Search results
Results from the WOW.Com Content Network
Provision for the Writ of Kalikasan was written in 2010 by the Supreme Court of the Philippines under Rule 7 of the Rules of Procedure for Environmental Cases as a Special Civil Action. [3] The Supreme Court under Chief Justice Reynato Puno took the initiative and issued Rules of Procedure for Environmental Case because Section 16, Article II ...
EPA v. Calumet Shreveport Refining (Docket No. 23-1229) is a pending United States Supreme Court case on whether the Clean Air Act requires challenges to the Environmental Protection Agency's Renewable Fuel Standard program to be heard in the US District of Columbia Circuit or the court of appeals in the locality of the affected party.
Sackett v. Environmental Protection Agency, 598 U.S. 651 (2023), also known as Sackett II (to distinguish it from the 2012 case), was a United States Supreme Court case in which the court held that only wetlands and permanent bodies of water with a "continuous surface connection" to "traditional interstate navigable waters" are covered by the Clean Water Act.
The Office for Environmental Protection said the Environment Department (Defra), the Environment Agency (EA) and Ofwat failed to comply with environmental law over regulating discharges from ...
Sackett v. Environmental Protection Agency, 566 U.S. 120 (2012), also known as Sackett I (to distinguish it from the 2023 case), is a United States Supreme Court case in which the Court held that orders issued by the Environmental Protection Agency under the Clean Water Act are subject to the Administrative Procedure Act. [1]
Whitman v. American Trucking Associations, Inc., 531 U.S. 457 (2001), was a case decided by the United States Supreme Court in which the Environmental Protection Agency's National Ambient Air Quality Standard (NAAQS) for regulating ozone and particulate matter was challenged by the American Trucking Association, along with other private companies and the states of Michigan, Ohio, and West ...
Michigan v. Environmental Protection Agency, 576 U.S. 743 (2015), is a landmark [1] United States Supreme Court case in which the Court analyzed whether the Environmental Protection Agency must consider costs when deciding to regulate, rather than later in the process of issuing the regulation.
Three Phases (rules) have been created over the years by the EPA in response from industry, environmental groups and judicial review to clarify exactly what is needed to meet the statute. [9] Promulgated 1326(b) regulations making the best technology available determination on a case-by-case basis for both Phase I and Phase II facilities.