Alfonso Rodriguez v. Secretary of Department of Environment

<> Alfonso Rodriguez v. Secretary of Department of Environment - 3/16/15. In the U.S. Court of Appeals, Third Circuit, Case No. 14-3467 (not precedential). Dr. Rodriguez challenges § 3222.1 of Act 13, which provides two mechanisms for health professionals to learn proprietary information about the chemicals used in fracking. The District Court dismissed the case for lack of standing, and the Appeals Court affirmed.

Communities for a Better Environment v. U.S. EPA

<> Communities for a Better Environment v. U.S. EPA – 3/16/15. In the U.S. Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit, Case No. 13-70167 (unpublished). Environmental groups challenged issues relating to Los Angeles air quality. The Panel denied the petition saying among other things, "EPA was neither arbitrary nor capricious in determining that the credits transferred to Sentinel were quantifiable and surplus."

AmerGen Energy Company, LLC v. U.S.

<> AmerGen Energy Company, LLC v. U.S. - 3/11/15. In the U.S. Court of Appeals, Federal Circuit, Case No. 2014-5067. The Appeals Court confirmed the decision  of the Court of Federal Claims that AmerGen may not include future nuclear decommissioning liabilities that it assumed when it purchased three nuclear power plants in the basis of the acquired assets in its 2001 through 2003 tax returns.

Precon Development Corporation v. US Army Corps of Engineers

<> Precon Development Corporation v. US Army Corps of Engineers - 3/10/15. In the U.S. Court of Appeals, Fourth Circuit, Case No. 13-2499 (unpublished). In a thirteen-year battle between Precon Development Corporation and the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers about whether the Corps has jurisdiction under the Clean Water Act over Precon's Edinburgh development in Chesapeake, VA.       The Panel said, "This episode involves 4.8 acres of wetlands that Precon wants to fill to build ten homes. The Corps asserted jurisdiction over these wetlands and denied Precon's permit application.2 We previously remanded this case after concluding that the Corps had not provided sufficient evidence to support its jurisdiction. Finding that the Corps has now amassed adequate evidence, we affirm." Corps' jurisdiction over Virginia wetlands upheld by Fourth Circuit - The Fourth Circuit has affirmed a lower court decision that upheld an Army Corps of Engineers' permit denial for a planned development affecting 4.8 acres of wetlands

NRDC v. U.S. EPA

<> NRDC v. U.S. EPA - 3/11/15. In the U.S. Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit, Case No. 13-70544. In the case environmental groups challenge a rule of the South Coast Air Quality Management District. The Panel ruled, ". . .we hold today that EPA reasonably found that § 172(e) contains an ambiguous gap. We also hold that EPA's interpretation of that ambiguity was reasonable – i.e., that the CAA's anti-backsliding provision, allowing for not less stringent alternative controls, applies when air quality standards have been strengthened as well as when they have been relaxed. We deny the petition for review."

Center for Sustainable Economy v. Sally Jewell

<> Center for Sustainable Economy v. Sally Jewell - 3/6/15. In the U.S. Court of Appeals, D.C. Circuit, Case No. 12-1431. In a 2-1 decision, the Majority indicate, "We deny CSE's petition and conclude that: (1) CSE has associational standing to petition for review, (2) CSE's NEPA claims are unripe, (3) two of CSE's Program challenges are forfeited, and (4) CSE's remaining challenges to Interior's adoption of the 2012-2017 leasing schedule fail on their merits."      The dissenting opinion states, "I dissent, not because I disagree with my colleagues' reasoning, nor because I would sustain the petition. Rather, I would dismiss the petition for lack of standing." D.C. Circuit rejects challenge to BOEM Outer Continental Shelf leasing program

Tamosaitis v. URS, Inc.

<> Tamosaitis v. URS, Inc. - In the U.S. Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit, Case No. 12-35924. The Panel affirmed the district court's dismissal of the U.S. Department of Energy from the suit, affirmed the grant of summary judgment in URS Corp.'s favor, and reversed the grant of summary judgment for URS Energy & Construction, Inc. in an action brought by a URS Energy employee alleging violations of the Energy Reorganization Act whistleblower protection provision, concerning cleanup efforts of nuclear waste at the Hanford Nuclear Site in Washington state.