Case Law Index: Clean Air Act


January 1, 1996 – December 31, 2014

This index provides a comprehensive though not necessarily exhaustive compilation of reported and unreported federal and state court decisions involving the Clean Air Act that were decided between the dates listed above.  The cases are listed in reverse chronological order. The “Text” link goes to the freely available Google Scholar text of the opinion.  These listings are for educational purposes only, and are not a substitute for legal counsel.

 

 

SUPREME COURT

 

E.P.A. v. EME Homer City Generation, L.P., 134 S.Ct. 1584 (2014) (EPA’s right to set state guidelines). Text

Util. Air Regulatory Grp. V. E.P.A., 134 S.Ct. 2427 (2014) (EPA’s authority to regulate stationary sources under CAA). Text

Alaska Dep’t of Envtl. Conservation v. E.P.A., 540 U.S. 461 (2004) (Stop orders under CAA). Text

Whitman v. Am. Trucking Associations, 531 U.S. 457 (2001) (Considerations for setting NAAQS).Union Elec. Co. v. E.P.A., 427 U.S. 246 (1976) (EPA approval of SIPs). Text

 


 

NINTH CIRCUIT

 

Sierra Club v. E.P.A., 671 F.3d 955 (9th Cir. 2012) (EPA’s approval of SIP without consideration of available updated emission data was arbitrary and capricious). Text

Jensen Family Farms, Inc. v. Monterey Bay Unified Air Pollution Control Dist., 644 F.3d 934 (9th Cir. 2011) (Upholding that local district regulatory scheme requiring owners and operators of diesel-powered engines used in agriculture to pay fees was not preempted by the CAA). Text

Latino Issues Forum v. E.P.A., 558 F.3d 936 (9th Cir. 2009) (Discussing best available control measures for non-attainable regions under the CAA). Text

Safe Air for Everyone v. E.P.A., 488 F.3d 1088 (9th Cir. 2007) (Discussing SIP plans and federal law as it relates to agricultural burning). Text

Idaho Conservation League v. Boer, 362 F.Supp.2d 1211 (D.Idaho 2004) (Holding that dairy was a stationary source and by-products are regulated air pollutants under the CAA). Text

Vigil v. Leavitt, 381 F.3d 826 (9th Cir. 2004) (Discussing Arizona’s rule regulating agricultural emissions of particulate matter). Text

California Farm Bureau Fed’n v. E.P.A., 72 Fed.Appx. 540 (9th Cir. 2003) (Upholding EPA’s decision to revoke approval of permit plans under the CAA that exempted major agricultural sources from complying).

Ober v. Whitman, 243 F.3d 1190 (9th Cir. 2001) (Permitting the EPA to exempt de minimis emission sources from the CAA). Text

 


 

ELEVENTH CIRCUIT

 

Sierra Club v. Atlanta Reg’l Comm’n, 255 F.Supp.2d 1319 (N.D.Ga. 2002) (Discussing standing to bring suit for enforcement under the CAA and review of procedures for complying with the CAA under SIP). Text

 


 

D.C. CIRCUIT

 

Engine Mfrs. Ass’n v. E.P.A., 88 F.3d 1075 (D.C. Cir. 1996). (Discussing state regulations of large non-road engines). Text

 


 

IOWA

 

Freeman v. Grain Processing Corp., 848 N.W.2d 58 (Iowa 2014) (Dealing with the interplay of the CAA and state preemption laws in the context of emissions from wet corn milling facility). Text

 


 

MISSOURI

 

Friends of Agric. For Reform of Missouri Envtl. Regulations v. Zimmerman, 51 S.W.3d 64 (Mo. Ct. App. 2001) (State had authority to regulate odor emissions from feed lots under the CAA). Text