On May 17, 2016, Chris Fontan discussed Diversity in the Changing Workplace at the 21st Annual Mississippi Human Resource Conference and Expo held at the Beau Rivage in Biloxi, Mississippi.
Materials used during the discussion may be viewed here.
Brunini Recognized Among Top Law Firms in Mississippi by Chambers USA
The 2016 edition of Chambers USA, which lists leading law firms and individual lawyers in an extensive range of practice areas, jointly awarded high rankings to ten Brunini attorneys and five of the firm’s practice areas.
Chambers USA ranked five of Brunini’s practices, including the firm’s Energy & Natural Resources, Environment, Real Estate, Commercial Litigation and Corporate/Commercial practices, all of which were highly ranked.
Each year, Chambers USA conducts thousands of interviews and surveys with lawyers and their clients, as well as analyzes its own database resources, to determine rankings for top law firms and individual attorneys. The qualities on which rankings are assessed include technical legal ability, professional conduct, client service, commercial astuteness, diligence, commitment and other qualities valued by clients.
“The Brunini firm is truly honored to have its practice groups and individual lawyers recognized by our clients as among the best in Mississippi through one of the nation’s most respected legal directories,” said Sam Kelly, Chairman of the firm’s Board of Directors. “Our commitment to client service and a long history of legal excellence are hallmarks that set us apart in Mississippi, and those are good reasons to earn the respect of business leaders and peers.”
A collective list of the ten Brunini attorneys recognized as among the best in their fields in Mississippi by Chambers USA include:
Corporate/Commercial
Louis Fuller
Walter Weems
Energy & Natural Resources
James L. Halford
Watts C. Ueltschey
Environment
John E. Milner
Eugene R. Wasson
Litigation
R. David Kaufman
Samuel C. Kelly
Ron A. Yarbrough
Real Estate
P. David Andress
Brunini Welcomes L. Kyle Williams
L. Kyle Williams has joined Brunini, Grantham, Grower & Hewes, PLLC as an associate in the firm’s regulatory department.
Kyle is a 2015 graduate of the University of Mississippi School of Law. While earning his J.D., he served as an Associate Articles Editor for the Mississippi Law Journal and as a Student Editor for the Journal of Space Law. Prior to attending law school, Kyle received his Bachelors of Arts in Political Science from the University of Southern Mississippi. Kyle will be located in the Jackson office.
Related Attorneys
OSHA Releases Final/Updated Workplace Injury Reporting Rule
On Wednesday, May 11, 2016, the Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) finalized a newly updated Rule governing employer responsibilities in recordkeeping and reporting regarding workplace injuries and illnesses. Effective in January 2017, the new Rule requires employers to electronically submit information about covered workplace injuries and illnesses to OSHA, for posting on the agency’s website. The new electronic submission requirements will apply to employers with 250 or more employees that are already required by OSHA to keep such records. Additionally, smaller businesses (those with 20-249 employees) may have to comply if they are in particularly dangerous industries.
Currently, OSHA (or an employee) may request work-related illness and injury records, and such records must be posted in the workplace. OSHA’s website already posts injury and illness data for more than 240,000 work sites collected between 2002 and 2011. What’s new in today’s Rule is that employers will now be required to send all such information to OSHA, and to send it electronically. It is estimated that the new regulation will require approximately 432,000 workplaces with 20-249 employees in high hazard industries and 34,000 workplaces with more than 250 employees to upload injury and illness data or summaries to OSHA on an annual basis.
To ensure that the injury data on an employer’s OSHA logs are accurate and complete, the final Rule also aims to encourage and promote an employee’s right to report injuries and illnesses without fear of retaliation, by clarifying that an employer must have a reasonable procedure for reporting work-related injuries that does not discourage employees from reporting. This aspect of the Rule targets employer programs and policies that, while nominally promoting safety, have the effect of discouraging workers from reporting injuries and, in turn leading to incomplete or inaccurate records of workplace hazards.
U.S. Deputy Labor Secretary Chris Lu said that the new Rule will increase workplace transparency. “OSHA’s final Rule will modernize the current system by taking establishment-specific injury information that is already collected by employers and making it available to the public once it is cleaned of personally identifiable information,” Lu said. “The data, however, will only be accurate if employees feel free to report injuries and illnesses without fear of retaliation. To ensure complete and accurate reporting, the Rule includes provisions that protect the rights of workers who report these incidents.”
Workplace advocates and OSHA believe the Rule will encourage stricter compliance with workplace safety laws, and may make it easier to identify common occupational hazards. However, opponents to the Rule, like the U.S. Chamber of Commerce, say the new requirements are overly burdensome and “provide special interest groups with information that can be misconstrued and distorted in a manner that does not reflect business’s commitment to the safety of this nation’s employees.”
This Newsletter is a publication of the law firm of Brunini, Grantham, Grower & Hewes, PLLC located in Jackson, Mississippi. This Newsletter is not designed or intended to provide legal or professional advice, as any such advice requires the consideration of the facts of the specific situation.
IRS Circular 230 Notice
To ensure compliance with requirements imposed by the IRS, we inform you that, unless specifically indicated otherwise, any tax advice contained in this communication (including any attachments) was not intended or written to be used, and cannot be used, for the purpose of (i) avoiding tax-related penalties under the Internal Revenue Code, or (ii) promoting, marketing, or recommending to another party any tax-related matter addressed herein.
Mississippi Commission on Environmental Quality Summary of Meeting Held April 28, 2016
Prepared By Brunini, Grantham, Grower & Hewes, PLLC
The Environmental Practice Group of the Brunini Law Firm publishes a summary of the proceedings of each monthly meeting of the Mississippi Environmental Quality Permit Board and of the Mississippi Commission on Environmental Quality. We strive to provide, in a succinct newsletter format, the key points addressed in each meeting that will be of interest to the regulated community in Mississippi.
If you have any questions concerning the content of a newsletter it would like further information about the matters addressed in a newsletter, please contact John Milner, the Brunini Firm Environmental Practice Group leader, at jmilner@brunini.com or (601) 960-6842.
Meeting Summary
The Mississippi Commission on Environmental Quality convened at 9:00 a.m. on April 28, 2016, at the offices of the Mississippi Department of Environmental Quality in Jackson. The Commission approved minutes from the previous meeting held on February 25, 2016. Following a prepared agenda, items considered were as follows:
Commission Approval of Environmental Covenant
The Commission approved the Environmental Covenant with the U.S. General Services regarding the remediation of property located adjacent to 3505 25th Avenue, Gulfport, Mississippi, referred to as the “USDA APHIS Laboratory (AI#69227).” The Site was the former Analytical and Natural Products Chemistry Lab (ANPCL), Center for Plant Science Health and Technology (CPHST). Environmental Site Assessments have revealed a release of hazardous substances impacting soils and groundwater, in excess of Target Remediation Goals (TRGs). Therefore, remediation of the site is necessary. The staff evaluated the proposed Environmental Covenant and believes that, with the conditions and restrictions contained within, the site will be in compliance with applicable State laws and standards and will be protective of the public health and the environment.
FY2017 Title V Fee Recommendation
The Commission approved MDEQ staff’s recommendation to set the FY2017 Title V permit fee at $47.00 per ton of regulated air pollutants with a minimum fee of $250.00. A public hearing concerning the fee was held on April 6, 2016. No comments were received.
Adoption of Amendments to 11 Mississippi Administrative Code, Part 2, Chapter 5, Regulations for the Prevention of Significant Deterioration of Air Quality and Associated Revision to the Mississippi State Implementation Plan for the Control of Air Pollution
The Commission approved staff’s recommendation to adopt the proposed regulation amendments and SIP Revision. The amendments to 11 Miss. Admin. Code, Pt. 2, Ch. 5, “Regulations for the Prevention of Significant Deterioration of Air Quality” and the associated Revision to the State Implementation Plan for Control of Air Pollution (SIP Revision) involve the adoption, by reference, of recent changes to federal rules in order to keep state regulations consistent with federal requirements. Specifically, the amendments will remove the portions of the Greenhouse Gas Tailoring Rule which was removed from the federal Prevention of Significant Deterioration of Air Quality (PSD) regulations on August 19, 2015. A public hearing was held on March 18, 2016 and no comments other than from EPA were received. EPA’s suggested changes were for clarity purposes and such changes were incorporated in the Amendment.
Stephanie Howard, Executrix of the Estate of Gerald Donald-Request for an Evidentiary Hearing
Hearing Officer Ricky Luke (Assistant Attorney with the Mississippi Attorney General’s Office and the Hearing Officer appointed by the Commission in this matter) presented his Findings and Recommendation for the Commission’s consideration. The Commission approved Hearing Officer’s recommendation that the oil company (“Defendants”) Motion to Lift Stay and Motion to Dismiss be granted.
A Motion to Lift Stay and Motion to Dismiss were filed by the oil company defendants in the referenced matter. Stephanie Howard, (“Petitioner”) owns property in Wayne County that she claims is contaminated with naturally occurring radioactive material related to a previous truck washing operation conducted on the site by Davis Brothers. Petitioner claims that Davis Brothers contracted with the oil company defendants who contaminated the site. Petitioner filed the current administrative action seeking a Commission ruling that the defendants were responsible for clean-up of her property because the Circuit Court of Wayne County required Petitioner to exhaust her administrative remedies through the Commission before Petitioner would be allowed to pursue her suit for damages in Circuit Court against the oil company defendants. Petitioner had also filed a lawsuit in federal court for damages related to the alleged contamination.
Petitioner failed to disclose her ownership of the property and the federal and state lawsuits as assets as required in a bankruptcy proceeding she previously filed with the U.S. Bankruptcy Court. Because Petitioner failed to disclose the property and the lawsuits as assets of her bankruptcy estate, the Bankruptcy Court ruled Petitioner was judicially estopped from pursuing her claims related to the alleged contamination of her property including the administrative claim now pending before the Commission.
The Bankruptcy Court denied Petitioner’s request to stay its decision pending her appeal of the Court’s decision to the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Mississippi, Southern Division. The District Court affirmed the Bankruptcy Court’s decision and the Petitioner appealed that decision to the U.S. Court of Appeals, Fifth Circuit. Citing the Bankruptcy Court’s judicial estoppel finding, the U.S. District Court for the Southern District of Mississippi, Eastern Division, dismissed Petitioner’s separate federal lawsuit for damages with prejudice. Before the Bankruptcy Court entered its decision, Petitioner and the oil company defendants entered an Agreed Order with the Commission agreeing to stay this matter. (Agreed Order No. 6304 13, August 27, 2013).
The Commission had previously designated Assistant Attorney General Ricky Luke as a hearing officer in this matter. Mr. Luke conducted a hearing on the oil company defendants’ Motion to Lift Stay and Motion to Dismiss on December 9, 2015, and allowed extensive briefing on this matter. The Commission has previously been provided materials for review which included copies of the Commission Agreed Order to Stay, Motion to Lift, Motion to Dismiss, Response, Reply, the transcript for the hearing held before Hearing Officer Luke on December 9, 2015, other Briefing and the Hearing Officer’s Findings and Recommendation to the Commission.
CERTIFICATIONS APPROVED
Asbestos: 226 certifications
Lead Paint: 100 certifications
Underground Storage Tanks: 25 certifications
EMERGENCY CLEAN-UP EXPENSES APPROVED
Eleven (9) emergency clean-up expenditures occurred since the last report.
ADMINISTRATIVE ORDERS APPROVED
Seventeen (17) administrative orders were issued by the Executive Director and approved by the Commission since the last report. These include the following matters:
| Program Area | Number of Orders | Penalty Range |
| NPDES | 3 | $937.50 – $10,000 |
| Construction Stormwater | 2 | $15,150 – $20,162 |
| Solid Waste | 2 | $8,400 – $75,000 |
| Surface Mining | 1 | $5,000 |
| Industrial Stormwater | 1 | $17,500 |
| Brownfield Agreement | 2 | None |
| Wet Deck Log Spray General Permit | 1 | $15,000 |
| Illegal Dump | 1 | $28,000 |
The Commission approved an Order adopting proposed amendments to MDEQ’s regulations for Water Quality Criteria for Intrastate, Interstate and Coastal Waters.
The Commission an Order increasing the exam fee for the wastewater certification examination to $45.
Other Business: Gary Rikard, MDEQ Executive Director, announced that the Legislature retained funding for the agency at current levels.
The next Commission meeting is scheduled for May 26, 2016 at 9 am.
This Newsletter is a publication of the Environmental Department of the law firm of Brunini, Grantham, Grower & Hewes located in Jackson, Mississippi. This Newsletter is not designed or intended to provide legal or professional advice, as any such advice requires the consideration of the facts of the specific situation.
IRS Circular 230 Notice
To ensure compliance with requirements imposed by the IRS, we inform you that, unless specifically indicated otherwise, any tax advice contained in this communication (including any attachments) was not intended or written to be used, and cannot be used, for the purpose of (i) avoiding tax-related penalties under the Internal Revenue Code, or (ii) promoting, marketing, or recommending to another party any tax-related matter addressed herein.
Related Attorneys
Curt Hébert Named as Keynote Speaker for EPI’s 2016 Energy Policy Research Conference
On April 25, 2016 Energy Policy Institute announced that Curt Hébert would be their Keynote Speaker for the 2016 Energy Policy Research Conference to be held September 8-9, 2016 at La Fonda on the Plaza in Santa Fe, New Mexico. He will speak on cyber security and protecting the grid. For more information on the conference click here.
Related Attorneys
Mississippi Environmental Quality Permit Board Summary of Meeting Held April 12, 2016
Prepared By Brunini, Grantham, Grower & Hewes, PLLC
The Environmental Practice Group of the Brunini Law Firm publishes a summary of the proceedings of each monthly meeting of the Mississippi Environmental Quality Permit Board and of the Mississippi Commission on Environmental Quality. We strive to provide, in a succinct newsletter format, the key points addressed in each meeting that will be of interest to the regulated community in Mississippi.
If you have any questions concerning the content of a newsletter it would like further information about the matters addressed in a newsletter, please contact John Milner, the Brunini Firm Environmental Practice Group leader, at jmilner@brunini.com or (601) 960-6842.
Meeting Summary
The Mississippi Department of Environmental Quality Permit Board (Board) convened its regular monthly meeting at 9:00 a.m. on April 12, 2016 at the offices of the Mississippi Department of Environmental Quality in Jackson. Mr. David H. Snodgrass, RPG chaired the meeting. The Board approved minutes from the March Regular meeting along with non-controversial actions/certifications by the staff since the March meeting.
Following a prepared agenda, items considered were as follows:
OFFICE OF GEOLOGY
In accordance with MDEQ staff recommendations, the Board approved the following surface mining bond releases.
Surface Mining Bond Releases:
| Permittee | County | Permit | Staff Recommendation |
| Hammett Gravel Company, Inc. | Yazoo | P05-029A | Initial 10% release |
| Preston Dobbs Truck Service | Monroe | P02-049A | Initial 30% release |
| Hammett Gravel Company, Inc. | Yazoo | P93-076 | Initial 10% release |
| Hammett Gravel Company, Inc. | Yazoo | P01-027 | Initial 10% release |
| Hammett Gravel Company, Inc. | Yazoo | P02-048 | Initial 10% release |
Mississippi Lignite Mining Company
The Board approved a revision of a permit expansion for Mississippi Lignite Mining Company. The approved expansion will include mining in an additional area and a new freshwater diversion. MDEQ held a public meeting on February 10, 2016 and comments were received from the attendees. After the meeting, MDEQ received four letters raising concerns about the project. However, the permit applicant and MDEQ have resolved such concerns. Noting that the project application was complete and in accordance with all state and federal environmental regulations, MDEQ recommended issuance of the permit.
OFFICE OF POLLUTION CONTROL
Construction and Building Materials Branch
The Board approved a modification for B and B Concrete Company, Inc., Oxford division (MSG110081). This approval allowed a modification of the facility’s Ready Mix Concrete Permit and associated Storm Water Pollution Prevention Plan (“SWPPP”). MDEQ staff received two letters of objection from members of the public during the public notice period. The letters raised concerns about dust, noise, and stormwater runoff. After addressing these concerns, MDEQ staff noted that the applications for modification of the General Permit and SWPPP were complete and met all technical requirements for federal and state environmental regulations.
OTHER BUSINESS
The Board welcomed Julie McLemore of the MS Dept. of Agriculture and Commerce. Ms. McLemore will be replacing Jim Lipe. Mr. Roy Furrh, MDEQ Chief Counsel, stated that an evidentiary hearing for Star Landing Rubbish Site in DeSoto County has been requested by two individuals. The hearing has been scheduled for July 2, 2016.
The next Permit Board meeting will be held on May 10, 2016 at 9 a.m.
This Newsletter is a publication of the Environmental Department of the law firm of Brunini, Grantham, Grower & Hewes located in Jackson, Mississippi. This Newsletter is not designed or intended to provide legal or professional advice, as any such advice requires the consideration of the facts of the specific situation.
IRS Circular 230 Notice
To ensure compliance with requirements imposed by the IRS, we inform you that, unless specifically indicated otherwise, any tax advice contained in this communication (including any attachments) was not intended or written to be used, and cannot be used, for the purpose of (i) avoiding tax-related penalties under the Internal Revenue Code, or (ii) promoting, marketing, or recommending to another party any tax-related matter addressed herein.
Related Attorneys
Five Things I Learned at Disney World
Last week, during my kids’ spring break, we finally took our epic family trip to Disney World (yes, I am the tightwad father that refused to take them until they were old enough to remember it because I didn’t want to “waste” the trip). We did it right, too. Instead of fooling with airports and all the unnecessary convenience they bring, we drove the whole way, 20 hours round trip, Clark Griswold style. It is sufficient to say that between that and the lines at Disney, we all received adequate practice in the development of that most wonderful virtue of patience.
I didn’t just take the week off, though. From the moment we passed under those storied gates to the tortuous wait for the final monorail with 100,000 of my closest friends at 11:30 pm on our final night, I observed several interesting facts and trends that will be tremendously useful in providing advice to my banking clients. Below are five of those lessons that I thought may be worth your time to consider.
1. The Debit Card is Dead (or At Least Will Be Soon)
Nobody who is anybody at Disney pays for anything with a debit card. For those that are staying at the resort, stylish wrist bands are the preferred form of payment. These wrist bands, which apparently come in an array of colors and styles, store all kinds of information about the Disney patron they belong to. This includes payment information, which means that paying $50 for a $10 meal can be as easy as waiving your wrist in front of pay terminal, but it also includes your reservation to ride Space Mountain at 9:15 pm without having to wait in line for an hour and a half, as well as your ticket into the park. It is your all in one golden ticket for everything Disney (as well as Disney’s golden ticket to all of your valuable personal information and preferences).
Of course, my children had the Dad that decided to use points for a hotel stay “off resort” instead of springing for five nights at the Polynesian, so they did not get to sport one of these trendy “Magic Bands.” However, their prevalence could not be avoided, along with the obvious enthusiasm with which they were embraced. A few times I pulled out a debit card to pay for light sabers or food and the attendant looked at me like I had just pulled out a check book. Obviously, Disney is still an isolated environment and the infrastructure it has in place has not yet been replicated throughout our broader economy, but the outcome to me appears inevitable. As trusting as we now seem to be of technology and as much as we welcome its convenience, the days of the uni-purpose debit card that merely allows access to your checking account are numbered. The alternative form of payment device, whether it be a pretty wrist band or an iPhone, that not only allows access to your checking account but also stores all of your personal information so that retailers can cater to your every stored preference is fast approaching, whether the law is ready for it or not.
2. Branding Success Does Not Mean Branding Complacency
This was the first time I visited Disney World since I was twelve, and while I do not remember everything about that trip, I remember enough to recognize that this experience was very different. Unlike a quarter of a century ago, I did not spend my time waiting in line to see Mickey Mouse or Donald Duck; instead I waited an hour to see Chewbacca and Kylo Ren. Whereas my last trip I rode “Mr. Toad’s Wild Ride,” this time my eight year old made me ride Buzz Lightyear’s shooting gallery numerous times.
There is no question that Disney is the king of branding, which has helped them develop and maintain a tremendously loyal following that still brings untold millions to their parks every year in what can only be called an American cultural pilgrimage. Let’s be honest, no one above 25 goes to Disney World because it is “fun;” they go because it has become such a rite of passage for children that those who do not take their kids are subject to a visit from DHS for mistreating their offspring. It is that irresistible brand which lead me to spend St. Patrick ’s Day walking untold miles while being run over by numerous mothers wearing green and pushing strollers (one of which who wore a shirt that proudly said “I’ll Shamrock Your World”).
That being said, the brand Walt Disney made famous 80 years ago is not the same brand that continues to make $100 a head off of those obnoxious green crowds today. While you still see Mickey Mouse and Donald from time to time, you come in contact possibly more frequently with talking toys and Jedi Knights. Disney’s brand has evolved. Instead of resting on the laurels that brought them incredible success, they continue to look for ways to make their brand relevant to new generations, and it is working. If you doubt their success, just ask movie attendants about the costumed crowds they had to manage this past Christmas and the millions of dollars they paid to get a glimpse at an aging Harrison Ford. However, Disney has not forgotten its original charm, and it still uses that legacy brand as well, which was evidenced by the way my eight year old’s eyes lit up both times he rode “It’s a Small World.” Their ability to improve a brand without destroying it is one to be envied and modeled.
3. Expectation and Perception are the Keys to Customer Service
While Disney’s branding is second to none, its crowd management is still a work in progress. Waiting an hour and a half for a minute and a half ride can really take it out of you. However, I noticed that my level of patience varied dramatically depending on how long they estimated the wait to be. When the estimated waiting time for the “standby” entrance to a ride was 90 minutes, I was thrilled when I only had to wait 60; however, when another ride estimated a waiting time of 35 minutes, I was fighting mad when that same 60 minute wait became a reality. I have always heard that you should under-promise and over-deliver when it comes to customer service and not the other way around. Disney is a very tangible expression of that truism.
In order to better manage crowds, Disney has developed something called the “Fastpass” which allows patrons to reserve preferred treatment in waiting lines for three separate rides at one park each day. The rules for the application of the concept are somewhat cumbersome and confusing, but the idea makes sense: spread out crowds at different times during the day in order to shorten wait times for everyone. The biggest problem is that everyone usually wants to ride the same three rides, so the bums who did not get their “Fastpass” reserved in time have to sit in line and watch the chosen ones pass easily to the front of the line. In theory, we all had the same opportunity to secure those reservations, but that didn’t help my feelings a bit when my child had been hanging on me and whining for the last 45 minutes and I had to watch a 19 year old and his girlfriend walk by me just by waiving their pretty wrist bands in front of a terminal until the Mickey Mouse outline turned green. Therefore, my suggestion for Disney, or any other customer service representative, is this: always over-estimate the amount of time that I am going to have to wait for your service, and if someone is jumping ahead of me, you had better not let me know about it, even if I had the same chance earlier and chose not to take it.
4. Sometimes You Just Have to Start Over
As Daddy’s reward for waiting in those long lines, we also decided to take in some Spring Training baseball while we were there. For those of you who don’t know, the Atlanta Braves Spring Training home is at Disney World, and this provided a much needed reprieve from the exhausting hustle and bustle of the Magic Kingdom. I and my youngest son are Braves fans, and we had an opportunity to watch them tie (unfortunately no free baseball in Spring Training) my oldest son’s favorite team, the St. Louis Cardinals. Incidentally, my oldest son was raised a Braves fan but unfortunately jumped ship (somewhat understandably) when the Braves decided to trade or run off every player he had ever known. He instead decided to proudly wear Cardinal colors and bask in the glory of 100 wins instead of hide from the shame of 95 losses.
However, while I constantly had my nose in the program looking up names of Braves players I have never heard of, I did notice that there was a lot of good, young talent on the field wearing navy blue. Not only that, but there seemed to be an energy and enthusiasm generated from so many optimistic minor leaguers looking for a job that you couldn’t help but feel that better days are ahead for the Braves. If you have followed the Braves like I have, you know that they spent at least a decade just above mediocrity holding onto the idea that what they had been doing for several years would ultimately bring them back to where they were in the 90s. To their credit, their management finally said enough, and they have decided to blow up a moderately successful model in hopes of achieving even greater success with unproven but incredibly talented prospects. Their ultimate destination is still unknown, but I don’t think there is any doubt that this was probably their only chance to again build lasting success. Baseball teams are no different from any other organization, including banks. Those who are happy with mediocrity can plod along with an outdated model, but to truly reach new heights in a changing environment, sometimes it is necessary to start all over.
5. We Must Continue to Dream
The dramatic success of Disney and everything it stands for is not an accident. It is directly related to the vision of its amazing creator, Walt Disney, who foresaw much more than a mouse on a piece of paper when he began the organization that has now become a cultural phenomenon, much less an American corporate giant. That vision lead to a corporate culture that fostered dreaming and dreamers and pushed the company to greater heights than its creator could have even imagined. Had Walt Disney, or his corporate heirs, ever allowed themselves to be motivated only by short time pursuits or quarterly earnings goals, the company would have never become what it is today. Dreamers may not be profitable every quarter, but their potential for greatness is much higher than pragmatists. Obviously both are needed, but they must balance each other, and one cannot be allowed to push the other to the side.
One aspect of Disney World that made an impression on me as a kid was the optimistic focus on the future and the possibilities it could bring. From Spaceship Earth at Epcot to Tomorrowland in the Magic Kingdom, my twelve year old sensibilities were fascinated by not only the amazing future the park imagined, but just how inevitable that future seemed to be. Maybe it was a difference in age and perspective, or the fact that my first visit was in the eternally optimistic 1980s while my most recent visit was during a much more pessimistic period of time, but for some reason, when I visited the park last week, those exciting views into the future seemed to be a retrospective window into past dreams rather than a thrilling prediction of future progress. It made me sad to feel that we, our companies and much worse our country, are losing the capacity to dream. When I was a kid, I spoke of becoming an astronaut often, but I rarely hear space discussed in my house these days unless it is in the context of “a long time ago in a galaxy far, far away.” Heck, our country doesn’t even have a space program anymore. I know that dreams and imagination are difficult to nurture in this age of Great Recessions / Terrorism / unbearable regulation / (insert current fear hear), but we can never allow our urge to defend against our worst fears impair our courage to pursue our wildest dreams. To do so would lead our lives, our families, our country, and our world to a fate worse than death.
Mississippi Environmental Quality Permit Board Summary of Meeting Held March 8, 2016
Prepared By Brunini, Grantham, Grower & Hewes, PLLC
The Environmental Practice Group of the Brunini Law Firm publishes a summary of the proceedings of each monthly meeting of the Mississippi Environmental Quality Permit Board and of the Mississippi Commission on Environmental Quality. We strive to provide, in a succinct newsletter format, the key points addressed in each meeting that will be of interest to the regulated community in Mississippi.
If you have any questions concerning the content of a newsletter it would like further information about the matters addressed in a newsletter, please contact John Milner, the Brunini Firm Environmental Practice Group leader, at jmilner@brunini.com or (601) 960-6842.
Meeting Summary
The Mississippi Department of Environmental Quality Permit Board (Board) convened its regular monthly meeting at 9:00 a.m. on March 8, 2016 at the offices of the Mississippi Department of Environmental Quality in Jackson. Mr. David H. Snodgrass, RPG chaired the meeting. The Board approved minutes from the February Regular meeting along with non-controversial actions/certifications by the staff since the February meeting.
Following a prepared agenda, items considered were as follows:
OFFICE OF GEOLOGY
In accordance with MDEQ staff recommendations, the Board approved the following surface mining bond releases.
Surface Mining Bond Releases:
| Permittee | County | Permit | Staff Recommendation |
| Columbus Brick Company | Clay | P94-095 | Initial 60% Release |
| Columbus Brick Company | Clay | P84-005 | Initial 82% Release |
| Talbot Bros. Const. Co. and Talbot Bros. Grading Co. | Grenada | P12-007 | Initial 60% Release |
Surface Mining Permits to Transfer:
| Permittee | County | Permit | Staff Recommendation |
| Kyle M. Mallette (Ms. Haidee Oppie Sheffield, Administrator of Estate) transfer to Jackie L. Richards, Jr. | Jackson | P98-057A | Approved |
| Buford Partners, L.P. transfer to Mississippi Sand Solutions, LLC | Warren | P80-005T2 | Approved |
Surface Mining Permit:
James Matheny, with the Office of Geology presented the Surface Mining Permit Application of Lee Allen and Associates, LLC (Hinds County, Permit Number A1929) to the Permit Board. The Application is a modification/expansion of a previously-exempt 4 acre surface mine and proposes to open pit mine 50 acres to a total depth of 10 feet for borrow material. There were two Visitors from the Presidential Hills Subdivision who spoke in opposition.
Board members posed questions on several potential issues including (but not limited to):
- Zoning;
- Stormwater Permit;
- Buffer Zone;
- Notification of adjoining property owners as well as State and Federal Agencies;
- Environmental Justice;
- Increased drainage into the Bogue Chitto Creek, and
- Reclamation Plan
The Board approved a motion to continue the matter until the Applicant submits documentation from the City of Jackson that the subject property is properly zoned for a surface mine and also submits a more detailed engineering analysis as to the runoff rates, stormwater control and flooding issues.
OTHER BUSINESS
Mr. Roy Furrh, MDEQ Legal Counsel stated that the Star Landing Rubbish Site matter (DeSoto County) will be scheduled for the May 10th or June 14th meeting. He also reminded the Board to file their Statements of Economic Interest.
The next Permit Board meeting will be held on April, 2016 at 9 a.m.
This Newsletter is a publication of the Environmental Department of the law firm of Brunini, Grantham, Grower & Hewes located in Jackson, Mississippi. This Newsletter is not designed or intended to provide legal or professional advice, as any such advice requires the consideration of the facts of the specific situation.
IRS Circular 230 Notice
To ensure compliance with requirements imposed by the IRS, we inform you that, unless specifically indicated otherwise, any tax advice contained in this communication (including any attachments) was not intended or written to be used, and cannot be used, for the purpose of (i) avoiding tax-related penalties under the Internal Revenue Code, or (ii) promoting, marketing, or recommending to another party any tax-related matter addressed herein.
Related Attorneys
U.S. EEOC Alters Key Investigation Procedures
Since the beginning of 2016, the U.S. Equal Employment Opportunity Commission (EEOC) has made several key changes to its standard operating procedures concerning the handling and investigation of charges of discrimination. The result of these changes continues the recent trend of bolstering legal protections provided to employees by the EEOC.
Proposed Changes to Enforcement Guidance on Retaliation
At the end of January 2016, the EEOC issued a 76-page proposed update to its retaliation enforcement guidance—a document that hasn’t been updated since 1998. The enforcement guidance serves as the EEOC’s interpretation of federal employment laws (Title VII, ADA, ADEA, GINA) based on court rulings. Most notable among the 76-page update is the EEOC’s expansion of what activity it feels deserves protection from retaliation.
For example, the proposed guidance enhances the EEOC’s interpretation of retaliatory “causation”—that is, the requisite connection between a “protected activity,” such as reporting discrimination or sexual harassment, and an adverse employment action, such as termination. Part of the expansion focuses on the ruling from one appellate court, which held that a charging party can discredit the employer’s explanation and demonstrate a causal connection by offering a “convincing mosaic of circumstantial evidence that would support the inference of retaliatory animus.” Many scholars agree that, for employers, this is too broad of an interpretation.
Currently, the EEOC is still seeking public comment on the proposed guidance. And, even if adopted, the guidance is just that—it does not carry the weight of a statute or an administrative decision. However, employers should be aware that the EEOC’s enforcement guidance remains a powerful tool, as it serves as a key reference for EEOC investigators during the investigation stage. As such, many employers rely on the guidance in evaluating personnel decisions.
Charging Party Access to Employer Position Statements
In February 2016, the EEOC announced new procedures for its investigation of EEOC charges. Under these new procedures, a Charging Party can obtain a responding employer’s position statement from the EEOC upon request, and then file his/her own response to that position statement within 20 days. The new procedures apply to position statements requested by the EEOC on or after January 1, 2016.
This marks an important change in the process by which charges of discrimination are handled at the EEOC. Previously, a charging party was not entitled to obtain an employer’s position statement until after the EEOC closed its investigation. Even then, the charging party could only obtain the position statement through an official Freedom of Information Act (FOIA) request. Additionally, the charging party did not have an opportunity to review and/or respond to a position statement during the course of the agency’s investigation.
The EEOC feels this new procedure “significantly improves” its investigative process, by facilitating a meaningful exchange of information and allowing investigators to consider responses.
Going forward, a typical EEOC investigation process proceeds as follows: First, the charging party files a charge of discrimination with the EEOC. The charge is then assigned to the EEOC’s Mediation Unit, which notifies each party of the opportunity to participate in its voluntary mediation program. If both parties agree, mediation is scheduled with an EEOC Mediator. If one or both parties do not agree to mediation—or mediation fails to resolve the issue—the charge is transferred to the EEOC’s Investigative Unit. At that point, the employer is required to submit a written position statement to the EEOC within 30 days (although extensions of time are common).
With the new procedure in place, after the respondent submits its position statement, the charging party may request the position statement from the EEOC Investigator, who will provide the position statement (and all non-confidential attachments) to the charging party. Then the charging party may submit a response to the position statement to the EEOC within 20 days. The charging party is not required to provide his or her response to the respondent; and the respondent may not obtain the charging party’s response from the EEOC.
These changes to the EEOC’s internal handling signal an increased effort on behalf of the agency to provide employees with a strong shield in interactions with their employers. In turn, employers are advised to become more diligent in dealing with personnel issues—especially those that raise the specter of potential EEOC involvement.
This Newsletter is a publication of the law firm of Brunini, Grantham, Grower & Hewes located in Jackson, Mississippi. This Newsletter is not designed or intended to provide legal or professional advice, as any such advice requires the consideration of the facts of the specific situation.
IRS Circular 230 Notice
To ensure compliance with requirements imposed by the IRS, we inform you that, unless specifically indicated otherwise, any tax advice contained in this communication (including any attachments) was not intended or written to be used, and cannot be used, for the purpose of (i) avoiding tax-related penalties under the Internal Revenue Code, or (ii) promoting, marketing, or recommending to another party any tax-related matter addressed herein.