. On March 16, 2000, EPA placed a lien on the lands and all real property then owned by the Respondents at the Site. On March 16, 2000, EPA notified them of their potential liability to EPA for response costs and were also notified of the Superfund Lien on the Site. On April 13, 2000, EPA issued a demand letter to the Respondents and Sav-Cote for payment of the response costs incurred in connection with the removal action at the Site. The proposed settlement involves two(2) individuals and one(1) defunct company. The Settling Parties asserted they did not have the financial ability to pay the total amount which EPA had incurred in response costs relating to the Site. After a thorough review of voluminous tax records and numerous other financial documents produced by the Respondents, it was determined the only realistic source of payment to the United States was the net proceeds which might be obtained by selling the Site. Taking into account the recovery of substantial amount of EPA's response costs in the form of court-ordered restitution in the criminal case, EPA determined that (i) Sav-Cote Chemical Labs, which is no longer in business, is not a viable party for reimbursement of costs; (ii) the Respondents adequately demonstrated an inability to fully reimburse EPA for all of its response costs. Payment of the amount they could afford however, required they sell the Site and use the proceeds of the sale to reimburse EPA for its response costs. The Settling Parties found a purchaser for the cleaned up property. EPA released the CERCLA lien to effectuate the sale of the Site to that buyer. In exchange, the Settling Parties agreed to pay United States from the proceeds of the sale in the form of restitution as ordered by the United States District Court of New Jersey Court in a criminal proceeding against the Respondent.

Defendants (3)

• Moskowitz, JoanNamed in complaintNamed in settlement
• Moskowitz, WilliamNamed in complaintNamed in settlement
• Sav-Cote Chemical Laboratories, Inc.

Facilities (1)

• SAVCOTE CHEMICAL LABS , INC

  1094 RIVER AVE, LAKEWOOD, NJ, 087015607

  Registry ID: 110004140082

Statutes cited

• CERCLA 122H — Administrative Cost Recovery Settlement

Enforcement conclusions (1)

• William Moskowitz et al.entered 2003-09-30

  Primary law: CERCLA

Timeline (4 milestones)

• 2003-05-29Complaint Filed/Proposed Order
• 2003-08-11Enforcement Action Data Entered
• 2003-09-30Enforcement Action Closed
• 2003-09-30Final Order Issued