Defending Environmental Common Law Claims After Bell v. Cheswick: Is Federal Permit Compliance Enough?

Description

In a first impression matter, the Third Circuit held the Clean Air Act does not preempt common law tort claims—even if facility owners/operators are in compliance with a federal permit. The Aug. 20, 2013, decision in Bell v. Cheswick Generating Station has important implications for environmental liability.

The court reasoned the Clean Air Act’s savings clause preserved the rights and remedies under state common law with regard to stationary sources. The implications for plaintiffs and defendants is significant and provides a basis to open the proverbial floodgates to nuisance and other state claims.

Counsel should consider advising clients that federal permit compliance will not necessarily be a shield from environmental liability and litigation. Practitioners must consider whether additional steps are needed to reduce exposure to environmental claims and litigation.

Listen as our authoritative panel of environmental law practitioners examines the Bell decision, discusses its impact on potential environmental liability, and reviews how other jurisdictions are treating the issue. The panel will offer best practices for counsel to guide clients in mitigating liability claims that may be outside the reach of federal permits.