Huls America Inc. v. Carol M. Browner, Administrator, and the Environmental Protection Agency

How courts have described this case

Verbatim parenthetical descriptions written by other courts when citing this decision. Ranked by citation-network relevance.

• holding “shall take into account the toxicity, reactivity . . . combustibility, or flammability of a substance” could limit “the EPA’s discretion to consider only those factors it deems relevant.”
• defining “cost” as the “amount paid or charged for something; price or expenditure”
• \[W]e will give an extreme degree of deference to the agency when it 'is evaluating scientific data within its technical expertise.' \ (citation omitted)
• “we will give an extreme degree of deference to the agency when it is evaluating scientific data within its technical expertise”
• “[W]e will give an extreme degree of deference to the agency when ‘it is evaluating scientific data within its technical expertise.’”
• regulation “merit[ed] traditional Chevron deference” where the agency “ha[d] never adopted any different interpretation” of the statutory provision at issue, although the agency had “suggested it could reconsider” the regulation

Source: CourtListener parenthetical corpus (CC0).