and the Transboundary Application of CERCLA:

Similar documents
CROSSING BORDERS: WHEN SHOULD CERCLA BE APPLIED EXTRATERRITORIALLY? KATHERINE HAUSRATH

Allocating CERCLA Liability: Divisibility or Section 113 Equitable Contribution

NO JOSEPH A. PAKOOTAS, et al., Plaintiffs-Appellees, and. STATE OF WASHINGTON, Plaintiff/Intervenor-Appellee,

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES

Enacting and Enforcing Tribal Law to Protect and Restore Natural Resources Part 1: Tribal Law and How it Works RICHARD A. DU BEY

NO UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

pìéêéãé=`çìêí=çñ=íüé=råáíéç=pí~íéë=

DETERMINING DAMAGES IN ENVIRONMENTAL CASES IN THE WORLD AFTER BURLINGTON NORTHERN

No In The United States Court Of Appeals For The Ninth Circuit ON APPEAL FROM THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON (NO.

Case 2:11-cv REB Document 1 Filed 09/22/11 Page 1 of 13

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

Case 2:04-cv LRS Document 357 Filed 06/19/2009 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF WASHINGTON

LIBRARY. CERCLA Case Law Developments ENVIRONMENTAL COST RECOVERY & LENDER LIABILITY UPDATE. Full Article

UNITED STATES V. ATLANTIC RESEARCH: OF SETTLEMENT AND VOLUNTARILY INCURRED COSTS

18-,,o ,,:,

No No CV LRS

Superfund and Natural Resource Damages Litigation Committee Newsletter

Assessing Costs under CERCLA: Sixth Circuit Requires Specificity in Complaints Seeking Prejudgment Interest. United States v. Consolidation Coal Co.

Superfund and Natural Resource Damages Litigation Committee Newsletter

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE SOUTHERN DISTRICT OF ILLINOIS. v. No DRH. MEMORANDUM and ORDER. I. Introduction and Background

pìéêéãé=`çìêí=çñ=íüé=råáíéç=pí~íéë=

No IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

Jerre S. Riggs. Volume 18 Issue 1 Article 2

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

No IN THE Supreme Court of the Unite Statee. MORRISON ENTERPRISES, LLC, Petitioner, DRAVO CORPORATION, Respondent.

Courthouse News Service

CASE NOTES recent environmental cases and final rules

Toxic Torts Recent Relevant Decisions. Rhon E. Jones Beasley, Allen Crow, Methvin, Portis & Miles, P.C.

ORDERED in the Southern District of Florida on May 23, 2014.

LIBRARY. CERCLA Case Law Developments ENVIRONMENTAL COST RECOVERY & LENDER LIABILITY UPDATE. Full Article

Coeur Alaska, Inc. v. Southeast Alaska Conservation Council, 129 S. Ct (U.S. 2009).

Robert T. Anderson, Professor, University of Washington School of Law Seattle, WA. April 2018

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

The PCS Nitrogen Case: A Chilling Effect on Prospective Contaminated Land Purchases

Transnational Pollution and the Efficacy of International and Domestic Dispute Resolutions among the NAFTA Countries

Colorado s Hazardous Waste Program: Current Activities and Issues

Journal of Environmental and Sustainability Law

Michael J. Van Zandt Partner

Consulting and Coordinating with Tribes for Superfund Sites

ENR Case Notes, Vol. 34 Recent Environmental Cases and Rules

Supreme Court Clarifies Rights of PRPs to Recover Cleanup Costs from Other PRPs, and the United States

Notwithstanding a pair of recent

Solving the CERCLA Statute of Limitations and Preemption Puzzles

SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES

ALI-ABA Course of Study Environmental Litigation

Your benefits are available online! Native American Resources Committee Newsletter

Tribal Lands and Environment: A National Forum on Solid Waste, Emergency Response, Contaminated Sites and Underground Storage Tanks

Chapter VIII SUPERFUND LAWS. In the aftermath of Love Canal and other revelations of the improper disposal of

Citizens Suit Remedies Can Expand Contaminated Site

A. Clean Water Act. 1. Natural Resources Defense Council, Inc. v. County of Los Angeles, 840 F.3d 1098 (9th Cir. 2016).

Policy Issues at Formerly Used Defense Sites (FUDS) Frequently Asked State Questions August 2010

Case 1:08-cv EJL Document 12 Filed 04/06/2009 Page 1 of 8 UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT DISTRICT OF IDAHO

Environmental Settlements in Bankruptcy: Practice Pointers for the Business Lawyer. A. Overview of the Bankruptcy Process

No IN THE. PROMEGA CORPORATION, Respondent.

LAW B584 / Global Warming in Indian Country Winter Syllabus

In the United States Court of Appeals For the Ninth Circuit

Spiritual and Cultural Resources as a Component of Tribal Natural Resource Damages Claims

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT EASTERN DISTRICT OF WISCONSIN

PRECEDENTIAL UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT. No PENNSYLVANIA DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION, Appellant

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE DISTRICT OF IDAHO

Environmental Obligations in United States Bankruptcy Actions: An Analysis of Two Key Issues

CERCLA: To Clean or Not to Clean - The Supreme Court Says There is no Question. U.S. v. Atl. Research Corp.

40 CFR Parts 110, 112, 116, 117, 122, 230, 232, 300, 302, and 401. Definition of Waters of the United States Amendment of Effective Date of 2015 Clean

UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT NORTHERN DISTRICT OF OHIO EASTERN DIVISION

December 15, In Brief by Theodore L. Garrett FOIA

In re Chateaugay Corp.: An Analysis of the Interaction Between the Bankruptcy Code and CERCLA

The Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act 42 U.S.C.

Tohono O odham Nation v. City of Glendale, 804 F.3d 1292 (9th Cir. 2015)

CERCLA SECTION 9658 AND STATE RULES OF REPOSE Two decades after passage, unanimity still elusive on basic question of statutory interpretation

No On Petition for a Writ of Certiorari to the United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit

IN THE SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES. No. A- UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, APPLICANT JICARILLA APACHE NATION

Supreme Court of the United States

In the Supreme Court of the United States

US ARMY CORPS Reply To: Public Notice No. OF ENGINEERS U.S. Army Corps of Engineers P-3104

Fordham Environmental Law Review

Supreme Court of the United States

Fourth Circuit Summary

COMMENT OBTAINING A DECLARATORY JUDGMENT UNDER CERCLA: SHOULD THE PAST CONTROL THE FUTURE?

AGO Environmental Crime Unit Factsheet

No IN THE Supreme Court of the United States. UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, Petitioner, v. BILLY JO LARA, Respondent.

Happy Birthday Superfund

In the Supreme Court of the United States

IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE MIDDLE DISTRICT OF NORTH CAROLINA

Francis A. Citera GREENBERG TRAURIG, LLP Suite W. Upper Wacker Drive Chicago, IL

Journal of Environmental and Sustainability Law

Disposing of Leaks and Spills: Passive Disposal of Hazardous Wastes Under CERCLA

Supreme Court of the United States

United States v USX Corp.

Expanding the Reach of the Bankruptcy Code's Automatic Stay Exception: City of New York v. Exxon

In the Supreme Court of the United States

In The Supreme Court of the United States

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

UKnowledge. University of Kentucky. Michael P. Healy University of Kentucky College of Law,

What You Need to Know About the Supreme Court's Clean Water Act Decision in Hawkes

Erosion of Joint and Several Liability under Superfund

PRP Contribution Claims Under CERCLA Strategies for Cost Recovery Against Other Potentially Responsible Parties

SUPREME COURT OF THE UNITED STATES

Supreme Court of the United States

Recent Developments Regarding CERCLA Claims and Their Disallowance Under Bankruptcy Code Section 502(e)(1)(B) Milissa A. Murray, Bingham McCutchen LLP

Centerior Service Company v. Acme Scrap Iron & (and) Metal Corporation: Cost Recovery or Contribution in the Sixth Circuit

Transcription:

American Bar Association Tort Trial & Insurance Practice Section Toxic Torts and Environmental Law Committee Reaching Across the 49 th Parallel: The Origins and Transformation of Canada/U.S. Environmental Disputes Phoenix, AZ April 2-4, 2009 Contamination ti of the Upper Columbia River and the Transboundary Application of CERCLA: Pakootas v. TCM Metals, Ltd. Presented by: Richard A. Du Bey Short Cressman & Burgess PLLC Seattle, WA (206) 682-3333 rdubey@scblaw.com 1

Superfund (CERCLA) 42 U.S.C. 9601 et seq. (1980) Provides a Federal Superfund to clean up uncontrolled or abandoned hazardous-waste sites..., and other... releases... into the environment Potentially responsible parties (PRPs) are held strictly jointly and severally liable for total cleanup cost 2

Superfund (CERCLA) 42 U.S.C. 9601 et seq. (1980) Provides for enforcement by Tribal, State and Federal governmental agencies for the clean up of hazardous substances and each of the three sovereigns may assert statutory claims for Natural Resource Damages (NRD) 3

Tribal Interests at Risk Indian Reservations are the remaining homeland of Indian Tribes Tribes entitled to use and enjoy their reservation homeland and associated on and off-reservation natural resources Tribal rights to natural resources have significant economic, cultural and spiritual value 4

Case Study: the Upper Columbia River Lake Roosevelt created by Grand Coulee Dam in 1942 150 miles between Grand Coulee Dam and US/Canada border Colville ll Reservation west of Lake Roosevelt Spokane Reservation east of Lake Roosevelt 5

Area of Concern Cominco Smelter 6

The Grand Coulee Dam 7

Source of Contamination Contamination from world s largest leadzinc smelter 16 km upstream from border 1992 USGS sediment study identified elevated levels of metals in sediments 1994 WA Dept. of Health issued fish consumption advisory 8

Trail Smelter 9

Timeline 1999 Tribe Petitioned U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) for PA Sept 2000 EPA granted Tribe s petition for Superfund Preliminary Assessment 2001 EPA conducting sampling/analysis sources of hazardous substances 2003 EPA issued Unilateral Administrative Order (UAO) to Teck Cominco, a Canadian corporation (TCM) 10

EPA s unilateral order concluded that Teck: Arranged for the disposal of its hazardous substances from the Trail Smelter into the Upper Columbia River by directly discharging up to 145,000 tons of slag annually prior to mid-1995. In addition, hazardous substances as liquid effluent were discharged into the Columbia River. Both slag and effluent were carried downstream and settled in slower flowing areas. 11

Rejection of EPA Order TCM rejects the EPA Order and asserts that EPA does not have jurisdiction. 2004 CERCLA Citizen Suit filed by 2 Tribal members against TCM seeking to enforce the UAO issued by EPA. Before answering the complaint, TCM filed a motion to dismiss i the case. 12

Issue Presented Whether U.S. Environmental Law (CERCLA) can be applied to a Canadian company whose discharges into the Columbia River flowed into Washington state. The case presents an issue of jurisdiction: whether Congress intended to make a foreign entity subject to CERCLA. 13

Presumption Against Extraterritoriality It is a longstanding principle of American law that legislation of Congress, unless a contrary intent appears, is meant to apply only within the territorial jurisdiction of the United States.... It serves to protect against unintended d clashes between our laws and those of other nations which could result in international discord. EEOC v. Arabian American Oil Company and Aramco Services Company, 499 U.S. 244, 111 S. Ct. 1227 14

Exception: The Effects Doctrine [T]he presumption [against extraterritoriality] is generally not applied where the failure to extend the scope of the statute to a foreign setting will result in adverse effects within the United States. Environmental Defense Fund, Inc. v. Massey, 986 F.2d 528, 531 (D.C. Cir. 1993), citing Restatement (Second) of Foreign Relations Law, 38, 17 15

CERCLA to Remedy Domestic Conditions [The purpose p of] CERCLA... was (1) to ensure the prompt and effective cleanup of waste disposal sites, and (2) to assure that parties responsible for hazardous substances bore the cost of remedying the conditions they created. CERCLA is to be liberally construed to achieve those goals. Carson Harbor Village, Ltd. v. Unocal Corp., 270 F.3d 863, 880-8181 (9th Cir. 2000), quoting Mardan Corp. v. C.G.C. CGC Music, Ltd., 804 F.2d 1454, 1455 (9th Cir. 1986) 16

District Court Decision Court denies TCM motion to dismiss (November 2004) finding that: Court has subject matter and personal jurisdiction and That the Complaint stated a cognizable claim for relief 17

The District Court held that: CERCLA was intended to address domestic pollution, even when the source of the domestic pollution originated in Canada under Canadian permits. Congress clearly l intended d that CERCLA be used to clean up hazardous substances within the United States. t 18

The District Court Found That CERCLA Applied Extraterritorially There is no doubt that CERCLA affirmatively expresses s a clear intent by Congress to remedy domestic conditions within the territorial jurisdiction of the U.S. That clear intent, combined with the well-established principle that the presumption [against extraterritoriality] does not apply where failure to extend the scope of the statute to a foreign setting will result in adverse effects within the United States, leads this court to conclude that extraterritorial application of CERCLA is appropriate in this case. 2004 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 23401 (E.D. Wash., Nov 8, 2004). 19

Appeal to 9th Circuit District Court opinion provided leave for TCM to file an immediate appeal to the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals February 2005, the Ninth Circuit agreed to hear TCM s appeal Trial Court proceedings were stayed (so long as EPA continues to fund the RI/FS) 20

Case of First Impression First time in the 25 years since the Superfund was enacted, a circuit court will address whether a Canadian corporation operating in Canada can be held liable under a U.S. strict liability statute for the transboundary release of hazardous substances into the United States. 21

Ninth Circuit Holds That CERCLA Is Being Applied Domestically We hold that because CERCLA liability is triggered by an actual threatened release of hazardous substances, and because a release of hazardous substances took place within the United States, this suit involves a domestic application of CERCLA. 452 F.3d 1066, 1068 (9th Cir. 2006) 22

United States Opposes Teck Cominco s Petition for Writ of Certiorari Teck seeks en banc review by 9th Circuit and review is not granted. Teck next filed a writ of certiorari to the U.S. Supreme Court. Court requests brief from the United States, and the U.S. brief states that: Because this case involves a direct and compelling United States interest, an assertion of jurisdiction to prescribed law would be consistent with considerations of international comity. Brief of the United States at 16 23

United States Rejects Teck Cominco s International Law Challenge In its brief the United States rejects Teck Cominco s international law challenge. [a] A state has jurisdiction to prescribe law with respect to... conduct outside its territory that has or is intended to have substantial ti effect within its territory. (Quoting Restatement (Third) of Foreign Relations Law of the United States 402(1)(c) at 227-228 24

The United States Solicitor General goes on to say that: Here, petitioner s deliberate 90 year discharge of millions of tons of hazardous substances into a river just upstream from the United States directly and foreseeably caused harmful effects in the United States. Brief of United States at 17 25

United States Supreme Court Denies Petition for Writ of Certiorari Case returns to district court for litigation of enforcement action. Teck Cominco is proceeding with CERCLA-like RIFS under settlement agreement with EPA. Trial on the question of Teck Cominco s liability under CERCLA as a covered person is set for October 2010. 26

The Earth and myself are of one mind. The measure of the land and the measure of our bodies are the same. Himmaton Yalatkit (Joseph) Nez Perce Chief 27

Teck Cominco Smelter, Trail BC ARSENIC COPPER LEAD ZINC CADMIUM MERCURY