The court rules that a right to contribution exists under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) as a matter of federal common law. The court initially notes that while the language of CERCLA §107(a)(4)(B) authorizes a private right-of-action, this langua...

The court rules that third-party complaints for contribution under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) must allege that the third-party defendant disposed of waste at the site, that the waste contains hazardous substances within the meaning of CERCLA §...

The court holds that third-party complaints for contribution under the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) should not be dismissed for late joinder. The court first holds that the filing of the third-party complaints did not prejudice the plaintiff since th...

The court holds that the Cedar Hills county landfill in King County, Washington, is in violation of various Resources Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA) groundwater regulations. In this RCRA suit, the court holds that the landfill is not in violation of RCRA's groundwater regulations with respect ...

The court holds that an award of attorney fees and litigation costs to the citizens' group that prevailed on its underlying claims is appropriate under Resource Conservation and Recovery Act §7002(e). The court first holds that the prevailing party's attorney's time records are insufficiently detai...

The court holds that a supplemental award of costs and attorney fees for time spent preparing the application for reimbursement of the attorney fees and litigation costs of a prevailing citizen's group under Resource Conservation and Recovery Act §7002(e) is appropriate. The court first holds that ...

The court rules that general allegations of response costs are sufficient to state a claim under §107(a) of the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA), failure to plead consistency with the National Contingency Plan (NCP) is not relevant to whether a claim ex...

The court holds that the district court abused its discretion in conditioning its approval of a consent decree to allow a third party that had not asserted an independent claim to receive part of the settlement. The district court conditioned its approval of a consent decree settling an enforcement ...

The court rules that the Nuclear Regulatory Commission's (NRC's) denial of a motion to reopen licensing proceedings before the Atomic Safety and Licensing Appeal Board prior to the issuance or denial of an operating license is not a final order allowing judicial review under the Atomic Energy Act. P...

The court holds that the Nuclear Regulatory Commission's (NRC's) decision to authorize a nuclear power plant's full-power operation despite the pendency of two motions to reopen the administrative record did not violate either the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) or the Atomic Energy Act (AEA), an...