Atlantic Richfield Co. v. Christian
Issues
Does the federal “Superfund” Act prevent property owners from seeking restoration damages under state law?
This case asks the Supreme Court to consider whether private citizens can fashion their own cleanup remedies at federal “Superfund” sites. The Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act, commonly known as “Superfund,” allows the Environmental Protection Agency to create cleanup plans for polluted sites across the nation. Gregory Christian and other resident landowners (“Landowners”) near the Superfund site of Anaconda, Montana, sued the owner of the site, Atlantic Richfield, alleging that the company owed them damages to restore their properties to pre-pollution status. Atlantic Richfield argues that the Superfund Act preempts any party from seeking state-law restoration damages. The Landowners counter that the Superfund Act leaves room for additional damages beyond what the Environmental Protection Agency has already deemed appropriate. The Supreme Court’s decision will impact the certainty and finality of Superfund cleanups, private-property rights, and the balance of state and federal power.
Questions as Framed for the Court by the Parties
(1) Whether a common-law claim for restoration seeking cleanup remedies that conflict with remedies the Environmental Protection Agency ordered is a jurisdictionally barred “challenge” to the EPA’s cleanup under 42 U.S.C. § 9613 of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act.
(2) Whether a landowner at a Superfund site is a “potentially responsible party” that must seek EPA approval under 42 U.S.C. § 9622(e)(6) of CERCLA before engaging in remedial action, even if the EPA has never ordered the landowner to pay for a cleanup.
(3) Whether CERCLA pre-empts state common-law claims for restoration that seek cleanup remedies that conflict with EPA-ordered remedies.
Beginning in the late nineteenth century, the Anaconda Copper Mining Company smelted copper near the town of Anaconda, Montana. Atlantic Richfield Co. v. Montana Second Judicial District Court at 517. Over time, smelting operations created large levels of pollutants—particularly, arsenic and lead—in the surrounding town.
Written by
Edited by
Additional Resources
- Gregory Dickinson and J. Michael Showalter, SCOTUS Will Review EPA’s Authority to Control Superfund Cleanups at Company’s Request, The National Law Review (June 26, 2019).
- Sylvia Carignan, Century of Toxic Gloom Drives Montanans Back to Supreme Court, Bloomberg Environment (Oct. 1, 2019).
- Ellen M. Gilmer, Superfund: “I’m Scared to Death of What the Supreme Court Might Do”, E&E News (June 20, 2019).