U.S. Courts of Appeals

In July 2001, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit vacated the challenged portions of the rule. When it made its decision, the Court invited any of the parties to request either that the current standards remain intact or that U.S. EPA be allowed time to publish interim standards. Acting on this initiative, U.S. EPA and the other parties jointly asked the Court for additional time to develop interim standards, and the Court granted this request. On February 13, 2002, U.S. EPA published these interim standards that temporarily replace the vacated... 

OSHA requires employers of workers who are occupationally exposed to -hexane to institute engineering controls and work practices to reduce and maintain employee exposure at or below permissible exposure limits (PELs). The employer must use controls and practices, if feasible, to reduce exposure to or below an 8-hour time-weighted average (TWA) of 500 ppm (1,800 mg/m3) (OSHA 1974). The PEL for -hexane was to have been lowered to 50 ppm in 1989 however, a U S. Court of Appeals decision overturned a number of PELs promulgated in 1989, including that for -hexane. The PEL in force prior to this decision (500 ppm) is currently in effect. 

An Occupational Safety and Health Administration (OSHA) permissible exposure limit (PEL) for disulfoton does not exist. A U.S. Court of Appeals decision rescinded the 1989 PELs promulgated by OSHA (OSHA 1989), which included a PEL for disulfoton. Only PELs in place prior to the 1989 are now allowed Disulfoton had no PEL prior to 1989 therefore, it currently has no PEL. 

Court action was instigated by the industry in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Fourth Circuit( ). Meanwhile, AFL-CIO also entered suit against the Department of Labor in the Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit, claiming that the final rule was too lax( ). All court actions eventually were consolidated in one case in the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals (10). 

U.S. Court of Appeals 4th Clr. No. 78-1979 ATMI vs Dr. Eula Bingham, Peltition filed June 19, 1978. 

A U.S. Court of Appeals rescinded the 1989 PELs promulgated by OSHA. Only PELs in place prior to the 1989 rule are currently allowed (58 FR 335338). 

The village of Morton Grove, Illinois, passes an ordinance that bans individual possession of a variety of weapons including handguns, automatic weapons, and short-barreled shotguns. A U.S. district court holds that the ordinance is constitutional. In 1983 the U.S. Court of Appeals, Seventh Circuit, confirms the lower court decision in Quilici v. Morton Grove. The Supreme Court declines to hear the case. 

August 1 A U.S. court of appeals strikes down a Washington, D.C., law to prohibit any patented drug from being sold in the district for an excessive price. The ruling concludes that the law presents an obstacle to federal patent law and therefore is void. 

The defense appealed the guilty verdict partly on the basis of the ink testimony, but the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Second Circuit affirmed the conviction. Later the U.S. Supreme Court denied certiorari. 

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the 2nd Circuit affirmed the conviction of Colasurdo after considering an appeal based on reasoning that the ink identification technique was not yet proven. In their opinion, the Court considered the ruling made by the Judge in the Bruno Case, but were not particularly influenced by his failure to accept the ink identification technique. 

Federal Reporter, Volume 489F, Second, U.S. Court of Appeals, Court of Claims, Court of Customs and Patents West Publishing Company 1974... 

Currently, the United States neither imports nor exports PCBs. Section 6(e)(3)(A) of TSCA (Pub. L. 94-969, 90 stat. 2003,15 USC 2601 et. seq.) prohibited all manufacture and importation of PCBs after January 1, 1979. On January 2, 1979, however, EPA announced that companies that had filed petitions for exemptions from the PCB manufactuiing/importation ban could continue manufacturing or import activity until EPA acted on the application petition. As of July 7,1997, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Ninth Circuit overturned the Import for Disposal Rule. EPA can now only allow imports of PCBs by issuing exemptions to importers via the petition process under Section 6(e) of TSCA. See the... 

The U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia declares that If. . . [the defendant] has a mental illness which makes it likely that he will commit other violent acts when his sentence is served, imprisonment is not a remedy. Not only would it be wrong to imprison him, but imprisonment would not secure the community against repetitions of his violence. Hospitalization, on the other hand, would serve the dual purpose of giving hiiYi the treatment required for his illness and keeping him confined until it would be safe to release him. ... 

Roche Prods. Inc. v. Bolar Pharm Co, U.S. Court of Appeals forthe Federal Circuit, Fed. Cir., 1984, 733F.2d858. 

Next consider the courts. Early this year, the U. S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia affirmed a lower court decision that kept NIH from approving a field test of recombined bacteria to be sprayed on plants to inhibit frost formation. The bacteria to be produced were not novel and were already isolated in the environment in small quantities. From an environmental protection standpoint, most scientists regarded the scaled-down experiment approved by NIH s Recombinant Advisory Committee as innocuous and looked forward to evaluating obtained field data. 

On April 8, 1996, the New Mexico Attorney General filed a petition for the review of 40 CPR 194 (Civil Action No. 96-1107 filed in the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit). This petition was ultimately consolidated with two other similar petitions filed by two environmental groups and two individuals (Civil Action No. 96-1108) and the Texas Attorney General (Civil Action No. 96-1109). The petitions alleged violations by EPA of the WIPP Land Withdrawal Act and the Administrative Procedure Act in promulgating the WIPP compliance criteria. The U.S. Court of Appeals for the DC Circuit denied the petitions and the final criteria remained as promulgated. 

In early November 2001, NRC published licensing criteria for disposal of SNF and HLW in the proposed geologic repository at Yucca Mountain. In June 2008, NRC received the license application from DOE. The NRC began winding down activity related to Yucca Mountain in October 2010 and ceased review activity at the end of September 2011. The NRC resumed work on its technical and environmental reviews of the Yucca Mountain application using available funds in response to an August 2013 ruling by the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit. The staff completed and published the final volumes of the safety evaluation report in January 2015. 

The notice of contest will be assigned to an administrative law judge by the OSHRC. Once the judge rules on the contest notice, further review by the OSHRC may be requested. If necessary, the OSHRC ruling can be appealed to the U.S. Court of Appeals. 

In summary, national consensus standards lack the force and effect of codified rules, which can only be promulgated after notice-and-comment rulemaking under the Administrative Procedures Act., 5 V.S.C. 551 et seq. And, as noted by the U.S. Court of Appeals mB B Insulation, Inc. v. OSHRC, et al., 583 F.2d 1364, 1367-1368 (5th Cir. 1978), the law requires only those protective measures which the knowledge and experience of the employer s industry would clearly deem appropriate under the circumstances. 

---