EPA v. METAMORA LANDFILL (BASF CORP. ET AL)

Case summary

BY THIS REFERRAL, I RECOMMEND THE FILING OF A CIVIL ACTION UNDERSECTION 107 OF THE COMPREHENSIVE ENVIRONMENTAL RESPONSE, COMPENSATIONAND LIABILILTY ACT OF 1980, AS AMENDED BY THE SUPERFUND AMENDMENTS ANDREAUTHORIZATION ACT OF 1986 (CERCLA) , AGAINST PERSONS WHO ARRANGED FORTHE DISPOSAL OF HAZARDOUS WASTES AT THE METAMORA LANDFILL SITE INMETAMORA, MICHIGAN. THE METAMORE LANDFILL IS LOCATED IN METAMORA TOWNSHIP, LAPEERCOUNTY, MICHIGAN, APPROXIMATELY ONE-HALF MILE NORTHEAST OF THE VILLAGEOF METAMORA, AND 20 MILES EAST-SOUTHEAST OF FLINT, MICHIGAN. THE SITEIS A 150 ACRE CLOSED LANDFILL THAT ACCEPTED INDUSTRIAL AND MUNICIPALWASTE BETWEEN 1955 AND 1980. THE LANDFILL BEGAN OPERATIONS IN 1955 AS APRIVATELY OWNED, UNREGULATED OPEN DUMP. IN 1969 THE LANDFILL WASUPGRADED TO MEET EXISTING STANDARDS, AND LICENSED TO RECEIVE GENERALREFUSE. HOWEVER, THE SITE ACCEPTED BOTH MUNICIPAL AND INDUSTRIAL WASTEUNTIL ITS CLOSURE IN 1980. EPA HAS COMPLETED ITS REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION AND FEASIBILITY STUDY(RI/FS) FOR THIS SITE AND HAS SIGNED TWO RECORDS OF DECISION (RODS) FORTHE SITE. IN THE FIRSAT ROD, SIGNED IN SEPTEMBER OF 1986, EPA CHOSEOFF-SITE INCINERATION OF DRUMMED WASTE LOCATED IN AREAS 1 AND 4 OF THESITE. IN THE SECOND ROD, SIGNED IN SEPTEMBER 1990, A LANDFILL CAP ANDINSTALLATION OF A GROUNDWATER PUMP AND TREAT SYSTEM WAS CHOSEN TOFURTHER REMEDIATE THE SITE. DUE TO A LACK OF INTERESAT ON THE PART OF THE IDENTIFIED POTENTIALLYRESPONSIBLE PARTIES, NO AGREEMENT WAS REACHED FOR EITHER A PRIVATELYFUNDED RI/FS NOR PRIVATE IMPLEMENTTION OF THE REMEDY SELECTED BY THEFIRSAT ROD. TO DATE, EPA HAS SPENT APPOXIMATELY $36,129,533.09 FUNDINGTHE RI/FS AND A PORTION OF THE DRUM EXCAVATION AND OFF-SITE INCINERATIONOF AREAS 1 AND 4. AT THE TIME THE SECOND ROD WAS SIGNED, U.S. EPA BEGAN NEGOTIATIONSWITH THE IDENTIFIED PRPS FOR PRIVATE IMPLEMENTATION OF THE REMEDYSELECTED BY THE SECOND ROD. AT THE CONCLUSION OF THESE NEGOTIATIONS,EPA REACHED AN AGREEMENT WITH SOME OF THE PRPS THAT OBLIGATED THOSE PRPSTO OF ONLY IMPLEMENT THE REMEDY SELECTED IN THE SECOND ROD BUT ALSOOBLIGATED THE PRPS TO TAKE OVER EPA'S IMPLEMENTATION OF THE FIRST ROD.THIS SETTLEMENT WAS EMBODIED IN A CONSENT DECREE ENTERED BY THE COURT INMARCH OF 1993. HOWEVER, UNDER THE TERMS OF THIS

Defendants (26)

• GENERAL ELECTRIC
• BASF
• BRAZEWAY
• CERTAIN TEED CORP.
• CHAMPION ENTERPRISES
• CONWED CORP.
• DESOTO INC.Named in complaintNamed in settlement
• DIAMOND SHAMROCK
• DOWNamed in complaintNamed in settlement
• EPPINGER MFG.
• GAGE PRODUCTSNamed in complaintNamed in settlement
• GTE VALENITE
• AKZO COATINGSNamed in complaintNamed in settlement
• AMERICAN CAN
• ARGUS CHEMICAL
• ARKWRIGHT
• AT WAGNER
• AUTOMOTIVE FINISHES
• MAC O LAC PAINTS
• PRECISION COATINGS
• STANDARD DETROIT PAINT
• STRICKER PAINT PRODUCTS
• TORNES SUPPLY CO.
• U. S. CHEMICAL
• UNITED PAINT & CHEMICAL
• …and 1 more

Facilities (1)

• METAMORA LANDFILL

  1636 DRYDEN ROAD, METAMORA, MI, 48455

  Registry ID: 110009263206

Statutes cited

• CERCLA 107 — Superfund

Enforcement conclusions (1)

• BASF CORP., ET AL./METAMORA LANDFILLentered 1998-01-08

  Primary law: CERCLA

Timeline (7 milestones)

• 1990-08-01Enforcement Action Data Entered
• 1994-09-26Referred To Dept Of Justice
• 1995-03-31Complaint Filed With Court
• 1996-11-18Final Order Lodged
• 1998-01-08Final Order Entered
• 1998-02-18Concluded
• 1998-02-24Enforcement Action Closed