Prognosticating the Ozone Standard Litigation: EPA to Win, Environmental Petitioners to Place, Murray Energy to Show

Foley Hoag LLP - Environmental Law
Contact

Last week, the “Public Health and Environmental Petitioners” challenging EPA’s decision not to reduce the ozone standard below 0.070 ppm filed their “Non-Binding Statement of Issues.”  My crystal ball still tells me that the most likely outcome is that the Court of Appeals upholds EPA’s 0.070 ppm standard.

I do think that the Public Health and Environmental Petitioners have a better case than Murray Energy (which filed its Statement of Issues late last year).  Given that the Clean Air Science Advisory Committee pretty clearly concluded that there are adverse health impacts below 0.070 ppm, the Public Health and Environmental Petitioners certainly have a credible argument for a lower standard, though I thought EPA did a pretty good job in the final rule insulating itself from challenges on that flank.  As to Murray Energy and the other industry and state challengers, I just don’t think that the background argument is going to get them anywhere.

 

DISCLAIMER: Because of the generality of this update, the information provided herein may not be applicable in all situations and should not be acted upon without specific legal advice based on particular situations. Attorney Advertising.

© Foley Hoag LLP - Environmental Law

Written by:

Foley Hoag LLP - Environmental Law
Contact
more
less

PUBLISH YOUR CONTENT ON JD SUPRA NOW

  • Increased visibility
  • Actionable analytics
  • Ongoing guidance

Foley Hoag LLP - Environmental Law on:

Reporters on Deadline

"My best business intelligence, in one easy email…"

Your first step to building a free, personalized, morning email brief covering pertinent authors and topics on JD Supra:
*By using the service, you signify your acceptance of JD Supra's Privacy Policy.
Custom Email Digest
- hide
- hide