The U.S. Supreme Court's New Dukedom: The Hour and Year, or a Proposal Quite Near

Potts, Brian H.
August 2006
Ecology Law Quarterly;2006, Vol. 33 Issue 3, p517
Academic Journal
The federal government in late 1999 sued thirty-six electric power facilities to enforce several of the Clean Air Act's New Source Review (NSR) and New Source Performance Standard (NSPS) provisions. As these cases have slowly churned through the courts, the government has simultaneously tinkered with these rules through various rulemaking initiatives. Taken together, these actions have clouded the meaning of critical NSR and NSPS provisions, and generated many additional civil and legislative battles. This Article focuses on the U.S. Supreme Court's review of one such civil battle--the Fourth Circuit's decision in United States v. Duke Energy Corp.--and EPA's subsequent rulemaking response. The Article first dissects the Fourth Circuit's opinion, argues that it was wrongly decided, and urges the US. Supreme Court to reach a different conclusion. Then, the Article outlines EPA's proposed regulatory solution to the Fourth Circuit's decision and proposes two vastly different regulatory responses. Unlike EPA's proposal, this Article's proposals unify the NSR and NSPS provisions and provide greater regulatory flexibility without significantly weakening the NSR program. Regardless of what the U.S. Supreme Court decides, this Article takes the position that Congress or EPA should adopt one of its proposals because the proposals ease industry burdens, provide greater environmental protection, and simplify the entire NSR and NSPS process.


Related Articles

  • Delegation of Authority to the Commonwealth of Virginia To Implement and Enforce Additional or Revised National Emission Standards for Hazardous Air Pollutants and New Source Performance Standards. Esher, Diana // Federal Register (National Archives & Records Service, Office of;5/16/2012, Vol. 77 Issue 95, p28875 

    The article offers information on the delegation of authority notice issued by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). It states that EPA has sent letter to the Commonwealth of Virginia informing Virginia's delegation authority to implement the National Emissions Standards for Hazardous...

  • New York v. EPA: State Response to a Federal Regulatory Rollback. Roberts, Casey // Ecology Law Quarterly;2006, Vol. 33 Issue 3, p613 

    In New York v. Environmental Protection Agency, the D.C. Circuit upheld most of EPA's changes to the Clean Air Act's New Source Review program. Despite widespread public criticism that the new rule would make it easier for existing sources to avoid installing pollution control technology when...

  • Clean air act update. Bassett, Susan // Pollution Engineering;Sep99, Vol. 31 Issue 9, p21 

    Presents an update on the Clean Air Act of 1990 in the United States (US). US Environmental Protection Agency's publication of a final rule requiring all 50 states to analyze their contributions to regional haze; Challenge of measuring natural visibility conditions for the mandatory Class I...

  • High Court Upholds CAA Standards. Krukowski, John // Pollution Engineering;Apr2001, Vol. 33 Issue 3, p9 

    Reports that the United States Supreme Court ruled in February 2001 upholding the Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA) implementation of the Clean Air Act (CAA). Points of disagreement of the court with industry groups on their charges against EPA; Supreme Court's validation of the ability...

  • Keeping Grandfathered Polluters Alive: EPA's New Equipment Replacement Provision. Moses, Shane J. // Ecology Law Quarterly;2004, Vol. 31 Issue 3, p787 

    Focuses on the final rule, Equipment Replacement Provision released by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency on August 27, 2003. Impact of the provision on the implementation of the Clean Air Act in the country; Criticisms against the shortcomings of the rule; Threats posed by the provision...

  • EPA's air program: Still hazy after all these years. Neville, Angela // Power;Sep2008, Vol. 152 Issue 9, p70 

    The article discusses the controversy on air pollution provisions in the U.S. The decision of the federal court on the Clean Air Mercury Rule (CAMR) resulted to dissatisfaction. Stephen Johnson, the administrator of the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA), commented on the decisions of the...

  • Aggregation proclamation. Geiselman, Bruce // Waste News;1/19/2009, Vol. 14 Issue 19, p5 

    The article reports that the The U.S. Environmental Protection Agency has finalized a change to the Clean Air Act's New Source Review that could make it easier to modify or modernize industrial facilities. It is stated that the NSR is a program that requires power plants and industrial...

  • The Environmental Propaganda Agency. Marxsen, Craig S. // Independent Review;Summer2000, Vol. 5 Issue 1, p65 

    Focuses on allegations on the costs and benefits of the Clean Air Act and its amendments by the United States Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). Exaggeration on the total costs and benefits of the act from 1970 to 1990 by the EPA; Details of researches conducted by independent groups on...

  • Air pollution--the inside story. Lieberman, Ben // Regulation;Spring98, Vol. 21 Issue 2, p12 

    Focuses on the two policy initiatives from the early 1970s that have had a lasting impact on the quality of air. Benefits of the Clean Air Act and the federal government's response to the energy crisis; United States Environmental Protection Agency's effort in regulating indoor air.


Read the Article


Sorry, but this item is not currently available from your library.

Try another library?
Sign out of this library

Other Topics