Talk:Montrose Chemical Corporation of California

Does Montrose Chemical still exist?
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)


 * 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)
 * 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)


 * Good to know. Thanks for digging that up. -- Rublov (talk) 21:54, 30 October 2020 (UTC)

The dump site is twice the size of Manhattan
PBS News, April 27, 2021. Viriditas (talk) 04:19, 28 April 2021 (UTC)

Rename article to a broader name?
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)


 * I'm not seeing an immediate or necessary need to change the title at this time. Montrose is historically connected with the bulk of DDT dumping in SoCal in the literature.  It sounds like you are trying to broaden the topic to include other companies and other types of waste, such as California Salvage and low level radioactive waste, but what we need is a separate article about the dumping site.  I would also be very hesitant to change the focus of this specific article, as there are several industrial polluter-funded think tanks who have been trying to whitewash this history for decades, and who continue to claim DDT is safe and effective and should be used widely without regulation. Viriditas (talk) 19:13, 21 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Sounds fair. For the new article, how about title such as "Montrose Superfund site" or "Disposal of industrial waste in ocean off Southern California", but that seems a bit wordy.   Noleander (talk) 19:18, 21 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Some more information here. It's also referred to as the Palos Verdes Shelf Superfund Site or the Palos Verdes Shelf Operable Unit of the Montrose Chemical Corp. Superfund Site (PV Shelf). List of Superfund sites in California uses the names of the polluters responsible for the site per the government.  Given that we are dealing with multiple sites within the Palos Verdes Shelf at this time, it looks like this information is too recent for a new designation.  My best guess is to start a new article on California Salvage Company in the interim, as that would match the naming convention for the disposal site designation. Viriditas (talk) 19:49, 21 February 2024 (UTC)
 * I like the idea of starting a new article on Palos Verdes Shelf that could discuss the marine environment and the use as a dumping site which could mention the companies as there isn't a lot available on each company. The article is a missed opportunity if it is just about the dumping. I would suggest leaving the Montrose article "as is" about the company as it includes their site on land. It would be a mess to rewrite to make it about all those who contributed to the offshore site. Regards, 〜 Adflatuss  •  talk  20:00, 21 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Hmmm, I cannot find any sources that talk about Cal Salvage, as an entity unto itself. It appears to be a small, defunct compnay.
 * The Superfund sites, as you point out, seem to be identified by very specific (not broad) locations. There seem to be at least two superfund sites involved:  the "Montrose Chemical" site (on land, 13 acres) in Torrance, and the "Palos Verdes shelf" which is also a fairly small region (see   ) which is a fairly small site off the coast of Torrance (near Montrose site).
 * Yet the sources discuss other sites offshore (including near Channel islands) that - as far as I can tell - are not designated as superfund sites.
 * Following the general WP guildines of "following sources":  there are quite a few source (including Guardian, Scripps Institute, etc) that talk generally about "dumping toxic waste/barrels off the shores of Southern California".  Noleander (talk) 20:00, 21 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Alrignt, I created Chemical dumps in ocean off Southern California. If anyone wants to review it, I'd be happy to incorporate any suggestions. Noleander (talk) 18:38, 22 February 2024 (UTC)
 * Good work. My only criticism is that the title probably needs to be changed to something a bit more conventional.  There are good article title candidates on this page. Viriditas (talk) 18:53, 27 February 2024 (UTC)