首页> 外文期刊>Inside EPA's environmental policy alert >EPA Says Adverse CWA 'Jurisdiction' Ruling Applies Only To Corps Orders
【24h】

EPA Says Adverse CWA 'Jurisdiction' Ruling Applies Only To Corps Orders

机译:EPA表示CWA的“管辖权”裁定仅适用于军团订单

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
       

摘要

EPA is arguing that a recent appellate ruling that allowed pre-enforcement review of agencies' Clean Water Act "jurisdictional" determinations for waterbodies should apply only to such findings by the Army Corps of Engineers and not those issued by EPA, the latest bid by the administration to limit the scope of the adverse decision. In a May 1 filing in a federal district court challenge to an EPA jurisdictional finding, the Department of Justice (DOJ) on EPA's behalf says the unanimous April 10 ruling by a three-judge panel of the U.S. Court of Appeals for the 8th Circuit in Hawkes Co., et al. v. U.S. Army Corps of Engineers, centered on a challenge to a Corps jurisdictional determination (JD) and not an EPA JD. While the court said the Corps' JD was judicially reviewable, the ruling was silent on EPA JDs, and DOJ says this.distinguishes Hawkes from the ongoing district court case.
机译:EPA争辩说,最近一项上诉裁决允许执法机构对机构的《清洁水法》对水体的“管辖权”裁定进行强制审查,而该裁决仅适用于陆军工程兵团的调查结果,而不适用于EPA所发布的调查结果。行政限制不利决定的范围。在5月1日向联邦地方法院提出的针对EPA管辖权裁决的质疑中,美国司法部(DOJ)代表EPA表示,美国第八巡回上诉法院三名法官组成的小组于4月10日一致作出裁决。霍克斯公司等。诉美国陆军工程兵团,重点是对军团管辖权确定(JD)而非EPA JD的质疑。虽然法院说该军团的JD可以接受司法审查,但该裁决对EPA JD保持沉默,司法部对此表示沉默。这使Hawkes与正在进行的地方法院案件有所不同。

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
  • 专利
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号