Judge rules against NOAA in auction dispute

A US District Judge has ruled that the Gloucester Seafood Display Auction cannot be closed while the court case is still pending.

Via FIS.com:
Judge rules against NOAA

The National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration (NOAA)’s attempt to shut down the Gloucester Seafood Display Auction as a penalty was prohibited earlier this week by a federal judge. It was decided that the auction cannot be closed down while a court case involving it is pending in a US District Court.

Read the complete FIS.com article here


Reaction from the Gloucester Daily News:
NOAA, after media push vs. auction, silent after court rebuke

The law enforcement office of the federal fisheries service undertook an aggressive, preemptive media campaign last month to inform the public of its decision to penalize the Gloucester Seafood Display Auction with a 10-day closure for a disputed violation of a 6-year-old probation agreement.

"The press release on this matter was designed to ensure that all relevant factual information was made available to the public," wrote NOAA enforcement attorney Mitch MacDonald, in a judicially demanded affidavit on the purpose of the campaign.

But yesterday — a day after a federal judge issued a restraining order on the National Oceanic and Atmospheric Administration and sharply chastised the service for attempting to impose punishment before the case was resolved in federal court — the NOAA media machine went silent.

Read the Gloucester Daily News article here
Read more!

NY State Supreme Court upholds Indian Point Decision

The sad thing is that this fish kill has been occurring for over 40 years. Despite the CWA, Con Ed was permitted to continue operating in this manner as compensation for being blocked by a lawsuit from building a larger plant called Storm King further up the river in the 80's. The Riverkeeper folks finally got a ruling from the DEC against this plant in 2003 - it took another 6 years to get the appeals through the courts. Much like the Exxon Valdez saga - the current owner Entergy is a big money corporation that can delay action for decades by using the courts.

Via Riverkeeper:
NY State Supreme Court Affirms that Indian Point Adversely Impacts Fish Riverkeeper and DEC claim victory in effort to bring plant into compliance with CWA

(Tarrytown, NY) On June 22, 2009, The Supreme Court of the State of New York ruled in favor of Riverkeeper and the Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC) and dismissed Entergy’s petition to overturn a decision by the Department of Environmental Conservation (DEC). That decision, released on August 15, 2008, determined that Indian Point’s cooling water intake system causes adverse environmental impacts on Hudson River fish.

In October 2008, Entergy filed a lawsuit challenging DEC’s determination. On behalf of Riverkeeper and Scenic Hudson, Riverkeeper Attorney Victor Tafur filed a motion to have Entergy’s suit dismissed on the grounds that the claims are premature, and that DEC established “adverse environmental impact,” in large part, by relying on Entergy’s data.

Read the entire press release here.
Read more!

Exxon Mobil will not appeal interest ruling

The AP reports via Google:

ANCHORAGE, Alaska (AP) — Oil giant Exxon Mobil Corp. has decided not to appeal hundreds of millions of dollars in interest on punitive damages resulting from the 1989 Exxon Valdez oil spill.

The Irving, Texas-based company will pay about $470 million in interest on more than $507.5 million in punitive damages following the 11 million gallon spill of crude in Prince William Sound, company spokesman Tony Cudmore said Monday.

Read the full story here.
Read more!

Exxon required to pay interest on the $507.5 million judgment

The 9th Circuit Court of Appeals has ruled that Exxon shall pay interest on the $507.5 million judgement awarded plaintiffs in the Exxon Valdez lawsuit,from September 24, 1996 at the rate of 5.9%. Read more!