## Facts

- A family-owned laundry business operated on a Chatham, Massachusetts parcel from 1916 to 1985.
- During a 1986 restructuring, the operating corporation transferred multiple parcels, including the laundry site, to a successor partnership that took over a pending sale contract.
- Environmental due diligence revealed petroleum contamination: underground No. 6 fuel-oil tanks were removed, one tank had a hole, and surrounding soil was saturated with fuel oil.
- A state environmental agency inspected the site, and a principal associated with the successor entities stated that the responsible entity would clean up the site.
- The agency issued a notice of responsibility identifying the successor entity as responsible for the release and for cleanup-related costs.
- The successor partnership subdivided the property into four lots; only one lot was contaminated. The contaminated lot was later conveyed to a newly formed entity that held only that lot.
- The agency performed assessment and oversight work (including testing/monitoring and related information-gathering) and incurred response costs.
- The agency recorded a statutory lien under G.L. c. 21E, § 13 against all property owned in Massachusetts by the responsible entities, including uncontaminated lots.
- The property owners challenged the lien as unauthorized and overbroad, asserting they were undertaking cleanup voluntarily and that the agency had not yet incurred substantial cleanup/removal expenses.

## Issues

1. Whether G.L. c. 21E, § 13 authorizes a lien on all property of a responsible person in Massachusetts once the Commonwealth incurs assessment and information-gathering response costs, even before major physical cleanup occurs.
2. Whether § 13 permits a lien to secure not only costs already incurred but also future costs expected to become due for ongoing monitoring, supervision, and response actions.
3. Whether the statute authorizes a lien that reaches beyond the contaminated parcel to all property of the responsible person in the Commonwealth.

## Decision

- The Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts affirmed summary judgment for the Secretary of Environmental Affairs and the environmental agency.
- The court held that assessment and information-gathering expenditures are response costs that trigger § 13 debt-and-lien consequences.
- The court held that the § 13 lien may secure both incurred costs and future costs that will become due in ongoing monitoring and supervision.
- The court held that the lien may attach to all property of the responsible person in Massachusetts, not only the contaminated parcel.

## Legal Principles

- Under G.L. c. 21E, § 13, Commonwealth-incurred response costs related to a release constitute a debt to the Commonwealth and may be secured by a lien on all property of the responsible person within Massachusetts.
- “Response costs” include assessment and information-gathering activities such as inspection, testing, monitoring, evaluation, and oversight connected to the release.
- A § 13 lien may secure both existing response costs and future response costs that are expected to become due in the course of ongoing monitoring and supervision.
- The statutory lien is not limited to the contaminated parcel; it may extend to all property of the responsible person in the Commonwealth, subject to statutory procedures for recording and enforcement.

## Conclusion

The court upheld the Commonwealth’s authority under G.L. c. 21E, § 13 to record a lien on all Massachusetts property of responsible parties once the state incurs assessment-related response costs, and to have that lien secure both already-incurred and reasonably anticipated future response costs.


Acme Laundry Co. v. Sec’y of Env’t Affs., 410 Mass. 760, 575 N.E.2d 1086 (1991)