2007 Clean Air Act Regulations 
Legal Planet
FEBRUARY 28, 2025
The issue was whether state plans under the Clean Air Act only need to prevent violation of national air quality standards, or whether they must prevent deterioration in areas where the air is already cleaner than the standards. National Highway Traffic Safety Administration (2007). Ruckelshaus (1973).
Union of Concerned Scientists
JULY 1, 2022
That’s because the case, which was about the nature and scope of EPA authority in regulating carbon emissions from existing power plants, turned on a rule that does not exist. Because while this decision does still recognize EPA’s authority to regulate greenhouse gas emissions, it simultaneously sharply curtails the agency’s ability to do so.
This site is protected by reCAPTCHA and the Google Privacy Policy and Terms of Service apply.
Legal Planet
JULY 12, 2023
That the state official who oversees the permitting and regulation of all major energy projects in Montana could be ignorant of the UN body that has been issuing increasingly urgent assessments about global warming and climate data for 30 years is unbelievable and distressing. Intergovernmental Panel on Climate Change.
The Energy Law
APRIL 7, 2010
By Stephen Wiegand EPA recently announced its position regarding the timing of the regulation of greenhouse gases under the Clean Air Act’s Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) Program. In Massachusetts v. EPA, 549 U.S. EPA, 549 U.S.
The Energy Law
JANUARY 6, 2010
497 (2007), in which the Supreme Court held that greenhouse gases were “pollutants” under the Clean Air Act and ordered EPA to determine whether greenhouse gases “may reasonably be anticipated to endanger public health or welfare” under Section 202 of the Act. See 74 Fed. 66496 (Dec. EPA, 549 U.S.
The Energy Law
AUGUST 16, 2012
When making single stationary source determinations without the protection of the non-aggregation provision in Section 112 of the Clean Air Act, 42 U.S.C. In 2007, in guidance specifically addressing oil and gas activities, EPA stated that “proximity is the most informative factor in making source determinations.”
Vermont Law
JUNE 30, 2014
Summary: Last week the Supreme Court handed down its second Clean Air Act case of the term, Utility Air Regulatory Group v. The case involved a challenge to EPA’s attempt to regulate greenhouse gases in the Prevention of Significant Deterioration (PSD) program of the Clean Air Act.
Expert insights. Personalized for you.
227 
Let's personalize your content