E2 Law Blog
NOVEMBER 8, 2021
After all, New York’s air permitting regime is based on health-based emissions standards derived from the federal Clean Air Act. The same goes for New York’s clean water regulations, which in some ways go beyond the dictates of the federal Clean Water Act. Envt’l Def. 3d 911 (Pa.
Law Columbia
OCTOBER 7, 2019
In addition, the court rejected the contention that the Clean Air Act or foreign affairs doctrine completely preempted the plaintiffs’ claims and also indicated that federal common law would not provide a basis for complete preemption. Department of Transportation, and NHTSA. The complaint alleged that the U.S.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Arnold Porter
AUGUST 26, 2021
In the first complaint, the Center alleged that a chemical manufacturer and importer headquartered in Akron, Ohio, had failed to report 843,047 pounds of tetrabromobisphenol A bis(2,3-dibromopropyl ether) and five other substances that it imported during the 2013–2015 reporting period. The House bill ( H.R. 31225 (June 11, 2021).]]
Columbia Climate Law
MAY 8, 2020
The court said that having remanded to the Corps for consultation under the Endangered Species Act, it was not necessary to determine whether the Corps “made a fully informed and well-considered decision” under NEPA and the Clean Water Act.
Law Columbia
NOVEMBER 7, 2017
Murray Energy Sought Supreme Court Review of Fourth Circuit’s Dismissal of Clean Air Act Jobs Study Case. Army Corps of Engineers had violated the Clean Water Act. Foster , No. 34-2016-CR-00187 (N.D. decision Sept. 29, 2017; verdict Oct. NEW CASES, MOTIONS, AND NOTICES. West Virginia v. 15-1363 (D.C.
Arnold Porter
JUNE 2, 2021
The bill would amend Section 4 of TSCA to require EPA to issue a testing rule for all PFAS that would require manufacturers and processors of PFAS to develop information “likely to be useful in evaluating the hazard and risk posed by such substances in land, air, and water (including drinking water), as well as in products.
Law Columbia
FEBRUARY 10, 2020
The Washington Supreme Court concluded that the Washington Clean Air Act did not grant the Department of Ecology authority to regulate indirect greenhouse gas emissions of businesses and utilities whose products ultimately generate such emissions. Trump , No. 4:19-cv-00028 (D.
Expert insights. Personalized for you.
52 
Let's personalize your content