This site uses cookies to improve your experience. To help us insure we adhere to various privacy regulations, please select your country/region of residence. If you do not select a country, we will assume you are from the United States. Select your Cookie Settings or view our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.
Cookie Settings
Cookies and similar technologies are used on this website for proper function of the website, for tracking performance analytics and for marketing purposes. We and some of our third-party providers may use cookie data for various purposes. Please review the cookie settings below and choose your preference.
Used for the proper function of the website
Used for monitoring website traffic and interactions
Cookie Settings
Cookies and similar technologies are used on this website for proper function of the website, for tracking performance analytics and for marketing purposes. We and some of our third-party providers may use cookie data for various purposes. Please review the cookie settings below and choose your preference.
Strictly Necessary: Used for the proper function of the website
Performance/Analytics: Used for monitoring website traffic and interactions
States and local air quality regulators have the legal authority to set particulate matter (PM), ozone, and nitrogen oxides (NOx) emissions standards and adopt regulations for these pollutants when they are already in attainment of the national ambient air quality standards ( NAAQS ) set by the U.S.
In effect, the Court argued that for decisions of “such economic and political significance”—here, shifting electricity generation from one resource to another—there must be clear congressional authorization. In issuing its decision , the majority relied upon a new-to-the-Supreme-Court framework called the “major questions doctrine.”
This is part of an occasional series of posts about the evolution of pollution standards. Today’s subject is pollutioncontrol for new vehicles, which have been known to cause smog since the 1960s. The history of these pollution standards is quite distinctive. Congress adjusted the standards twice. gpm NOx standard.
In an unpublished judgment, the court rejected the petitioners’ other NEPA arguments regarding project design and capacity and cumulative ozone impacts. The court agreed with the defendants, however, that injunctive relief ordering a remedial plan or an accounting of greenhouse gas emissions would violate the political question doctrine.
Since then, EPA has consistently regulated GHG emissions from motor vehicles, although the scope of EPA’s GHG emissions regulations has been the subject of a political tug-of-war. In many of the states challenging EPA’s emissions regulations, local governments are leading the fight against climate change.
It will likely be at least two weeks before the Senate takes up the legislation and the Senate will likely make major changes to the bill before passing the legislation for political and parliamentary reasons. EPA – Request for Nominations of Candidates for the Clean Air Scientific Advisory Committee (CASAC) Ozone Panel. 3, 2021.
We organize all of the trending information in your field so you don't have to. Join 12,000+ users and stay up to date on the latest articles your peers are reading.
You know about us, now we want to get to know you!
Let's personalize your content
Let's get even more personalized
We recognize your account from another site in our network, please click 'Send Email' below to continue with verifying your account and setting a password.
Let's personalize your content