EPA v. PRETTY PRODUCTS INC.

Case summary

THE U.S. EPA CONDUCTED 2 PHASES OF A REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION AT THE SITE; THE FIRST FROM 1983 TO 1985 AND THE SECOND FROM 1985 TO 1987. THE FEASIBILITY STUDY WAS ISSUED ON 10/9/87. THE RECORD OF DECISION WAS ISSUED ON 6/17/88. U.S.EPA HAS ALREADY ENTERED INTO A PROPOSED CONSENT DECREE WITH ALL OF THE PRPS EXCEPT PRETTY PRODUCTS, INC., ONE OF THE SUBJECTS OF THE INSTANT REFERRAL. THE OTHER PROPOSED DEFENDANT IS PRETTY PRODUCTS' PARENT CORPORATION, LANCASTER COLONY CORP. - THE PROPOSED CONSENT DECREE COMMITS THE SETTLING PRPS TO PER FORM THE REMEDIAL DESIGN/REMEDIAL ACTION IDENTIFIED IN THE ROD. THE CONSENT DECREE HAS ALREADY BEEN THE SUBJECT OF A PRIOR REFERRAL BY U.S. EPA. THAT COMPLAINT WAS FILED ON 2/23/90; THE PROPOSED CONSENT DECREE WAS LODGED ON THE SAME DATE. A MOTION TO ENTER THE DECREE WAS FILED BY THE DOJ ON 9/5/90; THIS MOTION HAS NOT YET BEEN RULED ON. - THE U.S. EPA IS SEEKING FROM PRETTY PRODUCTS AND LANCASTER COLONY THE RECOVERY OF ITS PAST COSTS. AS OF 4/30/90, THESE PAST COSTS WERE $1,419,564.44, INCLUDING PRE-JUDGMENT INTE- REST OF $184,811.12. - INFORMATION REQUESTS WERE SENT TO PRETTY PRODUCTS, INC., AS TO ITS WASTE GENERATION AND DISPOSAL. IN ADDITION, PRETTY PRODUCTS' CONSULTANT PREPARED AND SUBMITTED TO U.S. EPA A REPORT WHICH WOULD SERVE AS AN ADMISSION, AND WHICH ESTABLIS HES PRETTY PRODUCTS' LIABILITY FOR THE DISPOSAL OF HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES AT THE SITE. - LANCASTER COLONY CORP IS THE 100% STOCKHOLDER OF PRETTY PRO- DUCTS, INC. U.S. EPA HAS ONLY LIMITED INFORMATION THAT LANCASTER COLONY EXERCISED THE DEGREE OF CONTROL OVER THE FINANCIAL OPERATIONS, BUSINESS OPERATIONS, AND WASTE DISPOS- AL PRACTICES OF PRETTY PRODUCTS, INC., SO THAT IT COULD BE HELD LIABLE AS A GENERATOR OF HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES AT THE COSHOCTON LANDFILL SITE. SEEKING MORE INFORMATION AS TO THIS DECREE OF CONTROL EXERCISED BY LANCASTER COLONY CORP, U.S. EPA ISSUED BOTH PARTIES INFORMATION REQUESTS PURSUANT TO SECTION 104(E). BOTH PARTIES REFUSED TO ANSWER THE VAST MAJORITY OF THE INFORMATION REQUESTS, CLAIMING THAT THE REQUESTS WERE OUTSIDE OF THE SCOPE OF U.S.EPA'S STATUTORY AUTHORITY UNDER SECTION 104(E). THUS, THE DEGREE OF EVI- DENCE NECESSARY TO HOLD LANCASTER COLONY LIABLE FOR THE ACTS OF PRETTY PRODUCTS WILL HAVE TO BE DEVELOPED THROUGH DISCOVE RY. - THE REPORT RECOMMENDS THAT AN ACTION TO BE FILED AGAINST PRETTY PRODUCTS, INC., AND ITS PARAENT CORPORATION, LANCAST- ER COLONY CORP., PURSUANT TO SECTIONS 104(E) AND 107(A) OF CERCLA, 42 U.S.C. SECTIONS 9604(E), 9607(A). THE SECTION 104(E) COUNT SEEKS INJUNCTIVE RELIEF THAT WOULD MANDATE THE PARTIES' COMPLIANCE WITH U.S. EPA'S INFORMATION REQUESTS, AND WOULD ALSO SEEK CIVIL PENALTIES FOR THE PARTIES' PAST NONCOMPLIANCE. THE SECTION 107 COUNT SEEKS RECOVERY OF COSTS EXPENDED BY U.S. EPA DURING THE REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION AND FEASIBILITY STUDY, AND THE RD/RA AND COST RECOVERY NEGO- TIATIONS, AND SEEKS THE ONE-THIRD OF U.S. EPA'S FUTURE OVER- SIGHT COSTS WHICH WILL NOT BE PAID UNDER THE RD/RA CONSENT DECREE BY THE SETTLING PRPS.

Defendants (2)

• LANCASTER COLONY CORPORATIONNamed in complaintNamed in settlement
• PRETTY PRODUCTSNamed in complaintNamed in settlement

Facilities (1)

• COSHOCTON CITY LANDFILL

  STATE RTE 83 S, COSHOCTON, OH, 43812

  Registry ID: 110008586360

Statutes cited

• CERCLA 104E5 — Violation of 104(e) Compliance Order
• CERCLA 104E2 — Information and/or Access
• CERCLA 107A — Cost Recovery

Enforcement conclusions (1)

• PRETTY PRODUCTS INCentered 1995-01-04

  Primary law: CERCLA

Timeline (6 milestones)

• 1988-08-24Enforcement Action Data Entered
• 1990-12-17Referred To Dept Of Justice
• 1991-01-28Complaint Filed With Court
• 1995-01-04Final Order Lodged
• 1995-01-04Final Order Entered
• 1995-01-04Concluded