taftlaw | environmental practice | subscribe | contact us | forward

Taft's environmental attorneys practice in all facets of environmental law, including Superfund defense and negotiation, enforcement defense, cost-recovery for plaintiffs and defendants, criminal environmental defense, environmental insurance and toxic tort litigation, mold and sick building litigation, lawsuits involving environmental problems discovered as a result of real property transfers or mergers and acquisitions, Brownfields redevelopment, defense of claims of occupational exposures, and administrative proceedings before state and federal agencies. Taft's environmental lawyers also are regularly engaged in insurance disputes concerning environmental issues and agricultural issues involving CAFOs and CFOs. The purpose of this newsletter is to provide you with insights from our team that may be of interest to yours.

EPA's Clean Water Act Jurisdiction Simplified? Think Again. The Devil is in the Definition.      

Devin D. Parram

dparram@taftlaw.com 

(614) 334-6117

LinkedIn 


On June 29, 2015, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) released the final version of the Clean Water Rule (CWR), which defines categories of water that are now subject to regulation without the need to perform a case-specific "significant nexus" determination. In doing so, the EPA stated that the primary purpose of the new rule is to limit the sometimes slow, confusing and costly process of determining whether a "water" is subject to EPA regulation under the Clean Water Act (CWA) on a case-by-case basis.

Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals Throws Out PM 2.5 Attainment Status for Cincinnati     

Kim K. Burke 

burke@taftlaw.com 

(513) 357-9369

LinkedIn 


On July 14, 2015, the Sixth Circuit Court of Appeals ruled that the Sierra Club had standing to challenge EPA's determination that the Cincinnati metropolitan area had reached attainment status for particulate matter (PM 2.5). Sierra Club v. EPA, - F.3d --, 2015 WL 4231713 (6th Cir. 2015). After granting the Sierra Club the right to challenge, the court held that EPA had failed to implement "reasonably available control measures" applicable to non-attainment areas, and therefore vacated the EPA's determination that the Cincinnati metropolitan area was in attainment for PM 2.5.

NIST Releases Guide for Manufacturers and Utilities on Securing Industrial Control Systems from Cyber-Attacks       

Bill Wagner

William C. Wagner 

wwagner@taftlaw.com 

(317) 713-3614

LinkedIn 


Manufacturers and utilities that incorporate widely-available, low-cost internet protocol devices into their industrial control systems are at an increased risk for cyber-attacks. National Institute of Standards and Technology (NIST), which is responsible for developing information security standards and guidelines to protect the nation's critical infrastructures, recently published the Guide to Industrial Control Systems (ICS) Security, NIST Special Publication 800-82, Revision 2, released May 2015.

Wisconsin District Court Paves the Way for Apportionment of Harm Under CERCLA in the Seventh Circuit  

Jeffrey D. Stemerick  

jstemerick@taftlaw.com 

(317) 713-3414

LinkedIn 


NCR Corporation recently avoided joint and several liability under CERCLA for its contribution to PCB contamination in the Lower Fox River. In United States v. NCR Corp., No. 10-C-913, 2015 WL 2350063 (E.D. Wisc. May 15, 2015), a Wisconsin District Court held that recent 7th Circuit guidance in the wake of Burlington Northern & Santa Fe Railway, Co., v. United States, 556 U.S.599 (2009) required a volumetric apportionment of NCR's liability.

Federal District Court Rules That Parties Cannot "Slice and Dice" Their Cleanup Costs Between CERCLA Sections 107 and 113      

E. Chase Dressman  

cdressman@taftlaw.com 

(513) 357-9406

LinkedIn 


In Ford Motor Co., et al. v. Mich. Consolidated Gas Co., et al., Case No. 08-13503, E.D. Mich. (Feb. 10, 2015), the U.S. District Court for the Eastern District of Michigan rejected a party's attempt to "slice and dice" its cleanup costs between Sections 107 and 113 of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act ("CERCLA"). Citing existing case law, the court concluded that if a party is eligible to bring a Section 113 contribution claim, then that party can only bring a Section 113 claim and cannot separately pursue its allegedly "voluntary" costs under Section 107..

The Net-Metering Wars: Ohio is One of the Battlegrounds in the Fight Between Electric Utilities and Net-Metering Supporters     

 

Devin D. Parram

dparram@taftlaw.com 

(614) 334-6117

LinkedIn 


There is a growing population of electric customers in Ohio who are interested in installing rooftop solar panels and other small-scale power sources on their homes and places of business. These "on-site" power sources are often referred to as distributed generation. Not only do distributed generation resources allow customers to reduce their monthly electric bills, but on-site resources can potentially earn customers money in the form of credits from their local electric utility. The credits are earned when distributed generation customers produce more electricity than they use during the month and the excess is distributed into the electric utility's grid. The mechanism that is used to track the amount of excess electricity produced by small-scale on-site power sources and credit owners of these resources for the excess electricity is called "net-metering."

U.S. EPA Issues New Vapor Intrusion Technical Guides: Highlights for Experienced Environmental Professionals        

William C. Wagner 

wwagner@taftlaw.com 

(317) 713-3614

LinkedIn 

More than 12 years in the making, U.S. EPA recently issued two new technical guides for assessing and mitigating the vapor intrusion pathway: Technical Guide for Assessing and Mitigating the Vapor Intrusion Pathway from Subsurface Vapor Sources to Indoor Air and Technical Guide for Addressing Petroleum Contamination at Leaking Underground Storage Tank Sites. Read a summary of some of the key issues in the guides here .



Taft's Environmental Law Newsletter is used to inform our clients and friends of significant new developments and current issues in environmental law. For more information about Taft Stettinius & Hollister LLP, please visit http://www.taftlaw.com.

These materials have been prepared by Taft Stettinius & Hollister LLP for informational purposes only and are not legal advice. This information is not intended to create, and receipt of it does not constitute, an attorney-client relationship. No person or organization should act upon this information without first seeking professional counsel.

We cannot and do not represent you until our client intake process is completed. Further, we reserve the right to accept or decline representing any person or organization in any matter. Accordingly, please do not send us any confidential information about any matter until you receive a written statement from us advising you that we represent you (an "engagement letter"). When you receive an engagement letter from one of our attorneys, you will be our client, and we may exchange confidential information freely. Again, do not send us unsolicited confidential information until you speak with one of our attorneys and get authorization to send that information to us.

Some aspects of this Web site may allow you to register for newsletters, events, functions, or seminars hosted by, sponsored by, or associated with Taft Stettinius & Hollister LLP. The transmission or receipt of any information related to registration for any event or service does not create an attorney-client relationship.

Taft Stettinius & Hollister LLP's Web site and associated materials may provide links to other websites that may be useful or informative.These links to third party sites or information are not intended, and should not be interpreted by readers, as constituting or implying our endorsement, sponsorship or recommendation of the third party information, products or services found there.

The following statement is required by many states, including Kentucky: "THIS IS AN ADVERTISEMENT."

 

Contact the Editor   

 

Is there a subject you'd like to see addressed in the Taft Environmental Newsletter?

Please email your suggestion to the article editor by clicking here.
   

 

 

Environmental Law

  Insight Blog   

 

We encourage you to visit

and subscribe to our blog,

Environmental Law Insight, where additional  articles are published.

 

July 2015 Issue
EPA's Clean Water Act Jurisdiction Simplified?
Sixth Circut Court of Appeals Throws Out PM 2.5 Attainment Status for Cincinnati
NIST Releases Guide for Manufacturers and Utilities
Wisconsin District Paves the Way for Apportionment of Harm Under CERCLA
Federal District Court Rules That Parties Cannot "Slice and Dice" Cleanup Costs
The Net-Metering Wars
U.S. EPA Issues New Vapor Intrusion Technical Guides









This email was sent to ksharpe@taftlaw.com by taft@taftlaw.com |  
Rapid removal with SafeUnsubscribe| Privacy Policy.


Taft Stettinius & Hollister LLP | 425 Walnut Street | Suite 1800 | Cincinnati | OH | 45202