DEFENDANTS CONSIST OF APPROXIMATELY 35 POTENTIALLY RESPONSIBLE PARTIES (PRPS) WHO WERE GENERATORS AND/OR TRANSPORTERS WITH REGARD TO THE SITE. THE VIOLATIONS UPON WHICH THE ACTION IS BASED: ARRANGEMENT FOR DISPOSAL, TREATMENT, AND TRANSPORTATION OF HAZARDOUS SUBSTANCES. RECOVERY OF $50,000 IN FEDERAL COSTS INCURRED FOR OVERSIGHT OF THE REMEDIAL INVESTIGATION/FEASIBILITY STUDY (RI/FS); RECOVERY OF APPROXIMATELY $26,000 IN STATE RESPONSE COSTS; AND CONDUCT OF REMEDIAL DESIGN/REMEDIAL ACTION (RD/RA) AT THE SITE IN ACCORDANCE WITH THE RECORD OF DECISION (ROD) OF SEPTEMBER 28, 1987.
THE CONSENT DECREE INCLUDES A SPECIAL COVENANT NOT TO SUE UNDER SECTION 122(F)(2) OF CERCLA FOR THE BIOREMEDIATION PORTION OF THE REMEDY. BECAUSE OF THE POSSIBLE PRECEDENTIAL NATURE OF THE SPECIAL COVENANT, THE QUESTION OF WHETHER OR NOT TO GRANT IT WAS PRESENTED BY THE REGION TO THE SETTLEMENT DECISION COMMITTEE (SDC) AT ITS OCTOBER 15, 1987 SESSION. THE SDC GAVE ITS CONCEPTUAL APPROVAL OF THE PROPOSED SETTLEMENT ON THAT DATE, AND THAT APPROVAL WAS FOLLOWED BY WRITTEN CONFIRMATION IN A MEMORANDUM FROM THE ASSISTANT ADMINISTRATORS OF OECM AND OSWER DATED 3/17/88. SHOULD THIS SETTLEMENT NOT BE ACHIEVED, EPA WOULD HAVE SEVERAL OPTIONS: (1) TO CONDUCT THE REMEDIAL ACTION ITSELF AND SEEK LATER COST RECOVERY; (2) TO SEEK INJUNCTIVE RELIEF UNDER SECTION 106 OF CERCLA AND/OR RECOVERY OF PAST COSTS THROUGH AN IMMEDIATE JUDICIAL ACTION; (3) TO ISSUE A UNILATERAL ORDER UN