Appeals Court Upholds Soot Compliance Regulations for Power Plants
(Washington,
D.C. – March 11, 2014) A three-judge panel for the U.S. Court of Appeals for
the D.C. Circuit has rejected
an industry effort to weaken compliance provisions for environmental
standards that reduce soot pollution from power plants.
“The
court’s decision today means communities can have more confidence that
pollution standards for soot are being met,” said Pamela Campos, attorney for
Environmental Defense Fund, which was a party to the case. “The court upheld
rules requiring those power plants to use low-cost procedures to ensure that
their pollution control technologies are working effectively. Strong compliance
rules are a critical for protecting public health.”
The
compliance rules at issue in the case cover fossil-fuel-fired steam generating
units built between 1971 and 1978. The plants emit particulate matter, which is
commonly known as soot. Soot is a dangerous type of air pollution that’s linked
to heart and lung diseases including heart attacks, asthma attacks, and in some
cases premature death.
EPA’s rules require older plants, which generally meet less stringent standards for soot, to use a process called opacity testing to confirm compliance. Industry opponents challenged the rules, arguing that opacity testing was too burdensome.
At the same time, the state of Texas sued, claiming it should have been allowed to use state, rather than federal, affirmative defense provisions in resolving any disputes associated with rules.
Today, the court ruled against industry opponents, stating:
[T]he purpose of retaining the opacity standard for such a unit is to provide a real-time check to ensure that its particulate matter control device is function properly … Because EPA has articulated a reasonable explanation for requiring opacity monitoring, petitioner’s challenge to this requirement fails.
The court also ruled that Texas could not assert its claims prior to EPA resolution of an administrative petition dealing with the same actions.
The case was heard by Chief Judge Merrick Garland and Judges Judith Rogers and Brett Kavanaugh.Today’s decision is one part of a larger set of cases that challenge EPA’s historic air toxics rules for power plants. The court has not yet released a decision in the main branch of that case, dealing with EPA’s Mercury and Air Toxics Standards for existing power plants.
The court is also now considering a challenge to our national air quality standards for soot pollution.
One of the world’s leading international nonprofit organizations, Environmental Defense Fund (edf.org) creates transformational solutions to the most serious environmental problems. To do so, EDF links science, economics, law, and innovative private-sector partnerships. With more than 3 million members and offices in the United States, China, Mexico, Indonesia and the European Union, EDF’s scientists, economists, attorneys and policy experts are working in 28 countries to turn our solutions into action. Connect with us on Twitter @EnvDefenseFund
Media Contact
Latest press releases
-
EPA Administrator Michael Regan to Step Down at End of This Month
December 20, 2024 -
Climate Resilience Maturity Model Will Help Illinois Utilities Prepare for Climate, Severe Weather
December 20, 2024 -
Environmental Defense Fund Statement On New Jersey's Opposition to Congestion Pricing
December 19, 2024 -
New U.S. 2035 Target Underscores Clean Energy Progress, State and Local Leadership
December 19, 2024 -
EPA Clears Way for California Clean Car Standards
December 18, 2024 -
Department of Energy Study On Environmental and Economic Impacts of U.S. Natural Gas Exports Shows Urgent Need to Cut Methane Pollution
December 17, 2024