Legal Opinion · Dissent

Psi Energy, Inc. And Cincinnati Gas & Electric Co. v. United States

Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit

Decided June 10, 2005No. 04-5079Published

1DissentClevenger, Circuit Judge

The court today resolves that the Court of Federal Claims has misread the relevant statutes in imposing liability on the appellants. For the reasons that follow, it is the court today that errs, not the Court of Federal Claims. In a nutshell, Congress designed a program for industry participation in enrichment plant clean-up costs that keys to the number of separative work units (“SWUs”) purchased from the government, not the number of pounds of uranium used by a utility.

This interpretation is in keeping with prior precedent involving the EPACT statute by this court. See Union Elec. Co. v.…

2Cases cited5 opinions

  1. Information Technology & Applications Corporation v. United States, and Rs Information Systems, Inc.Court of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2003
  2. Commonwealth Edison Company v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2001
  3. Yankee Atomic Electric Company, Plaintiff/cross-Appellant v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 1997
  4. Union Electric Company v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2004
  5. Maine Yankee Atomic Power Co. v. United StatesCourt of Appeals for the Federal Circuit · 2001

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API