FR 2020-29039

In the Federal Register notice, the Department of Justice highlights its intention to settle a legal dispute involving violations of the Clean Water Act. This dispute involves Russell Kirk and associated companies accused of unlawfully discharging pollutants into U.S. waters. The notice communicates the lodging of a proposed Consent Decree with the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Iowa to resolve these allegations. This action requires the defendants to restore damaged areas, undertake necessary mitigation activities, and pay a civil penalty. The public is invited to submit comments on the proposal within 30 days of the notice's publication.

Significant Issues and Concerns

The notice presents several issues and concerns worth noting:

1. Lack of Detail in Restoration and Mitigation: The document does not detail the specific restoration or mitigation efforts required of the defendants. This lack of transparency may leave the public without a clear understanding of the actions that will be undertaken to rectify the environmental damage.

2. Understanding Legal References: With references to specific U.S. legal codes like "33 U.S.C. 1311(a)," readers unfamiliar with legal jargon may struggle to fully comprehend the nature of the violations. Providing more context or an explanation of these legal codes could enhance understanding.

3. Comment Submission Method: The notice requires comments to be submitted via physical mail, which may not align with modern expectations of digital communication. The absence of clarity about the acceptance of electronic submissions might deter public participation due to the inconvenience involved.

4. Access to the Proposed Decree: Though the document provides both a physical location and a web link for reviewing the proposed Consent Decree, potential issues related to digital accessibility could arise if the link were to become inactive or the site temporarily unavailable. This reliance on external resources for document access might limit public scrutiny.

5. Lack of Specific Environmental Information: The document does not specify the pollutants involved or their environmental impacts. Providing such details would aid the public in understanding the case’s significance and the potential benefits of the decree's requirements.

Impact on the Public and Stakeholders

The notice has implications for various groups:

• General Public: The intended restoration and mitigation activities could positively impact the environment, benefiting local communities if effectively carried out. However, the lack of detailed information might undermine public trust or interest in the proceedings.

• Local Communities: Communities located near the affected waters may feel reassured that measures are being taken to address pollution. Nonetheless, transparency in specifying restoration activities is crucial to ensure community members fully understand what is being done to rectify the situation.

• Defendants and Businesses: For the defendants, entering the proposed Consent Decree offers a path to resolve the legal case. It may result in financial impacts due to penalties and the costs of implementing environmental measures. Other businesses might view this case as a reminder of the importance of regulatory compliance to avoid similar legal challenges.

In essence, while the document outlines a procedural step in addressing environmental violations, it highlights areas where additional clarity and modernizing communication methods could improve public engagement and transparency.