16 / Schnitzer Steel Industries, Inc. Form 10-K 2021 In the ROD, the EPA acknowledged that much of the data was more than a decade old at that time and would need to be updated with a new round of “baseline” sampling to be conducted prior to the remedial design phase. The remedial design phase is an engineering phase during which additional technical information and data are collected, identified, and incorporated into technical drawings and specifications developed for the subsequent remedial action. Following issuance of the ROD, the EPA proposed that the PRPs, or a subgroup of PRPs, perform the additional investigative work in advance of remedial design. In December 2017, we and three other PRPs entered into an Administrative Settlement Agreement and Order on Consent with the EPA to perform such pre-remedial design investigation and baseline sampling over a two-year period. The report analyzing the results concluded that Site conditions have improved substantially since the data forming the basis of the ROD was collected. The EPA found with a few limited corrections that the data is of suitable quality and stated that such data will be used, in addition to existing and forthcoming design-level data, to inform implementation of the ROD. However, the EPA did not agree that the data or the analysis warranted a change to the remedy at this time and reaffirmed its commitment to proceed with remedial design. We and other PRPs disagree with the EPA’s position on use of the more recent data and will continue to pursue limited, but critical, changes to the selected remedy for the Site during the remedial design phase. The EPA encouraged PRPs to step forward (individually or in groups) to enter into consent agreements to perform remedial design in various project areas covering the entire Site. While certain PRPs executed consent agreements for remedial design work, because of the EPA’s refusal to date to modify the remedy to reflect the most current data on Site conditions and because of concerns with the terms of the consent agreement, we elected not to enter into a consent agreement. In April 2020, the EPA issued a unilateral administrative order (“UAO”) to us and MMGL, LLC (“MMGL”), an unaffiliated company, for the remedial design work in a portion of the Site designated as the River Mile 3.5 East Project Area. As required by the UAO, we notified the EPA of our intent to comply while reserving all of our sufficient cause defenses. Failure to comply with a UAO, without sufficient cause, could subject us to significant penalties or treble damages. Pursuant to the optimized remedial design timeline set forth in the UAO, the EPA’s expected schedule for completion of the remedial design work is four years. The EPA has estimated the cost of the work at approximately $4 million. We have agreed with the other respondent to the UAO, MMGL, that we will lead the performance and be responsible for a portion of the costs of the work for remedial design under the UAO and also entered into an agreement with another PRP pursuant to which such other PRP has agreed to fund a portion of the costs of such work. These agreements are not an allocation of liability or claims associated with the Site as between the respondents or with respect to any third party. We estimated that our share of the costs of performing such work under the UAO would be approximately $3 million, which we recorded to environmental liabilities and selling, general, and administrative expense in the consolidated financial statements in the third quarter of fiscal 2020. We have insurance policies pursuant to which we are being reimbursed for the costs we have incurred for remedial design. In the second quarter of fiscal 2021, we recorded an insurance receivable and a related insurance recovery to selling, general, and administrative expense for approximately $3 million. We also expect to pursue in the future allocation or contribution from other PRPs for a portion of such remedial design costs. In February 2021, the EPA announced that 100 percent of the Site’s areas requiring active cleanup are in the remedial design phase of the process. Except for certain early action projects in which we are not involved, remediation activities at the Site are not expected to commence for a number of years. Moreover, those activities are expected to be sequenced, and the order and timing of such sequencing has not been determined. In addition, as noted above, the ROD does not determine the allocation of costs among PRPs. We have joined with approximately 100 other PRPs, including the RI/FS performing parties, in a voluntary process to establish an allocation of costs at the Site, including the costs incurred in the RI/FS, ongoing remedial design costs, and future remedial action costs. We expect the next major stage of the allocation process to proceed in parallel with the remedial design process. In addition to the remedial action process overseen by the EPA, the Portland Harbor Natural Resource Trustee Council (“Trustee Council”) is assessing natural resource damages at the Site. In 2008, the Trustee Council invited us and other PRPs to participate in funding and implementing the Natural Resource Injury Assessment for the Site. We and other participating PRPs ultimately agreed to fund the first two phases of the three-phase assessment, which included the development of the Natural Resource Damage Assessment Plan (“AP”) and implementation of the AP to develop information sufficient to facilitate early settlements between the Trustee Council and Phase 2 participants and the identification of restoration projects to be funded by the settlements. In late May 2018, the Trustee Council published notice of its intent to proceed with Phase 3, which will involve the full implementation of the AP and the final injury and damage determination. We are proceeding with the process established by the Trustee Council regarding early settlements under Phase 2. We have established an environmental reserve of approximately $2.3 million for this alleged natural resource damages liability as we continue to work with the Trustee Council to finalize an early settlement. We have insurance policies that we believe will provide reimbursement for costs related to this matter. As of August 31, 2021, we had an insurance receivable in the same amount as the environmental reserve.
RkJQdWJsaXNoZXIy NTIzOTM0