I will confess that I do enjoy being correct. In 2014, the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals refused to defer to a state agency determination of the procedural and substantive fairness of a CERCLA consent decree. Various parties and commentators promptly began, if I may say so, to run around like chickens with their heads cut off. However, I remained calm. I stated then:
I'm assuming that, on remand, the district court will engage in the required review and again approve the settlements.
On July 13, the District Court on remand did exactly that. In a concise opinion, Judge Jorgenson ran through the established criteria used to establish procedural and substantive fairness and – properly – blessed the settlements.
The original 9th Circuit decision did no more than ensure that district courts would not rubber stamp state consent decrees under CERCLA. This is a good outcome, one which did not impose any unreasonable burden either on state agencies or district courts.
To view Foley Hoag's Law and the Environment Blog please click here
The content of this article is intended to provide a general guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought about your specific circumstances.
