Environmental, Energy & Climate Change Law and Regulation Reporter
BBK Attorneys Discuss Recent Environmental Investigations and Judicial Developments in April Issue
Several members of Best Best & Krieger’s Environmental Law & Natural Resources practice group were published in the April 2022 issue of the Environmental, Energy & Climate Change Law and Regulation Reporter. Their published analysis covers a range of recent environmental investigations, settlements, penalties and judicial developments.
Article overviews and excerpts are below. The complete April issue can be found here.
Recent Investigations, Settlements, Penalties and Sanctions
By Andre Monette
Discusses recent investigations and outcomes in matters involving air quality, water quality, chemical regulation and hazardous waste.
District Court Rejects Preliminary Injunction Against Hydroelectric Dams Under the Federal Endangered Species Act
By Rebecca Andrews
This case highlights the importance of presenting detailed and specific expert testimony on the population-level impacts of proposed injunctive relief in a citizen suit under the Endangered Species Act. Courts may not view the particular harm or cause of mortality to an individual member of the species or population as identical to the cumulative harm to the endangered species or population as a whole.
District Court Upholds EPA’s ‘Reasonable Availability’ Analysis in the Establishment of a Clean Water Act ‘No Discharge Zone’
By David Lloyd and Rebecca Andrews
This case affirms that EPA must consider costs relevant to the reasonable availability of disposal and treatment facilities when making a determination on a state’s application for an NDZ, but qualifies it by providing that EPA need not consider the costs of creating an NDZ as a whole – only those that are attributable to the reasonable availability of treatment and disposal facilities. This is an important distinction, as it affirms EPA’s discretion to determine which costs are relevant and the methodology for accounting for those costs, such that EPA is not required to consider costs which will directly arise from the establishment of an NDZ, such as retrofit costs, but which have no bearing on the accessibility of facilities.
Reprinted with permission from the April issue of the Law and Regulation Reporter, Copyright © 2022, Argent Communications Group (ACG). All rights reserved. No further reproduction or dissemination is permitted without separate consent from ACG, 530-852-7222 or Reporters@argentco.com.