By:  Alexander J. Bandza

As part of the "Environmental & Energy Cert. Petition Watch" project, in the past week, no EHS-related petitions have been filed, denied, or granted. The following three EHS-related petitions are set for conference early next year (Jan. 10, 2014). For a full list of EHS-related cert. petitions submitted from August 2013 through the present (as of December 23, 2013), click here.

American Road & Transp. Builders Ass'n v. EPA, No. 13-145

Lower Court: D.C. Cir.

Subject: Clean Air Act

Question(s) Presented: "(1) Does [CAA] §307(b)(1) allow petitioning for direct review within 60 days of the denial of a [5 U.S.C.] §553(e) petition that presents after-arising issues? (2) Does §307(b)(1) prohibit indirect review of an agency rule – outside the original 60-day window – if made as part of a timely challenge to new agency action that applies the prior rule?"

Source: http://www.supremecourt.gov/Search.aspx?FileName=/docketfiles/13-145.htm

Chubb Custom Ins. Co. v. Space Systems/Loral, LLC, No. 13-412

Lower Court: 9th Cir.

Subject: CERCLA

Question(s) Presented: "May a subrogated insurer, after paying environmental response costs its insured incurred remediating a contaminated site, step into the insured's shoes and pursue, against the persons responsible for the pollution, the cost-recovery action its insured could have pursued under Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation and Liability Act (CERCLA) section 107(a), or did Congress intend, as the Ninth Circuit's divided panel has held here, to restrict CERCLA subrogation rights in such circumstances to persons who compensate "claimants" under section 112, compelling insured remediators to satisfy a pre-suit claim requirement that was enacted to apply only to persons who seek reimbursement from the Superfund, not to civil actions under section 107(a)?"

Source: http://www.supremecourt.gov/Search.aspx?FileName=/docketfiles/13-412.htm

CTS Corp. v. Waldburger, No. 13-339

Lower Court: 4th Cir.

Subject: CERCLA

Question(s) Presented: "For certain state-law tort actions involving environmental harms, the Comprehensive Environmental Response, Compensation, and Liability Act (CERCLA) preempts the state statute of limitations' commencement date and replaces it with a delayed commencement date provided by federal law. . . . The question presented is: Did the Fourth Circuit correctly interpret 42 U.S.C. § 9658 to apply to state statutes of repose in addition to state statutes of limitations?"

Source: http://www.supremecourt.gov/Search.aspx?FileName=/docketfiles/13-339.htm