PRP

October 20, 2022

A Risky Dance: When Emerging Contaminants Comingle With CERCLA Hazardous Substances

The distinction between CERCLA hazardous substances and all else, including pollutants or contaminants, is important because CERCLA liability is triggered by the existence of a “hazardous substance” at a site, nothing else. Continue reading

CERCLA, Emerging Contaminants, Hazmat, Sustainability, TSCA

ARAR, Arie Feltman-Frank, CEC, CERCLA, Corporate Environmental Lawyer, diisopropyl methylphosphonate, DIMP, EPA, Jenner & Block, NCP, PFAS, PFOA, PRP
October 5, 2010

Fifth Circuit Limits Scope of CERCLA’s “Arranger” Liability

In Celanese Corporation v. Martin K. Eby Construction Company Inc., the Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals addressed the scope of “arranger” liability under CERCLA and affirmed the ruling of the district court that Defendant-Appellee Martin K. Eby Construction Company, Inc. was not liable as an “arranger” under CERCLA for the remediation costs Celanese Corporation had… Continue reading

CERCLA, Hazmat

arranger liability, Burlington Northern, CERCLA, PRP, remediation costs
July 29, 2010

Limits to CERCLA’S Owner/Operator Liability

The United States District Court for the Western District of Washington has ruled that a party cannot be liable under CERCLA as an “owner/operator” for the remediation of impacted soil and water if the impacted soil and water is not located within the party’s facility, and is entirely outside of the property limits of the… Continue reading

CERCLA, RCRA, Water

CERCLA, facility, operator, owner, owner/operator, PRP, remediate, Superfund

PRP

A Risky Dance: When Emerging Contaminants Comingle With CERCLA Hazardous Substances

Fifth Circuit Limits Scope of CERCLA’s “Arranger” Liability

Limits to CERCLA’S Owner/Operator Liability