This site uses cookies to improve your experience. To help us insure we adhere to various privacy regulations, please select your country/region of residence. If you do not select a country, we will assume you are from the United States. Select your Cookie Settings or view our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.
Cookie Settings
Cookies and similar technologies are used on this website for proper function of the website, for tracking performance analytics and for marketing purposes. We and some of our third-party providers may use cookie data for various purposes. Please review the cookie settings below and choose your preference.
Used for the proper function of the website
Used for monitoring website traffic and interactions
Cookie Settings
Cookies and similar technologies are used on this website for proper function of the website, for tracking performance analytics and for marketing purposes. We and some of our third-party providers may use cookie data for various purposes. Please review the cookie settings below and choose your preference.
Strictly Necessary: Used for the proper function of the website
Performance/Analytics: Used for monitoring website traffic and interactions
The case relates to a 2006 oil spill which occurred at CITGO’s Lake Charles, Louisiana, refinery. This opinion from the Fifth Circuit is likely to have wide-ranging effects on CWA penalty cases. The CITGO case may continue to provide insight as it progresses on remand and any subsequent appeals. 11-31117 (5th Cir.
The judgment is the latest in a suit the EPA filed against CITGO under the Clean Water Act for a 2006 spill at the oil company’s St. Charles refinery. In January 2016, Judge Haik retired from the bench and the case was transferred to Judge Drell. .– allowing an $81 million judgment against the oil company to stand. Year in Rev.
ACT 312 BEFORE THE NEW LEGISLATION Act 312 of the 2006 legislative session was enacted in response to judicial decisions that awarded significant damages for remediation costs with no obligation for landowners to actually use such awards for cleanup work. Third, a limited admission precludes another plan hearing later in the case.
We organize all of the trending information in your field so you don't have to. Join 5,000+ users and stay up to date on the latest articles your peers are reading.
You know about us, now we want to get to know you!
Let's personalize your content
Let's get even more personalized
We recognize your account from another site in our network, please click 'Send Email' below to continue with verifying your account and setting a password.
Let's personalize your content