Environmental Law

Solid Waste

Partners

Cohen, Edward A.

Kellmeyer, Joseph M.

Kennedy, Crystal M.

Sonderegger, Paul T.

Stone, Brian C.

Strassner, Peter S.

Associates

Bousquet, Kimberly M.

Kemper, Ryan Russell

Linzer, Ross E.

EHS Senior Advisor

McCombs, Max W.

• Agrium
• American Commercial Barge Lines
• Bemis Company
• BNSF Railway
• Bunge North America
• CKE Restaurants (Hardee's)
• ConocoPhillips
• ExxonMobil Coal & Minerals
• ExxonMobil
• Insituform Technologies
• Kansas City Southern Railway
• Laclede Gas
• Mallinckrodt
• Norfolk Southern
• United Van Lines 
• WCA Waste Corporation

Solid Waste Experience

RCRA Subtitle D Interpretations
We successfully represented a major landfill operator in a preemptive declaratory judgment lawsuit filed against the state of Missouri. The case resulted in the State reversing its position and agreeing that certain significant and extremely expensive provisions of RCRA Subtitle D did not apply to our client. The state also issued an “authority to operate” license which had been previously withheld.

Agreement Regarding Use of Landfill Gas
On behalf of a landfill client, we negotiated a “first of its kind” agreement in which an area high school could be the first high school in the country to be heated with biogas (methane). The project was estimated to save the local school district $30,000 to $40,000 a year in heating bills. The landfill client successfully utilized the landfill gas as a heating source at its facilities for several years.

New Landfill Rules
After the MDNR proposed new rules which would have imposed significant requirements on new and existing demolition landfills, one Thompson Coburn landfill client believed it would be forced to close since it was too costly and impractical to comply with the proposed rules. We were asked to help keep the landfill open. Following significant lobbying with major area contractors’ organizations, major landfill customers, and state officials, MDNR announced its decision to exempt existing demolition landfills from the new requirements.

Landfill Enforcement Defense
We have handled enforcement/penalty cases for major waste disposal firms in which favorable resolutions were achieved. In one such case, our efforts assisted our client in obtaining a modification to its permit which allowed a major expansion of its landfill operations to occur before the liability issues were resolved. We also successfully represented a landfill operator in a matter where a state sought to impose a $617,000 penalty, by convincing the state that it lacked legal authority to impose any penalty. The following year, the state legislature amended the solid waste law to close the statutory loophole.

Integration of Waste Disposal Needs with New Construction
We represented the regional airport authority regarding the disposal of debris from multiple subdivisions which were demolished in order to make way for a new runway. We successfully negotiated a resolution with the state in which the demolition debris was placed in cells and “capped” by the construction of the new runway, thereby saving significant disposal costs for the airport authority.

Reversal of Permit Denial
We successfully represented a permit applicant in an administrative appeal after its application for a demolition debris landfill permit had been denied based on alleged poor hydrogeological conditions at the proposed site. After showing that the state had previously approved the hydrogeological conditions at the site for use as a sanitary landfill on four prior occasions, the Hearing Officer found the state’s denial was arbitrary and capricious and recommended approval of the site. Ultimately, the state issued a landfill permit to our client.