首页> 外文期刊>Pennsylvania journal of environmental litigation >PPG chides groups for linking 90-day notice period in RCRA with PA cleanup law in third-party complaint
【24h】

PPG chides groups for linking 90-day notice period in RCRA with PA cleanup law in third-party complaint

机译:PPG责成小组将RCRA中的90天通知期与第三方投诉中的PA清理法联系起来

获取原文
获取原文并翻译 | 示例
           

摘要

In opposing reconsideration, PPG Inc. challenged on Jan. 11 PennEnvironment and Sierra Club's insistence that the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act's 90-day statutory notice provision must be applied to PPG's third-party claims against Eljer Inc. under Pennsylvania law in litigation over contamination from slurry lagoons in Armstrong County. The case is in federal court for the Western District of Pennsylvania. (See issue of Nov. 30,2015 P. 10.) PPG says, "Plaintiffs initially proceed upon the false premise that PPG's third-party complaint asserts a citizens' suit claim under RCRA against Eljer. Based upon this false premise, plaintiffs demand that PPG's third-party complaint must be dismissed because 90 days' advanced notice of an intent to sue was not given to Eljer, the EPA, and 'the appropriate state agency,' pursuant to 42 U.S.C. §6972(b)(2)(A)."
机译:在反对重审中,PPG Inc.于1月11日对PennEnvironment和Sierra Club的坚持提出质疑,即资源保护和恢复法案的90天法定通知条款必须适用于PPG针对宾夕法尼亚州法律针对Eljer Inc.的第三方针对污染诉讼的第三方索赔从阿姆斯特朗县的泻湖中提取。该案在宾夕法尼亚州西部地区的联邦法院审理。 (请参阅2015年11月30日,第10页。)PPG说:“原告最初是基于PPG的第三方投诉主张RCRA针对Eljer提起公民诉讼的虚假前提而提出的。基于此虚假前提,原告要求PPG的第三方投诉必须被驳回,因为未根据42 USC§6972(b)(2)()提前90天将预先通知的意图通知给Eljer,EPA和“适当的州机构”(一个)。”

著录项

相似文献

  • 外文文献
  • 中文文献
获取原文

客服邮箱:kefu@zhangqiaokeyan.com

京公网安备:11010802029741号 ICP备案号:京ICP备15016152号-6 六维联合信息科技 (北京) 有限公司©版权所有
  • 客服微信

  • 服务号