Use this button to switch between dark and light mode.

Experience a New Era in Legal Research with Free Access to Lexis+

Coalition for Responsible Regulation, Inc. v. EPA

Coalition for Responsible Regulation, Inc. v. EPA

United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit

February 28, 2012, Argued; February 29, 2012, Argued; June 26, 2012, Decided

No. 09-1322 Consolidated with 10-1024, 10-1025, 10-1026, 10-1030, 10-1035, 10-1036, 10-1037, 10-1038, 10-1039, 10-1040, 10-1041, 10-1042, 10-1044, 10-1045, 10-1046, 10-1234, 10-1235, 10-1239, 10-1245, 10-1281, 10-1310, 10-1318, 10-1319, 10-1320, 10-1321, No. 10-1073 Consolidated with 10-1083, 10-1099, 10-1109, 10-1110, 10-1114, 10-1118, 10-1119, 10-1120, 10-1122, 10-1123, 10-1124, 10-1125, 10-1126, 10-1127, 10-1128, 10-1129, 10-1131, 10-1132, 10-1145, 10-1147, 10-1148, 10-1199, 10-1200, 10-1201, 10-1202, 10-1203, 10-1206, 10-1207, 10-1208, 10-1210, 10-1211, 10-1212, 10-1213, 10-1216, 10-1218, 10-1219, 10-1220, 10-1221, 10-1222, No. 10-1092 Consolidated with 10-1094, 10-1134, 10-1143, 10-1144, 10-1152, 10-1156, 10-1158, 10-1159, 10-1160, 10-1161, 10-1162, 10-1163, 10-1164, 10-1166, 10-1182, No. 10-1167 Consolidated with 10-1168, 10-1169, 10-1170, 10-1173, 10-1174, 10-1175, 10-1176, 10-1177, 10-1178, 10-1179, 10-1180

Opinion

 [*113]  [**317]   Opinion for the Court filed Per Curiam.

Per Curiam: Following the Supreme Court's decision in Massachusetts v. EPA, 549 U.S. 497, 127 S. Ct. 1438, 167 L. Ed. 2d 248 (2007)which clarified that greenhouse gases are an "air pollutant" subject to regulation under the Clean Air Act (CAA)—the Environmental Protection Agency promulgated a series of greenhouse gas-related rules. First, EPA issued an Endangerment Finding, in which it determined that greenhouse gases may "reasonably be anticipated to endanger public health or welfare." See 42 U.S.C. § 7521(a)(1). Next, it issued the Tailpipe Rule, which set emission standards for cars and light trucks. Finally, EPA determined that the CAA requires major stationary sources of greenhouse  [***19] gases to obtain construction and operating permits. But because immediate regulation of all such sources would result in overwhelming permitting burdens on permitting authorities and sources, EPA issued the Timing and Tailoring Rules, in which it determined that only the largest stationary sources would initially be subject to permitting requirements.

Petitioners, various states and industry groups, challenge all these rules, arguing that they are based on improper constructions of the CAA and are otherwise arbitrary and capricious. But for the reasons set forth below, we conclude: 1) the Endangerment Finding and Tailpipe Rule are neither arbitrary nor capricious; 2) EPA's interpretation of the governing CAA provisions is unambiguously correct; and 3) no petitioner has standing to challenge the Timing and Tailoring Rules. We thus dismiss for lack of jurisdiction all petitions for  [*114]   [**318]  review of the Timing and Tailoring Rules, and deny the remainder of the petitions.

We begin with a brief primer on greenhouse gases. As their name suggests, when released into the atmosphere, these gases act "like the ceiling of a greenhouse, trapping solar energy and retarding the escape of reflected heat."  [***20] Massachusetts v. EPA, 549 U.S. at 505. A wide variety of modern human activities result in greenhouse gas emissions; cars, power plants, and industrial sites all release significant amounts of these heat-trapping gases. In recent decades "[a] well-documented rise in global temperatures has coincided with a significant increase in the concentration of [greenhouse gases] in the atmosphere." Id. at 504-05. Many scientists believe that mankind's greenhouse gas emissions are driving this climate change. These scientists predict that global climate change will cause a host of deleterious consequences, including drought, increasingly severe weather events, and rising sea levels.

Read The Full CaseNot a Lexis Advance subscriber? Try it out for free.

Full case includes Shepard's, Headnotes, Legal Analytics from Lex Machina, and more.

684 F.3d 102 *; 401 U.S. App. D.C. 306 **; 2012 U.S. App. LEXIS 12980 ***; 42 ELR 20141; 74 ERC (BNA) 2161; 2012 WL 2381955

COALITION FOR RESPONSIBLE REGULATION, INC., ET AL., PETITIONERS v. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY, RESPONDENT, STATE OF MICHIGAN, ET AL., INTERVENORS;COALITION FOR RESPONSIBLE REGULATION, INC., ET AL., PETITIONERS v. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY, RESPONDENT, AMERICAN FROZEN FOOD INSTITUTE, ET AL., INTERVENORS;COALITION FOR RESPONSIBLE REGULATION, INC., ET AL., PETITIONERS v. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY, RESPONDENT, LANGBOARD, INC. - MDF, ET AL., INTERVENORS;AMERICAN CHEMISTRY COUNCIL, PETITIONER v. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY AND LISA PEREZ JACKSON, ADMINISTRATOR, U.S. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY, RESPONDENTS, CHAMBER OF COMMERCE OF THE UNITED STATES OF AMERICA, ET AL., INTERVENORS

Subsequent History: Rehearing, en banc, denied by Coalition for Responsible Regulation v. EPA, 2012 U.S. App. LEXIS 26313 (D.C. Cir., Dec. 20, 2012)

Rehearing denied by Coalition for Responsible Regulation, Inc. v. EPA, 2012 U.S. App. LEXIS 26315 (D.C. Cir., Dec. 20, 2012)

Rehearing, en banc, denied by Coalition for Responsible Regulation, Inc. v. EPA, 2012 U.S. App. LEXIS 25997 (D.C. Cir., 2012)

US Supreme Court certiorari granted by, in part Util. Air Regulatory Group v. EPA, 134 S. Ct. 418, 187 L. Ed. 2d 278, 2013 U.S. LEXIS 7380 (U.S., 2013)

US Supreme Court certiorari denied by Virginia v. EPA, 134 S. Ct. 418, 187 L. Ed. 2d 279, 2013 U.S. LEXIS 7378 (U.S., 2013)

US Supreme Court certiorari denied by Pac. Legal Found. v. EPA, 134 S. Ct. 418, 187 L. Ed. 2d 279, 2013 U.S. LEXIS 7427 (U.S., 2013)

US Supreme Court certiorari denied by Coalition for Responsible Regulation, Inc. v. EPA, 134 S. Ct. 468, 187 L. Ed. 2d 279, 2013 U.S. LEXIS 7530 (U.S., 2013)

US Supreme Court certiorari granted by Southeastern Legal Found., Inc. v. EPA, 134 S. Ct. 419, 187 L. Ed. 2d 278, 2013 U.S. LEXIS 7546 (U.S., 2013)

US Supreme Court certiorari granted by, in part Texas v. EPA, 134 S. Ct. 419, 187 L. Ed. 2d 278, 2013 U.S. LEXIS 7448 (U.S., 2013)

US Supreme Court certiorari granted by, in part Am. Chemistry Council v. EPA, 134 S. Ct. 468, 187 L. Ed. 2d 278, 2013 U.S. LEXIS 7443 (U.S., 2013)

US Supreme Court certiorari granted by, in part Chamber of Commerce v. EPA, 134 S. Ct. 468, 187 L. Ed. 2d 278, 2013 U.S. LEXIS 7399 (U.S., 2013)

US Supreme Court certiorari granted by, in part Energy-Intensive Mfrs. Working Group on Greenhouse Gas Regulation v. EPA, 134 S. Ct. 418, 187 L. Ed. 2d 278, 2013 U.S. LEXIS 7483 (U.S., 2013)

Affirmed in part and reversed in part by Util. Air Regulatory Group v. EPA, 134 S. Ct. 2427, 189 L. Ed. 2d 372, 2014 U.S. LEXIS 4377 (U.S., 2014)

Amended by, Petition denied by Coalition for Responsible Regulation, Inc. v. EPA, 2015 U.S. App. LEXIS 11132 (D.C. Cir., Apr. 10, 2015)

Prior History:  [***1] On Petitions for Review of Final Actions of the Environmental Protection Agency.

Coalition for Responsible Regulation, Inc. v. EPA, 2010 U.S. App. LEXIS 26980 (D.C. Cir., Dec. 10, 2010)

CORE TERMS

EPA, greenhouse, gases, pollutant, air pollutant, regulated, Endangerment, emitting, Tailoring, emissions, climate, Petitioners', stationary, Tailpipe Rule, tpy, triggers, public health, threshold, endanger, attainment, scientific, emission standards, promulgated, concentration, Air, permits, air pollution, anticipated, global, subject to regulation

Environmental Law, Air Quality, Enforcement, Administrative Proceedings, Transportation Law, Private Vehicles, Safety Standards, Emission Control, Emission Standards, General Overview, Operating Permits, Preconstruction Permits, Prevention of Significant Deterioration, Administrative Law, Judicial Review, Standards of Review, Deference to Agency Statutory Interpretation, Administrative Proceedings & Litigation, Judicial Review, Governments, Legislation, Interpretation, Jurisdiction, Arbitrary & Capricious Standard of Review, Substantial Evidence, Business & Corporate Compliance, Mobile Emissions Sources, Fuel Economy, Environmental Law, National Ambient Air Quality Standards, Reviewability, Ripeness, Civil Procedure, Justiciability, Ripeness, Constitutional Law, Case or Controversy, Standing, Elements, Standing, The Judiciary, Imminence, Courts, Judicial Precedent, Judgments, Preclusion of Judgments, Law of the Case, Res Judicata, Nonattainment Areas, Stationary Emission Sources, Injury in Fact, Appeals, Appellate Briefs, Appellate Jurisdiction