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.

Out With the Old, In With the New: EPA to Alter "All Appropriate Inquiry" Regulations to Replace ASTM E1527-05 With E1527-13     

 

Bradley R. Sugarman

bsugarman@taftlaw.com  (317) 713-3526  

 

 

Julian Harrell

jharrell@taftlaw.com 

(317) 713-3410


On Jan. 11, 2002, President Bush signed the Small Business Liability Relief and Brownfields Revitalization Act, Public Law 107-118 ("the Brownfields Amendments"). Among other things, the Brownfields Amendments limited CERCLA liability for certain purchasers of contaminated property, including bona fide prospective purchasers and contiguous land owners, while clarifying requirements necessary to establish the innocent landowner defense under CERCLA. The amendments state that parties purchasing potentially contaminated property must undertake "all appropriate inquiries" (often referred to as "AAI").

 

Clean Air Act Does Not Require EPA to Regulate Emissions From Animal Feeding Operations      

   

Julian Harrell

jharrell@taftlaw.com 

(317) 713-3410

 

Animal feeding operations ("AFOs"), which include confined animal feeding operations ("CAFOs"), emit a host of chemicals into the air, including ammonia, hydrogen sulfide, particulate matter and volatile organic compounds ("AFO emissions"). Air emissions studies have found a correlation between AFO emissions and potential negative health impacts, such as increased rates of asthma. Yet, despite knowledge of these studies, the United States Environmental Protection Agency ("EPA") has not made a finding that AFO emissions can "reasonably be anticipated to endanger public health or welfare." Therefore, the agency has not added AFO emissions to the list of pollutants under Section 108 of the Clean Air Act ("CAA") and has not established limits (known as National Ambient Air Quality Standards or "NAAQS") for the maximum allowable concentrations of AFO emisions. See 42 U.S.C. §§ 7408(a)(1)(A)-(C) & 7409. Several residents of Winneshiek County, Iowa, who - as it turns out - teach at, have attended or have children that attend a school that was the focus of one of the studies, sued the EPA to force the agency to regulate AFO emissions. They argued that the CAA places a "nondiscretionary duty" on the agency to regulate AFO emissions and to designate AFOs as stationary sources.

 

Subrogation and CERCLA Cost Recovery: 7th Circuit Court Refuses to Adopt 9th Circuit Ruling in Chubb       

 

Tammara D. Porter

tporter@taftlaw.com 

(317) 713-3509


Subrogation has been defined as "the substitution of one person in the place of another with reference to a lawful claim, demand or right, so that he who is substituted succeeds to the rights of the other in relation to the debt or claim, and its rights, remedies, or securities." Farm Bureau Ins. Co. v. Allstate Ins. Co., 765 N.E.2d 651, (Ind. Ct. App. 2002). Stated differently, the equitable principle of subrogation allows one person to stand in the shoes of another and assert that person's rights against a third party. U.S. Airways, Inc. v. McCuthchen, 133 S.Ct. 1537, 1546 n. 5 (2013). A typical example of a subrogation action involves an auto accident where a driver gets struck by another motorist. The driver submits a claim to its auto insurer to cover the costs of repairing the driver's car or to cover the driver's hospital bills. The auto insurer pays the claim and then sues the other motorist (or the motorist's insurer) to recover the costs it has paid. Over the course of the last year or so, two federal courts have rendered different decisions on the issue of whether an insurer who pays claims based on costs incurred to remediate environmental contamination may maintain a subrogation action against other potential responsible parties under the federal Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act ("CERCLA" or "Superfund"). 

» continue reading 

Indiana Court of Appeals Issues Opinion Providing Guidance on Seeking Coverage for Environmental Liabilities   

   

David L. Guevara

dguevara@taftlaw.com 

(317) 713-3453 

In a recent opinion, the Indiana Court of Appeals examined and provided significant analyses of a number of fundamental concepts in insurance law, including the definition of "property damage," the concept of "occurrence," the expected-or-intended exclusion, the contractual-liability exclusion and the common-law known-loss doctrine. Indiana Insurance v. Kopetsky, No. 49A02-1304-PL-340 (June 4, 2014). The opinion affords policyholders considerable guidance on, and assistance with regard to, seeking coverage under commercial general liability insurance for environmental liabilities.  
  

EPA and Army Corps Issue Proposed Rule Defining the Scope of Waters Protected Under the Clean Water Act     

 

E. Chase Dressman

cdressman@taftlaw.com 

(513) 357-9406

  
On April 21, 2014, the United States Environmental Protection Agency ("EPA") and U.S. Army Corps of Engineers ("Army Corps") issued a joint proposed rule designed to clarify which water bodies are subject to Clean Water Act ("CWA") jurisdiction. The proposed rule states that it is aimed at assisting the regulated community and saving agency resources by limiting the need for fact-intensive determinations regarding the jurisdictional scope of water bodies. Comments on the proposed rule are due no later than Oct. 20, 2014.
  

IDEM Interprets AAI Rule to Run from Date of Beginning of Investigation 

  

Bradley R. Sugarman

bsugarman@taftlaw.com  (317) 713-3526 

 

Jeffrey D. Stemerick

jstemerick@taftlaw.com 

(317) 713-3414


The Indiana Department of Environmental Management ("IDEM") has updated forms related to obtaining a Comfort Letter or Site Status Letter for brownfields sites. The purpose of the update was to address the timeline for compliance with the All Appropriate Inquiries ("AAI") Rule for qualification as a bona fide prospective purchaser under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act ("CERCLA") and corresponding state law. The AAI Rule requires that AAI must be completed within one year prior to the purchase date of the real property to establish the bona fide prospective purchaser defense.

 



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."

  Environmental Law

  Insight Blog   

 

  We encourage you to visit

  and subscribe to our blog,

  Environmental Law Insight,

  where additional articles

  are published.

 

July 2014 Issue
EPA to Alter "All Appropriate Inquiry" Regulations to Replace ASTM E1527-05 With E1527-13
Clean Air Act Does Not Require EPA to Regulate Emissions From Animal Feeding Operations
7th Circuit Court Refuses to Adopt 9th Circuit Ruling in Chubb
Indiana Court of Appeals Issues Opinion
EPA and Army Corps Issue Proposed Rule
IDEM Interprets AAI Rule to Run from Date of Beginning of Investigation









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


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