Tenth Circuit Upholds the EPA's Right to Overfile under RCRA

May, Margaret
November 2003
Ecology Law Quarterly;2003, Vol. 30 Issue 3, p777
Academic Journal
Examines the appeals court's decision on the case, United States v. Power Engineering Co., regarding the right of the Environmental Protection Agency to overfile under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act. Purpose of overfiling; Facts of the case; Overview of the decision.


Related Articles

  • Colorado District Court Strengthens EPA'S Enforcement Ability For Hazardous Waste Violations. Hughes, Kristi // Ecology Law Quarterly;2002, Vol. 29 Issue 2, p431 

    Discusses the court case U.S. versus Power Engineering Co. in which a Colorado district court granted a victory to the Environmental Protection Agency by establishing its right to overfile state enforcement actions initiated under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act. Background of the...

  • Court tells EPA to rewrite emissions rule. Toloken, Steve // Plastics News;6/28/2004, Vol. 16 Issue 17, p11 

    A federal court has tossed out part of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) emissions standards for PVC manufacturing plants, ruling that the agency failed to set limits for emissions of several hazardous air pollutants. The June 18 ruling from the U.S. Court of Appeals for the...

  • States sue EPA over carbon dioxide emissions. Arias, Donya C. // Nation's Health;Aug2003, Vol. 33 Issue 6, p10 

    Reports on the move of three New England states to sue the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) in June 2003 in an effort to force the government to regulate carbon dioxide emissions. Basis of the lawsuit; Dangers posed by global warming to the public; Provisions of the Clean Air Act.

  • regulatory.  // Chemical Week;12/10/2003, Vol. 165 Issue 44, p28 

    Presents news briefs on regulatory issues involving the chemical industry as of December 10, 2003. Decision of Russian diplomats not to agree with the ratification of the Kyoto Protocol on global warming; Plan of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency to consider a ruling that liver tumors...

  • Groups Sue to Overturn EPA Human Testing Rule. Sissell, Kara // Chemical Week;3/8/2006, Vol. 168 Issue 8, p28 

    This article reports on the lawsuit filed by a coalition of environmental and labor groups against the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency for its rule that establishes ethical guidelines for the agency's use of pesticide risk assessment data derived from tests on humans as of March 2006. The...

  • "A Breathtaking Assertion of Power"? Not Quite. Pronsolino v. Nastri and the Still Limited Role of Federal Regulation of Nonpoint Source Pollution. Garovoy, Jocelyn B. // Ecology Law Quarterly;2003, Vol. 30 Issue 3, p543 

    Explores the role of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency to regulate nonpoint source pollution in the case, Pronsolino v. Nastri. Legal background of the U.S. Clean Water Act and its relevance to the nonpoint source pollution; Facts of the case; Economic incentives of adopting solutions to...

  • Interpreting the Relevance of Economic Harm in the Clean Air Act: Tennessee Valley Authority v. Environmental Protection Agency. Riddle, Marnie // Ecology Law Quarterly;2003, Vol. 30 Issue 3, p617 

    Explores the relevance of economic harm in the U.S. Clean Air Act in the case, Tennessee Valley Authority v. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. History and purpose of the act; Facts of the case; Implications and analysis of the case.

  • D.C. Circuit Upholds Restrictions on Diesel Emissions. Starr, Jasmine // Ecology Law Quarterly;2003, Vol. 30 Issue 3, p787 

    Examines the decision of an appeals court in the case, National Petrochemical & Refiners Association v. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, uphelding restrictions on diesel emissions. Background on the 2007 Rule; Facts of the case; Benefits of the rule to engine manufacturers.

  • U.S. SUES COAL PLANTS OVER POLLUTION.  // Coal International;Jan/Feb2000, Vol. 248 Issue 1, p3 

    Discusses the lawsuit filed by the United States Environmental Protection Agency against seven power companies for its failure to reduce emissions from old coal-fired plants. Power companies included in the lawsuit; Potential civil fines of the companies; Overview of a clause in the Clean Air...


Read the Article


Sorry, but this item is not currently available from your library.

Try another library?
Sign out of this library

Other Topics