EME Homer City Generation, L.P. v. Environmental Protection Agency
402 U.S. App. D.C. 383
| D.C. Cir. | 2012Background
- EPA’s Transport Rule (Cross-State Air Pollution Rule) 2011 targeted upwind states’ SO2 and NOx emissions to address downwind nonattainment under three NAAQS; rule used a two-stage approach: stage-one significance thresholds based on air-quality impacts, stage-two cost-based reductions; EPA promulgated Federal Implementation Plans (FIPs) and allowed limited SIP adjustments; the rule built on CAIR and prior Michigan/North Carolina line of cases; court stayed the rule pending merits; this opinion vacates the Transport Rule and its FIPs and remands to EPA; CAIR would continue pending a replacement rule; majority emphasizes statutory limits on EPA and preserves state primacy in SIP implementation; dissent would uphold broader agency authority.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether EPA exceeded authority under 110(a)(2)(D)(i)(I) | States argued EPA impermissibly required more than significant-contribution. | EPA contended cost-based reductions could be used to meet significant-contribution obligations. | Yes; Transport Rule exceeds statutory limits and must be vacated. |
| Whether EPA could issue FIPs without giving states first SIP opportunity | States contended FIP-first approach deprived them of initial SIP implementation. | EPA could promulgate FIPs after disapproving SIPs to remedy failures to submit. | Yes; but court vacates Transport Rule and FIPs for broader statutory reasons. |
| Whether the court has jurisdiction to review these objections | Petitioners argued issues raised during Transport Rule proceedings were preserved. | Agency interpretations challenged should have been raised with reasonable specificity during rulemaking. | Court retains jurisdiction for merits but ultimately vacates on statutory grounds. |
| Whether EPA’s SIP-first structure respects federal-state balance under Train/Virginia | States argued state primacy in SIP implementation should be preserved; EPA overstep would intrude on state roles. | EPA may set nationwide standards and provide backstops to ensure attainment. | Yes; the statute preserves state first-implementer role; Transport Rule inconsistent. |
Key Cases Cited
- Michigan v. EPA, 213 F.3d 663 (D.C. Cir. 2000) (cost considerations may lower an upwind state's obligation, but not raise it)
- North Carolina v. EPA, 531 F.3d 896 (D.C. Cir. 2008) (EPA cannot require upwind states to exceed the mark or share other states’ burdens)
- Appalachian Power Co. v. EPA, 249 F.3d 1032 (D.C. Cir. 2001) (recognizes interstate pollution as a regional problem; federalism concerns limit EPA authority)
- Whitman v. American Trucking Ass’ns, 531 U.S. 457 (Supreme Court 2001) (statutory interpretation and delegation limits for agency action)
- Train v. NRDC, 421 U.S. 60 (Supreme Court 1975) (federal-state division of labor under Clean Air Act; EPA sets standards, states implement)