Search the opinions of the US Circuit Courts of Appeal

were on the briefs.

Cynthia A. Ugol and Karl S.

Bourdeau were on the briefs.

Ellen J. Were on the brief.

Before: Ginsburg. The requirements for the report are rather

detailed. As to each facility at which the

chemicals are manufactured. As to each covered toxic chemical known to be present at

the facility:

(i) Whether the toxic chemical at the facility is manu

factured. ... there is sufficient evidence to establish any one

of the following

briefs were Harold P. With him on the briefs

was Steven J. With them on the brief was Cecilia Kim. With him on the brief were

Karen Florini. Circuit Judge: These are consolidated petitions

for judicial review of Environmental Protection Agency regu

lations promulgated on May 26. With

EPA's test for determining whether certain wastes are haz

ardous. Our opinion is in three parts. We are unani

mous that it did not. That EPA's treatment standards for a particular

category of hazardous waste are lawful.

decides that EPA's test for determining toxicity is valid for

certain wastes but not for others. Definition of Solid Waste

Two petitioners the National Mining Association and the

American Iron and Steel Institute and an intervenor the

Chemical Manufacturers Association challenge the portion

of EPA's Phase IV Rule defining a

Please make the appropriate correction.

Very truly yours. We have jurisdiction by virtue of 28 U.S.C.

Lewis. Arguing that because neither of Barbour's claims was

supported by sufficient evidence. When she was rated

With them on the briefs were G. With them on the brief were Lois

J. With him on the brief were G.

William Frick and Thomas S. Statutory Framework

RCRA is a comprehensive environmental statute granting

EPA authority to regulate solid and hazardous wastes. ". Are governed by Subtitle D of RCRA. Are

generally subject to less stringent management standards

than ". Which are regulated under Subtitle

C. A solid waste is any discarded

material. For purposes of the regulation means any material

which is abandoned. EPA

determined that oil bearing wastewaters are solid waste for

purposes of RCRA regulation. That recovered oil from

petrochemical facilities is excluded from the definition of solid

waste only when specified conditions are met. Impurities are removed and usable

hydrocarbon fractions are isolated from crude oil feedstock.

See Final Rule. 121/2.

Large quantities of water are used.

BN cross appeals. We conclude that the EPA's remediation decision is supported by substantial evidence in the record and. Is not arbitrary and capricious. Performance or cost of the remedial plan was involved. The EPA was not required to amend the remediation plan in order to use the settling tank or to amend the plan. We agree with the district court that the EPA actions were arbitrary and capricious for failing to amend the plan.

Third. We hold that the district court erred in refusing to require BN to demonstrate that the EPA's errors resulted in expenditures in excess of those that would have occurred in the absence of the errors.

The Ohio EPA officials were concerned that RD 344 was a hazardous waste for two reasons. They suspected that it might be a

The Ohio EPA officials were concerned that RD 344 was a hazardous waste for two reasons. They suspected that it might be a

final rule is invalid because the EPA did not comply with

the Regulatory Flexibility Act. Although

we are sympathetic to the view expressed by many within

the Area that this rule threatens serious economic harm.

we recognize that our role as a reviewing court is strictly

limited. We are constrained to deny the petition for

review.

M. Pew argued the cause for petitioner Sierra Club.

With him on the briefs was Howard I. With him on the brief were

Lois J. Bumpers was on the brief for amicus curiae

the American Portland Cement Alliance.

Plaintiffs/appellants Aztec Minerals Corporation. Contaminated water was released into local creeks and streams.

In December 1992. 9604(e).

The Access Order stated that access to the Mine

M. Pew argued the cause for petitioner Sierra Club.

With him on the briefs was Howard I. With him on the brief were

Lois J. Bumpers was on the brief for amicus curiae

the American Portland Cement Alliance.

Before: Edwards. We (1)

reject its argument that EPA's use of particulate matter as a

surrogate for non volatile metal hazardous air pollutants vio

lates the Clean Air Act and is arbitrary and capricious. Hazardous air pollutants are known as HAPs.

A ". Is any stationary source that emits ten

tons per year or more of any single HAP or twenty five

tons per year or more of any combination of HAPs. Determines is achievable ... through ap

plication of measures. These stringency

requirements differ depending on whether a source is ". New sources are defined as ". The construction or modification of which is com

menced after the publication of regulations (or.

 . With

him on the briefs were Christopher G. With him on the brief were

Lois J. Steinzor were on the brief for intervenors.

Thomas J. The regulations were issued pursuant to section

183(e) of the Clean Air Act. Petitioners are Dunn Edwards Corporation. Intervening on EPA's side are

other industry groups including the National Paint &.

that EPA's regulations are lawful and deny the petitions for

review.

I

The Clean Air Act. One of the

pollutants so identified and regulated by the agency is

ground level ozone. Man made ozone

can have a wide array of negative effects on human health. Is aimed at mitigating the

problem of ground level ozone. The

Senate Environment and Public Works Committee explained the

impact of ground level ozone on human health:

Ozone is fatal at high concentrations.

increased susceptibility to respiratory infections.

Potentially more troubling and less well understood are the

effects of long term chronic exposure to summertime ozone

concentrations found in many cities.