The court affirms a district court's denial of a waste hauling company's motion to enjoin a town from enforcing a local ordinance that provides for a municipal takeover of solid waste collection. The court first holds that the waste hauler is not likely to succeed on the merits of its claim that the...
The court holds that 15 of Washington State's 16 best achievable protection (BAP) oil spill prevention regulations are not preempted by federal law. The court first holds that the BAP regulations are not preempted by the Oil Pollution Act (OPA). OPA §1018 provides that nothing in the OPA preempts s...
The 1999 National Nuclear Security Administration Act (NNSA Act) threatens to reverse 20 years of reforms and court decisions intended to bring the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) into compliance with environmental laws and regulations. The NNSA Act, enacted in the wake of allegations of spying at Los Alamos nuclear weapons laboratory in New Mexico, established a semi-autonomous agency within DOE—the National Nuclear Security Administration (NNSA). The NNSA operates nine laboratories and facilities within the U.S. nuclear weapons complex.
Since the enactment of Superfund in 1980, critics of the statute's liability regime have been relentless in their attempts to convince courts that Superfund liability is so unfair as to be unconstitutional. While their persistence has produced only minor changes in the liability regime, their cause may have been given a lift by the U.S. Supreme Court's 1998 decision in Eastern Enterprises v. Apfel.
A judge dissents from the Ninth Circuit's decision not to rehear a case addressing the Oil Pollution Act's (OPA's) preemptive effect on Washington State's oil spill prevention regulations. The initial Ninth Circuit opinion held that the OPA did not preempt the majority of the state's oil spill regul...
The court holds that a district court erred in failing to abstain under Younger v. Harris, 401 U.S. 37 (1971), in a case challenging the constitutionality of an Oregon county's solid waste ordinance. A company charged with violating the ordinance sought declaratory and injunctive relief against enfo...
The court upholds a district court decision finding that an intermunicipal agreement between a town and several villages concerning the disposal of solid waste does not violate the dormant U.S. Commerce Clause. The agreement required each village to deliver all waste generated within its jurisdictio...
The court holds that a lower court improperly dismissed a laundry detergent manufacturer's claim that an exclusive franchise agreement between a county and a solid waste handler violated the dormant U.S. Commerce Clause. The agreement gave the waste handler the exclusive right to collect and process...
The court holds that a local utilities authority was not authorized under the New Jersey Municipal and Counties Utilities Authorities Law (MCUAL) to charge prior users of the authority's waste disposal facilities an environmental investment credit (EIC). The authority imposed the EIC in order to liq...
The court holds that a county in Missouri can regulate the location of solid waste facilities. A development company challenged a county regulation that prohibits the location of a sanitary landfill within one-quarter mile of any occupied dwelling. A trial court denied the company's motion for summa...