From: | "Steven B. Pollack" <Steve@EcoEsq.com> |
Date: | Mon, 22 Sep 2008 08:30:02 -0700 (PDT) |
Reply: | cpeo-military |
Subject: | Re: [CPEO-MEF] MUNITIONS: FBI North Chicago (IL) range |
Judge Guzman used the wrong stardard for standing. By using the water quality levels as the standard he essentially raised standing requirements higher than what is necessary to prove violation of the Clean Water Act. All we needed to prove under the CWA is the discharge of pollutants into navigable waters without a permit. There is no requirement that the discharge cause the water quality to exceed any specific benchmark as the judge required. The purpose of the CWA is to stop the discharges. This ruling means that discharges which degrade the water but not enough to make you ill, are now legal. It amounts to Judicial interference with the constitutional right of Congress to have laws executed the way they are written and invalidates the portion of the citizen suit provision allowing any person to sue anyone for any violation. Now citizen suits can only be brought for violations that reach a particularly high threshold of personal injury. That is not what Congress wrote. Congress enacted the federal facilities provisions to ensure the Executive comply in the same manner as private facilities. Usually the Executive has prosecutorial discretion and cannot be second guessed when it chooses not to enforce the laws enacted by Congress. Congress overrode this discretion in the environmental laws to ensure compliance by allowing citizens to sue when the Executive won't, or in this case when the Executive is the violator. So if Congress allows the citizen to sue the Executive for any violation, and a violation of the CWA is simply the discharge of pollutants into navigable waters without a permit, what business does the Judiciary have in raising the standing bar higher than Congress says is enough for citizen enforcement? The judiciary is stepping all over Congress, a co-equal branch of government. This ruling upsets a system of checks and balances duly enacted by Congress. In my view, there is a judicial hostility to citizen suits. While giving strict deference to Congressional intent to bar citizen suits challenging cleanups under CERCLA's 113(h) bar, the Judiciary ignores Congressional intent to allow citizen suits for ongoing violations. It seems the Judiciary only likes Congressional intent when it negatively affects citizen suits. Blue Eco Legal Council believes Congress needs to re-authorize the major environmental laws to delegate enforcement authority at federal facilities directly to US EPA. For more on this issue, visit our site at http://www.fireclaimlaw.com/blueeco.html Steven B. Pollack, Attorney Executive Director, Blue Eco Legal Council 3390 Commercial Ave. Northbrook, IL 60062 847-436-9566 www.ecoesq.com www.landfill7.com www.fireclaimlaw.com > -------- Original Message -------- > Subject: [CPEO-MEF] MUNITIONS: FBI North Chicago (IL) range > From: Lenny Siegel <lsiegel@cpeo.org> > Date: Sun, September 21, 2008 2:45 am > To: Military Environmental Forum <military@lists.cpeo.org> > Environmental group loses FBI firing-range suit > By FRANK ABDERHOLDEN > Lake County News-Sun (IL) > September 20, 2008 > The environmental group that was trying to close the FBI shooting range > in North Chicago failed to make its case. > U.S. District Judge Ronald Guzman ruled this week that Blue Eco Legal > Council failed to prove sufficient harm for them to have standing in > court. The suit was filed in January. > Blue Eco of Northbrook filed suit in January, alleging that the FBI was > discharging lead into Lake Michigan. Blue Eco sought an award of $20 > million that was to be split between Alliance for the Great Lakes and > the Natural Resource Defense Council. > "We're proud that everything we set out to prove, we proved," said > Steven Pollack, executive director of Blue Eco. The judge basically said > "there wasn't enough pollution." > ... > For the entire article, see > http://www.suburbanchicagonews.com/newssun/news/1174272,5_1_WA20_GUNRANGE_S1.article > -- > Lenny Siegel > Executive Director, Center for Public Environmental Oversight > a project of the Pacific Studies Center > 278-A Hope St., Mountain View, CA 94041 > Voice: 650/961-8918 or 650/969-1545 > Fax: 650/961-8918 > <lsiegel@cpeo.org> > http://www.cpeo.org > _______________________________________________ > Military mailing list > Military@lists.cpeo.org > http://lists.cpeo.org/listinfo.cgi/military-cpeo.org Attachment:
MTDMemorandum.pdf _______________________________________________ Military mailing list Military@lists.cpeo.org http://lists.cpeo.org/listinfo.cgi/military-cpeo.org | |
Prev by Date: [CPEO-MEF] MUNITIONS, FUDS: Former Aiken Army Airfield Next by Date: [CPEO-MEF] ENCROACHMENT: Texas legislation | |
Prev by Thread: [CPEO-MEF] MUNITIONS: FBI North Chicago (IL) range Next by Thread: [CPEO-MEF] PERCHLORATE: "EPA expected to do nothing ..." |