Draft:Corrosion Proof Fittings v. EPA
Corrosion Proof Fitting vs. EPA was a 1991 Fifth Circuit Court of Appeals case in which the court ruled that much of the EPA's Asbestos Ban and Phase Out Rule (ABPO) was unlawful, finding that while the EPA established the carcinogenicity and danger of asbestos, in the absence of a cost-benefit analysis they did not determine it presented an "unreasonable" risk.[1]
Possible Sources
Rothschild, Rachel. 2023. Unreasonable Risk: The Failure to Ban Asbestos and the Future of Toxic Substances Regulation
Inside EPA's Risk Policy Report, 2016. "EPA Crafting Additional SNUR to Limit Uses of Controversial Solvent TCE".
DiCosmo, Bridget. 2016. "TSCA Supporters Say Lawsuits Will Likely Hinge on EPA's Implementation"
Inside EPA. 2012. "Activists Launch New Push for EPA to Ban Lead Bullet Under TSCA."
Masur, Jonathan & Posner, Eric A. 2018. Cost-Benefit Analysis and the Judicial Role
Gaheen, Michael Francis. 1995. "Cost-benefit analysis and the regulatory Process: A case study of the Environmental Protection Agency's asbestos ban regulations 1979-1991."
Percival, Robert V. https://www-taylorfrancis-com/chapters/edit/10.4324/9781315886787-5/risk-uncertainty-precaution-robert-percival
Warren, Edward W. 1993. "More Good Than Harm": A First Principle for Environmental Agencies and Reviewing Courts.
Davies, Clarence. 2009. “The Toxic Substances Control Act: From the Perspective of J. Clarence Davies.” Oral History Program, Science History Institute, Philadelphia, PA.
Hepler-Smith, Evan. 2019. “Molecular Bureaucracy: Toxicological Information and Environmental Protection.” Environmental History 24(3):534–60.
- ^ Stadler, Linda (Summer 1993). "Corrosion Proof Fittings V. EPA: Asbestos in the Fifth Court--A Battle of Unreasonableness". Tulane Environmental Law Journal. 6 (2): 423–438.