|
|
||
       |
||
| > |
Blue Eco Sues To Enforce CERCLA Duties On U.S. Army and NavyWe are currently litigating against the Department of the Army, Navy, and Defense in United States Federal Court of Appeals for the 7th Circuit for failure to consult with, and obtain covenants from U.S. EPA regarding the property transfered from the Army and then Navy.
Read about our lawsuit at www.Landfill7.com
The Army is avoiding these obligations because it implemented the 1997 interim cap so badly that U.S. EPA indicated an unwillingness to sign onto the cap as the final remedy or grant the required covenants.
Leaving A Hazardous Waste Landfill In An Eroding Bluff Next To Lake Michigan Is ArbitraryBeyond the failure to obtain pre-transfer covenants, the Army future plan to leave Landfill 6 & 7 next to Lake Michigan ignores the obvious long-term implication of the bluffs eroding at 10" per year.
Blue Eco plans to litigate this arbitrary decision if and when the Army proposes it as a final remedy.
Leaving Landfill 6 & 7 next to Lake Michigan is not a long-term effective or permanent decision as required under CERCLA. Read our extensive public comments (14mb)
Bluff Erosion Is A Well Understood Phenomenon Which Both The Army Corps Of Engineers And The USGS Accept Is Not Stoppable.So why does the Army continue to proclaim that engineering the Lake Michigan face of Landfill 6 & 7 can permanently stop erosion? By sleight of hand, the Army in the interim remedy selection process substituted an arbitrary 30-year period to assess permanence and long-term effectiveness. CERCLA, however, defines permanence as the length of time that the site will remain hazardous to human health and the environment. In this case, Landfill 6 & 7 will remain a threat well beyond the arbitrary 30-year period.
The Fight Is Not Over, The Army Must Still Propose A Final RemedyMany people mistakenly believe the final decision was made in 1997 to cap Landfill 6 & 7. The Army must, however, choose a final remedy. Even if that remedy is the already implemented cap, that final decision is the last piece of the rulemaking puzzle necessary to challenge the cap as arbitrary in light of accepted geologic knowledge of the eroding bluffs.
|