ARTICLE III. PRACTICE AND PROCEDURES
Chap. Sec.
21. [Reserved] … 21.1
23. ENVIRONMENTAL QUALITY BOARD POLICY FOR PROCESSING PETITIONS—STATEMENT OF POLICY … 23.1
24. MODEL PROCEDURE FOR MEANINGFUL PUBLIC PARTICIPATION—STATEMENT OF POLICY … 24.1
(Editor’s Note: For the text of the rules of practice and procedures before the Environmental Hearing Board, see Chapter 1021 (relating to practice and procedures).)
Notes of Decisions Exhaustion Requirement Inapplicable
For a regulatory taking action to be ripe, the final decision maker must have acted, not the entity with the final review powers. In this case, the requirement of exhaustion of administrative appeals was inapplicable because the appellants are in no way challenging the action of an administrative agency without allowing the administrative process the chance to correct the decision; instead, they are relying on the agency’s determination that there were no special circumstances entitling them to a variance. Gardner v. Department of Environmental Resources, 658 A.2d 440 (Pa. Cmwlth. 1995).
Jurisdiction
The appellant’s challenge to restrictions which the Environmental Quality Board promulgated under Federal law was a challenge to a state regulation and, therefore, the Environmental Hearing Board had jurisdiction. Croner, Inc. v. Department of Environmental Resources, 589 A.2d 1183 (Pa. Cmwlth. 1991).
No part of the information on this site may be reproduced for profit or sold for profit.
This material has been drawn directly from the official Pennsylvania Code full text database. Due to the limitations of HTML or differences in display capabilities of different browsers, this version may differ slightly from the official printed version.
