Close

Articles Posted in Environmental

Updated:

In Massachusetts, Oil Exemption Is Not Like CERCLA Petroleum Exclusion

On June 6, the Supreme Judicial Court of Massachusetts released an opinion of considerable importance to petroleum retailers in Massachusetts. In Peterborough Oil Company, LLC v. Department of Environmental Protection, the Court interpreted the term “Oil” as used in the Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection’s (DEP) regulation (the “Oil exemption”) implementing the Massachusetts…

Updated:

Twice Is Not As Nice: Plaintiff’s Counsel Ordered to Pay Defendant For Unreasonable and Vexatious Filing

On June 1, 2016, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Seventh Circuit issued an interesting ruling in Beatrice Boyer, et al., v. BNSF Railway Company dba Burlington Northern and Santa Fe Railway Company. It ordered plaintiffs’ counsel to compensate BNSF almost $35,000. The Court of Appeals’ ruling was premised on…

Updated:

Court Has Inherent Authority to Supervise CSSP, Including Sanctioning Attorneys for Ethical Violations and Misconduct

On June 2, 2016, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit addressed another matter of alleged attorney misconduct in a Deepwater Horizon claims case and the District Court’s authority to impose sanctions for misconduct. This controversy also involves former FBI Director Louis Freeh, who was designated a Special Master…

Updated:

DC Circuit: NRC Rule Is Not a Licensing Action and Generic EIS Satisfies NEPA

In 2014, the NRC promulgated a “Continued Storage Rule” followed by the Nuclear Regulatory Commission’s (NRC) issuance of a Generic Environmental Impact Statement on Decommissioning of Nuclear Facilities (NUREG-0586) to support the Rule. On June 3, 2016, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the DC Circuit, in State of New York, et al.,…

Updated:

Vermont’s Generalized Injury Claims from MTBE Contamination Time-Barred

On May 27, 2016, Vermont’s Supreme Court, in State of Vermont v. Atlantic Richfield Company, et al., ruled that the State of Vermont’s “generalized injury” claims “to state waters as a whole due to groundwater contamination from gasoline additives” are not exempted from Vermont’s six-year statute of limitations for civil claims.…

Updated:

Congress’ Directive to Service to Reinstate Captive-Bred Exemption Upheld

Since the celebrated Supreme Court decision of Tennessee Valley Authority v. Hill, which for a time sidetracked the construction of the Tellico Dam, the Endangered Species Act (ESA) has been recognized as a potentially powerful impediment to the construction of many projects. However, as demonstrated by the Congressional response to that case, the…

Updated:

Federal Courts Get a Say in CWA Jurisdictional Determinations by Army Corps of Engineers

Many construction projects are subject to the regulatory requirements of the Clean Water Act (CWA), including the determination whether an earth-moving operation is covered by a “dredge and fill” permits administered by the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers. If there is a question about the applicability of the CWA to…

Updated:

When Contract is Silent, Accommodation Doctrine Applies to Water Rights Disputes

A case that has been closely followed by oil and gas and other interests which involves groundwater disputes has now been decided by the Texas Supreme Court. In Coyote Lake Ranch, LLC, v. The City of Lubbock, decided on May 27, the Court held that the “accommodation doctrine,” a doctrine developed…

Updated:

Commonality and Cohesiveness Lacking for Class Contamination Claims

On May 20, 2016, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eighth Circuit, in Ebert, et al., v. General Mills, Inc., reversed the federal district court’s decision to grant class certification in an environmental contamination lawsuit. The district court had found that the requisites of Federal Rule of Civil Procedure 23 had…