EPA v. SUNBEAM CORPORATION, NEOSHO, MO

Case summary

PREPARED AND SENT AN EXPEDITED CIVIL REFERRAL TO DOJ TO OBTAIN REPRESENTATION IN PROCEEDING FOR DECLARATORY RELIEF IN THE U.S. BANKRUPTCY COURT FOR THE WESTERN DISTRICT OF PA. PLAINTIFF IN THE BANKRUPTCY ACTION IS SUNBEAM CORP., WHICH IS A PRP AT THE I.J. STEPHENS FARM SITE IN REGION VII. REGION VII REQUESTS THAT DOJ FILE A COUNTERCLAIM FOR DECLARATORY JUDGMENT IN THIS BANKRUPTCY MATTER TO DETERMINE THAT THE ISSUANCE OF A UAO PURSUANT TO SECTION 106 OF CERCLA WOULD NOT BE A VIOLATION OF THE INJUNCTIVE PROVISION SET FORTH IN SECTION 1141(D) OF THE BANKRUPTCY CODE, 11 U.S.C. SECTION 101 ET SEQ. SUNBEAM ORIGINALLY FILED AS A DEBTOR IN A CHAPT. 11 BANKRUPTCY PROCEEDING ON FEBRUARY 20, 1988. THE PLAN CONFIRMATION ORDER WAS ISSUED BY THE COURT ON JULY 12, 1990. ON MAY 27, 1994, SUNBEAM FILED A COMPLAINT FOR DECLARATORY RELIEF. BY ITS PLEADING, SUNBEAM SEEKS A DECLARATION THAT EPA AND MDNR HAD CLAIMS UNDER CERCLA AGAINST SUNBEAM IN CONNECTION WITH THE I.J. STEPHENS FARM SITE, AND THAT THESE CLAIMS WERE DISCHARGED IN SUNBEAM'S PRIOR CHAPT. 11 BANKRUPTCY PROCEEDING. EPA IS NAMED AS A DEFENDANT IN THE COMPLAINT, AND THUS MUST FILE ANY CLAIMS IT HAS, AS WELL AS RESPOND TO THE COMPLAINT. EPA WOULD LIKE TO ISSUE A UAO REQUIRING SUNBEAM TO CONDUCT REMOVAL ACTIVITIES. ALTERNATIVELY, EPA MAY CONDUCT FUND LEAD REMOVAL ACTION TO ADDRESS THE CONTAMINATION AT THE SITE. THIS BANKRUPTCY MATTER IS THE ONLY REASON EPA HAS NOT ISSUED A UAO TO DATE. EPA IS CONCERNED THAT THE ISSUANCE OF A UAO WOULD BE CONSTRUED AS A VIOLATION OF THE INJUNCTION SET FORTH IN SECTION 1141 OF THE CODE. EPA WOULD LIKE THIS ISSUE RESOLVED SO THAT IT MAY PROCEED IN THE MANNER MOST LIKELY TO PROTECT THE INTERESTS OF EPA, I.E., THE ABATEMENT OF THE ENVIRONMENTAL HARM AT THE SITE, WHILE AVOIDING THE INCURRENCE OF A CLAIM UNDER THE EQUAL ACCESS TO JUSTICE ACT AND VIOLATION OF THE INJUNCTION SET FORTH IN SECTION 1141. THUS, EPA WOULD LIKE TO COORDINATE THE ISSUANCE OF THE UAO WITH THE HANDLING OF THE BANKRUPTCY MATTER IN A WAY WHICH WILL ENABLE EPA TO EFFECT A RESPONSE TO THE CONTAMINATION AT THE SITE AS SOON AS POSSIBLE. THIS CASE COULD SET SIGNIFICANT LEGAL PRECEDENT ON THE ISSUES PRESENTED. THE FACTS PRESENTED ARE DISTINGUISHABLE FROM OTHER CASES WHICH RAISE SIMILAR ISSUES OF WHEN A CLAIM FOR INJUNCTIVE RELIEF UNDER CERCLA ARISES, AND WHETHER OR NOT A CERCLA SECTION 106 ORDER FOR THE CLEANUP OF PROPERTY NOW OWNED BY A DEBTOR IS A CLAIM DISCHARGEABLE UNDER SECTION 1141 OF THE CODE.

Defendants (1)

• SUNBEAM CORP.Named in complaint

Facilities (1)

• I J STEPHENS FARM SITE

  RT 4 BOX 407, NEOSHO, MO, 64850

  Registry ID: 110009338975

Statutes cited

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

Timeline (5 milestones)

• 1994-06-15Enforcement Action Data Entered
• 1994-06-30Referred To Dept Of Justice
• 1994-09-02Complaint Filed With Court
• 1995-09-28Concluded
• 1995-09-28Enforcement Action Closed