Search this blog
Subscribe for updates
Subscribe for updates
Recent Posts
- Colorado District Court Puts Brakes on Denver Dam Work Pending Environmental Review
- Tenth Circuit Applies Statute of Limitations That Is “Closest Fit” in CERCLA Action, Overrules Earlier Precedent
- New Jersey Weighs in on State Climate Tort Claims
- First Circuit Holds that Smelling Vehicle Exhaust Constitutes Injury-in-Fact under Clean Air Act
- Ninth Circuit Upholds Vacatur of Some Oil and Gas Leases
Topics
- NJDEP
- Connecticut
- Pollutants
- Federal Land Policy and Management Act
- Council on Environmental Quality
- Agency Action
- Loper Bright
- New Jersey Civil Rights Act
- Public Trust Doctrine
- Disparate Impact
- Title VI
- Environmental Justice
- Massachusetts
- Internal Investigation
- Evidence
- Citizens Suit
- FIFRA
- Federal Insecticide, Fungicide, and Rodenticide Act
- Georgia
- Major Questions Doctrine
- Lead Paint
- Greenwashing
- Good Faith Settlement
- Federal Facilities
- Statutory Notice
- Oil Pollution Act
- Federal Jurisdiction
- Owner Liability
- Court of Federal Claims
- Ripeness
- Renewable Fuel Standard
- Fish and Wildlife Service
- Greenhouse Gas
- Refinery
- Alaska
- Florida
- Vapor Intrusion
- Solvents
- National Priorities List
- Price-Anderson Act
- Solid Waste Management Act
- Personal Jurisdiction
- Successor Liability
- Operator Liability
- Potentially Responsible Parties
- Environmental Covenants
- Federal Circuit
- Divisibility
- National Contingency Plan
- Apportionment
- Strict Liability
- Water Pollution Control Act
- Historic Resources
- Utilities
- Public Utilities Commission
- Hydraulic Fracturing
- Water Use
- PFAS
- Ohio
- Arbitration
- Alternative Dispute Resolution
- Climate Change
- Auer Deference
- Commonwealth Court
- Fees
- West Virginia
- Forest Service
- TSCA
- Asbestos
- Martime
- Tribal Lands
- Gold King Mine
- Utah
- Federal Tort Claims Act
- New Mexico
- Delaware
- Delaware Department of Natural Resources and Environmental Control
- FERC
- National Forest Management Act
- United States Supreme Court
- Chevron Deference
- Endangered Species Act
- HSCA
- Corporate Veil
- Alter Ego
- Allocation
- Eleventh Amendment
- Delaware River Basin Commission
- Mining
- Intervention
- New Hampshire
- PCBs
- Building Materials
- First Circuit
- Property Damage
- Groundwater
- Natural Resource Damages
- Innocent Party
- Brownfields
- Brownfield
- Environmental Rights Amendment
- Pipeline Hazardous Materials Safety Administration
- PHMSA
- FOIA
- Effluents
- Sediment Sites
- EHB
- Pipelines
- Texas
- Missouri
- Injunction
- Coal Ash
- Spoliation
- Stormwater
- TMDL
- Safe Drinking Water Act
- Colorado
- Michigan
- Drinking Water
- North Carolina
- Bankruptcy
- Clean Streams Law
- Civil Penalties
- Hearing Board
- Arranger Liability
- Sovereign Immunity
- Retroactive
- Tax assessment
- Damages
- Property Value
- Stigma
- Fair Market Value
- Storage Tank
- Electric
- Indemnification
- Energy
- Fifth Circuit
- Ninth Circuit
- Arizona
- Attorney-Client
- OPRA
- Iowa
- Fourth Circuit
- Discovery Rule
- Eighth Circuit
- Administrative Appeals
- Taxes
- Preemption
- CAFA
- Residential
- Inspection
- Freshwater Wetlands Protect Act
- New York
- Natural Gas Act
- Federal Energy Regulatory Commission
- Pennsylvania Department of Environmental Protection
- HAPs
- D.C. Circuit
- Mercury
- Hazardous Air Pollutants
- Takings
- Condemnation
- Storage
- Natural Gas
- Fifth Amendment
- Takings Clause
- Flooding
- Causation
- Spill Act
- NEPA
- Mineral Leasing Act
- Tenth Circuit
- Interior
- California
- Zoning
- Act 13
- Insurance Coverage
- Duty to Defend
- Landfill
- Eminent Domain
- Private Right of Action
- Sixth Circuit
- Illinois
- Water
- Citizen Suit
- Diligent Prosecution
- Subject Matter Jurisdiction
- Arkansas
- Pennsylvania
- Press
- Uncategorized
- Maryland
- Eleventh Circuit
- Riverbed
- Navigability
- Montana
- Equal-Footing Doctrine
- Indiana
- Seventh Circuit
- Breach of Contract
- Public Lands
- Green House Counsel
- Bona Fide Prospective Purchaser
- Laches
- Boiler MACT
- Delay Notice
- Rulemaking
- Equity
- CISWI
- Consent Decree
- Enforcement
- EPA
- Declaratory Relief
- Second Circuit
- Contribution
- Procedure
- Standing
- NPDES
- Medical Monitoring
- Dimock
- Legislation
- Case Update
- Dukes
- Certification
- Contamination
- Louisiana
- CLE
- Cases to Watch
- Privilege
- Decisions of Note
- Expert Witness
- Discovery
- Work Product
- Defense Costs
- Cost Recovery
- CERCLA
- Insurance
- Real Estate
- Response Action Contractors
- Consultant Liability
- Negligence
- Remediation
- Donovan
- Rapanos
- Army Corps
- Nuisance
- Class Actions
- Hog Barn
- Kentucky
- Trespass
- Farming
- Odors
- New Jersey
- ISRA
- Informal Agency Action
- Administrative Hearing
- Cancer
- Emissions
- Waste
- Air
- Combustion
- RCRA
- Railroad
- Speaking Engagements
- Third Circuit
- Toxic Torts
- Removal
- Federal Procedure
- Title V
- Clean Air Act
- Statute of Limitations
- Permits
- Cleanup
- Supreme Court
- Superfund
- Camp Lejeune
- Statute of Repose
- Multi-District Litigation
- Tolling
- Wetlands
- Mineral Rights
- Administrative Procedures Act
- Enforcement Action
- Marcellus Shale
- Due Process
- Deeds
- Clean Water Act
- Exploration
- Royalties
- Drilling
- Oil and Gas
- Leases
Blog editor
Blog Contributors
Showing 1 post in Federal Facilities.
In Rio Linda Elverta Cmty. Water Dist. v. United States, No. 2:17-CV-01349, 2022 WL 3567143 (E.D. Cal. Aug. 18, 2022), the Honorable Kimberly J. Mueller, Chief Judge for the United States District Court for the Eastern District of California, dismissed two California water utilities’ federal and state law claims against the federal government and several private sector defendants relating to hexavalent chromium (“Cr6”) pollution at the former McClellan Air Force Base (“Base”) near Sacramento, California. The water utilities allege that during active operations of the Base, the federal government used products containing Cr6, which contaminated the groundwater aquifer from which the water utilities derive municipal drinking water, making it unsafe for human consumption. Much of the case turned on the interplay between CERCLA sections 104 and 113(h) in the context of a clean up of a federal facility. Read More »
Share 
|
Email|
Comments|
Topics: California, CERCLA, Contribution, Cost Recovery, Drinking Water, Federal Facilities, Groundwater, Negligence, Nuisance, RCRA, Remediation, Removal, Subject Matter Jurisdiction, Superfund, Trespass
|
Email|
Comments|
Topics: California, CERCLA, Contribution, Cost Recovery, Drinking Water, Federal Facilities, Groundwater, Negligence, Nuisance, RCRA, Remediation, Removal, Subject Matter Jurisdiction, Superfund, Trespass
