U.S. v. Compaction Systems Corp.
| Decision Date | 02 December 1999 |
| Docket Number | No. CIV. A. 96-5349 KSH.,No. 2:96CV05349.,2:96CV05349.,CIV. A. 96-5349 KSH. |
| Parties | UNITED STATES of America v. COMPACTION SYSTEMS CORPORATION, et al. |
| Court | New Jersey Supreme Court |
Susan C. Cassell, United States Attorney's Office, Newark, NJ, Brian G. Donohue, United States Department of Justice, Washington, DC, for United States of America, plaintiff.
Jeffrey M. Pollack, Sills, Cummis, Zuckerman, Radin, Tischman, Epstein & Gross, P.A., Newark, NJ, for Compaction Systems Corporation, Compaction Systems Corporation of Connecticut, defendants.
Brian J. Molloy, Wilentz, Goldman & Spitzer, Woodbridge, NJ, for Connecticut Resource Recovery Authority, Inc., defendant.
Robert Joseph Fettweis, Fleming, Roth & Fettweis, Newark, NJ, for Occidental Petroleum Corporation, defendant.
Lynn Wright, Edwards & Angell, Short Hills, NJ, for Rayonier, Inc., defendant.
David Paul Schneider, Bressler, Amery & Ross, PC, Florham Park, NJ, for Knoll Pharmaceutical Company, Inc., defendant.
Wayne L. Mello, Hersh, Ramsey & Berman, P.C., Morristown, NJ, for Browning-Ferris Industries of South Jersey, Inc., defendant.
John H. Dorsey, Dorsey & Fisher, Boonton, NJ, for Town of Boontown, Mount Arlington, third-party, defendants.
Pamela S. Goodwin, Saul, Ewing, Remick & Saul, Princeton, NJ, for CWM Chemical Services, Inc., R & R Sanitation Services, Inc., third-party, defendant.
John A. McKinney, Jr., McCarter & English, Newark, NJ, for Mennen Company, the, fourth-party, plaintiff.
Robert Joseph Fettweis, Fleming, Roth & Fettweis, Newark, NJ, for Occidental Petroleum Corporation, cross-claimant.
Brian J. Molloy, Wilentz, Goldman & Spitzer, Woodbridge, NJ, for Connecticut Resource Recovery Authority, Inc., cross-claimant.
Barbara H. Kelly, Wilson, Elser, Moskowitz, Edelman & Dicker, Newark, NJ, for Town of Darien, Town of Easton, Town of Greenwich, Town of Monroe, Town of Stratford, Town of Trumbull, Town of Westport, third-party, defendants.
Fredric Paul Gallin, Methfessel & Werbel, PC, Rahway, NJ, for Bloomfield Manufacturing Company, third-party, defendant.
John H. Dorsey, Dorsey & Fisher, Boonton, NJ, for Chatham Borough, East Hanover Township, Mt. Arlington, Mountain Lakes Borough, Randolph Tp., Rockaway Tp., Wharton Tp., Hanover Tp., Chatham Borough, Town of Boontown, third-party, defendant.
Carl R. Woodward, III, Carella, Byrne, Bain, Gilfillan, Cecchi, Stewart & Olstein, Roseland, NJ, for Chatham Township, third-party, defendant.
Michael David Lichtenstein, Lowenstein, Sandler, Kohl, Fisher & Boylan, Roseland, NJ, for Dayco Corporation, third-party, defendant.
David W. Reger, Bressler, Amery & Ross, Morristown, NJ, for Dart Industries, Inc., third-party, defendant.
Steven A. Kunzman, Bivona, Cohen, Kunzman, Coley, Yospin, Bernstein & Difrancesco, P.A., Warren, NJ, for Denville, Hackettstown, Montville Township, Morris Plains Borough, Denville, Montville, Morris Plains Borough, Mt. Olive Tp., Roxbury Tp., Rockaway, Parsippany-Troy Hills Tp., third-party, defendant.
Donald J. Camerson, II, Bressler, Amery & Ross, Florham Park, NJ, for Dominick International, Thatcher Glass Manufacturing Company, third-party, defendant.
Damon R. Sedita, Schwartz, Tobia, Stanziale, Becker, Rosensweig & Sedita, Montclair, NJ, for Filiberto Sanitation, Inc., third-party, defendant.
Joseph J. Bell, Denville, NJ, for Florham Park Borough, third-party, defendant.
Gregory Joseph Coffey, Coffey & Sullivan, Morristown, NJ, for Harding Township, third-party, defendant.
John H. Klock, Gibbons, Del Deo, Dolan, Griffinger & Vecchione, PC, Newark, NJ, Herbert B. Bennett, Bennett & Yoskin, Princeton, NJ, for Keuffel & Esser Company, third-party, defendant.
Frank A. Lattal, Connell, Foley & Geiser, P.C., Roseland, NJ, for Leslie Controls, Inc., third-party, defendant.
John A. McKinney, Jr., McCarter & English, Newark, NJ, for Mennen Company, third-party, defendant.
John M. Mills, III, Mills & Mills, Morristown, NJ, for Morris Township, third-party, defendant.
Thomas F. Collins, Vogel, Chait, Schwartz and Collins, Morristown, NJ, for Morristown, third-party, defendant.
James R. Greene, Hardin, Kundla, McKeon, Poletto & Polifroni, PC, Springfield, NJ, for Paul M. Ritter Roofing Co., third-party, defendant.
Pamela R. Esterman, Sive, Paget & Riesel, P.C., New York, NY, Ronald S. Bergamini, Ronald S. Bergamini, Counsellor at Law, Hasbrouck Heights, NJ, for Policastro Sanitation, third-party, defendant.
Fred Semrau, Jansen, Bucco & Debona, Boonton, NJ, Kim Hollaender, Manta and Welge, Mountain View Office Park, West Trenton, NJ, for Washington Township, third-party, defendant.
Steven Andrew Kunzman, Bivonia Cohen, Warren, NJ, for Washington Borough, third-party, defendant.
Steven A. Kunzman, Bivona, Cohen, Kunzman, Coley, Yospin, Bernstein & Difrancesco, P.A., Warren, NJ, for Mount Olive Township, counter-claimant.
Joseph J. Bell, Denville, NJ, for Florham Park Borough, counter-claimant.
James R. Greene, Hardin, Kundla, Mckeon, Poletto & Polifroni, PC, Springfield NJ, for Paul M. Ritter Roofing Co., counter-claimant.
Thomas F. Collins, Vogel, Chait, Schwartz and Collins, Morristown, NJ, for Morristown, cross-claimant.
Carl R. Woodward, III, Carella, Byrne, Bain, Gilfillan, Cecchi, Stewart & Olstein, Roseland, NJ, for Chatham Township, counter-claimant.
Damon R. Sedita, Schwartz, Tobia, Stanziale, Becker, Rosensweig & Sedita, Montclair, NJ, for Filiberto Sanitation, Inc., counter-claimant.
Gregory Joseph Coffey, Coffey & Sullivan, Morristown, NJ, for Harding Township, counter-claimant.
John M. Mills, III, Mills & Mills, Morristown, NJ, for Morris Township, counterclaimant.
Donald J. Camerson, II, Bressler, Amery & Ross, Florham Park, NJ, for Dominick International, Thatcher Glass Manufacturing Company, counter-claimant.
John A. McKinney, Jr., McCarter & English, Newark, NJ, for Mennen Company, counter-claimant.
Pamela S. Goodwin, Saul, Ewing, Remick & Saul, Princeton, NJ, for Waste Management of North Jersey, cross-claimant.
INTRODUCTION
By Letter-Opinion and Order dated July 15, 1999, I granted partial summary judgment in favor of third-party plaintiffs, Browning Ferris Industries of North Jersey, Inc., Connecticut Resources Recovery Authority, Knoll Pharmaceutical Company, Occidental Petroleum Corporation, and Rayonier Inc. and third-party defendants BASF Corporation, CWM Chemical Services LLC f/k/a CWM Chemical Services, Inc., as successor to R & R Sanitation, Waste Management of North Jersey, Inc., Cadillac Plastic Groups, Inc., Dart Industries, Inc., Garbco Associates, Inc. f/k/a J. Filiberto Sanitation Inc., The Mennen Company, and Paul Ritter Roofing Co., Inc. (the "Settlors"), and against third-party-defendant Keuffel & Esser ("K & E"). On August 30, 1999, I granted K & E's motion for reconsideration. Settlors now move for reconsideration of the August 30th order. I have considered the papers submitted in support of and in opposition to the motion. There was no oral argument. Rule 78.
The underlying action was for cost recovery and declaratory relief against numerous potentially responsible parties ("PRPs") under Section 107 of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act of 1980, as amended ("CERCLA"), 42 U.S.C. § 9607. The United States sought to recover costs that it incurred in connection with the release and threatened release of hazardous substances into the environment at and from the Combe Fill North Landfill Superfund Site (the "Site"), located in Mount Olive Township, Morris County, New Jersey. The Site occupies approximately 100 acres, about 65 acres of which were used as a landfill between 1966 and 1981.
In the early 1980's, the United States Environmental Protection Agency ("EPA") commenced an investigation at the Site searching for environmental contamination. As a result of the finding that hazardous substances had been disposed of, in September of 1983, the Site was placed on the National Priorities List ("NPL"), 40 C.F.R. Part 300, Appendix B, pursuant to Section 105(a) of CERCLA, 42 U.S.C. § 9605(a). NPL sites are those which the EPA has determined present the greatest danger to public health, welfare, or the environment, and are eligible for long-term remedial action financed with funds from the Hazardous Substance Superfund, commonly referred to as the "Superfund." 42 U.S.C. § 9611.
Under a cooperative agreement with the EPA, a remedial investigation and feasibility study ("RI/FS") was conducted by the New Jersey Department of Environmental Protection ("NJDEP"). The RI/FS identified the presence of hazardous substances at and near the Site including, but not limited to, lead, mercury, zinc, phenols, phthalates, cyanides, hexachlorobenzene, ethylbenzene, toluene, and methylene chloride. It also revealed the existence of considerable groundwater contamination in and around the Site. This contamination was particularly alarming because approximately 10,000 people within a four-mile radius of the Site relied on this groundwater for potable water.
Based on the results of the RI/FS, the EPA determined that there was a "release" or "threatened release" of hazardous substances at or from the Site within the meaning of Section 101(22) of CERCLA, 42 U.S.C. § 9601(22). On September 29, 1986, the Regional Administrator of EPA Region II signed a Record of Decision ("ROD"). The ROD outlined the remedial action to be conducted at the Site, which included the installation of a cap over the landfill, construction of a drainage system to control run-off, installation of a vent system to control underground methane gas, fencing of the Site, and monitoring of the remedy. The remedial activities are now complete and monitoring is ongoing. These actions taken by the EPA and NJDEP in connection with the Site constituted "response" actions within the meaning of Section 101(25)...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
S.C. ex rel. C.C v. Deptford Tp. Bd. of Educ.
...The Federal Rules of Civil Procedure do not expressly recognize motions for "reconsideration." See United States v. Compaction Sys. Corp., 88 F.Supp.2d 339, 345 (D.N.J.1999). Instead, such motions are treated as motions to alter or amend judgment, under Fed.R.Civ.P. 59(e), or as motions for......
-
CPS Medmanagement LLC v. Bergen Reg'l Med. Ctr., L.P.
...Procedure. See Harrison v. Smith, Civ. No. 08–3050, 2010 WL 715666, at *2 (D.N.J. Feb. 24, 2010) (citing United States v. Compaction Sys. Corp., 88 F.Supp.2d 339, 345 (D.N.J.1999)). Courts have sometimes treated them as motions to alter or amend the judgment of the court pursuant to Rule 59......
-
Cataldo v. Moses, CIV.A. 02-2588FSH.
...and if the overlooked matter "might reasonably have resulted in a different conclusion [by the court]." United States v. Compaction Systems Corp., 88 F.Supp.2d 339, 345-46 (D.N.J.1999). C. In her Dismissal Report and Recommendation, Judge Shwartz applied existing case law to reach the concl......
-
Interfaith Community Organ. v. Honeywell Intern.
...in the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure for reconsideration or reargument of a judicial decision. See United States v. Compaction Systems Corp., 88 F.Supp.2d 339, 345 (D.N.J.1999) (Hedges). The closest federal rule is Fed.R.Civ.P. 59(e), which allows a court to "alter or amend" a judgment. ......