Section 6928 - Federal enforcement

8 Citing briefs

  1. In the Matter of FMC Corporation, Respondent,v.New York State Department of Environmental Conservation, Appellant.

    Brief

    Filed March 21, 2018

    Section 3008(h) is entitled "Interim status corrective action orders," and applies when EPA "determines that there is or has been a release of hazardous waste into the environment from a facility authorized to operate under section 6925(e) of this title," which provides for interim status. 42 U.S. C. § 6928(h); see 42 U.S. C. § 6925(e). The 1991 Order found that such releases had occurred.

  2. Xl Insurance America, Inc. et al v. Craig R. Jalbert et al

    NOTICE OF MOTION AND MOTION for Summary Judgment as to coverage for the bodily injury and property damage claims alleged

    Filed July 3, 2017

    [U.F. 36]. In the Non-Prosecution Agreement, Exide admitted that it knowingly and illegally stored and disposed of lead-contaminated hazardous waste at the Vernon Plant over the past two decades in violation of the Federal Resource Conservation & Recovery Act, 42 U.S.C. §6928(d)(2). [U.F. 37].

  3. USA v. Pacific Gas and Electric Company

    MOTION to Dismiss for Failure to State an Offense: Counts 2-28

    Filed September 7, 2015

    ..................... 11 33 U.S.C. § 1319(c)(1)(A) .......................................................................................................... 12 33 U.S.C. § 1319(c)(2)(A) .......................................................................................................... 12 33 U.S.C. § 1319(c)(3)(A) .......................................................................................................... 12 33 U.S.C. § 1342(b) .................................................................................................................... 12 33 U.S.C. § 1342(i) ..................................................................................................................... 12 42 U.S.C. § 6926(b) .................................................................................................................... 12 42 U.S.C. § 6928(d)(4) ............................................................................................................... 12 42 U.S.C. § 6928(d)(5) ............................................................................................................... 12 42 U.S.C. § 7410(a) .................................................................................................................... 11 42 U.S.C. § 7410(c) .................................................................................................................... 11 42 U.S.C. § 7413(c) .................................................................................................................... 11 49 U.S.C. § 60105 ....................................................................................................................... 10 49 U.S.C. § 60105(a) ...................................................................................................... 4, 7, 8, 11 49 U.S.C. § 60105(b)(2) ............................................................................................................... 4 49 U.S.C. § 60105(b)(5)-(7) ..............

  4. USA v. Slough et al

    Reply to defendants' opposition to restitution re MOTION restitution

    Filed July 8, 2015

    Violations of RCRA were punishable by a fine of up to $50,000 for each day of violation. 42 U.S.C. 6928(d)(7). Although the jury was not asked to determine the length of the Case 1:08-cr-00360-RCL Document 785 Filed 07/08/15 Page 5 of 11 6 violation, the district court concluded from the verdict and the evidence that the jury had found a 762-day violation, making the statutory maximum fine $38.

  5. In re: Triton Asset Leasing GmbH et al

    MEMORANDUM of the United States, Appearing Specially and Not Generally, in Support of Opposed Motion to Lift or Modify the Court's Amended Monition as to Certain Claims and Causes of Action re: [88] MOTION to Lift Stay

    Filed June 1, 2010

    ss statutory exclusion of the Limitation Act as applied to fines, penalties, and other relief: the CWA, 33 U.S.C. §§ 1319(d), 1321(b)(7); the NMSA, 16 U.S.C. § 1437(c) (civil penalties up to $100,000 for each violation, with each day of a continuing violation constituting a separate violation); Marine Mammal Protection Act (“MMPA”), 16 U.S.C. § 1375(a)(1) (civil penalty of not more than $10,000 for each such violation); Endangered Species Act (“ESA”), 16 U.S.C. § 1540 (a) (civil penalty of $25,000 for each violation); 46 U.S.C. § 2302(a) (civil penalty for negligent operations and interfering with safe operation of a vessel); Ports and Waterways Safety Act (“PWSA”), 33 U.S.C. § 1236 (civil penalty for violations of regulations); the Act to Prevent Pollution from Ships ("APPS"), 33 U.S.C. § 1908 (civil penalty for violations of MARPOL); the Clean Air Act (“CAA”), 42 U.S.C. § 7413(b) (civil penalties up to $25,000 for each violation); the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (“RCRA”), 42 U.S.C. §§ 6928, 6978 (civil penalties); and the Outer Continental Shelf Lands Act (“OCSLA”), 43 U.S.C. § 1430(b) (civil penalty of $20,000 for each day of continuance of a violation).9 Case 2:10-cv-02771-CJB-SS Document 89 Filed 06/01/10 Page 26 of 32 10 The PSRPA was amended in 1996 to extend its scope to all resources within any unit of the National Park System. 20 B. The Limitation Act Does Not Apply to Claims Cognizable Under the RHA The Limitation Act also does not apply to violations of the Rivers and Harbors Act.

  6. In the Matter of FMC Corporation, Respondent,v.New York State Department of Environmental Conservation, Appellant.

    Brief

    Filed March 21, 2018

    E. Section 27-0916(1) of the ECL Does Not Require a Hearing Before DEC May Use the State Superfund. FMC argues at length that a hearing is required before DEC may act under other statutory provisions, including RCRA § 3008(h) (42U.S.C. § 6928(h)), ECL § 71-2727(3)(a), and the permitting procedures in 6 N.Y.C.R.R. §§ 621.3-621.11 (FMC Br. 19-23).

  7. Liebhart, William et al v. Spx Corporation et al

    Brief in Opposition

    Filed February 7, 2017

    The dual structure of the RCRA citizen suit provision makes perfect sense. The Subtitle C hazardous waste regulations are extensive but do not encompass all substances that may 20 As the table below shows, each item in the litany of types of requirements in subsection (1)(A) is addressed in the RCRA Subtitle C regulations (except, of course, for orders, which are authorized by statute at 42 U.S.C. §6928(a)). Permit 40 CFR Part 270, “EPA Administered Permit Programs: The Hazardous Waste Permit Program.

  8. City of Waukegan, The v. Arshed et al

    MEMORANDUM

    Filed July 2, 2008

    Subsection (a) of section 6928 (“Federal enforcement”) pertains to compliance orders issued by the EPA Administrator, and subsection (g) provides civil penalties for violations of that subchapter. 42 U.S.C. § 6928(a) and (g) (emphasis added). The subchapter referred to in subsection 6928(g) is Subchapter III (“Hazardous Waste Enforcement”), which governs the ‘cradle-to-grave’ management of hazardous waste.