Court Of Appeals Of The District Of Columbia

• Morton L. Simons and Barbara M. Simons, Appellants, v. Edgar T. Bellinger, as Chairman of the Committee on Unauthorized Practice of Law of the District of Columbia Court of Appeals, Individually and in His Official Capacity, Et Al., 643 F.2d 774 (D.C. Cir. 1980)

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Columbia (D.C. Civil 75-1164). Morton L. Simons, Washington, D. C., with whom Barba...

• Federal Circuits

• Federal Plan Requirements for Hospital/Medical/Infectious Waste Incinerators Constructed on or Before December 1, 2008 and Standards of Performance for New Stationary Sources

On October 6, 2009, the EPA adopted amendments to the September 15, 1997, new source performance standards and emissions guidelines for hospital/medical/infectious waste incinerators. The amendments were developed in response to the March 2, 1999, remand of the 1997 hospital/medical/infectious waste incinerators regulations by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit (the Court), which requested further explanation of the EPA's reasoning in determining the minimum regulatory emission standards for new and existing hospital/medical/infectious waste incinerators. Today's action proposes amendments to the hospital/medical/infectious waste incinerators federal plan to implement the amended emission guidelines adopted on October 6, 2009, for those states that do not hav...

• Federal Register Nbr. 77 FR 24272, April 23, 2012
• Proposed rules
• Environmental Protection Agency

• Approval and Promulgation of Air Quality Implementation Plans; West Virginia; Regional Haze State Implementation Plan

EPA is finalizing the limited approval and limited disapproval of West Virginia's Regional Haze State Implementation Plan (SIP) revision. EPA is taking this action because West Virginia's SIP revision, as a whole, strengthens the West Virginia SIP. We are finalizing our limited disapproval of the same SIP revision arising from the remand by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia (DC Circuit) to EPA of the Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR). This action is being taken in accordance with the requirements of the Clean Air Act (CAA) and EPA's rules for states to prevent and remedy future and existing anthropogenic impairment of visibility in mandatory Class I areas through a regional haze program. EPA is also approving this revision as meeting the infrastructure requirements r...

• Federal Register Nbr. 77 FR 16937, March 23, 2012
• Rules and Regulations
• Environmental Protection Agency

• The Post-Ratification Consensus Agreements of the Parties to the Montreal Protocol: Law or Politics? An Analysis of Natural Resources Defense Council v. EPA

This Note addresses the legal status of the post-ratification consensus Decisions of the Parties to the Montreal Protocol. The discussion covers the background to the Montreal Protocol and the incorporation of the United States' treaty commitments under the Protocol in the Clean Air Act. It then examines the opinion of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit in Natural Resources Defense Council v. EPA, 464 F.3d 1 (2006), in which that court determined that the parties' consensus Decisions represent political commitments, not law cognizable in U.S. courts. This Note critiques the court's justifications for concluding that the Decisions are not law applicable in the courts. It then considers the negotiating records and examples of party practice on the int...

• Iowa Law Review
• Nbr. 93-2, February 2008

• Three's a Crowd: Why Mandating Union Representation at Mediation of Federal Employees' Discrimination Complaints Is Illegal and Contrary to Legislative Intent

The article focuses on the most recent, and most relevant, of the cases, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia's decision in Department of the Air Force, Dover Air Force Base v. Federal Labor Relations Authority.3 The courts, particularly the Dover AFB court, have made several errors which have forced government agencies to invite unions to participate in mediation of discrimination complaints brought by its bargaining unit members. The courts' errors include: deferring to the Federal Labor Relations Authority (FLRA)4 in its interpretation of a statutory process governed by the EEOC, failing to consider the text of the Civil Rights Act (Title VII)5 in its analysis of a process mandated by that Act, using a Labor statute to determine if a process created by Title VII is...

• Air Force Law Review, The
• Nbr. 62, January 2008

• Commercial and Industrial Solid Waste Incineration Units: Reconsideration and Proposed Amendments; Non-Hazardous Secondary Materials That Are Solid Waste

On March 21, 2011, the EPA promulgated its final response to the 2001 voluntary remand of the December 1, 2000, new source performance standards and emission guidelines for commercial and industrial solid waste incineration units and the vacatur and remand of several definitions by the District of Columbia Circuit Court of Appeals in 2007. Following that action, the Administrator received petition[s] for reconsideration as well as identified some issues that warrant further opportunity for public comment. In response to the petition[s], the EPA is reconsidering and requesting comment on several provisions of the final new source performance standards and emission guidelines for commercial and industrial solid waste incineration units. In addition, the EPA is proposing amendments to the ...

• Federal Register Nbr. 76 FR 80452, December 23, 2011
• Proposed rules
• Environmental Protection Agency

• John Doe, Esq. C/O His Counsel, Perito, Duerk, Carlson and Pinco, P.C., Appellant, v. Board on Professional Responsibility of the District of Columbia Court of Appeals, Et Al., 717 F.2d 1424 (D.C. Cir. 1983)

Appeal from the United States District Court for the District of Columbia (D.C.Civil Action No. 81-02683). Paul L. Perito, Glenn H. Carlson and Rober...

• Federal Circuits

• Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; Commonwealth of Kentucky; Regional Haze State Implementation Plan

EPA is finalizing a limited approval and a limited disapproval of two revisions to the Kentucky state implementation plan (SIP) submitted by the Commonwealth of Kentucky through the Kentucky Energy and Environment Cabinet, Division of Air Quality (KYDAQ), on June 25, 2008, and May 28, 2010. Kentucky's June 25, 2008, and May 28, 2010, SIP revisions address regional haze for the first implementation period. Specifically, these revisions address the requirements of the Clean Air Act (CAA or Act) and EPA's rules that require states to prevent any future and remedy any existing anthropogenic impairment of visibility in mandatory Class I areas (national parks and wilderness areas) caused by emissions of air pollutants from numerous sources located over a wide geographic area (also referred to...

...Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit (D...

• Federal Register Nbr. 77 FR 19098, March 30, 2012
• Rules and Regulations
• Environmental Protection Agency

• Irvin H. Mason, Phyllis H. Mason, and the Mason Engineering Company, Plaintiffs-Appellants, v. the Judges of the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit in Regular Active Service Acting in Their Official Capacities, and the United States, as Successor To the Panama Canal Company, Defendants-Appellees., 952 F.2d 423 (D.C. Cir. 1992)

On Motion for Summary Affirmance of Judgment of the United States District Court. Edward E. Wright, Washington, D.C., for plaintiffs-appellants. Jay ...

• Federal Circuits

• Approval and Promulgation of Implementation Plans; Tennessee; Regional Haze State Implementation Plan

EPA is finalizing a limited approval and a limited disapproval of a revision to the Tennessee State Implementation Plan (SIP) submitted by the State of Tennessee, through the Tennessee Department Environment and Conservation (TDEC), on April 4, 2008. EPA is taking final action on the entire SIP revision except for the Best Available Retrofit Technology (BART) determination for Eastman Chemical Company (Eastman). EPA is not taking any action on the Eastman BART determination at this time. Tennessee's April 4, 2008, SIP revision addresses regional haze for the first implementation period. Specifically, this SIP revision addresses the requirements of the Clean Air Act (CAA or Act) and EPA's rules that require states to prevent any future and remedy any existing anthropogenic impairment of ...

...Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit (D...

• Federal Register Nbr. 77 FR 24392, April 24, 2012
• Rules and Regulations
• Environmental Protection Agency