Description: Challenge to EPA rules imposing federal greenhouse gas permitting requirements.
-
Texas v. EPA
Case Documents:
Filing Date Type File Action Taken Summary 05/04/2015 Order Download Order issued denying panel rehearing. The D.C. Circuit issued orders denying the petitions for rehearing. The denial of the petitions for rehearing came after the D.C. Circuit ordered EPA in April 2015 to rescind regulations that required PSD and Title V permits solely based on a source’s greenhouse gas emissions. 05/04/2015 Order Download Order issued denying rehearing en banc. 11/04/2014 Response Download Response filed by EPA to petitions for rehearing or rehearing en banc. 11/04/2014 Response Download Response filed by respondent-intervenors in opposition to petitions for rehearing or rehearing en banc. 09/22/2014 Petition for Rehearing Download Petition for panel rehearing or rehearing en banc filed by SIP/FIP Advocacy Group. After the Supreme Court's decision in Utility Air Regulatory Group v. EPA, two states, along with trade associations and other organizations representing various industrial sectors, filed petitions for rehearing. The petitions argued that rehearing was necessary because Utility Air Regulatory Group v. EPA negated the D.C. Circuit’s dismissal of the proceedings on standing grounds. The D.C. Circuit’s ruling was grounded in its interpretation of the Clean Air Act’s Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) permitting requirements were “self-executing” for stationary sources that emitted greenhouse gases—the D.C. Circuit therefore reasoned that petitioners’ injuries were caused by the statute itself and not by EPA’s actions. Petitioners argued in their petitions for rehearing that since the Supreme Court expressly rejected this interpretation, the D.C. Circuit’s ruling should be vacated and the petitions for review should be granted or the matter reheard. 09/22/2014 Petition for Rehearing Download Petition for rehearing filed by states and industry groups. 09/04/2013 Order Download Order issued granting motion to extend deadline for petition for rehearing. The D.C. Circuit granted the unopposed motion seeking to extend the deadline to file petitions for rehearing. 08/21/2013 Motion Download Motion filed by petitioners to extend deadline to petition for rehearing and to extend issuance of the mandate. Petitioners filed a motion seeking to extend their deadline to file a petition for rehearing. Petitioners asked that the deadline for filing the petition and for issuing the mandate be extended until 30 days after the Supreme Court’s disposition of pending petitions for a writ of certiorari that seek review of Coalition for Responsible Regulation v. EPA, in which the D.C. Circuit upheld EPA’s regulation of greenhouse gas emissions under the Clean Air Act. The motion papers assert that deferral of the deadline would not significantly delay issuance of the mandate because the petitions for writ of certiorari have been distributed for conference on September 30, only two weeks after the mandate is currently scheduled to issue. The motion is unopposed. 07/26/2013 Opinion Download Opinion issued. The federal Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit dismissed, on standing grounds, challenges by Texas, Wyoming, and industry groups to United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) rules that imposed federal permitting requirements for greenhouse gases. The D.C. Circuit concluded that section 165(a) of the Clean Air Act (CAA) was “self-executing,” finding that the provision requires that major emitting facilities obtain Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) preconstruction permits with best available control technology for every pollutant regulated under the CAA regardless of whether a pollutant is included in a given state’s implementation plan. The D.C. Circuit therefore held that industry petitioners lacked standing because their purported injury—that they would be subject to PSD permitting requirements for greenhouse gases—was caused not by the challenged EPA rules, but by “automatic operation” of the CAA. With respect to the state petitioners, the court ruled that a successful challenge to the EPA rules would result in a “construction moratorium,” not restoration of the states’ permitting powers. The states therefore lacked standing because their challenge would not redress the alleged harm to their “quasi-sovereign interests in regulating air quality within their borders.” Judge Kavanaugh dissented. 01/12/2011 Order Download Order issued dissolving administrative stay and denying stay pending court review. The D.C. Circuit lifted an emergency stay that had blocked EPA from taking over Texas’s greenhouse gas permitting program, holding that the state did not satisfy the standards required for a stay pending review. The decision allows EPA to issue permits for large stationary sources of greenhouse gas emissions in Texas pending a review of the merits of the lawsuit. 12/30/2010 Motion Download Emergency motion filed by petitioners for stay pending review. Texas filed an emergency motion in the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals seeking a stay of an EPA rule providing for a federal takeover of the State's Prevention of Significant Deterioration permitting program for new and modified stationary sources. 12/30/2010 Order Download Order issued granting administrative stay. The D.C. Circuit granted an “administrative stay” on December 30, 2010. In its order, the court stated that it did not rule on the merits and granted the stay only so it had an adequate opportunity to consider the motion. 12/30/2010 Petition for Review Download Petition for review filed. After EPA published a rule that would allow it to issue permits for new and modified sources of greenhouse gas emissions in Texas, Texas filed a petition for review in the D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals. EPA said that it took the action because Texas refused to implement greenhouse gas emissions permits as it was required to do under prevention of significant deterioration (PSD) provisions of the Clean Air Act starting January 2, 2011. -
Texas v. EPA
Case Documents:
Filing Date Type File Action Taken Summary 02/24/2011 Order Download Order issued transferring case to D.C. Circuit. The Fifth Circuit transferred a case brought by Texas challenging a final rule by EPA, referred to as the “SIP Call,” requiring states to adopt laws and regulations allowing them to issue permits to new and modified stationary sources for greenhouse gas emissions. In deciding the transfer the case to the D.C. Circuit, the court held that centralized review of national issues was preferable and that Texas did not convincingly argue that the Fifth Circuit should hear the case because the state was challenging a local aspect of the rule. 12/29/2010 Order Order issued denying motion for stay pending the disposition of the petition for review. 12/15/2010 Petition for Review Petition for review filed. Texas filed a challenge to EPA's "SIP Call," in which EPA found that 13 states did not apply their existing Prevention of Significant Deterioration programs to greenhouse gases and thus had “substantially inadequate” state implementation plans requiring revision. -
Utility Air Regulatory Group v. EPA
Case Documents:
Filing Date Type File Action Taken Summary 02/28/2011 Petition for Review Petition for review filed. An electric power company trade group and several other entities challenged two EPA rules to facilitate greenhouse gas permitting in seven states. The rules allowed EPA to impose a federal implementation plan on seven states whose laws and regulations would have prevented them from initiating greenhouse gas permitting on January 2, 2011, the date on which GHG emissions permitting took effect. The seven states were Arizona, Arkansas, Florida, Idaho, Kansas, Oregon, and Wyoming. The other entities challenging these rules are Texas, SIP/FIP Advocacy Group, and various mining and energy industry coalitions.