Here are the materials:
The attorney fees award, I believe, is discussed here.
Here are the materials:
The attorney fees award, I believe, is discussed here.
Robert J. Martin has published “The Village of Kivalina is Falling Into the Sea: Should CERCLA Section 9626(b) Be Available To Move the Village from Harm’s Way?” in the Barry Law Review.
Here is the abstract:
The Village of Kivalina, and other similarly situated Native Alaska villages, are in danger of falling into the sea. Regional climate change is melting the permafrost that acts as the foundation of their communities. Sea ice that once acted as a barrier during storm season today melts earlier, and erosion rates are increasing. Kivalina’s situation is further worsened by the threat of contamination from a nearby open dump. Without permanent relocation, Kivalina and its residents face imminent harm.
Congress has given the President authority to permanently relocate an Indian tribe or Alaska Native village under CERCLA Section 9626(b). This article proposes that the President exercise such authority to protect the health and welfare of Kivalina and its residents. In view of the longstanding trust obligation of the United States to Indian tribes and Alaska Native villages, which is embodied in treaties, statutes, executive orders and court decisions, the President should exercise his clear authority to protect the Village from harm.
Here is the order in Pakootas v. Teck Cominco Metals (E.D. Wash.):
DCT Judgment Favoring Pakootas — Phase I
Cody McBride has published “Making Pollution Inefficient Through Empowerment” in the Ecological Law Quarterly.
The abstract:
At its crux, environmental law is about forcing potential polluters to act in ways they would not otherwise. To do this, environmental law attempts to make noncompliance more costly than compliance. Without doing so, potential polluters would pollute regardless of its legality, a theory known as efficient breach of public law. Academics and judges alike have increasingly accepted this theory, resulting in courts struggling to prevent efficient breaches. But that has proven a difficult task. In Pakootas v. Teck Cominco Ltd., the Ninth Circuit sought to prevent efficient breach by barring citizen suits to enforce Environmental Protection Agency penalties, thereby concentrating enforcement power in the Environmental Protection Agency. This Note argues, however, that the Ninth Circuit ruling will generally make efficient breach more likely, even if it ensured compliance in Pakootas v. Teck Cominco Ltd. The Environmental Protection Agency has repeatedly failed to protect the environment due to lack of oversight, a lack of resources, or a lack of desire. Citizen suits are powerful tools to counteract the Environmental Protection Agency’s failure and should not be uniformly discarded. Contrary to the Ninth Circuit’s rule, I argue for a case-by-case approach to determine whether a citizen suit for Environmental Protection Agency penalties would increase or decrease the likelihood of compliance in each particular case. Even beyond the realm of citizen suits, environmental protection powers should be broadly shared among potential enforcers, including the Environmental Protection Agency, citizens, states, and Native American tribes, so that the probability of paying for pollution and the cost of noncompliance both rise.
Trial is set for September in Pakootas v. Teck Cominco Metals, Ltd. The News Tribune article about the order denying efforts by Teck Cominco Metals to bring in other parties is here.
The order is here DCT Order 4-4-12
Seven previous posts on this case can be found here.
Here is the opinion.
An excerpt:
As the district court correctly concluded, it lacked jurisdiction to adjudicate the Pakootas and Michel claims for penalties for the 892 days of noncompliance with the unilateral administrative order, and properly dismissed their claims.
Here is the opinion in Pakootas v. Teck Camino (E.D. Wash.) in which the court dismisses counterclaims by the polluter (Teck Camino) against one of the plaintiffs (the Colville Confederated Tribes) on grounds that tribes cannot be liable under CERCLA — DCT Order Dismissing Teck Camino Counterclaims
Here are the briefs:
Colville Motion to Dismiss Counterclaims
A million bucks is pretty significant…. pakootas-atty-fees-dct-order
(H/T Indianz)
In United States v. Newmont USA, the Eastern District of Washington held that the Newmont company was liable for clean-up costs at the “Midnite Mine.”
You must be logged in to post a comment.