42 U.S.C. § 9617

Public participation

Read at: OLRCuscode.house.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov JustiaTitle 42 CasesGoogle Scholar

(a) Proposed planBefore adoption of any plan for remedial action to be undertaken by the President, by a State, or by any other person, under section 9604, 9606, 9620, or 9622 of this title, the President or State, as appropriate, shall take both of the following actions:(1) Publish a notice and brief analysis of the proposed plan and make such plan available to the public.(2) Provide a reasonable opportunity for submission of written and oral comments and an opportunity for a public meeting at or near the facility at issue regarding the proposed plan and regarding any proposed findings under section 9621(d)(4) of this title (relating to cleanup standards). The President or the State shall keep a transcript of the meeting and make such transcript available to the public.The notice and analysis published under paragraph (1) shall include sufficient information as may be necessary to provide a reasonable explanation of the proposed plan and alternative proposals considered.(b) Final plan

Notice of the final remedial action plan adopted shall be published and the plan shall be made available to the public before commencement of any remedial action. Such final plan shall be accompanied by a discussion of any significant changes (and the reasons for such changes) in the proposed plan and a response to each of the significant comments, criticisms, and new data submitted in written or oral presentations under subsection (a).

(c) Explanation of differencesAfter adoption of a final remedial action plan—(1) if any remedial action is taken,(2) if any enforcement action under section 9606 of this title is taken, or(3) if any settlement or consent decree under section 9606 of this title or section 9622 of this title is entered into,and if such action, settlement, or decree differs in any significant respects from the final plan, the President or the State shall publish an explanation of the significant differences and the reasons such changes were made.(d) Publication

For the purposes of this section, publication shall include, at a minimum, publication in a major local newspaper of general circulation. In addition, each item developed, received, published, or made available to the public under this section shall be available for public inspection and copying at or near the facility at issue.

(e) Grants for technical assistance(1) Authority

Subject to such amounts as are provided in appropriations Acts and in accordance with rules promulgated by the President, the President may make grants available to any group of individuals which may be affected by a release or threatened release at any facility which is listed on the National Priorities List under the National Contingency Plan. Such grants may be used to obtain technical assistance in interpreting information with regard to the nature of the hazard, remedial investigation and feasibility study, record of decision, remedial design, selection and construction of remedial action, operation and maintenance, or removal action at such facility.

(2) Amount

The amount of any grant under this subsection may not exceed $50,000 for a single grant recipient. The President may waive the $50,000 limitation in any case where such waiver is necessary to carry out the purposes of this subsection. Each grant recipient shall be required, as a condition of the grant, to contribute at least 20 percent of the total of costs of the technical assistance for which such grant is made. The President may waive the 20 percent contribution requirement if the grant recipient demonstrates financial need and such waiver is necessary to facilitate public participation in the selection of remedial action at the facility. Not more than one grant may be made under this subsection with respect to a single facility, but the grant may be renewed to facilitate public participation at all stages of remedial action.

(Pub. L. 96–510, title I, § 117, as added Pub. L. 99–499, title I, § 117, Oct. 17, 1986, 100 Stat. 1654.)

Notes of Decisions

Cited in 37 cases, 1987–2019 · leading case: State of California, on Behalf of the California Dep't of Toxic Substances Control v. Neville Chem. Co., a Corp., 358 F.3d 661 (9th Cir. 2004).

Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment

State of California, on Behalf of the California Dep't of Toxic Substances Control v. Neville Chem. Co., a Corp., 358 F.3d 661 (9th Cir. 2004). · cites it 3× “mandating a public notice and comment period and a public meeting regarding the proposed remedial action plan, 42 U.S.C. § 9617 (a)(1) & (2), the statute provides: “Notice of the final remedial action plan adopted shall be published and the plan shall be made available to the…”

United States of Am. v. Avx Corp., Nat'l Wildlife Fed'n, Intervenor, 962 F.2d 108 (1st Cir. 1992). · cites it 2× “42 U.S.C. § 9617 (a). As an adjunct to this theme, NWF also argues that by failing to promulgate a final cleanup plan before soliciting public comment on the proposed consent decree, the federal government has undermined the public’s statutory right to provide meaningful comment…”

Farmers Against Irresponsible Remediation (FAIR) Ex Rel. Hanehan v. United States Env't Prot. Agency, 165 F. Supp. 2d 253 (N.D.N.Y. 2001). · cites it 8× “*257 After issuing the Reassessment FS, the EPA immediately sought public commentary on it pursuant 42 U.S.C. § 9617 (a). For 120 days following the EPA’s issuance of the Reassessment FS, interested members of the public were invited to submit written comments 3 or attend one of…”

United States v. Akzo Coatings of Am., Inc., 949 F.2d 1409 (6th Cir. 1991). · cites it 5× “42 U.S.C. § 9617 . EPA then issues a Record of Decision (“ROD”) setting forth the remedy selected for the site, including remedial technologies and cleanup standards.”

Gencorp, Inc., Plaintiff-Appellant/cross-Appellee v. Olin Corp., Defendant-Appellee/cross-Appellant, 390 F.3d 433 (6th Cir. 2004). “2004) (emphasis added); see also 42 U.S.C. § 9617 (outlining procedures for proposing and adopting a final remedial action plan).”

Ashley II of Charleston, LLC v. Pcs Nitrogen, Inc., 791 F. Supp. 2d 431 (D.S.C. 2011). · cites it 2× “See 42 U.S.C. § 9617 . While EPA has not yet adopted a final remediation plan for the Site, EPA’s proposed remediation plan uses the residential standards for lead and arsenic as its remediation levels.”

State of New Mexico v. Gen. Elec., 467 F.3d 1223 (10th Cir. 2006). “See 42 U.S.C. § 9617 (addressing public participation in cleanup).”

United States v. Rohm & Haas Co., Inc., 669 F. Supp. 672 (D.N.J. 1987). · cites it 2× “” § 117(a)(2) of CERCLA, 42 U.S.C. § 9617 (a)(2), incorporated by reference in § 113(k)(2)(B)(iii) of CERCLA, 42 U.”

Alabama v. United States Env't Prot. Agency, 871 F.2d 1548 (11th Cir. 1989). · cites it 4× “Finally, all plaintiffs argue EPA failed to comply with the publication requirements of 42 U.S.C.A. § 9617 . Plaintiffs base jurisdiction on four separate provisions: 28 U.”

City of New York v. Exxon Corp., 697 F. Supp. 677 (S.D.N.Y. 1988). “§ 9613 (k) (EPA response actions must be based on an administrative record made available to the public at or near the facility at issue and remedial action plans must be developed with the participation of potentially affected persons); section 117, 42 U.S.C. § 9617…”

United States v. Davis, 31 F. Supp. 2d 45 (D.R.I. 1998). “The Plan was published and circulated for public comment pursuant to § 117 of CERCLA, 42 U.S.C. § 9617 . Later, it was modified by an Explanation of Significant Differences (“ESD”) and was issued in final form as a Record of Decision (“ROD”).”

Ambrogi v. Gould, Inc., 750 F. Supp. 1233 (M.D. Penn. 1991). “Moreover, under 42 U.S.C. § 9617 (e), CERCLA provides for funding to “facilitate” public participation in cleanup efforts.”

Show all 37 citing cases →

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.