Legal Opinion · Concurring in part, dissenting in part

ASARCO Inc. v. Environmental Protection Agency

Court of Appeals for the D.C. Circuit

Decided January 27, 1978No. Nos. 76-1030 and 76-1037Published

1Concurring in part, dissenting in partMacKINNON, Circuit Judge

I dissent from the judgment of the court for two general reasons. Primarily, I feel that the Administrator is vested with authority — under the terms of 42 U.S.C. § 1857c-6(b)(l)(B) directing him to “establish Federal standards of performance for new sources” and 42 U.S.C. § 1857c — 6(b)(2) authorizing him to distinguish among classes, types, and sizes within categories of new sources for the purpose of establishing such standards” — to promulgate regulations effectively exempting certain “modified” stationary sources from the requirement of compliance with New Source Performance Standards…

2Cases cited17 opinions

  1. Warth v. SeldinSupreme Court of the United States · 1975
  2. Abbott Laboratories v. GardnerSupreme Court of the United States · 1967
  3. Sierra Club v. MortonSupreme Court of the United States · 1972
  4. Linda R. S. v. Richard D.Supreme Court of the United States · 1973
  5. United States v. Students Challenging Regulatory Agency Procedures (SCRAP)Supreme Court of the United States · 1973

12 more not listed; retrieve them via the Exa API.

Showing a preview — retrieve the full document via the Exa API.

Powered by the Exa API