EPA is fighting a coal company's claim that a Supreme Court labor ruling boosts its lawsuit arguing the agency failed to adequately consider its "reliance costs" - or the costs incurred by the company acting on an expected EPA outcome that did not happen - for its bar on disposal sites underlying a final Clean Water Act (CWA) permit. In a June 24 letter to the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit on EPA's behalf, Department of Justice (DOJ) attorney Matthew Littleton says the high court labor case Encino Motorcars, LLC v. Navarro actually reinforces that the agency's prohibition should not be vacated due to reliance interests.
展开▼
