U.S. Steel Corp. v. U.S. E.P.A.
| Citation | 598 F.2d 915 |
| Decision Date | 10 July 1979 |
| Docket Number | Nos. 78-1922,78-1927,s. 78-1922 |
| Parties | , 9 Envtl. L. Rep. 20,597 UNITED STATES STEEL CORP., Petitioner, v. UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY, Respondent. REPUBLIC STEEL CORPORATION, Petitioner, v. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY, Respondent. |
| Court | United States Courts of Appeals. United States Court of Appeals (5th Circuit) |
Before GODBOLD, Circuit Judge, SKELTON, * Senior Judge, and RUBIN, Circuit Judge.
The EPA has petitioned for a rehearing on or clarification of the issue of application of the Emission Offset Ruling referred to in the last part of our original opinion. The petition must be granted to the following extent.
The Offset Ruling applies fairly stringent limitations on the construction of any new emissions source that would cause an NAAQS violation or exacerbate an existing one. As the EPA points out, application of the Ruling is on a case by case basis and does not depend entirely upon whether the proposed source is within a designated § 7407(d) nonattainment area. Some sources within such areas may be approved 1 and some sources not within such areas may be disapproved. 2 It appears evident to us that the existence of a nonattainment designation may have substantial impact on application of the Ruling in the areas in question in this case. As EPA acknowledges, a designation creates a "working presumption." EPA is not precluded from using the Offset Ruling in these areas, if such application is warranted in a particular case. Rather, in its application of the Ruling EPA may not rely upon the designations invalidated by us. Any reliance upon nonattainment designations as relevant to application of the Ruling must await new designations. We express no views on the...
To continue reading
Request your trial
-
Central Lincoln Peoples' Utility Dist. v. Johnson, s. 81-7622
...Agency, 633 F.2d 803 (9th Cir.1980); United States Steel Corp. v. Environmental Protection Agency, 595 F.2d 207 (5th Cir.), clarified 598 F.2d 915 (1979). In this case, however, given the complexity of the rule making and the fact that the Act did not become law until December 5, 1980, we c......
-
Chemical Mfrs. Ass'n v. U.S. E.P.A.
...Inst., 749 F.2d at 58.67 5 U.S.C. Sec. 706.68 U.S. Steel Corp. v. EPA, 595 F.2d 207, 215, reh'g granted in part on other grounds, 598 F.2d 915 (5th Cir.1979).69 Small Refiner Lead Phase-Down Task Force v. EPA, 705 F.2d 506, 540-41 (D.C.Cir.1983) (citation omitted).70 52 Fed.Reg 42,542-43.71......
-
Northwest Airlines, Inc. v. Goldschmidt
...F.2d 1038 (no "good cause"); United States Steel Corp. v. EPA, 595 F.2d 207 (5th Cir.) (no "good cause"), rehearing granted in part, 598 F.2d 915 (1979); Sharon Steel Corp. v. EPA, 597 F.2d 377 (3d Cir. 1979) (no "good cause"), with Republic Steel Corp. v. Costle, 621 F.2d 797 (6th Cir. 198......
-
Wells v. Schweiker, Civ. A. No. 81-4833.
...I conclude that I am bound by the Fifth Circuit's approach in United States Steel Corp. v. EPA, 595 F.2d 207 (5th Cir.) clarified 598 F.2d 915 (1979) and City of Waco v. EPA, 620 F.2d 84 (5th Cir. 1980). In both cases the court subjected the agency's determination of good cause to independe......
-
Introduction to Air Pollution
...(7th Cir. 1983); City of Waco v. EPA, 620 F.2d 84, 10 ELR 20545 (5th Cir. 1980). 158. 595 F.2d 207, 9 ELR 20311 (5th Cir. 1979). 159. 598 F.2d 915, 9 ELR 20597 (5th Cir. 1979). 160. 597 F.2d 377, 9 ELR 20316 (3d Cir.1979). 153. Cal. Health & Safety Code §§39510, 39515 (2005). 154. Id. §§396......