parties undertaking voluntary cleanups should consider. See 40 C.F.R. § 300.700(c)(3)® & (c)(5)-(7). One set calls for an opportunity for public comment concerning the selection of a response action, and identifies a set of potentially applicable NCP regulations. Id. § 300.700(c)(6)(i)-(v) (the “public participation” requirement). Failure to substantially comply with the public participation requirement is considered a material deviation from the NCP- and is grounds for summary judgment. See 40 C.F.R. 300.700(c)(3)® (2007) (providing that private party response action must result in a “CERCLA-quality cleanup”); 55 Fed.Reg. 8666, 8793 (1990) (explaining that meaningful public participation is necessary element of CERCLA-quality cleanup); see also, e.g., Union Pac., 215 F.3d at 839 (<HOLDING>); Carson Harbor Village, 433 F.3d at 1266-67
holding plaintiffs failure to comply with section 2622 requires dismissal in federal court holding that dismissal for failure to comply with discovery orders is on the merits holding that absent extraordinary circumstances a failure to comply with the statute requires a dismissal with prejudice holding that wsdot was not entitled to recover response costs under cercla where its actions in connection with an environmental cleanup were inconsistent with the ncp to such a high degree as to be arbitrary and capricious but also stating that failure to comply with the ncp is not a defense to liability but rather a factual issue affecting damages holding that plaintiffs failure to substantially comply with public participation requirement rendered cleanup inconsistent with ncp