Waste Management, Inc. v. Environmental Protection Agency
United States District Court for the District of Columbia
669 F. Supp. 536 (1987)
- Written by Jamie Milne, JD
Facts
The Marine Protection, Research, and Sanctuaries Act required parties to obtain a permit from the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) (defendant) before dumping hazardous materials in the ocean. The requirement was construed to apply to both dumping materials into the ocean and burning materials on ocean vessels, a process known as ocean incineration. However, the problems and consequences associated with ocean incineration differed from those associated with ocean dumping. Consequently, in 1983, the EPA started developing new regulations specific to ocean incineration. In 1984, the EPA announced it would defer acceptance and review of applications for new ocean-incineration permits until the new regulations were promulgated. The EPA published proposed regulations in February 1985 and accepted public comment through June 1985. The EPA then considered those comments as it prepared to finalize the new regulations. The process remained ongoing in 1986. Waste Management, Inc. (plaintiff) wanted to engage in ocean incineration but could not obtain the required permits because of the EPA’s deferral policy. Waste Management sued the EPA, arguing that the EPA’s deferral policy constituted rulemaking because it effectively revoked the prior ocean-incineration rules. Waste Management argued that because the deferral policy constituted rulemaking, the EPA violated the Administrative Procedure Act (APA) by adopting the policy without providing notice and an opportunity for public comment. Both parties moved for summary judgment.
Rule of Law
Issue
Holding and Reasoning (Richey, J.)
What to do next…
Here's why 899,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 47,000 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.


