Welcome to DU! The truly grassroots left-of-center political community where regular people, not algorithms, drive the discussions and set the standards. Join the community: Create a free account Support DU (and get rid of ads!): Become a Star Member Latest Breaking News General Discussion The DU Lounge All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

G_j

(40,366 posts)
Wed Apr 2, 2014, 08:18 AM Apr 2014

North Carolina: Duke Energy Wants Citizens Groups Barred From Complaint

Duke Energy is asking a judge to prevent citizens groups from taking part in any action that would make it clean up nearly three dozen coal ash pits in the state. The Department of Environment and Natural Resources filed a complaint against Duke last year, and several citizens groups got involved in the case, saying the pits polluted groundwater. But Duke filed a motion on Monday to remove the groups from the case. The motion comes nearly two months after a coal ash spill at a Duke plant coated 70 miles of the Dan River in toxic sludge.

http://www.nytimes.com/2014/04/02/us/north-carolina-duke-energy-wants-citizens-groups-barred-from-complaint.html?_r=0

8 replies = new reply since forum marked as read
Highlight: NoneDon't highlight anything 5 newestHighlight 5 most recent replies
North Carolina: Duke Energy Wants Citizens Groups Barred From Complaint (Original Post) G_j Apr 2014 OP
Citizen Action Provisions... Laxman Apr 2014 #1
good information G_j Apr 2014 #2
Hubris, bought and paid for. djean111 Apr 2014 #3
Thanks GJ and Laxman.... KoKo Apr 2014 #4
Does that surprise anyone? The world seems to be turning upside down: corporations get to donate jwirr Apr 2014 #5
It's called nascent fascism. nt woo me with science Apr 2014 #6
Exactly. And most of America does not seem to see it. jwirr Apr 2014 #7
Duke Energy Corp: "Real people have too much say in government." Scuba Apr 2014 #8

Laxman

(2,419 posts)
1. Citizen Action Provisions...
Wed Apr 2, 2014, 08:25 AM
Apr 2014

have always been part of the Clean Water Act for instances just like this. Where the government wasn't doing its job. Industry never likes it-especially in a state like North Carolina where they've bought and paid for their protections. Which makes organizations like the Riverkeeper all the more important because they will step up when government fails-and its pretty apparent they failed here.


Section 505, 33 U.S.C. 1365
(a) Except as provided in subsection (b) of this section and section 309(g)(6), any citizen may commence a civil action on his own behalf-- (1) against any person (including (i) the United States, and (ii) any other governmental instrumentality or agency to the extent permitted by the eleventh amendment to the constitution) who is alleged to be in violation of (A) an effluent standard or limitation under this Act or (b) an order issued by the Administrator or a State with respect to such a standard or limitation, or (2) against the Administrator where there is alleged a failure of the Administrator to perform any act of duty under this Act which is not discretionary with the Administrator.

The district courts shall have jurisdiction, without regard to the amount in controversy or the citizenship of the parties, to enforce such an effluent standard or limitation, or such an order, or to order the Administrator to perform such act or duty, as the case may be, and to apply any appropriate civil penalties under section 309(d)
of this Act.

(b) No action may be commenceed--

(1) under subsection (a)(1) of this section--

(A) prior to sixty days after the plaintiff has given notice of the alleged violation (i) to the Administrator, (ii) to the State in which the alleged violation occurs, and (iii) to any alleged violator of the standard, limitation, or order, or
(B) if the Administrator or State has commenced and is diligently prosecuting a civil or criminal action in a court of the United States, or a State to require compliance with the standard limitation, or order, but in any such action in a court of the United States any citizen may intervene as a matter of right.

(2) under subsection (a)(2) of this section prior to sixty days after the plaintiff has given notice of such action to the Administrator, except that such action may be brought immediately after such notification in the case of an action under this section respecting a violation of sections 306 and 307(a) of this Act. Notice under this subsection shall be given in such manner as the Administrator shall prescribe by regulation.

(c)

(1) Any action respecting a violation by a discharge source of an effluent standard or limitation or an order respecting such standard or limitation may be brought under this section only in the judicial district in which such source is located.
(2) In such action under this section, the Administrator, if not a party, may intervene as a matter of right.

(3) Protection of the United States.--Whenever any action is brought under this section in a court of the United States, the plaintiff shall serve a copy of the complaint on the Attorney General and the Administrator. No consent judgment shall be entered in an action in which the United States is not a party prior to 45 days following the receipt of a copy of the proposed consent judgment by the Attorney General and the Administrator.

(d) The court, in issuing any final order in any action brought pursuant to this section, may award costs of litigation (including reasonable attorney and expert witness fees) to any prevailing or substantially prevailing party, whenever the court determines such award is appropriate. The court may, if a temporary restraining order or preliminary injunction is sought, require the filing of a bond or equivalent security in accordance with the Federal Rules of Civil Procedure.

(e) Nothing in this section shall restrict any right which any person (or class of persons) may have under any statute or common law to seek enforcement of any effluent standard or limitation or to seek any other relief (including relief against the Administrator or a State agency).

(f) For purposes of this section, the term "effluent standard or limitation under this Act" means (1) effective July 1, 1973, an unlawful act under subsection (a) of section 301 of this Act; (2) an effluent limitation or other limitation under section 301 or 302 of this Act; (3) standard or performance under section 306 of this act; (4) prohibition, effluent standard or pretreatment standards under section 307 of this Act; (5) certification under sectiono 401 of this Act; [or] (6) a permit or condition thereof issued under section 402 of this Act, which is in effect under this Act (including a requirement applicable by reason of section 313 of this Act); or (7) a regulation under section 405(d) of this Act.

(g) For the purposes of this section the term "citizen" means a person or persons having an interest which is or may be adversely affected.

(h) A Govenor of a State may commence a civil action under subsection (a), without regard to the limitations of subsection (b) of this section, against the Administrator where there is alleged a failure of the Administrator to enforce an effluent standard or limitation under this Act the violation of which is occurring in another State and is causing an adverse effect on the public health or welfare in his State or is causing a violation of any water quality requirement in his State.

G_j

(40,366 posts)
2. good information
Wed Apr 2, 2014, 08:51 AM
Apr 2014

I imagine they are aware of this. I will try to keep up to date with this as it unfolds.

jwirr

(39,215 posts)
5. Does that surprise anyone? The world seems to be turning upside down: corporations get to donate
Wed Apr 2, 2014, 11:29 AM
Apr 2014

as much as they want to candidates no limits to donations favors the 1% and now peoples groups are silenced. Seems to be the trend.

 

Scuba

(53,475 posts)
8. Duke Energy Corp: "Real people have too much say in government."
Wed Apr 2, 2014, 01:10 PM
Apr 2014

Now if another corporation had been harmed, or faced a tax increase, that would be different!

Latest Discussions»General Discussion»North Carolina: Duke Ener...