The court holds that the Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA's) monitoring program for total trihalomethanes (TTHMs) meets the Safe Drinking Water Act's mandate to protect the public health. EPA requires only quarterly monitoring, and determines compliance with the maximum contaminant level (MCL)...

The court holds that the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act Authorizes the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) to conduct investigations to identify and assess releases and empowers it to enter sites to do the investigations. The court grants EPA's motion for an o...

The court holds that the three year statute of limitations in §112(d) of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) does not apply to CERCLA §107 cost recovery actions, which may be brought at any time. The court favors this construction for five reasons. Fi...

The court holds that, under §104 of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act and §3007 of the Resource, Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA), the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) was entitled to seek injunctive relief and civil penalties against defendant oper...

The court remands in part the Office of Surface Mining's revised Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act (SMCRA) regulations dealing with subsidence, prime farmland, roads, alluvial valley floors, stream buffer zones, excess spoil, performance bonds, backfilling and grading, topsoil, and fish and...

The court holds that the Office of Surface Mining promulgated parts of its regulations defining "valid existing rights" under the Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act (SMCRA) without sufficient notice and opportunity for comment as required by Administrative Procedure Act §553 and, alternativ...

The court holds that the Department of Agriculture's environmental impact statement (EIS) on the use of pesticidesto eradicate gypsy moths is inadequate because its worst-case analysis is so hypertechnical that it violates the Council on Environmental Quality (CEQ) regulation on EIS clarity. The cou...

Upon motion for rehearing after its April 16, 1985, opinion, 15 ELR 20499, the court holds that the environmental impact statement (EIS) clarity regulation is not trivial and applies to material in an EIS' appendix. The court first reaffirms its prior holding that the filing of the EIS was a final, ...

While rejecting other challenges to the Federal Energy Regulatory Commission's (FERC's) decision to grant a small-scale hydropower project an exemption from federal licensing procedures under the Energy Security Act of 1980, the court holds that FERC erred in preparing neither an environmental asses...

The court holds that the Corps of Engineers did not abuse its discretion in concluding that a temporary barge fleeting facility on the Illinois bank of the Mississippi River would not have a significant impact on the environment requiring preparation of an environmental impact statement (EIS). The c...