Guam v. United States

In the 1940s, the U.S. Navy built the Ordot Dump on Guam and used it for decades to dispose of waste, including hazardous materials. In 2004, the Environmental Protection Agency and Guam entered a consent decree under the Clean Water Act, which required Guam to pay a penalty and close the dump. In 2017, Guam sued the United States under CERCLA, seeking to recover over $160 million in cleanup costs. The Supreme Court unanimously held that a settlement must resolve a CERCLA-specific liability to trigger a contribution action under CERCLA §113(f)(3)(B). Because the 2004 consent decree resolved only Clean Water Act claims, Guam could pursue its cost-recovery claim under CERCLA §107(a).

The Supreme Court reversed and remanded the D.C. Circuit's decision in a unanimous 9-0 ruling. The Court held that a settlement of environmental liabilities must resolve a CERCLA-specific liability to give rise to a contribution action under CERCLA §113(f)(3)(B).

Whether a settlement that does not resolve a CERCLA-specific liability can trigger a contribution claim under CERCLA §113(f)(3)(B).

The decision was a victory for Guam and other communities affected by hazardous waste sites. It enabled them to hold polluters accountable for cleanup costs and prevented the U.S. military from escaping its share of financial responsibility. The ruling also clarified the interplay between CERCLA §§107(a) and 113(f)(3), providing a longer statute of limitations for cost-recovery claims.