Healy Enviro Law Fall 2012.docx

C standard greatest degree of emission reduction

Info icon This preview shows pages 24–27. Sign up to view the full content.

c. Standard : greatest degree of emission reduction using tech the Admin determines will be available considering cost, energy and safety. d. 1990 Act required new reductions in emissions of VOCs and NOx: i. Tier I limits by ‘96 ii. Tier II limits by 2003 at ½ the tier I limits iii. Useful life: tech must have useful life of 10 years/100,000 miles 4. Federal standards for non-road engine categories whose emissions may reasonably be anticipated to endanger health or welfare [§213]. 24
Image of page 24

Info icon This preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

a. EPA has defined standards for many such categories including aircraft and lawnmowers. 5. ***Note: In the CAA, states are free to set their own standards as long as they meet minimum federal standards. Title II is an exception to this rule (see below) iii. Federal Pre-emption of State Standards and CA Waiver 1. §209(a) generally pre-empts state standards, relating to emissions from new motor vehicles, tech based standards for vehicle emissions and fuel content. a. Congress wanted national standards here. b. §209(a) preempts any pre-sale regulation of motor vehicles —even if a state is merely attempting to enforce a federal standard. i. EMA v. SCAQMD establishes the limits of pre- emption by broadly defining “standard” at 209(a) to mean any criterion related to the emission of characteristics of a vehicle or engine. The court held that preemption of “attempts to enforce” such “standards” may be directed to either manufacturers or purchases. 2. §209(b) requires EPA to waive pre-emption by CA, if the state determines, in the aggregate, that the state standards will be at least as protective as federal standards . A waiver is required, unless the EPA makes 1 of 3 findings: a. The state’s determination is arbitrary and capricious, b. State does not need standard to meet compelling and extraordinary circumstances; OR c. State standards are contrary to §202(a) [that the technology will not be available] i. Note – CA has been given 50 waivers and been shot down only once. 3. Scope of Waiver Requirement was defined in Motor & Vehicle Equipment v. EPA (1979): Basically the scope of waiver authority under 209(a) is co-extensive with 209(b) [Supp p.1030]. 4. Prohibition Against 3 rd Vehicle a. 1990 Act added §177, which allows states within nonattainment areas to adopt CA standards in their SIPs. But these must be identical to CA standards. Mobile Sources – What states can and can’t do: Attainment Non-attainment New Source Federal Standards Under §177, state with nonattainment may adopt CA standards (which are more strict than Feds, but no 3 rd vehicle) 25
Image of page 25
Existing Source Nothing Required 1990 Act requires transportation planning by states: States must establish limits that conform to reduction targets that are based on the degree of nonattainment. This may include enhanced inspection & maintenance, clean fuels program and transportation control plans that reduce vehicle miles travelled.
Image of page 26

Info icon This preview has intentionally blurred sections. Sign up to view the full version.

Image of page 27
This is the end of the preview. Sign up to access the rest of the document.
  • Spring '18
  • Tragedy of the Commons, United States Environmental Protection Agency, CAIR

{[ snackBarMessage ]}

What students are saying

  • Left Quote Icon

    As a current student on this bumpy collegiate pathway, I stumbled upon Course Hero, where I can find study resources for nearly all my courses, get online help from tutors 24/7, and even share my old projects, papers, and lecture notes with other students.

    Student Picture

    Kiran Temple University Fox School of Business ‘17, Course Hero Intern

  • Left Quote Icon

    I cannot even describe how much Course Hero helped me this summer. It’s truly become something I can always rely on and help me. In the end, I was not only able to survive summer classes, but I was able to thrive thanks to Course Hero.

    Student Picture

    Dana University of Pennsylvania ‘17, Course Hero Intern

  • Left Quote Icon

    The ability to access any university’s resources through Course Hero proved invaluable in my case. I was behind on Tulane coursework and actually used UCLA’s materials to help me move forward and get everything together on time.

    Student Picture

    Jill Tulane University ‘16, Course Hero Intern