The court rules that the Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA's) failure to complete its review of Clean Air Act state implementation plan (SIP) revisions within the required four months does not bar it from enforcing an existing SIP during the interval between the end of the four-month period and...

The court holds that the Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA's) regulation defining an oil spill that may be harmful as that which creates a sheen is within the Agency's authority under §311(b)(3) of the Federal Water Pollution Control Act (FWPCA). Approximately five gallons of diesel fuel spill...

The court holds that the misrepresentation exception to the Federal Tort Claims Act (FTCA) bars a third-party action against the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) for any negligence in its analysis, testing, or approval of a city's wastewater treatment process. The city of Garland, Texas, had su...

The court holds that the Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA's) interpretation of the 1988 Ocean Dumping Ban Act equating ocean incineration with ocean dumping and its subsequent decision to suspend consideration of an ocean incineration permit was reasonable. The Ocean Dumping Ban Act, passed by...

The court holds that it has subject matter jurisdiction to review a Federal Water Pollution Control Act (FWPCA) citizen suit concerning illegal destruction of North Carolina wetlands because plaintiffs have clearly alleged continuing violations, the statute-of-limitations period would not begin to r...

The court holds that a state implementation plan (SIP) under the Clean Air Act is not as a matter of law superseded by a site-specific permit issued by the state, and SIP compliance is still required. The court first observes that the SIP provides that approval of a particular project does not relie...

The court holds that a municipality is not a "state" for purposes of recovering response costs under Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) §107(a)(4)(A). This subparagraph authorizes the federal government and states to recover their response costs, and plac...

The court holds that the trustees of a trust that had owned a company that generated hazardous waste found at a city landfill are not liable to the city for its response costs under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act. The city alleged that the trustees failed t...

The court holds that the district court lacked jurisdiction over a challenge to the closure of the South Atlantic King Mackerel fisheries. The South Atlantic Regional Council, pursuant to the Magnuson Fishery Conservation and Management Act, closed both the recreational and commercial fishing season...

The court rules that the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) does not provide a private cause of action for building renovators to recover from previous owners the cost of removing asbestos installed as part of the structure of a building. The court first h...