State ex rel. Darwin v. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency

Good Law
815 F.3d 519
United States Court of Appeals for the Ninth CircuitFebruary 24, 2016Nos. 13-70366, 13-70410California11,193 words

Opinion

Lead Opinion

Berzon, J.

Congress initially enacted the Clean Air Act (“the Act” or “CAA”) in 1963 to “protect and enhance the quality of the Nation’s air resources so as to promote the public health and welfare and the productive capacity of its population.” 42 U.S.C. § 7401 (b)(1). Later, in the Clean Air Act Amendments of 1977, Pub. L. No. 95-95, § 128 , 91 Stat. 685 , 742 (current version at 42 U.S.C. § 7491 ), Section 169A was added “in response to a growing awareness that visibility was rapidly deteriorating in many places, such as wilderness areas and national parks.” Am. Corn Growers Ass’n v. EPA, 291 F.3d 1, 3 (D.C.Cir.2002) (internal quotation marks omitted) (quoting Chevron U.S.A., Inc. v. EPA, 658 F.2d 271, 272 (5th Cir.1981)).

To improve outdoor visibility, the Act as amended “invites each State to submit to EPA a ‘State Implementation Plan’ (‘SIP’) setting forth emission limits and other measures necessary to make reasonable progress toward the national visibility goal.” Nat’l Parks Conservation Ass’n v. EPA, 788 F.3d 1134, 1138 (9th Cir.2015) (“NPCA ”) (citing 42 U.S.C. §§ 7410 (a), 7491(b)(2)). SIPs must include determinations of the “best available retrofit technology” (“BART”)…

Sign in to read the full opinion

Create a free account to read the complete opinion text, citation history, and good-law status for this case.