Does Montrose Chemical still exist?[edit]

While looking for the year that Montrose Chemical became defunct for the infobox, I realized that none of the sources cited in the article, nor any others that I could locate, actually confirm that Montrose Chemical no longer exists. We do know that they shut down their DDT plant near Torrance in 1982, but we don't know whether that was their only plant, or if they subsequently opened new plants elsewhere. The Los Angeles Times says: "Attorneys representing Montrose, when contacted by The Times, declined to comment on the new underwater data..." While it's certainly possible for attorneys to represent a defunct company, it does suggest the possibility that they are still in operation in 2020. I found a company called Montrose Environmental which is also involved in the chemical industry and is also based in Southern California, but I couldn't confirm whether or not they are related to Montrose Chemical. If anyone has more information on this matter, it would be much appreciated. -- Rublov (talk) 21:36, 28 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

I went ahead and added 1947 and 1982 as the start and end dates of the company to the infobox, as that is what the sources imply. But it would still be nice to definitively confirm it. -- Rublov (talk) 14:54, 30 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
In this 1992 court case, they are called defunct. They may exist for the purposes of liability in court cases. MONTROSE CHEMICAL CORPORATION OF CALIFORNIA v. ADMIRAL INSURANCE COMPANY Fettlemap (talk) 21:41, 30 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]
Good to know. Thanks for digging that up. -- Rublov (talk) 21:54, 30 October 2020 (UTC)[reply]

The dump site is twice the size of Manhattan[edit]

PBS News, April 27, 2021. Viriditas (talk) 04:19, 28 April 2021 (UTC)[reply]

Rename article to a broader name?[edit]

In light of the new article in LA Times in Feb 2024:

https://www.latimes.com/environment/story/2024-02-21/radioactive-waste-ocean-dumping-los-angeles-coast

Which is based on scientific publication:

https://pubs.acs.org/doi/10.1021/acs.est.3c08575

Here is a quote from an EPA web site: "From the 1930s until the early 1970s, multiple government agencies (the California Regional Water Quality Control Board and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers) approved ocean disposal of domestic, industrial, and military waste at 14 deep-water locations (See Figure 1) off the coast of Southern California. Waste disposed included: refinery wastes, filter cakes and oil drilling wastes, chemical wastes, refuse and garbage, military explosives and radioactive wastes. Very little is known about the history of this deep-ocean disposal, the nature of the wastes, or waste sources." ( https://www.epa.gov/ocean-dumping/southern-california-ocean-disposal-site-2-investigation#progress ).

It appears that (a) several other companies besides Montrose (e.g. Cal Salvage) were involved with dumping toxic waste; and (b) the toxic waste included lots of materials other than DDT (esp radioactive) from those non-Montrose companies.

It seems more encyclopedic to rename the article to something that includes the broader dumping issue, including Cal Salvage Inc, and including radioactive material. Of course, there could still be an article for Montrose Inc, or perhaps simply a REDIRECT from Montrose Inc to the newly-named article.

Another factor to consider is: the EPA has designated this as a SuperFund site, and the official name is the "Montrose Chemical" superfund site. Apparently, the primary location is 13 acres on the ground (see https://www.montrosesite.com/ ) but the site also includes some ocean sites. So, a possible name for the article is "Montrose Chemical superfund site" or something like that.

Thoughts? Noleander (talk) 18:53, 21 February 2024 (UTC)[reply]