period of time” and PRPs are normally represented by counsel. Id. at ¶¶ 21-22. PRPs are permitted to, and often do, challenge EPA’s determinations regarding liability and remedy selection during the negotiation process. Id. at ¶ 23. Finally, at the end of this lengthy process and only if negotiation fails, EPA will normally issue a UAO. 1. Private Interest The type and length of the pre-hearing deprivation inform the constitutional relevance of the private interest. See City of Los Angeles V. David, 538 U.S. 715, 717, 123 S.Ct. 1895, 155 L.Ed.2d 946 (2003); Mathews, 424 U.S. at 341-42, 96 S.Ct. 893. Deprivations that can be recouped after a hearing — like purely financial deprivations — are less significant than irreparable deprivations. See David, 538 U.S. at 717, 123 S.Ct. 1895 (<HOLDING>). A substantial financial deprivation bearing
holding that garnishment of wages is a deprivation holding that liability under  1983 can be established by showing that the defendants either personally participated in a deprivation of the plaintiffs rights or caused such a deprivation to occur holding that a civil rights deprivation is a personal injury tort holding that a temporary deprivation of a car was more significant than a deprivation of money in the form of impoundment and towing fees holding that even a temporary deprivation of first amendment rights constitutes irreparable harm