Case: Ohio Public Interest Research Group v. Laidlaw Environmental Services, Inc., 963 F.Supp. 635 (S.D. Ohio, 1996)
Attorney Representing OEC: Stephen P. Samuels
Summary of Decision: Cities’ action against company for failure to cure alleged violations of local law was not enforcement action commenced by state that would preclude Clean Water Act citizen suit. Organizations sufficiently stated Clean Water Act claims. Organizations made good faith allegations of continuing Clean Water Act violations as would support finding of subject matter jurisdiction.
Case: U.S. v. Cinergy Corp., 384 F.Supp.2d 1272 (S.D. Indiana, 2005)
Attorney Representing OEC: Jonathan F. Lewis (Clean Air Task Force)
Summary of Decision: The Clean Air Act’s program for prevention of significant deterioration requires an owner or operator of an air pollutant emitting facility to make a preconstruction projection of whether and how much emissions will increase at a particular unit following construction, rather than to determine post-project emissions by making a post-project measurement. The Clean Air Act’s new source review permit provisions require an owner or operator of an air pollutant emitting facility to calculate an increase in the amount of any air pollutant emitted by the source based on an annual, rather than an hourly, emissions rate. Affirmed by US Court of Appeals, 7th Circuit, 458 F.3d 705 (2006)