40 C.F.R. § 24.09

Qualifications of Presiding Officer; ex parte discussion of the proceeding

Read at: eCFRecfr.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov CasesGoogle Scholar

The Presiding Officer shall be either the Regional Judicial Officer (as described in 40 CFR 22.04(b)) or another attorney employed by the Agency, who has had no prior connection with the case, including the performance of any investigative or prosecuting functions. At no time after issuance of the initial administrative order and prior to issuance of the final order shall the Regional Administrator, Presiding Officer, or any person who will advise these officials in the decision on the case, discuss ex parte the merits of the proceeding with any interested person outside the Agency, with any Agency staff member who performs a prosecutorial or investigative function in such proceeding or a factually related proceeding, or with any representative of such person. If, after issuance of the initial order and prior to issuance of the final order, the Regional Administrator, Presiding Officer, or any person who will advise these officials in the decision on the case receives from or on behalf of any party in an ex parte communication information which is relevant to the decision on the case and to which other parties have not had an opportunity to respond, a summary of such information shall be served on all other parties, who shall have an opportunity to reply to same within ten (10) days of service of the summary.

Notes of Decisions
Cited in 1 case, 1989–1989 · leading case: Chem. Waste Mgmt., Inc. & Waste Mgmt. of North Am., Inc. v. U.S. Env't Prot. Agency & Lee M. Thomas, Adm'r, 873 F.2d 1477 (D.C. Cir. 1989).
Chem. Waste Mgmt., Inc. & Waste Mgmt. of North Am., Inc. v. U.S. Env't Prot. Agency & Lee M. Thomas, Adm'r, 873 F.2d 1477 (D.C. Cir. 1989). · cites it 2× “” 40 C.F.R. §§ 24.09 & 24.13(a). With respect to both Subpart B and Subpart C proceedings, EPA, when issuing a corrective action order, shall deliver to the operator “all relevant doc *1480 uments and oral information (which has been reduced to writing), which the Agency…”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.