From: FindLaw Opinion Summaries - Environmental
(U.S. D.C. Cir., Administrative Law, Civil Procedure,
Constitutional Law, Environmental Law) In a petition for review of
certain EPA Clean Air Act regulations, the petition is dismissed
where National Mining Ass'n. v. U.S. Dept. of Interior, 70 F.3d
1345 (D.C. Cir. 1995), required the court to treat petitioner's
petition to the EPA as a challenge to the regulations it sought
revised, and judicial review of such a challenge was time-barred
under Clean Air Act section 307(b)(1).
Respond to this topic on your own blog
Click and press Ctrl+C to copy and paste this discussion on your blog or site
Related Articles
Commuter Rail Div. v. Surface Transp. Bd.
(U.S. D.C. Cir., Administrative Law, Civil Procedure, Construction,
Corporation & Enterprise Law, Environmental Law, M&A,
Transportation) In a petition for review of the Surface
Transportation Board's approval of the acquisition of certain
railroads by another railroad, the petition is denied where: 1) one
petitioner lacked standing because, if the board's decision were
overturned, the construction authorization would not be affected
and no new environmental impact statement would be required for the
area; and 2) the board did not abuse its discretion in approving
the transaction.
Commuter Rail Div. v. Surface Transp. Bd.
(U.S. D.C. Cir., Administrative Law, Civil Procedure, Construction,
Corporation & Enterprise Law, Environmental Law, M&A,
Transportation) In a petition for review of the Surface
Transportation Board's approval of the acquisition of certain
railroads by another railroad, the petition is denied where: 1) one
petitioner lacked standing because, if the board's decision were
overturned, the construction authorization would not be affected
and no new environmental impact statement would be required for the
area; and 2) the board did not abuse its discretion in approving
the transaction.
California Trout v. FERC
(U.S. 9th Cir., Administrative Law, Civil Procedure, Environmental
Law) In a petition for review of the Federal Energy Regulatory
Commission's denial of petitioner's motion to intervene in a
license renewal proceeding, the petition is denied where 16 U.S.C.
section 825g(a) allows the agency to differentiate among untimely
interveners and permits the Commission to summarily reject a
prospective intervener who cannot demonstrate "good cause" for its
untimely motion.
Hydro Resources, Inc. v. EPA
(U.S. 10th Cir., Administrative Law, Environmental Law, Indian Law,
Property Law & Real Estate) In a petition for review of the
EPA's "final land status determination" expressing its judgment
that petitioner's land qualified as "Indian land," the petition is
granted where the EPA's interpretation cannot be reconciled with
the Supreme Court's explanation of 18 U.S.C. section 1151(b)'s
plain meaning.
<...
Hydro Resources, Inc. v. EPA
(U.S. 10th Cir., Administrative Law, Environmental Law, Indian Law,
Property Law & Real Estate) In a petition for review of the
EPA's "final land status determination" expressing its judgment
that petitioner's land qualified as "Indian land," the petition is
granted where the EPA's interpretation cannot be reconciled with
the Supreme Court's explanation of 18 U.S.C. section 1151(b)'s
plain meaning.
<...