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

Carpenter Technology Corp. v. Bridgeport, City of

The court holds that a district court abused its discretion in denying a landowner's motion for a preliminary injunction to prevent the taking of its property by a local port authority. The district court denied the landowner's motion for a preliminary injunction because it failed to show a threat o...

Chenoweth v. Clinton

The court holds that congressional representatives lack standing to sue to enjoin implementation of the President's American Heritage Rivers Initiative, which was established by executive order. The representatives claim that by issuing the Executive Order, the president denied them their proper rol...

Boothbay, Town of v. Getty Oil Co.

The court holds that under Maine law, the doctrine of res judicata bars a town from suing a gasoline company for environmental damage affecting the town's water supply insofar as the state previously litigated and settled claims against the same company for the same environmental damage. The court f...

Florida Power & Light Co. v. United States

The court holds that the doctrine of res judicata does not bar nuclear utilities' claims that they were improperly charged by the U.S. Department of Energy (DOE) for decontamination and decommissioning costs in its contracts for enriched uranium during the time period after the Energy Policy Act ena...

Goldfine v. Kelly

The court dismisses as unripe a developer's civil rights action against a city, a state environmental protection agency, agency employees, and a citizen group that allegedly opposed the developer's construction of a residential subdivision within the city's watershed. The court first holds that the ...

Grand Council of the Crees v. Federal Energy Regulatory Comm'n

The court holds that a Native American council and an environmental group lack standing under the Federal Power Act (FPA) and the National Environmental Policy Act (NEPA) to challenge a Federal Energy Regulatory Commission (FERC) order authorizing a Canadian power generator to sell power in the Unit...

Cooley v. United States

The court holds that the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers' denial of landowners' Clean Water Act §404 permit application effected a permanent taking of their property in violation of the Fifth Amendment. The court first holds that the landowners' claim is ripe. Even if more information were offered by ...

Chemical Waste Management, Inc. v. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency: When Does a Waste Escape RCRA Subtitle C Regulation?

Congress enacted the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) in 1976, to regulate management of solid and hazardous waste. RCRA Subtitle C regulates hazardous waste management and Subtitle D governs nonhazardous, solid waste. In 1984, Congress passed the Hazardous and Solid Waste Amendments (HSWA), significantly amending and expanding RCRA Subtitle C. HSWA added to RCRA the Land Disposal Restriction (LDR) Program, or land ban, which bars land disposal of hazardous wastes that fail to meet U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA or the Agency)-promulgated treatment standards.

RCRA Subtitle I: The Federal Underground Storage Tank Program

Editors' Summary: Congress first addressed the problem of leaking underground storage tanks (USTs) in 1984, by enacting Subtitle I of RCRA. The UST regulatory program addresses, inter alia, corrosion protection, reporting, corrective action, and financial responsibility. In this Article, the author provides an overview of the federal UST program. The author outlines the program's significant elements and explores specific regulations in the context of the technical problems they are intended to address, giving particular attention to how, to what, and to whom the regulations apply.

Regulatory Framework for the Management and Remediation of Contaminated Marine Sediments

Editors' Summary: In 1989, a National Research Council study concluded that contaminated sediments are "widespread in U.S. coastal waters" and have "potentially far-reaching consequences to both public health and the environment." A 1996 interim EPA report reached a similar conclusion. This concern over contaminated sediments is not new. It has manifested itself in a dizzying array of statutory and regulatory restrictions on the disposal of these sediments.