EPA Can Inspect Ship for Chemicals, Court Rules
Recent Cases
The Environmental Protection Agency can inspect a former U.S. Navy hospital ship for toxic chemicals, the 4th circuit ruled.
The EPA was issued a warrant under the Toxic Substances Control Act to board the M/V Sanctuary, built in 1944, to test for polychlorinated biphenyls (PCBs), which may lead to reproductive and developmental problems.
Potomac Navigation Inc. bought the ship for $50,000 at a court-ordered auction in 2007, with plans to use it for storage or as a hotel platform, but ship recycling consultant Polly Parks warned that ship buyers often sell PCB laden ships to third-world countries for a "huge profit on the scrap metal market," the ruling states.
Environmental group Basel Action Network intervened before Potomac had a chance to move the ship offshore, saying the possible presence of PCBs on the vessel demanded that it remain at the Baltimore pier under the Act's export clause. As a result, the district court ordered the ship to stay docked.
Potomac argued that the ship was exempt from the Act's regulations because it was not intended for commerce, but could not prove that PCBs "were not distributed in commerce before the ship was built," Judge Michael wrote.
The appeals court said that the export concern was "immaterial" to finding probable cause, because sampling and research data showed that there were likely PCBs on the ship, prompting an EPA inspection. A ship recycling firm that considered bidding on the Sanctuary had already confirmed the presence of PCBs, the ruling states, finding four out of five paint samples contained PCBs in concentrations greater than 50 parts per million.
The three-judge panel found that public health interests outweighed the possible economic loss of the ship, and encouraged the EPA to either determine if possible PCBs were "totally enclosed," as required by the Act, or call for proper disposal.
Related listings
-
Court upholds sentence for I-65 sniper
Recent Cases 08/24/2008An attorney for 19-year-old Zachariah Blanton had appealed the sentence as inappropriate, arguing that the shooting “was a more or less routine act of manslaughter, if such a thing is said to exist.”But in an eight-page ruling, the court disagreed, n...
-
City of New York reaches settlement in unlawful arrest suit
Recent Cases 08/21/2008The City of New York agreed to pay approximately $2 million to settle a lawsuit brought by protesters who had claimed they had been illegally arrested, according to Tuesday statements made by the city's Law Department. In April 2003, city police arre...
-
Fifth Circuit rules on jurors using Bible
Recent Cases 08/15/2008The US Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit on Thursday refused to grant a writ of habeas corpus to convicted murder Khristian Oliver, who had argued that his Sixth and Eighth Amendment rights were violated when the jury took Bible passages into ac...
Workers’ Compensation Subrogation of Administrative Fees and Costs
When a worker covered by workers’ compensation makes a claim against a third party, the workers’ compensation insurance retains the right to subrogate against any recovery from that third party for all benefits paid to or on behalf of a claimant injured at work. When subrogating for more than basic medical and indemnity benefits, the Texas workers’ compensation subrogation statute provides that “the net amount recovered by a claimant in a third‑party action shall be used to reimburse the carrier for benefits, including medical benefits that have been paid for the compensable injury.” TX Labor Code § 417.002.
In fact, all 50 states provide for similar subrogation. However, none of them precisely outlines which payments or costs paid by a compensation carrier constitute “compensation” and can be recovered. The result is industry-wide confusion and an ongoing debate and argument with claimants’ attorneys over what can and can’t be included in a carrier’s lien for recovery purposes.
In addition to medical expenses, death benefits, funeral costs and/or indemnity benefits for lost wages and loss of earning capacity resulting from a compensable injury, workers’ compensation insurance carriers also expend considerable dollars for case management costs, medical bill audit fees, rehabilitation benefits, nurse case worker fees, and other similar fees. They also incur other expenses in conjunction with the handling and adjusting of workers’ compensation claims. Workers’ compensation carriers typically assert, of course, that, they are entitled to reimbursement for such expenditures when it recovers its workers’ compensation lien. Injured workers and their attorneys disagree.