EPA v. CLEVELAND, CITY OF

Case summary

A PROPOSED CONSENT DECREE BY WHICH 16 OHIO MUNICIPALITIES WOULD BECOME OBLIGATED TO REIMBURSE THE SUPERFUND FOR A POR- TION OF THE MONIES EXPENDED BY USEPA IN RESPONDING TO A CRI- TICAL EMERGENCY AT THE MATOUSEK LANDFILL IN GARFIELD HEIGHTS OHIO. THE CONSENT DECREE WOULD BE ENTERED PURSUANT TO SEC- TION 7003 OF THE SOLID WASTE DISPOSAL ACT (SWDA), THOUGH THE MONIES SOUGHT TO BE RECOVERED WERE EXPENDED PURSUANT TO CER- CLA. THIS UNUSUAL CIRCUMSTANCE IS A FUNCTION OF THE FACT THAT THE METHANE, WHICH POSED THE DANGER TO THE PUBLIC, HAS NOT BEEN CATEGORIZED AS A HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCE. UNFORTUNATE- LY, CERCLA MAKES LIABLE ONLY PERSONS WHO HAVE ENGAGED IN ACTIVITIES RELATING TO HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES. HOWEVER, SEC- TION 7003 OF THE SWDA APPLIES TO A BROADER RANGE OF WASTE HANDLING ACTIVITIES, THOUGH IT CONTAINS NO EXPLICIT COST RECOVERY AUTHORITY. IN APRIL 1988, IT WAS DISCOVERED THAT METHANE GAS WAS BEING RELEASED FROM THIS LONG CLOSED LANDFILL AND WAS MIGRAT ING INTO NEIGHBORING RESIDENCES WHERE IT WAS PRESENT AT EXPLOSIVE LEVELS. THE AGENCY ATTEMPTED TO HAVE THE OWNER AND THE CITY OF CLEVELAND, WHICH HAD SENT LARGE VOLUMES OF WASTE MATERIAL TO THE SITE, PERFORM THE RESPONSE ACTION. HOWEVER, BOTH DECLINED AND IT WAS NECESSARY FOR THE AGENCY TO TAKE IMMEDIATE ACTION, WHICH IT CONTINUES TO THE PRESENT. OTHER MUNICIPALITIES THAT HAD SENT WASTES TO THE SITE WERE SUBSEQUENTLY IDENTIFIED, AND NEGOTIATIONS ENSUED. IT BECAME EVIDENT THAT THESE ENTITIES WERE NOT IN A POSITION TO PER- FORM THE REMAINING REMOVAL ACTIVITIES, BUT THAT THEY MIGHT BE PERSUADED TO HELP PAY FOR THEM.

Defendants (1)

• CLEVELAND MUNICIPALNamed in complaintNamed in settlement

Facilities (1)

• MATOUSEK LDFL

  11400 VALLEY LN DR, GARFIELD HEIGHTS, OH, 44125

  Registry ID: 110010592769

Statutes cited

• RCRA 7003 — Imminent Order: Solid or Hazardous Waste

Enforcement conclusions (1)

• CLEVELAND, CITY OFentered 1992-01-22

  Primary law: RCRA

  Federal penalty: $36,000

Timeline (7 milestones)

• 1988-05-01Enforcement Action Data Entered
• 1990-06-29Referred To Dept Of Justice
• 1991-11-26Complaint Filed With Court
• 1992-01-22Final Order Lodged
• 1992-01-22Final Order Entered
• 1992-01-22Concluded
• 1992-05-27Enforcement Action Closed