LexisNexis® Legal Newsroom
Sorry, but there are no more tags available to filter with.
Massachusetts v. EPA, 2007 U.S. LEXIS 3785

EPA erroneously declined to regulate motor vehicle emissions of greenhouse gases which allegedly contributed to global warming, since the Clean Air Act authorized EPA to regulate such gases and executive policy addressing global warming was irrelevant to EPA's statutory mandate to determine whether...

Nat'l Ass'n of Home Builders v. U. S. Army Corps of Eng'rs, 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 6366

The plaintiffs' motion for summary judgment was granted after plaintiffs challenged a regulation jointly issued by the Army Corps of Engineers and the Environmental Protection Agency that governed when the use of "mechanized earth-moving equipment" resulted in the discharge of "dredged...

Green Mt. Chrysler Plymouth Dodge Jeep v. Crombie, 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 67617

Vermont regulations establishing greenhouse gas emission standards for automobiles were not preempted by Energy Policy and Conservation Act (EPCA) because 49 U.S.C.S. § 32919(a) did not expressly preempt regulations and automobile manufacturers did not show that compliance was not feasible or that...

San Francisco Baykeeper v. Cargill Salt Division, 2007 U.S. App. LEXIS 5442

Because mere adjacency provided a basis for Clean Water Act coverage only when the relevant waterbody was a wetland, and no other reason for CWA coverage of the pond was supported by evidence or was properly before the appellate court, the appellate court it reversed the district court's summary...

Environmental Defense v. Duke Energy Corp., 2007 U.S. LEXIS 3784

Construing the Clean Air Act's Prevention of Significant Deterioration regulations on "modification" as tracking the New Source Performance Standards definition implicitly invalidated those regulations, thus 42 U.S.C.S. § 7607(b)'s judicial review limits had to be considered on...

Cooper Industries, Inc. v. Aviall Services, Inc., 2004 U.S. LEXIS 8271

Property purchaser could not obtain CERCLA contribution from seller following voluntary cleanup of contaminated site because purchaser had not been sued under CERCLA; contribution could only be sought "during or following" specified civil actions. Lexis.com subscribers can view the enhanced...

United Haulers Ass'n v. Oneida-Herkimer Solid Waste Mgmt. Auth., 2007 U.S. LEXIS 4746

Counties' flow control ordinances, which required delivery of all solid waste to processing facilities operated by a public entity, did not violate the Commerce Clause, U.S. Const. art. I, § 8, cl. 3; the ordinances did not discriminate against interstate commerce, as they benefitted a public...

Rapanos v. United States, 2006 U.S. LEXIS 4887

Decisions upholding Army Corps of Engineers' Clean Water Act jurisdiction over dredging and filling wetlands with hydrological connections to adjacent navigable waters were vacated and remanded, as "the waters of the United States" included only relatively permanent, standing or continuously...

National Ass'n of Home Builders v. Defenders of Wildlife, 2007 U.S. LEXIS 8312

The ESA requirement to insure no jeopardy to endangered species did not apply to the EPA's approval of a transfer to a state of water quality permitting authority under the CWA, since the no-jeopardy duty only applied to discretionary actions and approval of the permitting transfer was mandatory...

S. D. Warren Co. v. Maine Bd. of Envtl. Protection, 2006 U.S. LEXIS 3955

Construing "discharge" in accordance with its ordinary or natural meaning, a processing plant owner's operation of a dam to produce hydroelectricity could result in any discharge into navigable waters, and thus, the owner was required to obtain a state certification under § 401 of...

Southeast Alaska Conservation Council v. United States Army Corps of Eng'rs, 2007 U.S. App. LEXIS 11968

Permit was vacated because Army Corps of Engineers violated CWA by issuing a permit for discharges of slurry from the froth-flotation mill at a gold mine because EPA's performance standard for froth-flotation mills, promulgated pursuant to § 301 and § 306 of the CWA, prohibited discharges...

Pac. Merch. Shipping Ass'n v. Goldstene, 2008 U.S. App. LEXIS 4171

Section 209(e)(2) of the Clean Air Act, 42 U.S.C.S. § 7543(e)(2), preempted the Marine Vessel Rules and required California to obtain EPA authorization prior to enforcement because the Rules were emissions standards that required that engines not emit more than a certain amount of a given pollutant...

RSR Corp. v. Commercial Metals Co., 2007 U.S. App. LEXIS 16991

District court properly dismissed potentially responsible party (PRP) corporation's 42 U.S.C.S. § 9613(f) contribution action against another corporation; PRP filed action more than three years after signing consent decree with U.S. to pay for remediation and thus action was filed outside CERCLA's...

Center for Bio Div v. Nat'l Hwy Traffic Safety Admin., 2007 U.S. App. LEXIS 26555

National Highway Traffic Safety Administration, on petition of states, D.C., City of New York, and organizations, was required to set new standards because light truck corporate average fuel economy standards did not monetize value of carbon emissions reduction, were arbitrary and capricious, and violated...

California v. General Motors Corp., 2007 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 68547

The Court granted defendants motion dismissing both causes of action: (1) public nuisance under federal common law; and, alternatively, (2) public nuisance under California Law, California Civil Code § 3479, et seq. and California Civil Code § 731. Lexis.com subscribers can view the enhanced...

United States v. Atlantic Research Corp., 2007 U.S. LEXIS 7718

Lessee that performed work for the federal government at a Department of Defense facility could bring an action under 42 U.S.C.S. § 9607(a) of CERCLA to recover costs of cleaning up contamination at the site; any private party, including a potentially responsible party, could bring a cost recovery...

Pac. Coast Fed'n of Fishermen's Ass'ns v. Gutierrez, 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 98611

A Biological Opinion issued by the National Marine Fisheries Service on the effect of the Central Valley Project and California State Water Project operations on salmonid species was remanded because it was arbitrary and capricious since it was incomplete and unlawfully silent on critical habitat effects...

North Carolina v. EPA, 2008 U.S. App. LEXIS 14733

An EPA rule allowing states to trade emission budgets, allowing them to emit more or less pollution than their caps would otherwise permit, violated 42 U.S.C.S. § 7410(a)(2)(D)(i)(I)'s requirement that each state's contributions to downwind nonattainment areas mattered; the rule was vacated...

American Petroleum Institute v. Johnson, 2008 U.S. Dist. LEXIS 24963

EPA violated the APA by failing to provide a sufficiently clear, cogent and reasoned explanation for its decision to promulgate a new broad definition of "navigable waters” under the Clean Water Act, 33 U.S.C.S. § 1251 et seq., and offering no indication of which cases it relied on or...

Entergy Corp. v. Riverkeeper, Inc., 2009 U.S. LEXIS 2498

Appellate court erred setting aside regulations adopted by EPA under 33 U.S.C.S. § 1326(b) of CWA; EPA permissibly relied on cost-benefit analysis in setting national performance standards and providing for cost-benefit variances under 40 C.F.R. § 125.94 in relation to minimizing adverse environmental...

Burlington Northern & Santa Fe Ry. v. United States, 2009 U.S. LEXIS 3306

Supplier of pesticides to a distributor and an owner of property which was a portion of a site contaminated by hazardous substances were not jointly and severally liable for remediation costs under CERCLA, since the supplier did not intentionally arrange for disposal of hazardous substances and the owner's...

Coeur Alaska, Inc. v. Southeast Alaska Conservation Council, 2009 U.S. LEXIS 4730

Court of appeals erred when it found that permit Army Corps of Engineers issued to a mining company, which allowed the company to discharge a rock and water mixture into a lake, was invalid because the permit violated standards EPA promulgated under 33 U.S.C.S. § 1316(b). The Corps acted lawfully...