(xposted over at skippy's)
what is it about conflict of interest that awol and his band of 1600 crew marauders don't seem to get? they nominate a lawyer who works for a firm that is constantly trying to undermine the epa's authority.
president bush has nominated as chief of enforcement for the environmental protection agency a partner in a law firm defending w.r. grace & co. against criminal charges in a major environmental case.
epa employees were told late thursday that bush had nominated granta nakayama to lead the office of enforcement and compliance assurance, according to an epa memo obtained by the sun.
....kirkland & ellis' web sites list page after page of environmental battles fought, often against the epa, on behalf of companies that use toxic materials and chemicals.
eleven epa lawyers and investigators contacted yesterday refused to comment on the record, with most saying that any public comments would be "a career-ender."
however, they said the appearance of a conflict of interest involving epa's top enforcement official is likely to have a chilling effect on pursuing investigations and actions involving grace and any other companies represented by nakayama's firm. - baltimore sun
hmmm..... kirkland & ellis pride themselves on:
successfully represented client in overturning osha's worker exposure standard for benzene based on the need for reasonable balance between costs and benefits of regulation. (benzene case, s. ct. 1980)
represented state of arkansas in interstate water quality dispute under clean water act. (arkansas v. oklahoma, u.s.. sup. ct. 1991)
lead industry challenge to department of interior regulations involving natural resource damages under cercla (d.c. cir. 1989)
represented asbestos industry clients in u.s. epa proceedings to ban asbestos (5th circuit)
represented operator of petroleum refinery in challenge of u.s. epa approval of discharge limits imposed by local sewer authority. (10th circuit)
represented major manufacturer in challenge before sixth circuit court of appeals of u.s. epa denial of variance under clean air act. (ohio)
regularly defend manufacturers in proposition 65 enforcement actions. cases have involved toluene, pharmaceuticals, silica, dioxin and other substances. (california)
represented manufacturer in u.s. epa enforcement action seeking over $600 million in penalties under clean air act. (ohio)
defended site operators in major rcra enforcement action. key issues have included the applicability of the rcra "mixture rule" and the closed-loop recycling and other solid hazardous waste exemptions and u.s. epa's injunction authority. (illinois and texas)
defended a facility owner in an asbestos enforcement action seeking injunctive relief and civil penalties with respect to an asbestos abatement project (the general and asbestos abatement contractors were also named) for the alleged violation of osha and air pollution control laws, including the asbestos neshap standard of the federal clean air act. (illinois)
time to pull out the book highlighting w.r. grace's not so graceful actions and throw it at these lying bastards in this administration.
the senate must approve the appointment. time to get dialing.