The Sixth Circuit affirms a district court judgment upholding the Interior Board of Land Appeals' (IBLA's) decision that a mining company violated federal Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act (SMCRA) regulations requiring the elimination of cliff-like rock walls known as "highwalls" at its sur...

The court holds that the best available retrofit technology (BART) provisions of the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA's) regional haze rule violate the Clean Air Act (CAA), but that the rule's natural visibility goal and no degradation requirement do not. The regional haze rule calls for ...

The court denies an industry association's petition to review the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA's) denial of the association's Clean Air Act (CAA) §112(b)(3) petition to delete methanol from the CAA list of hazardous air pollutants (HAPs). The association's petition to delist methanol...

The court holds that the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) did not abuse its discretion or act arbitrarily or capriciously in invalidating a state-granted prevention of significant deterioration (PSD) permit and finding that a state environmental agency's best available control technology (...

The court holds that a gas and electric company violated the Clean Air Act (CAA) by failing to obtain a preconstruction permit before making modifications to its facility even though there were no actual increases in emissions of pollutants after the changes were made. Based on the CAA and its imple...

The court holds that the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency's (EPA's) approval of Georgia's state implementation plan (SIP) mooted environmental groups' claims that Atlanta's motor vehicle emissions budget (MVEB) was not adequate for transportation conformity. In 2001, Georgia submitted to EPA a p...

The court holds that the citizen suit provision of the Surface Mining Control and Reclamation Act (SMCRA), §520(f), provides a federal cause of action for the recovery of damages resulting from violation of state regulations that are a part of the state's surface coal mining and reclamation regulat...

A district court holds that the Clean Air Act (CAA) does not preempt New York's zero emission vehicle (ZEV) sales mandate and dismisses an action brought by automobile manufacturers seeking to enjoin the state from enforcing legislation that requires the sale of ZEVs beginning in the 1998 model year...

The court holds that the Massachusetts Department of Environmental Protection's (DEP's) zero emission vehicle (ZEV) regulations for automobile manufacturers are not identical to California standards as required by Clean Air Act (CAA) §177 and, thus, are preempted by CAA §209(a). In 1992, Massachus...

The court holds that the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) did not act arbitrarily and capriciously when, under the Clean Air Act (CAA) §612(c) and its regulations, it designated a manufacturer's product an unacceptable substitute to freon or when it refused to place the product on the CAA...