Editors' Summary: On December 14, 2004, the U.S. District Court for the Northern District of Georgia ruled that a series of EPA policy memoranda aimed at addressing excess emissions that occur during startup, shutdown, and/or malfunction (SSM) superceded part of Georgia's EPA-approved SIP that allowed, under certain conditions, excess emissions that occur during SSM conditions. The authors argue that this case is notable for two reasons. First, more than one-half of the air regulatory agencies in the country have SIPs that include a provision similar to the Georgia SSM condition. If the court's decision in Sierra Club v. Georgia Power Co. is upheld on appeal, the result will be to throw the entire CAA §110 SIP structure into jeopardy because it effectively renders the entire SIP submittal and approval process superfluous. Second, the decision highlights several common misconceptions about EPA's SSM policy memoranda. This Article provides a critical analysis of the court's decision in Sierra Club v. Georgia Power Co. and in doing so addresses these two important concepts.