United States DC Circuit

Petition for review of the EPA's residual risk rulemaking under subsection 112(f) of the Clean Air Act for facilities that use or produce synthetic organic chemicals, as well as the EPA's technology review under subsection 112(d)(6), is denied where: 1) a sentence in the statute calls for standards that "provide an ample margin of safety to protect public health" and draws no distinctions between carcinogens and non-carcinogens, and thus, the EPA is not obligated to reduce residual risks to one-in-one million for all sources that emit carcinogenic hazardous air pollutants; 2) under subsection 112(d)(6) the EPA is not required to completely recalculate the maximum achievable control technology; 3) the EPA's consideration of costs in setting the initial floors when setting standards did not taint the decision since the EPA's reaffirmation of its cost-based reasoning was based on the lack of significant developments in technologies; and 4) the EPA's use of data supplied by the industry to come to its conclusions was not arbitrary and capricious.

Appellate Information

• Argued 04/10/2008
• Decided 06/06/2008
• Published 06/06/2008

Judges

• Before: GRIFFITH and KAVANAUGH, Circuit Judges, and SILBERMAN, Senior Circuit Judge.

Court

• United States DC Circuit

Counsel

• For Appellant:
  
• John D. Walke argued the cause for petitioners.   With him on the briefs were Aaron S. Colangelo, Patrice Simms, Adam Babich, and Jill Witkowski., Leslie A. Hulse, Charles H. Knauss, Robert S. Taylor, and Robert V. Zener were on the brief for intervenor.


• For Appellees:
  
• David S. Gualtieri, Attorney, U.S. Department of Justice, argued the cause for respondent.   With him on the brief were John C. Cruden, Deputy Assistant Attorney General, and Michael W. Thrift, Counsel.  Kent E. Hanson, Attorney, U.S. Department of Justice, entered an appearance.