Skip To Main Content
Andrew Homer on Muck Rack

Andrew Homer

Boston
As seen in: ZDNet, JD Supra, Security Boulevard, Mondaq, Security Magazine, LexBlog, CISO MAG, Industry Today, eLearningInside News
Is this you? As a journalist, you can create a free Muck Rack account to customize your profile, list your contact preferences, and upload a portfolio of your best work. Claim your profile

Get in touch with Andrew

Contact Andrew, search articles and posts on X, monitor coverage, and track replies from one place.

Learn more about Muck Rack

Actions

Share this page

Is this you?

As a journalist, you can create a free Muck Rack account to customize your profile, list your contact preferences, and upload a portfolio of your best work.
Claim your profile

Articles

PFOA And PFOS Are Upheld As CERCLA Hazardous Substances: D.C. Circuit Rejects Industry Challenge

|
By Andrew Homer, Steven Humphreys, Sabrina Morelli
| Mondaq
In a closely watched PFAS decision, the D.C. Circuit upheld EPA’s designation of PFOA and PFOS as hazardous substances under CERCLA. In its decision issued on August 18, 2026, the court rejected consolidated challenges to the agency’s statutory interpretation and rulemaking process, leaving intact the first new hazardous substance designations since the statute’s 1980 enactment.
Open in Who Shared View Duplicates (2) Issue with article?

Supreme Court Strikes Down ​“End-Result” Requirements in NPDES Permits | JD Supra

|
By Wayne D'Angelo, Andrew Homer
| JD Supra
On March 4, 2025, the U.S. Supreme Court issued a ruling that prohibits the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (“EPA” or ​“the Agency”) from setting qualitative limits based on the condition of the ​“receiving waters” that the permit authorizes discharge into, rather than specific limits on the permittee’s discharge itself.
Open in Who Shared Issue with article?

Supreme Court Strikes Down ​"End-Result" Requirements In NPDES Permits

|
By Wayne D'Angelo, Andrew Homer, Zachary Lee
| Mondaq
On March 4, 2025, the U.S. Supreme Court issued a ruling that prohibits the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency ("EPA" or "the Agency") from setting qualitative limits based on the condition of the "receiving waters" that the permit authorizes discharge into, rather than specific limits on the permittee's discharge itself.
Open in Who Shared Issue with article?
See all 31 licensed articles (32 Total)