This site uses cookies to improve your experience. To help us insure we adhere to various privacy regulations, please select your country/region of residence. If you do not select a country, we will assume you are from the United States. Select your Cookie Settings or view our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.
Cookie Settings
Cookies and similar technologies are used on this website for proper function of the website, for tracking performance analytics and for marketing purposes. We and some of our third-party providers may use cookie data for various purposes. Please review the cookie settings below and choose your preference.
Used for the proper function of the website
Used for monitoring website traffic and interactions
Cookie Settings
Cookies and similar technologies are used on this website for proper function of the website, for tracking performance analytics and for marketing purposes. We and some of our third-party providers may use cookie data for various purposes. Please review the cookie settings below and choose your preference.
Strictly Necessary: Used for the proper function of the website
Performance/Analytics: Used for monitoring website traffic and interactions
. Summary: Unfortunately for many fish, dams are the end of the river. It doesn’t have to be that way: Dam removal is becoming more common across the country. However, the mechanisms for initiating dam removal are not always efficient. Current dam removal mechanisms are expensive, involve many parties, and can take several years to get the job done.
By Andrew Wooley On May 8, 2015, the Supreme Court of Texas held in Phillips v. Carlton Energy Group, LLC [1] / that an expert witness’s pre-suit evaluations of a coal bed methane concession in Bulgaria and his and another expert’s opinion testimony at trial were too speculative to support a jury’s damage finding for tortious interference related to the concession, but that several bona fide offers to purchase an interest in the concession, even if based on the same pre-suit expert evaluations,
United States v. Anaplex Corporation. 05/14/2015. anderson@eli.org. Tue, 05/19/2015 - 10:50. A settling CWA and RCRA defendant that discharged pollutants to a POTW and that violated regulations on the storage, disposal, and management of hazardous wastes at its electroplating facility in Paramount, California, must pay a $142,200 civil penalty, must undertake a rinsewater use evaluation, must implement ongoing pollution monitoring, and must report on hazardous waste handling measures.
United States v. Marathon Petroleum Corporation. 05/19/2015. anderson@eli.org. Tue, 05/19/2015 - 10:52. A settling CAA defendant responsible for emissions violations at gasoline refineries and terminals in several states must pay a $2.9 million civil penalty, must retire 5.5 billion sulfur credits, and must make structural modifications to several of its fuel distribution terminals in environmental justice areas.
Speaker: Nikhil Joshi, Founder & President of Snic Solutions
Is your manufacturing operation reaching its efficiency potential? A Manufacturing Execution System (MES) could be the game-changer, helping you reduce waste, cut costs, and lower your carbon footprint. Join Nikhil Joshi, Founder & President of Snic Solutions, in this value-packed webinar as he breaks down how MES can drive operational excellence and sustainability.
Summary: The Environmental and Natural Resources Law Clinic is constantly involved in cases that benefit our environment locally and beyond. Rachel Stewart was a student clinician on the Jay Peak Stormwater team and worked to protect polluted rivers around Jay Peak Resort. The work of student clinicians and the staff at the ENRLC resulted in a beneficial ruling, which should improve the surrounding rivers.
United States v. Enviro-Safe Refrigerants, Inc. 05/14/2015. anderson@eli.org. Fri, 05/15/2015 - 07:20. A settling CAA and Significant New Alternatives Policy (SNAP) program defendant that marketed and sold flammable hydrocarbon refrigerants as direct replacements for ozone-depleting substances without notification to EPA must pay a $300,000 civil penalty and must restrict future marketing activities to comply with SNAP regulations.
United States v. Jerome, Idaho, City of. 05/07/2015. anderson@eli.org. Fri, 05/15/2015 - 07:22. A settling CWA defendant that discharged pollutants from its POTW and sanitary sewer collection system, in violation of its NPDES permit, must pay an $86,000 penalty and must upgrade the capacity of its wastewater treatment facility.
Sign up to get articles personalized to your interests!
Environmental Professionals Connection brings together the best content for environmental professionals from the widest variety of industry thought leaders.
United States v. Jerome, Idaho, City of. 05/07/2015. anderson@eli.org. Fri, 05/15/2015 - 07:22. A settling CWA defendant that discharged pollutants from its POTW and sanitary sewer collection system, in violation of its NPDES permit, must pay an $86,000 penalty and must upgrade the capacity of its wastewater treatment facility.
United States v. Honolulu, Hawaii, City and County of. 05/12/2015. anderson@eli.org. Wed, 05/13/2015 - 07:59. A settling CAA defendant that failed to timely submit, install, and operate a design plan for a gas collection and control system at a landfill on the island of Oahu, Hawaii, must pay an $875,000 civil penalty and must implement a supplemental environmental project comprised of the installation and operation of a photovoltaic system at its waste-to-energy facility.
United States v. Tonawanda Coke Corp. 05/11/2015. anderson@eli.org. Mon, 05/11/2015 - 08:06. A settling CAA, CWA, and EPCRA defendant responsible for violations at its facility in Tonawanda, New York, must pay a $2,750,000 civil penalty to the United States and New York, must perform a wetlands preservation supplemental environmental project valued at $357,143, must fund a $1,000,000 state-led environmental benefit project fund, and must perform injunctive relief.
United States v. Lawrence, MA, City of. 04/29/2015. anderson@eli.org. Tue, 05/05/2015 - 06:43. A settling CWA defendant that failed to comply with its NPDES and small municipal separate storm sewer system permits must undertake various measures to study and correct the permit violations in order to achieve compliance with the CWA and applicable regulations.
Speaker: Kevin Kai Wong, President of Emergent Energy Solutions
In today's industrial landscape, the pursuit of sustainable energy optimization and decarbonization has become paramount. ♻️ Manufacturing corporations across the U.S. are facing the urgent need to align with decarbonization goals while enhancing efficiency and productivity. Unfortunately, the lack of comprehensive energy data poses a significant challenge for manufacturing managers striving to meet their targets. 📊 Join us for a practical webinar hosted by Kevin Kai Wong of Emergent Ene
United States v. Merit Energy Company, LLC. 05/01/2015. anderson@eli.org. Tue, 05/05/2015 - 06:45. A settling CAA defendant that violated volatile organic compound regulations at an onshore natural gas processing plant in Kalkaska, Michigan, must pay an $850,000 civil penalty and must implement an enhanced leak detection and repair program as injunctive relief.
Summary: The Depart of the Interior recently released its final rule on hydraulic fracturing on public and tribal lands. Because many states have no comprehensive fracking regulation in place, the federal rule will become the only governing authority in many parts of the country. However, several groups recently filed suit against the Department over the validity of the rule. _.
We organize all of the trending information in your field so you don't have to. Join 12,000+ users and stay up to date on the latest articles your peers are reading.
You know about us, now we want to get to know you!
Let's personalize your content
Let's get even more personalized
We recognize your account from another site in our network, please click 'Send Email' below to continue with verifying your account and setting a password.
Let's personalize your content