Skip to content

Menu

LexBlog, Inc. logo
NetworkSub-MenuBrowse by SubjectBrowse by PublisherJoin the NetworkGet StartedSubscribeSupportContact
Search
Close

Industry Challenges to Hazardous Waste Generator Improvements Rule

By Karlie Webb & Laura Boorman on March 13, 2017
Email this postTweet this postLike this postShare this post on LinkedIn

On February 24, 2017, industry groups challenged the final Hazardous Waste Generator Improvements Rule (“Final Rule”) in the Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit.  The long-anticipated Final Rule was published in the Federal Register on November 28, 2016 (81 Fed. Reg. 85732).  Pursuant to Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (“RCRA”) section 7006, petitioners have ninety days from that date to challenge the rule in the D.C. Circuit.  Because the ninety-day deadline to challenge the rule expired on Monday, February 27, 2017, no more challenges may be filed.  A previous discussion of the Final Rule and its potential impacts can be found here.

The petition was filed by nine industry groups, including the American Chemistry Council, American Forest & Paper Association, American Iron and Steel Institute, American Petroleum Institute, American Wood Council, Association Connecting Electronics Industries, Motor & Equipment Manufacturers Association, National Oilseed Processors Association, and Society of Chemical Manufacturers & Affiliates.  In their petition, the groups allege the Final Rule should be set aside “because it is unlawful, arbitrary, capricious, an abuse of discretion, or not otherwise in accordance with law.”  A more detailed outline of Petitioners’ legal challenges will be presented to the court when their Statement of Issues is filed on April 3rd.

While the petition itself includes no detail as to the group’s specific concerns, the same industry groups’ comments on the draft rule could shed some light on what the main arguments in the Statement of Issues are likely to entail.  In its comments on the draft rule for example, the American Chemistry Council (and several of the other named Petitioners) said it was particularly concerned about the provision which states that failure to meet any of EPA’s “conditions for exemption” could subject a generator to multiple RCRA violations and serious penalties.  This argument, as well as some of the others raised in the organizations’ comments, is likely to be prominent in their Statement of Issues.

We are closely following developments on the challenge.  For more information on the Final Rule and the pending challenge, please contact Karlie Webb or Laura Boorman.

Photo of Karlie Webb Karlie Webb

Karlie assists clients in all areas of environmental compliance for existing operations and environmental due diligence for real estate and equity transactions. Clients turn to Karlie when they are acquiring a property or company, and then rely on her environmental compliance counsel post-acquisition.

Read more about Karlie WebbEmail
  • Posted in:
    Environmental and Climate
  • Blog:
    Environmental Law & Policy Monitor
  • Organization:
    Troutman Pepper Locke
  • Article: View Original Source

Call us at 1-800-913-0988 or email sales@lexblog.com.

Facebook LinkedIn Twitter RSS
The Library at LexBlog
  • About LexBlog
  • The Field We Built
  • Library at LexBlog
  • Our Beliefs
  • Our Team
  • Contact LexBlog
  • Disclaimer
  • Editorial Policy
  • Terms of Service
  • Get Started
  • Publishing Solutions
  • Compass
  • Submit a Request
  • Support Center
  • System Status
Copyright © 2026, LexBlog, Inc. All Rights Reserved.
Law blog design & platform by LexBlog LexBlog Logo