1. Home
  2. |Insights
  3. |It's All In The Name

It's All In The Name

Client Alert | less than 1 min read | 10.14.09

In Wackenhut Int'l, Inc. v. Dep't of State (Sept. 22, 2009), the Civilian Board of Contract Appeals ("CBCA") ;dismissed for lack of jurisdiction when the appellant's Contract Disputes Act claim and subsequent appeal to the CBCA were brought in the name of a single joint venture partner instead of the joint venture itself. The Board found that only the joint venture had privity of contract with the government and that that was altered neither by appellant's 51% ownership stake in the joint venture nor by appellant's obtaining written authorization to pursue the claim from its joint venture partner.

Contacts

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Action for Releases From Solid Waste Management Units,” under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA).[1] The withdrawn proposal would have revised RCRA corrective action regulations to expressly apply the broader statutory definition of “hazardous waste,” rather than only the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