CERCLA Settlements and PRP Interventions
Protecting PRP Interests in Contribution and Cost Recovery Process
Non-settling potentially responsible parties (PRPs) in a contaminated site cleanup want to intervene in settlement proceedings to ensure that any settling parties are held responsible for their share of the cleanup costs. Federal courts are split as to whether to permit such intervention.
Parties involved in a site cleanup must protect their interests in a proposed consent decree. Understanding how, when and where non-settling PRPs can intervene in a settlement is critical to seeking contribution from settling parties.
MGKF Partner Suzanne Ilene (Shoshana) Schiller will serve as a panelist and provide counsel advising parties in a contaminated site cleanup with guidance on protecting the contribution interests of non-settling PRPs by intervening in settlement proceedings involving other PRPs.
The panel will review these and other key issues:
- When does a PRP have sufficient interest in settlement proceedings to satisfy the intervention requirements of CERCLA and the Federal Rules?
- Under what circumstances should a PRP seek to participate in a settlement?
- What strategies should PRPs employ to protect their contribution interests in settlements to which they are not a party?
