Solite Corp. v. EPA

952 F.2d 473 (1991)

From our private database of 46,500+ case briefs, written and edited by humans—never with AI.

Solite Corp. v. EPA

United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit
952 F.2d 473 (1991)

  • Written by Heather Whittemore, JD

Facts

The Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) (defendant) was tasked with regulating the management of hazardous waste under the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act. The EPA proposed to exempt several substances from regulation and relied on the 1985 Biennial Report to determine which substances to exempt. The EPA conducted public hearings and gave interested parties an opportunity to comment on its proposed regulation of hazardous waste. In its final rule, the EPA exempted fewer substances than in its initial proposal and used data from the TSDR Survey, which was not available during the notice-and-comment period. The TSDR Survey updated and expanded data that was contained in the 1985 Biennial Report. Solite Corporation (plaintiff) alleged that the EPA violated the notice-and-comment requirements of § 553(b) of the Administrative Procedure Act by relying on data that was not available during the notice-and-comment period.

Rule of Law

Issue

Holding and Reasoning (Per curiam)

What to do next…

  1. Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.

    You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 832,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students.

  2. Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.

    Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students.

Here's why 832,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:

  • Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 46,500 briefs, keyed to 994 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
  • The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
  • Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
  • Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership
Here's why 832,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
  • Reliable - written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students
  • The right length and amount of information - includes the facts, issue, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents
  • Access in your class - works on your mobile and tablet
  • 46,500 briefs - keyed to 994 casebooks
  • Uniform format for every case brief
  • Written in plain English - not in legalese and not just repeating the court's language
  • Massive library of related video lessons - and practice questions
  • Top-notch customer support

Access this case brief for FREE

With a 7-day free trial membership