Document ID: ./input/supremecourt_opinions/opinions/19pdf/17-1498_8mjp.pdf
Page Number: 26

22 

ATLANTIC RICHFIELD CO. v. CHRISTIAN 

Opinion of the Court 

§122(e)(6) and therefore did not need to seek EPA approval.
Montana law requires that “an award of restoration dam-
ages actually . . . be used to repair the damaged property.” 
Sunburst School Dist. No. 2, 338 Mont., at 273, 165 P. 3d, 
at 1089.  But such action cannot be taken in the absence of 
EPA  approval.    That  approval  process,  if  pursued,  could 
ameliorate  any  conflict  between  the  landowners’  restora-
tion  plan  and  EPA’s  Superfund  cleanup,  just  as  Congress 
envisioned.  In the absence of EPA approval of the current 
restoration plan, we have no occasion to entertain Atlantic
Richfield’s claim that the Act otherwise preempts the plan.
The judgment of the Montana Supreme Court is affirmed 
in part and vacated in part.  The case is remanded for fur-
ther proceedings not inconsistent with this opinion. 

It is so ordered.