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 All Forums Issue Forums Culture Forums Alliance Forums Region Forums Support Forums Help & Search

hatrack

(59,436 posts)
Wed Dec 17, 2014, 10:00 AM Dec 2014

Surprise, Surprise! Investigation Finds Duke May Be Off Legal Hook Forever If Coal Ash Plan Passes

EDIT

Several environmental lawyers in North Carolina note Duke's proposal moves the ash off the energy company's property. Avoiding legal liability could be why the utility chose not to pursue a different disposal plan, one supported by the Blue Ridge Environmental Defense League and the Haw Riverkeepers Association: Encase the coal ash in concrete and store it on Duke Energy property, near the 33 leaky retention ponds across the state. "Once it's transferred, they're not going to own it anymore," says Flatt, a point confirmed by Duke Energy.

Jabon told the INDY that the company does not believe it is responsible for the ash's impacts once it leaves a Duke facility. Asked repeatedly why Duke would seek to transfer liability for the dangerous waste, Jabon offered the same statement: "We feel a responsibility for the safe and permanent storage of the coal ash, which is why we've partnered with experienced vendors."

Instead, Duke is dumping the ash in these mines owned by Green Meadow LLC, a relatively unknown corporation formed in May in North Carolina. And while ownership of a limited liability corporation is not public record in North Carolina, state permit applications filed with the DENR show Green Meadow's president and chief executive is Charles Price, also the president and CEO of Charah Inc.

Green Meadow, according to state records, has no principal office and, until its first annual report to the Secretary of State's office is filed next spring, its list of officers is unknown, much like its assets. "What is the financial security of this entity?" says Ryke Longest, director of Duke University's Environmental Law and Policy Clinic. "Clearly an investor-owned utility in the Fortune 500 is a far more viable defendant than a contractor."

Ed. - emphasis added.

EDIT

http://www.indyweek.com/indyweek/a-legal-maneuver-could-absolve-duke-energy-of-its-responsibility-for-coal-ash-dumps/Content?oid=4305912

Latest Discussions»Issue Forums»Environment & Energy»Surprise, Surprise! Inve...