EPA v. 3M Company et al.

Case summary

The remediation for this site was separated into three operable units. On September 27, 2012, EPA issued a Record of Decision relating to Operable Unit Three (OU3) for the Site. The OU3 remedy addresses groundwater located outside the boundaries of the former SCP facility as well as deep groundwater beneath the shallow aquifer at that facility. On March 13, 2013, EPA notified a group of 66 parties, including Settling Defendants, of their potential responsibility regarding the Site and provided them with an opportunity to make a good faith offer to perform OU3 and to reimburse EPA for its costs. The estimated cost of the OU3 remedy is $7,830,000. On April 29, 2013, liaison counsel for the Settling Defendants expressed a willingness to finance and perform the Remedial Design and Remedial Action (RD/RA) for OU3. Subsequently, negotiations commenced with the Settling Defendants and culminated in the settlement embodied in the Consent Decree. The Consent Decree requires the Settling Defendants to do the following activities, among others: a)Design and implement the remedy for OU3; b)Pay $50,000 towards unreimbursed costs incurred from September 4, 2002 through November 30, 2012; c)Reimburse all interim costs incurred from December 1, 2012 to the effective date of the Consent Decree; and d)Reimburse all future response costs incurred other than what are defined as “Future Oversight Costs” in the Consent Decree.

Defendants (71)

• Veolia Es Technical Solutions, LLCNamed in complaintNamed in settlement
• Cycle Chem, Inc.Named in complaintNamed in settlement
• Alcatel-Lucent USA Inc.Named in complaintNamed in settlement
• Arkema Inc.Named in complaintNamed in settlement
• Avantor Performance Materials, Inc.Named in complaintNamed in settlement
• Avery Dennison CorporationNamed in complaintNamed in settlement
• Bristol-Myers Squibb CompanyNamed in complaintNamed in settlement
• CBS CorporationNamed in complaintNamed in settlement
• CNA Holdings LLCNamed in complaintNamed in settlement
• Continental Holdings Inc.Named in complaintNamed in settlement
• Pan Technology, Inc.Named in complaintNamed in settlement
• Occidental Chemical CorporationNamed in complaintNamed in settlement
• Northrup Grumman Systems CorporationNamed in complaintNamed in settlement
• Nepera, Inc.Named in complaintNamed in settlement
• Momentive Speciality Chemicals Inc.Named in complaintNamed in settlement
• LanxessCorporationNamed in complaintNamed in settlement
• Honeywell International Inc.Named in complaintNamed in settlement
• HCR Manorcare, Inc.Named in complaintNamed in settlement
• Goodrich CorporationNamed in complaintNamed in settlement
• Glaxosmith Kline, LLCNamed in complaintNamed in settlement
• United Technologies CorporationNamed in complaintNamed in settlement
• Akzo Nobel Coatings, Inc.Named in complaintNamed in settlement
• American Cyanamid-Lederle-Shulton, Inc.
• 3M CompanyNamed in complaintNamed in settlement
• Air Products and Chemicals, Inc.Named in complaintNamed in settlement
• …and 46 more

Facilities (1)

• SCIENTIFIC CHEMICAL PROCESSING

  216 PATERSON PLANK RD, CARLSTADT, NJ, 07072

  Registry ID: 110000701223

Statutes cited

• CERCLA 106A — Imminent & Substantial Endangerment Order
• CERCLA 107A — Cost Recovery

Enforcement conclusions (1)

• 3M Company et al.entered 2014-03-17

  Primary law: CERCLA

Timeline (7 milestones)

• 2012-12-26PRN Sent
• 2013-01-10Enforcement Action Data Entered
• 2013-09-26Referred To Dept Of Justice
• 2013-11-05Complaint Filed With Court
• 2013-11-06Final Order Lodged
• 2014-03-17Concluded
• 2014-03-17Final Order Entered