Pacificorp, D/B/A Pac. Power & Light Co. v. Lee Thomas, Adm'r, Epa, 883 F.2d 661 (9th Cir. 1988). · Go Syfert
Search
Pacificorp, D/B/A Pac. Power & Light Co. v. Lee Thomas, Adm'r, Epa, 883 F.2d 661 (9th Cir. 1988). Cases Citing This Book View Copy Cite
3 citation events across 3 distinct courts.
Strongest positive: Luminant Generation Co. v. United States Environmental Protection Agency (ca5, 2014-07-03)
Top citers, strongest first. 2 distinct citers. How cited ↗
cited Cited "see" Luminant Generation Co. v. United States Environmental Protection Agency
5th Cir. · 2014 · signal: see · confidence high
See Pacificorp v. Thomas, 883 F.2d 661, 661 (9th Cir.1988) (“Respondents' motion to dismiss is granted.
discussed Cited "see" Royster-Clark Agribusiness, Inc. v. Johnson
D.D.C. · 2005 · signal: see · confidence high
See Pacificorp v. Thomas, 883 F.2d 661, 661 (9th Cir.1988); West Penn Power Co. v. Train, 522 F.2d 302, 310-11 (3d Cir.1975); see also Union Elec., 593 F.2d at 304-06 (rejecting pre-enforcement review of CAA NOV); Lloyd A. Fry Roofing Co. v. EPA 554 F.2d 885, 890-91 (8th Cir.1977) (pre-enforcement review of NOV is “wholly inconsistent with the enforcement mechanism established by Congress.”). 6 As the Third Circuit explained, “the only effect of a notice of violation is to make the recipient aware that the ‘definitive’ regulations are not being met and to trigger the statutory mechan…
Retrieving the full opinion text from the archive…
Pacificorp, D/B/A Pacific Power & Light Company
v.
Lee Thomas, Administrator, Epa
88-7184.
Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit.
Sep 8, 1988.
883 F.2d 661
Published

883 F.2d 661

20 Envtl. L. Rep. 20,086

PACIFICORP, d/b/a Pacific Power & Light Company, Petitioner,
v.
Lee THOMAS, Administrator, EPA, et al., Respondents.

Nos. 88-7184, 88-7231.

United States Court of Appeals,
Ninth Circuit.

Submitted Sept. 6, 1988.
Decided Sept. 8, 1988.

Before BROWNING, WIGGINS, and LEAVY, Circuit Judges.

ORDER

1

Respondents' motion to dismiss is granted. An EPA notice of violation is not reviewable because it is not a final agency action. See 42 U.S.C. Sec. 7607(b)(1983); Union Electric Co. v. Environmental Protection Agency, 593 F.2d 299, 304-06 (8th Cir.1979); West Penn Power Co. v. Train, 522 F.2d 302, 310-11 (3d Cir.1975); see also Air California v. United States Department of Transportation, 654 F.2d 616, 620-21 (9th Cir.1981) (FAA letter warning of possible civil penalties not reviewable as non-final).