1. Home
  2. |Insights
  3. |Beware The Cooperative Agreement

Beware The Cooperative Agreement

Client Alert | less than 1 min read | 04.21.08

In Rick's Mushroom Service, Inc. (Apr. 2, 2008), the Federal Circuit held that a contractor who had a cooperative cost sharing agreement for mushroom waste remediation was out of luck when it followed defective government specifications and had to pay third parties close to $1 million for environmental violations. The Federal Circuit denied Rick's claims for indemnification, holding there was no Contract Disputes Act jurisdiction and that the Spearin doctrine, which provides that the government breaches an implied warranty when it supplies a contractor with defective specifications, was inapplicable because there was no procurement contract and because the doctrine does not extend to third-party claims.

Insights

Client Alert | 3 min read | 05.28.26

PFAS Regulatory Alert: EPA Rolls Back RCRA Proposed Rule on “Hazardous Waste” but Does Not Disturb Proposed RCRA Rule on PFAS

Earlier this month, the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) withdrew a February 2024 Biden administration proposed rule, “Definition of Hazardous Waste Applicable to Corrective Action for Releases From Solid Waste Management Units,” under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA).[1] The withdrawn proposal would have revised RCRA corrective action regulations to expressly apply the broader statutory definition of “hazardous waste,” rather than only the narrower regulatory definition. Now, EPA is maintaining the status quo for corrective action under RCRA. However, EPA’s withdrawal of its proposed RCRA hazardous waste definition makes no mention of its corresponding proposal from 2024 to list nine per- and polyfluoroalkyl substances (PFAS) as RCRA hazardous constituents.[2] This disjointed withdrawal, while providing some certainty for regulated entities, does not resolve how EPA plans to address PFAS under the RCRA program....

View All Insights