Cluster 509499
green
· 47 citation events
across 10 courts.
Showing the 9 strongest citers on record
(one row per citing case, strongest signal kept).
green
Living Lands, LLC v. Cline (2023)
Fund, 852 F.2d at 1316 (“At this point, we do not find that EPA has taken unreasonable action in its determination to regulate extraction and beneficiation wastes under Subtitle D.”); Friends of Santa Fe v. LAC Minerals, Inc., 892 F. Supp. 1333, 1342 (D.N.M. 1995) (“The 1986 regulation is clear: mining overburden . . . is exempt from subtitle C regulation.”).
“At this point, we do not find that EPA has taken unreasonable action in its determination to regulate extraction and beneficiation wastes under Subtitle D.”
green
AES Puerto Rico, L.P. v. Trujillo-Panisse (2015)
Fund, 852 F.2d at 1310-13.
green
Appalachian Voices v. McCarthy (2013)
Fund, 852 F.2d at 1310, as determined using the Toxicity Characteristic Leaching Procedure (“Leaching Procedure”) set forth in EPA Publication SW-846, 40 C.F.R. § 261.24 .
green
West Virginia Highlands Conservancy v. Johnson (2008)
Fund, 852 F.2d at 1311.
EDF I, 852 F.2d at 1310. *441 RCRA itself does not include a list of hazardous wastes nor a specific method for determining whether a waste is hazardous.
green
United States v. Iron Mountain Mines, Inc. (1993)
In a 1986 regulation, EPA exempted extraction and beneficiation wastes from RCRA. 51 Fed.Reg. 24, 496 (1986); also see Environmental Defense Fund v. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency [sic], 852 F.2d 1309, 1312 (D.C.Cir.1988), ce rt. denied, 489 U.S. 1011 , 109 S.Ct. 1120 , 103 L.Ed.2d 183 (1989).
green
Black Warrior River-Keeper, Inc. v. Drummond Co. (2019)
See Environmental Defense Fund v. U.S.E.P.A. , 852 F.2d 1309 , 1313 (D.C.
finding that the EPA's decision to regulate mining wastes under subtitle D rather than subtitle C was reasonable
green
American Iron and Steel Institute v. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, American Petroleum Institute, Edis… (1989)
See generally Environmental Defense Fund v. EPA, 852 F.2d at 1314-15; Environmental Defense Fund v. EPA, 852 F.2d 1316 , 1318-20 (D.C.
green
Solite Corporation v. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, and William K. Reilly, Administrator, Epa, the Al… (1992)
Compare EDF I, 852 F.2d 1309 (upholding Bevill status of all beneficiation wastes), with EDF II, 852 F.2d 1316 (EPA to determine which mineral processing wastes qualify for Bevill exclusion).