September, 28 2018, 12:00am EDT

For Immediate Release
Contact:
Precious Brady-Davis, precious.brady-davis@sierraclub.org (312) 229-4695
Jennifer Cassel, jcassel@earthjustice.org, (215) 717-4525
Earl Hatley, LEAD Agency, earlhatley77@gmail.com, (918) 256-5269
Maia Raposo, Waterkeeper Alliance, mraposo@waterkeeper.org, (203) 824-2229
Conservation Groups File Lawsuit Against Transfer of Oversight of Toxic Coal Ash Dumps from Federal Government to Oklahoma
Contrary to court order, Oklahoma allows unlined toxic coal ash ponds to continue operating
WASHINGTON
On behalf of Sierra Club, Waterkeeper Alliance, and Local Environmental Action Demanded ("LEAD Agency"), Earthjustice filed a lawsuit against the U.S. EPA to block EPA from transferring federal oversight over disposal of toxic coal ash in Oklahoma to the state. The Oklahoma program runs directly counter to a federal court appeals court ruling the same organizations won that bans unlined toxic coal ash ponds from continuing to operate.
In a highly controversial move, the U.S. EPA in June approved a request by the Oklahoma Department of Environmental Quality to take over the oversight of toxic coal ash under the federal Resource Conservation and Recovery Act. As EPA was finalizing that decision, Earthjustice and the Environmental Integrity Project released analysisrevealing that all of the dumps containing "coal ash" waste generated by Oklahoma's coal-fired power plants that tested nearby groundwater found toxic contamination.
Unfortunately, Oklahoma state agencies have a seriously deficient track record in protecting public health and the environment from the impacts of coal ash, prompting today's lawsuit.
The lawsuit identifies a number of specific problems with the coal ash program that the state of Oklahoma operates:
- The D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals struck down key provisions of the federal coal ash program - all of which are included in the new Oklahoma program - because they were too weak to protect public health and the environment. That means Oklahoma's plan contains unlawful provisions, including allowing unlined toxic coal ash ponds, such as the pond at A.E.P's Northeastern coal plan in Oologah, to continue to operate.
- Oklahoma's program grants coal ash dumps permits "for life," effectively shielding them from new public health requirements EPA develops in the future.
- Oklahoma DEQ said it wanted to protect industry from citizen oversight, and that is what the state's program does. DEQ officials make critical decisions about Oklahoman's air and water - including how toxic coal ash dust pollution is controlled, how pollution from closed ash dumps is monitored, and, in some cases, how coal ash dumps will be closed - behind closed doors, with no public input or oversight.
Finally, the lawsuit also alleges that EPA violated federal law by failing to issue any public participation guidelines for state coal ash programs, and by approving Oklahoma's coal ash program without first issuing those guidelines.
In response, Oklahoma Sierra Club Chapter Director Johnson Grimm-Bridgwater released the following statement:
"The State of Oklahoma is in no position, either financially or resource-wise, to take on such a monumental effort as managing coal ash. Coal ash disposal sites have already caused massive public health challenges in places like Bokoshe, Oklahoma, as well as groundwater contamination at sites across the state. Just this week a massive coal ash spill in North Carolina was caused by hurricane Florence, showing that massive coal ash dumps are risks in areas prone to storms or flooding. ODEQ's budget has been slashed every year the last several years, and they have cut back staffing numbers repeatedly. Neither ODEQ nor any other state agency has a solid track record of managing coal ash, and they are not prepared to add on a new function to their environmental management responsibilities."
Jennifer Cassel, attorney with Earthjustice, released the following statement:
"Time and time again, politicians in Oklahoma have chosen to ignore the health and safety of their own citizens. We fought hard to win a court ruling that rightly bans unlined coal ash ponds from continuing to operate, yet Oklahoma allows those dangerous ponds to do just that. Every single one of the coal ash dump sites that were tested in Oklahoma was found to have toxic chemicals from coal ash in nearby groundwater. It's clear we need stronger protections from the hazardous chemicals in coal ash, not weaker ones. EPA's decision to transfer oversight over Oklahoma's coal ash dumps to DEQ not only violates the law, it puts Oklahoma families at risk."
Kelly Hunter Foster, senior attorney with Waterkeeper Alliance, released the following statement:
"State and federal laws are in place to protect Oklahoma citizens and their abundant, irreplaceable water resources, like the Verdigris and Grand Rivers, from toxic pollution caused by coal ash. Instead of implementing the law to protect the public, EPA and Oklahoma DEQ are openly trying to contort the law into a liability shield for industry. This is an attempt to preclude anyone injured by the pollution from taking action to protect themselves, turning the notions of rule of law and government in the public interest on their heads. That this was approved by former EPA administrator Scott Pruitt, whose ties to polluters are so well documented, is no surprise at all."
Earl Hatley, Grand Riverkeeper with LEAD Agency, released the following statement:
"This is egregious. The Grand River Dam Authority in Northeast Oklahoma has contaminated the groundwater in Northeast Oklahoma with arsenic and other contaminants since 2007. They've been out of compliance with Oklahoma's CCR rule; demonstrating that Oklahoma can't manage its CCR Rule. Lifetime permits of these coal ash units and the fact that states are being given discretion as to what to do about these units that contaminate the groundwater now rather than shutting them down and cleaning them up leaves the public without any rights regarding this problem. LEAD Agency takes exception to this and is joining this lawsuit because we have the right to know. We have the right to comment, and no solid or hazardous waste management unit should ever be given a lifetime permit. Every other solid or hazardous waste management facility gets a five-year permit, with permit renewal, giving the public transparency. That's how this should be handled, too. OK has just waived those rights for its citizens and EPA is turning its back on Oklahoma."
Read the fact sheet: Oklahoma groundwater contamination from coal ash
Earthjustice is a non-profit public interest law firm dedicated to protecting the magnificent places, natural resources, and wildlife of this earth, and to defending the right of all people to a healthy environment. We bring about far-reaching change by enforcing and strengthening environmental laws on behalf of hundreds of organizations, coalitions and communities.
800-584-6460LATEST NEWS
'They Just Made Sh*t Up': Declassified Spy Memo Undercuts Trump Pretext for Deportations to El Salvador
"Sunlight remains the best disinfectant for falsehoods," said one open government advocate.
May 06, 2025
A memo released Monday by the Trump administration in response to a Freedom of Information Act request confirmed that U.S. intelligence agencies never agreed with President Donald Trump's claim in March that Venezuelan President Nicolás Maduro controls the criminal gang Tren de Aragua—an assertion that was used to justify sending hundreds of migrants to a notorious Salvadoran prison.
The document said that "while Venezuela's permissive environment enables TDA to operate, the Maduro regime probably does not have a policy of cooperating with TDA and is not directing TDA movement to and operations in the United States."
Trump's claim about Maduro's connection to the group had been called into question by The New York Times in March, after Trump invoked the Alien Enemies Act for only the fourth time in U.S. history. The law empowers the federal government to summarily expel citizens of a country that is at war with or invading the United States.
The Times reported at the time, based on interviews with officials, that the intelligence community's findings about Tren de Aragua were "starkly at odds" with Trump's claims. The anonymous officials said the gang was not taking orders from Maduro's government.
That reporting prompted the U.S. Justice Department to open a criminal investigation into the "selective leak of inaccurate" information to the Times, with the Trump administration criticizing the Times for its "misleading" report.
Attorney General Pam Bondi also said in an April memo that the department would roll back press freedom protections in leak investigations after The Washington Postreported on the memo that was declassified Monday. The Post reported on the document from the Office of the Director of National Intelligence in mid-April when it was still classified.
"The declassification proves that the material should have been public from the start—not used as an excuse to suppress sharing information with the press," Lauren Harper, the Daniel Ellsberg chair on government secrecy at the Freedom of the Press Foundation, told the Times. The group filed the FOIA request for the memo, dated April 7, to be released.
A declassified ODNI memo disclosed in response to a @Freedom.Press FOIA request confirms a @nytimes.com report from March: U.S. intel agencies rejected the claim Trump made to justify deporting Venezuelans to a prison in El Salvador. www.nytimes.com/2025/05/05/u...
[image or embed]
— Alexander Howard (@digiphile.bsky.social) May 5, 2025 at 10:27 PM
The memo noted that the FBI partially dissented with the intelligence community's findings about Tren de Aragua.
Analysts at the FBI agreed with the agencies' overall assessment but believed "some Venezuelan government officials facilitate [Tren de Aragua] members' migration from Venezuela to the United States and use members as proxies in Chile, Colombia, Ecuador, Peru, and the United States to advance what they see as the Maduro regime's goal of destabilizing governments and undermining public safety in these countries."
"Most" of the intelligence community "judges that intelligence indicating that regime leaders are directing or enabling [Tren de Aragua] migration to the United States is not credible," the memo reads.
Intelligence agencies also noted in the memo that detainees accused of being members of the gang could have been motivated "to make false allegations about their ties to the Venezuelan regime in an effort to deflect responsibility for their crimes and to lessen any punishment by providing exculpatory or otherwise 'valuable' information to U.S. prosecutors."
Analysts said they had not collected information about communications or funding exchanges between Venezuelan officials and leaders of Tren de Aragua.
"So you mean kidnapping folks off the streets and sending them to a foreign gulag was not justified by our own intelligence?" said the Arkansas Justice Project. "They just made shit up to dog whistle their base. The AEA argument was never legitimate and they knew it all along."
After the memo was released, Director of National Intelligence Tulsi Gabbard said it was "outrageous that as President Trump and his administration work hard every day to make America safe by deporting these violent criminals, some in the media remain intent on twisting and manipulating intelligence assessments to undermine the president's agenda to keep the American people safe."
Courts, including the U.S. Supreme Court, have blocked the Trump administration from sending more migrants to El Salvador under the Alien Enemies Act, and the ACLU last month asked a federal judge to facilitate the return of all Venezuelans sent to the country's Terrorism Confinement Center to ensure they have due process via immigration hearings.
But judges hearing cases regarding Trump's mass deportations under the Alien Enemies Act have not yet questioned the administration's debunked claims about Tren de Aragua and the Maduro government.
Writer and open government advocate Alexander B. Howard said the release of the memo proves that "sunlight remains the best disinfectant for falsehoods."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Florida Sued Over DeSantis' 'Ultimate Cowardly Act' Against Direct Democracy
"We believe in democracy, and we believe that when politicians fail to act, the people have the right to step in," said the campaign manager of Florida Decides Healthcare, a plaintiff in the suit.
May 06, 2025
Florida Decides Healthcare, a political committee and nonprofit that is fighting for expanded Medicaid eligibility in the Sunshine State, on Sunday sued the Florida secretary of state and other state officials, challenging a law Republican Gov. Ron DeSantis signed last week that makes it tougher for citizens to get constitutional amendments on the ballot.
According to the lawsuit, which was filed in federal court, Florida Decides Healthcare (FDH) is working to qualify a ballot measure to appear on the 2026 general election ballot that, if voted through, would expand Medicaid coverage in Florida.
Provisions in H.B. 1205 include decreased time for organizers to submit signed petitions and increased monetary penalties for violations. The law also makes it a third-degree felony for anyone other than a registered petition circulator to collect or physically possess more than 25 signed petition forms beyond ones own and immediate family members.
"Because of H.B. 1205's punitive and onerous restrictions, set to go into effect in the middle of FDH's ongoing petition drive, the organization faces the real and imminent threat of being unable to continue its operations," according to the suit. "H.B. 1205 creates intolerable uncertainty, exposes FDH to ruinous civil and criminal penalties, and could ultimately force FDH to shut down its campaign entirely."
According to a statement from FDH, the lawsuit contends that the bill is a "direct assault" on the citizen-led constitutional amendment process in Florida, "a vital democratic tool that gives everyday Floridians the power to propose ballot initiatives."
H.B. 1205 creates "vague" and "punitive" restrictions around the process that will have a chilling impact on political speech and dissuade civic engagement, according to the group.
The Elias Law Group, a prominent Democratic law firm, and the Southern Poverty Law Center, a racial justice and legal advocacy group, are lending legal support to FDH.
This targeting of the citizens amendment process comes less than one year after two ballot initiatives in Florida narrowly failed. Amendment 4 sought to ensure the right to an abortion up until fetal viability. The measure narrowly failed, falling short of the 60% majority needed to pass, meaning Florida will remain under a six-week abortion ban. Amendment 3 sought to legalize marijuana and also failed. Groups backing the initiatives raised tens of millions of dollars.
According to the Orlando Sentinel, the DeSantis administration used public money to run ads targeting the initiatives, and defended the ad campaigns as educational.
"Floridians have a constitutional right to change policy themselves. State legislators have now effectively silenced their constituents, all in order to maintain their chokehold on policymaking," said Kelly Hall, executive director of the Fairness Project, in a statement on Tuesday. The Fairness Project was among the groups that backed Amendment 4 last fall.
"It's the ultimate cowardly act—for politicians to enact minority rule when they know their policies don't align with the will of the majority," Hall added. "Sadly, this is nothing new for DeSantis, who used extraordinarily undemocratic means to block the will of the people during the 2024 election."
Mitch Emerson, campaign manager for Florida Decides Healthcare, similarly called the law "cowardly." Emerson is also a plaintiff in the suit.
"It's not reform—it's repression. We are filing this lawsuit because we refuse to let them silence the people of Florida," said Emerson in a statement on Monday. "We believe in democracy, and we believe that when politicians fail to act, the people have the right to step in. Floridians are ready to vote for Medicaid expansion—and we intend to make sure they get that chance."
Keep ReadingShow Less
'We Don't Do Kings': Mass Protests Planned to Counter Trump's Birthday Military Parade
"Donald Trump wants to spend tens of millions of taxpayer dollars to throw himself a big fancy parade with tanks in the streets," said one organizer. "This is straight out of the authoritarian playbook."
May 06, 2025
Pro-democracy campaigners late Monday announced a nationwide "No Kings" day of defiance on June 14—the same day U.S. President Donald Trump plans to hold a birthday military parade more befitting a dictator than an elected head of state.
More than 100 "No Kings" events have already been registered across the U.S., with many more expected in the weeks ahead of the day of action.
See the full list of planned events and locations here.
"Donald Trump wants to spend tens of millions of taxpayer dollars to throw himself a big fancy parade with tanks in the streets," explained Ezra Levin, co-executive director of Indivisible, on Monday's broadcast of The Rachel Maddow Show. "This is straight out of the authoritarian playbook. He wants to project strength. He wants everybody to think that he is all-powerful. That he rules the world."
"He doesn't," Levin added. "Real power is not in D.C. It's distributed all across the country. And what we're looking to do on No Kings Day is to say, look—Donald Trump does not own the flag. He does not own patriotism. In fact, we can all show up in opposition to a king in this country."
The event's website says the goal of the mass demonstrations is to show that "from city blocks to small towns, from courthouse steps to community parks, we're taking action to reject authoritarianism."
"In America, we don't do kings," the website states. "On June 14th, we're showing up everywhere he isn't—to say no thrones, no crowns, no kings."
News of the latest mass mobilization against Trump and his far-right agenda came days after the U.S. Army confirmed plans for a parade on June 14—the Army's 250th birthday and Trump's 79th.
"The Army anticipates featuring 150 vehicles, 50 aircraft, and 6,600 soldiers," The Washington Postreported, citing an Army spokesperson. "The parade will accompany a fireworks display and a day-long festival on the National Mall with military demonstrations, musical performances, and a fitness competition."
The price tag for such festivities could be massive, with two unnamed defense officials tellingNBC News that it could be as high as $45 million. In an interview that aired over the weekend, Trump called the potential cost "peanuts compared to the value of doing it."
"We have the greatest missiles in the world," Trump declared. "We have the greatest submarines in the world. We have the greatest army tanks in the world. We have the greatest weapons in the world. And we're going to celebrate it."
U.S. Rep. Steve Cohen (D-Tenn.) said in a statement Monday that "this would be an unprecedented waste of money to please this self-absorbed con man, and the public should make clear it's unacceptable."
"The egotist-in-chief wants taxpayers to foot the bill for a military parade on his birthday," said Cohen, the lead sponsor of legislation that would "prohibit the use of federal funds for a military parade in the District of Columbia intended for the personal celebration of President Donald J. Trump, and for other purposes."
Keep ReadingShow Less
Most Popular