Consolidation Coal Company v. Georgia Power Company

<> Consolidation Coal Company v. Georgia Power Company - 3/20/15. In the U.S. Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit, Case No. 13-1603 & 13-1664. Consolidated Coal Company and PCS Phosphate Company, Inc. filed a CERCA complaint against Georgia Power, to recover cost contending that, as supplier of some of the PCB transformers, it should be liable for a contribution to those costs. The district court granted summary judgment in favor of Georgia Power and the Appeals Court affirmed the judgment of the district court.

Sierra Club v. EPA

<> Sierra Club v. EPA - 3/18/15. In the U.S. Court of Appeals, Sixth Circuit, Case Nos. 12-3169, 12-3182 & 3420.      Sierra Club challenged EPA's particulate matter attainment status and redesignation of the Cincinnati-Hamilton metropolitan area to "attainment" status and said the agency had acted illegally with respect to both actions, and it filed a petition for direct appellate review. The parties dispute both Sierra Club's standing to challenge the agency action and the correct interpretation of the relevant statute, the Clean Air Act.      In a significant decision, the Appeals Court rules, "We find that the Club has standing, and we agree with its claim that "reasonably available control measures" are a prerequisite to redesignation. Therefore, we vacate EPA's redesignation of the Ohio and Indiana portions of the Cincinnati area."

FROM NOW UNTIL June 1, 2015

Special Notice:

FROM NOW UNTIL June 1, 2015, 
the complete WIMS Daily Environmental HotSheet 
 issue will be posted on our blog each working day

(click here to view the blog)

(click here if you would like to receive the HotSheet directly via email until June 1, 2015)

Following this special promotion you may continue receiving 
the WIMS Daily Environmental HotSheet by subscribing (click here).
Note: A "National Edition", which does not include Michigan & Great Lakes information,
 is also available at one-half the subscription price.

Alfonso Rodriguez v. Secretary of Department of Environment

<> Alfonso Rodriguez v. Secretary of Department of Environment - 3/16/15. In the U.S. Court of Appeals, Third Circuit, Case No. 14-3467 (not precedential). Dr. Rodriguez challenges § 3222.1 of Act 13, which provides two mechanisms for health professionals to learn proprietary information about the chemicals used in fracking. The District Court dismissed the case for lack of standing, and the Appeals Court affirmed.

Communities for a Better Environment v. U.S. EPA

<> Communities for a Better Environment v. U.S. EPA – 3/16/15. In the U.S. Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit, Case No. 13-70167 (unpublished). Environmental groups challenged issues relating to Los Angeles air quality. The Panel denied the petition saying among other things, "EPA was neither arbitrary nor capricious in determining that the credits transferred to Sentinel were quantifiable and surplus."

AmerGen Energy Company, LLC v. U.S.

<> AmerGen Energy Company, LLC v. U.S. - 3/11/15. In the U.S. Court of Appeals, Federal Circuit, Case No. 2014-5067. The Appeals Court confirmed the decision  of the Court of Federal Claims that AmerGen may not include future nuclear decommissioning liabilities that it assumed when it purchased three nuclear power plants in the basis of the acquired assets in its 2001 through 2003 tax returns.

Precon Development Corporation v. US Army Corps of Engineers

<> Precon Development Corporation v. US Army Corps of Engineers - 3/10/15. In the U.S. Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit, Case No. 13-2499 (unpublished). In a thirteen-year battle between Precon Development Corporation and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers about whether the Corps has jurisdiction under the Clean Water Act over Precon's Edinburgh development in Chesapeake, VA.       The Panel said, "This episode involves 4.8 acres of wetlands that Precon wants to fill to build ten homes. The Corps asserted jurisdiction over these wetlands and denied Precon's permit application.2 We previously remanded this case after concluding that the Corps had not provided sufficient evidence to support its jurisdiction. Finding that the Corps has now amassed adequate evidence, we affirm." Corps' jurisdiction over Virginia wetlands upheld by Fourth Circuit - The Fourth Circuit has affirmed a lower court decision that upheld an Army Corps of Engineers' permit denial for a planned development affecting 4.8 acres of wetlands