Turn to the nation's most objective and informative daily environmental news resource to learn how the United States and key players around the world are responding to the environmental...
Dec. 23 — The Environmental Protection Agency unlawfully extended the deadline for states to comply with revised air quality standards for ozone issued in 2008, federal appellate judges ruled Dec. 23.
“Even assuming EPA could adequately justify choosing a trigger date other than the designation date, it has failed to do so here,” the U.S. Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit said in a 2-1 decision.
That decision means states will have six months less to demonstrate compliance with the national ambient air quality standards (NAAQS) for ozone set in 2008.
“We saw what EPA would do given a free hand,” Seth Johnson, the Earthjustice attorney who argued the case on behalf of the Natural Resources Defense Council, told Bloomberg BNA Dec. 23. “It delays and prevaricates and nothing gets cleaned up. This opinion reminds EPA, not for the first time, it can’t do that.”
State representatives couldn't be reached for comment.
The court also overturned the EPA's decision to revoke the requirement for some states to maintain transportation conformity plans for the 1997 ozone standards, which were superseded by the standards set in 2008.
Judge Sri Srinivasan wrote the opinion of the court, which was joined by Judge David Tatel. Judge A. Raymond Randolph dissented.
The judges heard oral argument in November 2013.
The Natural Resources Defense Council had challenged the EPA's May 21, 2012, rule to implement the national ambient air quality standards for ozone, which were revised to 0.075 parts per million in 2008 (77 Fed. Reg. 30,160).
The EPA rule set the compliance period beginning Dec. 31, 2012, but the NRDC argued the compliance period should have begun July 20, 2012, when nonattainment designations took effect. That would mean states designated as marginal nonattainment areas would have to demonstrate compliance by July 20, 2015. The EPA's extended deadline would have given states until Dec. 31, 2015, to comply with the standards.
Because the ozone season ends in June, that effectively gave states an additional year to comply, the environmental group had argued.
“What EPA did was basically give a lot of areas an extra year to come into attainment,” Johnson said. “That’s a year more of people missing work, people missing school, premature deaths.”
Srinivasan said the EPA couldn't identify any statutory authority for extending that deadline.
“To the contrary, all textual indications point to triggering commencement of the attainment periods on the designation date, rather than delaying the trigger date to some other date selected by the agency,” he said in the court's opinion.
The EPA, itself, had concluded it lacked the authority to extend the compliance deadlines beyond what is prescribed in the Clean Air Act when it previously revised the ozone standards in 1997, the court said.
“EPA’s ozone-season explanation lacks any grounding in the statute,” the court said. “The agency itself previously recognized as much. When EPA declined to extend the attainment deadlines to ‘November or December' of the attainment year in its implementation of the 1997 NAAQS, the reason cited in support of the proposed extension was to enable ‘areas [to] use the ozone season air quality data from the attainment year to demonstrate attainment'—precisely the same explanation now invoked by the agency.”
In his dissent, Randolph said the EPA shouldn't be bound by that prior interpretation in the 2008 rule. He said nothing in the Clean Air Act bars the agency from extending the compliance period.
“The Clean Air Act says nothing about when EPA should start the clock after the agency has issued new, stricter National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) for ozone,” Randolph said.
Randolph said revising the compliance deadlines retroactively would cause “disarray” for states that have already mapped out compliance strategies.
“These and other problems are bound to arise as a result of what I consider a mistake in judicial analysis,” he said.
The court also vacated the portion of the EPA's rule that revoked the requirement for some states to maintain transportation conformity plans for the 1997 ozone standards, which were superseded by the standards set in 2008. The EPA's implementation rule revoked the requirement for areas that had been designated as not in attainment of the 1997 standards but in attainment of the more stringent 2008 standards to maintain transportation conformity plans for the revoked 1997 standard. The agency has argued that complying with the more stringent 2008 standard automatically meant those areas were also in attainment with the 1997 standard.
“EPA does not deny the mandatory nature of the conformity requirements for all nonattainment and maintenance areas,” the court said. “Nor does EPA dispute that all nonattainment designations and maintenance requirements remain in place for the 1997 NAAQS. Rather, EPA seeks to turn off the conformity requirements—and those requirements alone—for areas that remain in nonattainment or maintenance status under the 1997 NAAQS. The statute forbids that result.”
Transportation conformity is a Clean Air Act requirement that states consider the impacts of transportation decisions in places where air quality doesn't meet national standards or hasn't met them in the past.
Johnson said approximately 70 areas nationwide would have been exempted from the requirement to consider ozone implications of transportation projects under the EPA's rule.
“These orphan areas are going to be subject to transportation conformity,” he said. “That’s an important control for preventing ozone problems before they happen.”
To contact the reporter on this story: Andrew Childers in Washington at firstname.lastname@example.org
To contact the editor responsible for this story: Larry Pearl in Washington at email@example.com
The opinion is available at http://www.bloomberglaw.com/public/document/NRDC_v_EPA_et_al_Docket_No_1201321_DC_Cir_Jul_20_2012_Court_Docke.
All Bloomberg BNA treatises are available on standing order, which ensures you will always receive the most current edition of the book or supplement of the title you have ordered from Bloomberg BNA’s book division. As soon as a new supplement or edition is published (usually annually) for a title you’ve previously purchased and requested to be placed on standing order, we’ll ship it to you to review for 30 days without any obligation. During this period, you can either (a) honor the invoice and receive a 5% discount (in addition to any other discounts you may qualify for) off the then-current price of the update, plus shipping and handling or (b) return the book(s), in which case, your invoice will be cancelled upon receipt of the book(s). Call us for a prepaid UPS label for your return. It’s as simple and easy as that. Most importantly, standing orders mean you will never have to worry about the timeliness of the information you’re relying on. And, you may discontinue standing orders at any time by contacting us at 1.800.960.1220 or by sending an email to firstname.lastname@example.org.
Put me on standing order at a 5% discount off list price of all future updates, in addition to any other discounts I may quality for. (Returnable within 30 days.)
Notify me when updates are available (No standing order will be created).
This Bloomberg BNA report is available on standing order, which ensures you will all receive the latest edition. This report is updated annually and we will send you the latest edition once it has been published. By signing up for standing order you will never have to worry about the timeliness of the information you need. And, you may discontinue standing orders at any time by contacting us at 1.800.372.1033, option 5, or by sending us an email to email@example.com.
Put me on standing order
Notify me when new releases are available (no standing order will be created)