Consent Decree

SDMSDocID 2011400 •'.«/« IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Plaintiff, v. Consolidated Civil Action Nos BP AMERICA, INC.., THE BUDD COMPANY, CHAMPLAIN CABLE CORPORATION, CHRYSLER CORPORATION, DAY INTERNATIONAL CORPORATION, E.I. DU PONT DE NEMOURS, 6 COMPANY, INC. GEC INDUSTRIES, INC., GENERAL MOTORS CORPORATION, HERCULES, INCORPORATED, ICI AMERICAS INC., MOTOR WHEEL CORPORATION, NEW CASTLE COUNTY, DELAWARE SCA SERVICES, INC., STANDARD CHLORINE OP DELAWARE, INC., STAUFPER CHEMICAL COMPANY, WASTE MANAGEMENT of DELAWARE, INC. WESTVACO CORPORATION, and WILMINGTON CHEMICAL CORPORATION, Dafandanta. AND flR000367 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE STATE OF DELAWARE, Plaintiff, v. Consolidated Civil Action Nos. BP AMERICA, INC. , ) THE BUDD COMPANY, ) CHAMPLAIN CABLE CORPORATION, ) CHRYSLER CORPORATION, ) DAY INTERNATIONAL CORPORATION, ) E.I. DU PONT DE NEMOURS, 6 ) COMPANY, INC. ) GEC INDUSTRIES, INC., ) GENERAL MOTORS CORPORATION, ) HERCULES, INCORPORATED, ) ICI AMERICAS INC., ) MOTOR WHEEL CORPORATION, ) NEW CASTLE COUNTY, DELAWARE ) SCA SERVICES, INC., ) STANDARD CHLORINE OP DELAWARE, ) INC. , STAUPPER CHEMICAL COMPANY, ) WASTE MANAGEMENT of DELAWARE, INC.,) WESTVACO CORPORATION, and ) WILMINGTON CHEMICAL CORPORATION, ) Dafendants. ) CONSENT DECREE AR000368 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT — FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE L.CtC'.^ UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, ) ) Plaintiff, ) v. ) Consolidated ) Civil Action Noa BP AMERICA, INC.., ) THE BUDD COMPANY, ) CHAMPLAIN CABLE CORPORATION, ) CHRYSLER CORPORATION, ) DAY INTERNATIONAL CORPORATION, ) E.I. DU PONT DE NEMOURS, 6 ) COMPANY, INC. ) GEC INDUSTRIES, INC., ) GENERAL MOTORS CORPORATION, ) HERCULES, INCORPORATED, ) ICI AMERICAS INC., ) MOTOR WHEEL CORPORATION, ) NEW CASTLE COUNTY, DELAWARE ) SCA SERVICES, INC., ) STANDARD CHLORINE OP DELAWARE, ) INC., STAUPPEX CHEMICAL COMPANY, ) WASTE MANAGEMENT of DELAWARE, INC.,) WESTVACO CORPORATION, and ) WILMINGTON CHEMICAL CORPORATION, ) Defendants. ) AND AR000369 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE STATS OF DELAWARE, Plaintiff, v. Conaolidated Civil Action Nos. 3P AMERICA, INC., THE BUDD COMPANY, CHAMPLAIN CABLE CORPORATION, CHRYSLER CORPORATION, DAY INTERNATIONAL CORPORATION, E.I. DU PONT 01 NEMOURS, 6 COMPANY, INC. GEC INDUSTRIES, INC., GENERAL MOTORS CORPORATION, HERCULES, INCORPORATED, ICZ AMERICAS INC., MOTOR WHEEL CORPORATION, NEW CASTLl COUNTY, DELAWARE SCA SERVICES, INC., STANDARD CHLORINE OP DELAWARE, INC., STAUPPUt CHEMICAL COMPANY, WESTVACWASTE MANAGEMENO CORPORATIONT of ,DELAWARE and , INC., WILMINGTON CHEMICAL CORPORATION, Defendant*. CONSENT DICJtIB AR000370 TABLE OF CONTENTS INTRODUCTION I. JURISDICTION 6 II. PARTIES BOUND 7 III. DEFINITIONS 3 IV. GENERAL PROVISIONS H V. TRUST FUND 15 VI. WORK TO BE PERFORMED 13 VII. IMPLEMENTATION OP WORK 24 VIII. U.S. EPA PERIODIC REVIEW 28 IX. REPORTING REQUIREMENTS .29 X. NOTICES 30 » XI. DESIGNATED REMEDIAL PROJECT MANAGER AND PROJECT COORDINATORS 32 XII. DATA QUALITY ASSURANCE 33 XIII. SITE ACCESS 33 XIV. SAMPLING AND DATA/DOCUMENT AVAILABILITY 42 XV. RECORD PRESERVATION 43 XVI. STIPULATED PENALTIES 44 XVII. FORCE MAJEURE 48 XVIII. DISPUTE RESOLUTION 51 XIX. RESPONSE AUTHORITY 53 XX. CONSISTENCY WITH NATIONAL CONTINGENCY PLAN 54 XXI. COVENANT NOT TO SUE 54 XXII. CLAIMS AGAINST THE PUHD AND PAYMENT OP RESPONSE COSTS AND NATURAL RESOURCE DAMAGES 60 - i - AR00037I XXIII. EFFECTIVE AND TERMINATION DATES SUBSEQUENT MODIFICATION XXIV. USE OF DECREE/ADMISSIONS ......................... 67 XXV. CONTRIBUTION PROTECTION .......................... 53 XXVI . RETENTION OF JURISDICTION ........................ 69 XXVII. OTHER PROVISIONS ................................. 69 XXVIII . COMMUNITY RELATIONS .............................. 71 - ii - AR000372 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF DELAWARE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, ) Plaintiff, ) v. ) Consolidated ) Civil Action Nos, ) and, BP AMERICA, INC. , a£ aJL. , ) Defendants, ) STATE OF DELAWARE, Plaintiff, v. BP AMERICA, INC., ft£ Defendants. ) CONSENT DECREE INTROPOCTIQM A. Whereas, the United Statae of America ("United statae*), on behalf of the Administrator of the United States Environmental Protection Agency ('IPX'), filed this action pursuant to Sectione IOC and 107 of the Comprehensive Environmental Reeponee, Compeneation, and Liability Act of 1910, ae amended (*CERCLA»), 42 U.S.C. ff 9«0« and 9407; B. Whereas, the united Statae in its Complaint seefcs: (i) abatement of an imminent and substantial endenqerment to the SR000373 public health, welfare, and the environaent; (ii) reimbursement of responaa costs incurred by EPA, together with accrued interest and costs of enforcement, for removal and remedial actions taken in response to the release or threat of release of hazardous substances from the Army Creek Landfill Superfund Site (the "Site*) located in New Castle County, Delaware; (iii) a declaratory judgment under Section 113(g)(2) of CERCLA, 42 u.s.c. ! 9«13(g)(2), and 2f U.S.C. S 2201, on liability for response costs or damages that will ba binding on any subsequent action or actions to recover further response costs or damages, and (iv) damages for injury to, destruction of, or lose of natural reaourcee under Section l07(a)(4)(C) of CZRCLA, 42 u.s.C. I f 9607(a)(4)(C); * c. Whereaa, the State of Delaware ('State') on behalf of the secretary of the Department of Natural Resources and Environmental Control (*DNREC*) filed an action pursuant to 7 Del. c. chapters 60, 63, and 90 for injunctive and other equitable relief to remedy a condition that may present an imminent and aubatantial hazard to the health of pereone or the environment and, pursuant to Section-107 of CHCXA, 42 U.s.C. I 9607, fort (i) reimbursement of reeponee coete incurred or to be incurreetay the Department (as hereinafter defined) in reeponee to a reissue) ot threat of release of hasardoua eubetancee from the Site, (ii) a declaratory judgment under Section 113(9) (2) of CZRCLA, 42 U.S.C. I 9413(9)(2), as to liability for further reeponee coeta, and (iii) damages for Injury to, destruction of, » - a - AR000371+ or loss of natural resources under Section 107(a)(4)(C) of CERCLA, 42 U.S.C. I 9607(a) (4) (C) ; D. Whereas, the United States and the State allege that hazardous substances as defined by Section 101(14) of CERCLA, 42 U.S.C. § 9601(14), and other pollutants or contaminants as defined by Section 101(33) of CERCLA, 42 U.S.C. § 9601(33), have been released and threaten to be released from the Site into the environment; E. whereas, for the purpose of entry and enforcement of this Consent Decree, the Settlors do not contest that the Complaint states a claim against the Settlors upon which relief may be granted. F. Whereas, the Settlors (as hereinafter defined) deny any * and all liability under any federal or state atatute, regulation, or common law for any reaponae coate incurred or to be incurred by the United statae, or the State caused by the relaaaa or threat of raleaae of hazardoua substances from the Site; G. Whereas, the United statae, the State, and the Settlors agree that Settlement of this matter and entry of this Consent Dacree are made in good faith in an effort to avoid expensive and protracted litigation; H. Whereas, all parties to thia Coneent Decree consent to the entry thereof; X. Whereaa, pursuant to Section 10S of CZJtCLA, 42 U.S.C. f 960S, EPA placed the Site on the National Priorities) Liat, - 3 - AR000375 (*NPL*), sat forth at 40 c.F.R. Part 300, Appendix B, 43 Fed. Reg. 40666 (September a, 1983); J. Whereas, the Site has been divided by the EPA into tvo operable units, Operable Unit One and Operable Unit Two (hereinafter defined); K. whereaa, certain Settlors have participated in the funding and/or performance of the Remedial Inveatigation and Feasibility Study for Operable Unit one, pursuant to an Administrative Order on consent, consistent with CERCLA and the National Contingency Plan (»NCP*); L. whereas, EPA conducted the Remedial Investigation and Feasibility Study for operable Unit Two; M. whereaa, on September 30, I9t«, the United Statae % executed a Record of Decision ('HOD-1*), which ie attached hereto ae Exhibit 1, and which among other things requiree that certain health and environmental threats poeed by the Site be addreaaed by aaane of inetallation of a aurface cap, gee venting system, appropriate eroeion and sediment controls, and pumping of groundvater; N. Whereaa, on June 29, 1990, the United Statae executed a Record of Decision for Operable Unit Two (•HOD-2*) which ie attar-heel hereto as) Exhibit 2, and which, among other things, require*that certain health and environmental threata poeed by the Site be addreaaed by treating the groundvater extracted by the recovery veil network; - 4 - &R000376 0. Whereas, various potentially responsible parties have been identified with regard to this Site and notified and revested to undertake the Remedial Action for Operable Unit one. various potentially responsible parties were also offered the opportunity to conduct the Remedial Investigation and Feasibility Study and the Remedial Action for operable Unit Two; p. Whereas, the Settlors have submitted to EPA a good faith offer to undertake and complete the Remedial Action for Operable Unit One and Operable Unit Two; Q. Whereas, in accordance with Section 121(f)(l)(F) of CERCLA, 42 U.S.C. S 9621(f)(1)(F), EPA notified the State prior to the negotiations with potentially reeponeible partiee t regarding the scope

Load more