Skip to content

Menu

LexBlog, Inc. logo
NetworkSub-MenuBrowse by SubjectBrowse by PublisherJoin the NetworkGet StartedSubscribeSupportContact
Search
Close

Does Environmental Enforcement Against Individuals Make Sense?

By David Mandelbaum on September 16, 2013
Email this postTweet this postLike this postShare this post on LinkedIn

As of September 8, 2013, 162 appeals had been filed in the Pennsylvania Environmental Hearing Board.  Some are appeals by disappointed applicants for permits.  Some are third-party appeals of permits.  Some are appeals from enforcement orders.  Of those 162 appeals, 19 are appeals from enforcement orders issued to individuals.  Of those, at least some are appeals by individuals who believe that they qualify for pro bono representation.

If the standard for using public resources on an enforcement action is that the enforcement will improve environmental quality in a way that benefits people, the number of individuals subjected to enforcement by the DEP who then believe they have litigable appeals is truly surprising.  Are the fights being picked the fights that matter?

I consider the issue in my column this month in the Pennsylvania Law Weekly.  Read Does Environmental Enforcement Against Individuals Make Sense?, 38 Pa. L. Weekly 858 (Sept. 17, 2013), by clicking here.

*The opinions expressed in this column are those of the author and do not necessarily reflect the views of Greenberg Traurig or its clients.

Photo of David Mandelbaum David Mandelbaum

David G. Mandelbaum represents clients facing problems under environmental laws. He regularly represents clients in lawsuits and also has helped clients achieve satisfactory outcomes through regulatory negotiation or private transactions. A Fellow of the American College of Environmental Lawyers, David teaches Superfund, and…

David G. Mandelbaum represents clients facing problems under environmental laws. He regularly represents clients in lawsuits and also has helped clients achieve satisfactory outcomes through regulatory negotiation or private transactions. A Fellow of the American College of Environmental Lawyers, David teaches Superfund, and Oil and Gas Law in rotation at the Temple University Beasley School of Law as well as an environmental litigation course at Suffolk (Boston) Law School.

Since United States v. Atlas Minerals, the first multi-generator Superfund contribution case to go to trial in 1993, Mr. Mandelbaum has been engaged in matters involving allocation of costs among responsible parties, especially under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA).  He has tried large cases and resolved others as lead counsel.  He has written, spoken, and taught extensively on the subject.  More recently he also has been engaged to assist lead counsel from this firm and others:

  • to develop cost allocation methodologies;
  • to craft expert testimony in support of a favored methodology (given a definition of “fairness,” why one methodology better tracks it than another);
  • to develop efficient case management approaches; and to assist private allocation as part of the neutral team.

Concentrations

  • Air, water and waste regulation
  • Superfund and contamination
  • Climate change
  • Oil and gas development
  • Water rights
Read more about David MandelbaumEmailDavid's Twitter Profile
Show more Show less
  • Posted in:
    Environmental and Climate
  • Blog:
    E2 Law Blog
  • Organization:
    Greenberg Traurig, LLP
  • Article: View Original Source

Call us at 1-800-913-0988 or email sales@lexblog.com.

Facebook LinkedIn Twitter RSS
The Library at LexBlog
  • About LexBlog
  • The Field We Built
  • Library at LexBlog
  • Our Beliefs
  • Our Team
  • Contact LexBlog
  • Disclaimer
  • Editorial Policy
  • Terms of Service
  • Get Started
  • Publishing Solutions
  • Compass
  • Submit a Request
  • Support Center
  • System Status
Copyright © 2026, LexBlog, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Law blog design & platform by LexBlog LexBlog Logo