Energy and Environment MonitorEnvironmental LitigationLinks in the Chain: The Evidential Significance of a Discharge Monitoring ReportAugust 31, 2015 A recent decision of the Eight Circuit Court of Appeals provides a useful reminder about the importance of the Discharge Monitoring Reports (DMR). The message is simple: you are bound by what the report states, and disavowal in a civil penalty action is nearly impossible. A DMR is filed by every person who holds an NPDES permit for the discharge of a pollutant from a point source. A discharge that… Links in the Chain: The Evidential Significance of a Discharge Monitoring ReportAugust 31, 2015 A recent decision of the Eight Circuit Court of Appeals provides a useful reminder about the importance of the Discharge Monitoring Reports (DMR). The message is simple: you are bound by what the report states, and disavowal in a civil penalty action is nearly impossible. A DMR is filed by every person who holds an NPDES permit for the discharge of a pollutant from a point source. A discharge… EPA Seeks Order From 4th Circuit to Prohibit Discovery by Murray Energy-UPDATE: EPA Needs More Time to Locate and Review DocumentsJuly 27, 2015 We have previously reported on Murray Energy’s action against EPA in the Northern District of West Virginia. There, Murray has sued EPA to enforce § 321(a) of the Clean Air Act, which requires EPA to “conduct continuing evaluations” of potential loss or shifts of employment” which may result from the administration or enforcement of the Clean Air Act. Recently, the District… Sierra Club Moves Efforts to Rescind WV and KY State NPDES Programs to Fourth and Sixth CircuitsJuly 22, 2015 The Sierra Club and its local partners previously petitioned EPA to withdraw its approval of the NPDES programs in at least Kentucky, Virginia and West Virginia, largely over alleged deficiencies by the state agencies in handling coal-related permits. Earlier this year, when EPA did not formally respond to the petitions, the Sierra Club sued EPA in federal courts in Kentucky and West Virginia. In… OSM Releases Proposed Stream Protection RuleJuly 20, 2015 OSM has released its newly re-proposed Stream Protection Rule and accompanying Draft Environmental Impact Statement and Regulatory Impact Assessment. Links to the documents may be found here. Once published in the federal register, the public will have 60 days to comment. The predecessor to this rule, the “Stream Buffer Zone” rule, was issued in 1983. In 1999, a federal judge in West… EPA Seeks Order From 4th Circuit to Prohibit Discovery by Murray Energy: UPDATE 4th Circuit Denies Relief to EPAJuly 10, 2015 We have previously reported on Murray Energy’s action against EPA in the Northern District of West Virginia. There, Murray has sued EPA to enforce § 321(a) of the Clean Air Act, which requires EPA to “conduct continuing evaluations” of potential loss or shifts of employment” which may result from the administration or enforcement of the Clean Air Act. Recently, the District… EPA’s Mercury and Air Toxics Standards (MATS) in Limbo After Supreme Court DecisionJune 30, 2015 On Monday, in an opinion written by Justice Antonin Scalia, the U.S. Supreme Court ruled that the Environmental Protection Agency “strayed far beyond [the] bounds” of reasonableness by not considering costs in its decision to regulate emissions of hazardous air pollutants from fossil fuel-fired power plants. The case, Michigan vs. EPA, was decided 5-4, with Justices Scalia, Roberts, Kennedy,… Mingo Logan Appeals Adverse District Court Decision on § 404 Permit “Veto” - AgainJune 18, 2015 Mingo Logan Coal Company obtained a Clean Water Act § 404 permit from the Corps of Engineers in January 2007. The permit authorized fills associated with the Spruce Mine in Logan County, West Virginia. In January 2011, USEPA exercised its authority under CWA § 404(c) and “vetoed” the permit. Mingo Logan challenged the veto in the D.C. District Court, claiming both… EPA Seeks Order From 4th Circuit to Prohibit Discovery by Murray EnergyJune 17, 2015 We have previously reported on Murray Energy’s action against EPA in the Northern District of West Virginia. There, Murray has sued EPA to enforce § 321(a) of the Clean Air Act, which requires EPA to “conduct continuing evaluations” of potential loss or shifts of employment” which may result from the administration or enforcement of the Clean Air Act. Recently, the District… Court Compels EPA to Respond to Murray Energy’s Discovery Requests in WV Clean Air Act CaseJune 12, 2015 In March 2014, Murray Energy sued EPA in West Virginia. Murray claimed EPA had failed to conduct “continuing evaluations of potential loss or shifts of employment which may result from the administration of” the Clean Air Act as required by Section 321(a) of that Act. In particular, Murray claimed EPA had not conducted the required evaluations of the effect of its programs on the coal… Board Affirms Certification Revocation for Water Lab in WVMarch 27, 2015
By order dated March 11, 2015, the West Virginia Environmental Quality Board (“EQB”) affirmed an earlier order by WVDEP revoking a laboratory certification granted to Appalachian Laboratories (“AppLabs”). WVDEP issued the order on October 16, 2014 in response to press accounts that a former employee of AppLabs (John Shelton) had pleaded guilty to diluting or falsifying water samples… EPA Moves to Dismiss Sierra Club Efforts to Rescind State NPDES ProgramsMarch 27, 2015 The Sierra Club and its local partners previously petitioned EPA to withdraw its approval of the NPDES programs in at least Kentucky, Virginia and West Virginia—largely over alleged deficiencies by the state agencies in handling coal-related permits. Earlier this year, when EPA did not formally respond to the petitions, the Sierra Club sued EPA in federal courts in Kentucky and West… |
|
© 2024 Jackson Kelly PLLC. All Rights Reserved.