Search Results
Use the filters on the left-hand side of this screen to refine the results further by topic or document type.

United States v. Deaton

The court holds that developers' sidecasting of dredged spoil in a jurisdictional wetland constitutes the discharge of a pollutant under the Clean Water Act (CWA). The court first holds that the deposit of dredged or excavated material from a wetland back into the same wetland constitutes the discha...

Niagara Mohawk Power Corp. v. Consolidated Rail Corp.

The court holds that a railroad's motion to dismiss a power company's Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) cost recovery action against it for lack of subject matter jurisdiction must be denied. The court first holds that the power company's allegation as co...

Shawnee Trail Conservancy v. Department of Agric.

The court upholds a district court dismissal for lack of subject matter jurisdiction of recreational groups' claims that the U.S. Forest Service violated the U.S. Constitution and the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) when it designated certain areas of the Shawnee National Forest as Research Natur...

Arkema, Inc. v. EPA

The D.C. Circuit remanded an EPA rule that retroactively altered allowances for controlling the production, import, and export of hydrochlorofluorocarbons that had been allowed under prior regulations. A 2003 rule allowed both inter-pollutant and intercompany transfers of allowances, but in the 2010...

Sierra Club. v. Duke Energy Ind., Inc.

A district court held that an environmental group's claims against an electric company for violating PSD requirements before making major modifications to one of its plants are time barred, but it stayed final entry of the judgment pending the ruling of the Seventh Circuit in a similar case. PSD obl...

Sierra Club v. EPA

The court holds that a U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) regulation that creates a 12-month grace period exempting transportation projects in nonattainment and maintenance areas from Clean Air Act (CAA) §176(c) is contrary to the plain meaning of the CAA. The court first holds that an envi...

Southwestern Pa. Growth Alliance v. Browner

The court affirms the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA's) decision to redesignate the Cleveland-Akron-Lorain, Ohio, area as a Clean Air Act (CAA) attainment area for ozone. The court first holds that an organization of manufacturers and local governments from the Pittsburgh-Beaver Valley,...

Natural Resources Defense Council v. EPA

The court holds that the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA's) adoption of a rule requiring compliance assurance monitoring (CAM) of major emission sources complies with the Clean Air Act (CAA) §114(a)(3)'s enhanced monitoring requirements. The court first holds that EPA's adoption of CAM ...

Clean Air Mkts. Group v. Pataki

The court holds that the New York Air Pollution Mitigation Law is preempted by the Clean Air Act (CAA) and violates the U.S. Commerce Clause. Under Air Pollution Mitigation Law §66-k, an electric generator is assessed an offset penalty when it sells a sulfur dioxide (SO2) allowance to a generator i...

United States v. Duke Energy Corp.

The court affirmed a lower court's grant of summary judgment in favor of a power company charged with modifying its power plants without first obtaining permits in violation of the Clean Air Act's (CAA's) prevention of significant deterioration (PSD) provisions. The company updated its coal-fired ge...