The settlement will eliminate thousands of tons of air pollution from flares. Chevron Phillips will also pay a $3.4 million civil penalty. The PRPs will provide financial assurance to ensure funding for the cleanup should IDA not be able to satisfactorily complete the work, reimburse the Agency $18 million for its past cleanup costs at the site, and pay for future state and EPA oversight costs at the site.Ĭhevron Phillips Chemical Company Clean LP Air Act SettlementĬhevron Phillips Chemical Company LP has agreed to make upgrades and perform compliance measures estimated to cost $118 million to resolve allegations that it violated the Clean Air Act and state air pollution control laws at three petrochemical manufacturing facilities located in Cedar Bayou, Port Arthur, and Sweeney, Texas. Along with the ASAOC, the Agency proposes to enter into a prospective purchaser agreement (PPA) with Industrial Development Advantage of East Chicago, LLC (IDA), a developer who will perform the cleanup work on the site. (PCS Nitrogen), involving PCS Nitrogen’s former phosphoric acid fertilizer production facility located in Geismar, Louisiana (Geismar Facility or Facility).Īgreement continues lead cleanup work and redevelopment at USS Lead Superfund SiteĪgreement with potentially responsible parties (PRPs) will allow for continued cleanup and redevelopment of the USS Lead Superfund site in East Chicago, Indiana. Department of Justice (DOJ), and the Louisiana Department of Environmental Quality (LDEQ) announce a settlement with PCS Nitrogen Fertilizer, L.P. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), the U.S. To rectify this situation, Professor Langevoort proposes an understanding of half-truths in the securities law context that synthesizes the relatively vigorous half-truth doctrine that exists in the common law of fraud and the more relaxed doctrine currently applied under securities laws.PCS Nitrogen Fertilizer, L.P. The ad hoc response of the courts has created confusion in an area where market efficiency is highly dependent on clear rules. Because of the lack of guidance in this area from Congress and the SEC, the job of developing a coherent and tractable theory of "corporate disclosure" under the securities laws has fallen on the courts. In the context of securities law the half-truth doctrine functions to mediate between disclosure duties and nondisclosure privileges. Because of the well-recognized protection granted to corporate secrets, the half-truth doctrine in the context of securities cases is understandably narrower than it is in the common law of fraud. This approach is then applied to half-truths under the securities laws in corporate disclosure cases. SUPREME BEVERAGE DONNY BRASS BIRMINGHAM FULLThus in a context where parties to a negotiation customarily withhold certain kinds of information, half-truths should be less actionable than in a situation where parties expect full disclosure. He argues that both the degree of trust and the background expectations regarding the legitimacy of concealing confidential information are important factors in finding liability. He first considers how the half-truth doctrine functions in the common law of fraud to describe the conditions under which a half-truth is misleading. Under what circumstances should one be held liable for speaking half-truths, statements that are literally true but mislead by omitting some material fact? In this article, Professor Langevoort places the half-truth doctrine of the securities laws in the context of the broader debate over the affirmative duty to disclose information to a party on the other side of a transaction.
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |