It has been learned through email correspondence that NDEP is preparing to issue an operating permit for a landfill in Desert Valley west of Winnemucca. This should come as no surprise to anyone as it has been evident that NDEP has been “in the bag” on this from the outset. After months of having it pointed out to them, they still have the wind blowing from the wrong direction in Desert Valley and haven’t even bothered to correct that! The risks to the environment and the health and welfare of the community that have been brought up and the overwhelming local opposition to this proposal has had no impact on NDEP.

They have indicated they will issue the permit on Wednesday, February 29, 2012. We can only wait and see who might appeal this before the SEC at this point. Nevadans Against Garbage will keep you informed as best we can, and will bring you additional details if and when we learn of them.

All we know at this time is what is stated in the legal filing. WHEREAS the Ninth Circuit Court of Appeals has issued an order scheduling a settlement assessment conference in this case to determine if this case is appropriate for the Ninth Circuit’s Mediation Program. NOW THEREFORE the parties, by and through their respective attorneys, hereby stipulate to stay all proceedings in this Court while the parties explore settlement through the Ninth Circuit Mediation Program. The parties shall provide a joint status report to the Court on or before April 23, 2012 regarding whether there remains a continued need for a stay. Click here to read it.

The EPA says that all liners leak. In the case of Jungo, the NDEP says they will not assume no leakage from liners which seems to be a backwards way of saying the same thing. Yerington, Nevada is a somewhat local example of what happens when these liners leak and pollute the groundwater. It’s also a good example of when regulatory oversight is absent or lacking and it shows that not all companies are responsible in any way, be it socially, morally, ethically, environmentally or any other way you can think of. Their sole reason for existence is profit. Please keep in mind as you read this story that the NDEP spokesperson at the December 1 public comment meeting in Winnemucca publicly stated that as far as the leachate question and how to handle it was concerned, that he was “still mulling it over“. NDEP went to public comment with the intent to issue an operating permit for the Jungo dump with no plan as to how to handle the leachate it will produce. That leachate is one of the most toxic substances found in a dump. Click here to find out how difficult it is to clean up once groundwater is contaminated.  Closure and post-closure requirements are extremely important factors in siting a dump.  Since this trash will be in the ground forever, 30 years of monitoring, as proposed for Jungo, is nowhere near enough time to check for pollution and the physical integrity of any landfill.

There has been some movement towards designating the Anaconda site a Superfund area.  Some local residents want this to happen in order to have safe drinking water and a healthy environment.  Other interests, mostly business, don’t want this designation as they feel it would stigmatize the area and be bad for business.  The cost estimates for cleanup stand at 40 million dollars, with the state’s share at 10 percent or 4 million dollars.  So far no money has been forthcoming from the state.  In the meantime, the Yerington Paiute Tribe is embarking on developing their own environmental  ordinances.

Click here to read the article.

To get an idea of just what summary judgment is, click here. NAG presents this long 36 page legal paper in our ongoing effort to keep the citizens of Humboldt County informed as to the progress of the opposition to the proposed Jungo landfill. It makes for an interesting read and history of events for those who have the time.

 

This statement on quasi-judicial immunity seems timely and appropriate:  “The public interest requires that persons serving on planning boards considering applications for development act with independence and without fear that developers, who will frequently have significant financial resources and the ability to litigate, not bring them into court. The possibility of facing expensive and aggravating litigation as a result of making a decision on an application for development may in a subtle way impact on the decision making process.”

 

Click here to read the motion as filed.

Humboldt County has filed a memorandum opposing Jungo’s claim for attorney’s fees and costs.  It appears that the county is asking that damages and fees claimed by Recology  be reduced or eliminated all together.  NAG has no legal expertise, so maybe it is best for everyone to read the motion for themselves and make their own determination.

Click here to read the appeal as filed.

Read all about Judicial Review here and here.

As we are sure all of you know, it is one week away from the deadline for all comments and questions on the Jungo Road Landfill to be delivered to the Nevada Division of Environmental Protection (NDEP) before they make their final decision on issuing the operating permit to Recology for the proposed Jungo Road Landfill.

Thanks to those of you who have already submitted your comments to the NDEP. For those who haven’t had a chance to get your comments in, here’s some resources to get you started:

. Dr. G Fred Lee & Associates was hired by Humboldt County to provide a review of the NDEP permit independent of the NDEP, Recology, or Recology consultants. You can read his report here. It may help you articulate your own comments

· See what others are saying to the NDEP via comments already shared with the NDEP.

· All NDEP and Recology documentation for the permit is at the NDEP Jungo Landfill Project site: http://ndep.nv.gov/bwm/jungo.htm for your review. The draft permit, public notice and Jungo fact sheet from the NDEP are here: http://ndep.nv.gov/bwm/doc​s/ndep_letter_102611.pdf

· A public hearing was held December 1, 2011, in Winnemucca. Public comment transcripts of what your neighbors had to say are available here.  At this meeting, the NDEP noted they had not been out to the site of the landfill, devised a leachate plan or read the soil report, and had to ‘dig deep into their bag of tricks’ to grant an exception to Nevada state law to build this dump closer to an active aquifer than 100 feet. Yet, they have published intent to permit this landfill.

Public comments must be submitted in writing no later than 5:00PM on January 30, 2012 to:

Jon Taylor, PE CEM

Division of Environmental Protection

Bureau of Waste Management

901 South Stewart Street, Suite 4001

Carson City, NV 89701-5249

775.687.9477

jtaylor@ndep.nv.gov

The NDEP states they will either issue or deny the operating permit 30 days later.

Hope your New Year is off to a great start.  Each of you are encouraged to submit questions or commentary to the NDEP, and we ask each of you to share this post with all of your friends, asking them to do the same!

The court document available to us is a pdf read only document from the Office of the Clerk for the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit in San Francisco, so it can’t be downloaded so you can all see it. Here are the dates that are important:

Fri., January 13, 2012
Mediation Questionnaire due. If your registration for Appellate ECF is confirmed after this date, the Mediation Questionnaire is due within one day of receiving the email from PACER confirming your registration.
Mon., February 6, 2012
Transcript shall be ordered.
Tue., March 6, 2012
Transcript shall be filed by court reporter.
Mon., April 16, 2012
Appellant’s opening brief and excerpts of record shall be served and filed pursuant to FRAP 32 and 9th Cir. R. 32-1.
Wed., May 16, 2012
Appellee’s answering brief and excerpts of record shall be served and filed pursuant to FRAP 32 and 9th Cir. R. 32-1.

Click here to read the legal document.

We will have more as or if we learn it.