1. Home
  2. |Insights
  3. |R-E-V-I-E-W Does Not Spell R-E-L-I-E-F

R-E-V-I-E-W Does Not Spell R-E-L-I-E-F

Client Alert | less than 1 min read | 12.06.04

Rejecting the contention that, after finding arbitrary and capricious conduct by procurement officials, the award must be declared invalid and set aside, the Federal Circuit in PGBA v. U.S. (Nov. 22, 2004) says that a court is to apply the normal balancing of the equities, including the public interest, when deciding whether to grant an injunction after finding for a protester on the merits. Congress only adopted the review provisions of section 706 of the Administrative Procedure Act, the court explained, not its seemingly mandatory relief provisions.

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for Releases From Solid Waste Management Units,” under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act (RCRA).[1] The withdrawn proposal would have revised RCRA corrective action regulations to expressly apply the broader statutory definition of “hazardous waste,” rather than only the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