United States v. General Motors Corp.
Citation: 19 ELR 21309
No. No. 87-1890, (W.D. La., 02/02/1989)
The court holds that a state implementation plan (SIP) under the Clean Air Act is not as a matter of law superseded by a site-specific permit issued by the state, and SIP compliance is still required. The court first observes that the SIP provides that approval of a particular project does not relieve the project from complying with the SIP. There is a substantial issue of fact whether the SIP requirements and the permit requirements are equivalent, making summary judgment inappropriate. Moreover, the permit was issued before the SIP had a provision dealing with the same topic, and the permitted project is the only site in the state to which this part of the SIP might apply; if the SIP were superceded by the permit, its issuance would have been superfluous. Although the SIP includes a provision authorizing the state to extend a compliance date, the parties have not argued that the permit is an implementation of this section.
Counsel for Plaintiff
John R. Haliburton, Ass't U.S. Attorney
3812 Federal Bldg., 500 Fannin St., Shreveport LA 71101-3088
Counsel for Defendant
Gerald R. Harper
1700 Commercial National Tower, 33 Texas St., Shreveport LA 71101-3621