Science and Technology of New York City

This paper does not list an author and does not contain a thesis because it discusses the background and outcome of a Supreme Court case. In the case, a business sues the EPA because a part of a company’s land was fenced off because contaminates from a nearby superfund site went to his area. In the end, the case was dismissed because the company waited too long to file a complaint.

Due to the large amount of quotes used in this paper, it is its greatest strength and it is also unbiased as events are reported and quoted as it happened. I felt that this source would at first have a lot of potential because it would have allowed the Supreme Court to judge the power of the EPA. However, the unfortunate part of the case was that it was dismissed because the company waited too long to do anything. Therefore what I thought was going to be a source that I could write about how the canal being a superfund site managed in part by the EPA would benefit the Gowanus, ended up being a source with little relevance to what I originally intended to write about. Nevertheless, this is still a source that I reviewed.

“U.S. Supreme Court Upholds Statute Of Limitations For Takings Claim Related To Superfund Site.” Hazardous Waste Consultant 26.2 (2008): 3.1-3.4. Business Source Complete. Web. 19 Oct. 2012.

http://ez-proxy.brooklyn.cuny.edu:2048/login?url=http://search.ebscohost.com/login.aspx?direct=true&db=bth&AN=31534990&site=ehost-live