Natural Resources Defense Council v. Jackson
650 F.3d 662
7th Cir.2011Background
- NRDC and Sierra Club challenge EPA 2002 NSR revisions and Wisconsin implementation plan.
- EPA's 2002 changes include actual-to-projected-actual tests, 10-year baseline, and PAL treatment.
- D.C. Circuit upheld New York v. EPA challenges to the 2002 rules; EPA projected net emissions effects were rational.
- Seventh Circuit discusses whether the 2002 revisions may increase pollution and how to test models, relying on EPA projections.
- Petitioners argue the Wisconsin plan could worsen emissions; respondents defend modeling and delegation.
- Court denies petitions; decision leaves open whether §7515 applies to the 2002 rules and state plans.
Issues
| Issue | Plaintiff's Argument | Defendant's Argument | Held |
|---|---|---|---|
| Whether the 2002 revisions comply with the Clean Air Act. | NRDC/Sierra Club argue revisions permit backsliding. | EPA argues revisions are rational and compliant. | Petitions denied; revisions upheld. |
| Whether EPA's reliance on models makes the plan arbitrary or capricious. | NRDC/Sierra Club say models insufficient to prove reductions. | EPA models provide substantial evidence and are rational. | Models substantial; not arbitrary or capricious. |
| Whether Wisconsin's plan implements the 2002 revisions lawfully. | Plan could permit more emissions. | Plan properly implements revisions with reasonable testing. | Plan upheld; EPA's denial of reconsideration affirmed. |
| Whether petitioners exhausted administrative remedies and the rulemaking process was properly followed. | Procedural flaws overlooked; need more rounds of comments. | No required additional round since text unchanged. | Procedural challenges not persuasive; exhausted remedies. |
| Whether §7515 applies to the 2002 revision and state plans relying on it. | Section 7515 covers pre-1990 control requirements; may apply. | D.C. Circuit avoided decision on applicability; not necessary here. | Not necessary to decide §7515 applicability. |
Key Cases Cited
- New York v. EPA, 413 F.3d 3 (D.C.Cir.2005) (upheld 2002 NSR revisions.)
- United States v. Cinergy Corp., 623 F.3d 455 (7th Cir.2010) (limits of the new approach to major repairs.)
- Bechtel v. FCC, 10 F.3d 875 (D.C.Cir.1993) (be careful with predictions; test against facts.)
- Chevron U.S.A. Inc. v. NRDC, 467 U.S. 837 (1984) (rats of deference to agency interpretations.)
- Environmental Defense v. Duke Energy Corp., 549 U.S. 561 (2007) (context on NSR and PSD.)
- FCC v. National Citizens Committee for Broadcasting, 436 U.S. 775 (1978) (presumption of rational agency predictions.)
- American Medical Association v. United States, 887 F.2d 760 (7th Cir.1989) (rulemaking and comment process.)
- Omnipoint Corp. v. FCC, 78 F.3d 620 (D.C.Cir.1996) (public comments not revisited unless text changes.)