U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit, 2001

Star Enterprise v. EPA

Star Enterprise v. EPA
U.S. Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit · Decided December 27, 2001

Star Enterprise v. EPA

Opinion

Opinions of the United 2001 Decisions States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit

12-27-2001 Star Enterprise v. EPA Precedential or Non-Precedential: Docket 98-6321

Follow this and additional works at: http://digitalcommons.law.villanova.edu/thirdcircuit_2001 Recommended Citation "Star Enterprise v. EPA" (2001). 2001 Decisions. Paper 301. http://digitalcommons.law.villanova.edu/thirdcircuit_2001/301

This decision is brought to you for free and open access by the Opinions of the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit at Villanova University School of Law Digital Repository. It has been accepted for inclusion in 2001 Decisions by an authorized administrator of Villanova University School of Law Digital Repository. For more information, please contact [email protected].

Filed December 27, 2001 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE THIRD CIRCUIT No. 98-6321 STAR ENTERPRISE; TEXACO INC., Petitioners v. UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY, Respondent On Petition for Review of a Final Action by The United States Environmental Protection Agency Argued July 15, 1999 Before: ROTH and RENDELL, Circuit Judges POLLAK, District Judge ORDER AMENDING OPINION IT IS ORDERED that the slip opinion in the above case, filed on December 6, 2000, and first amended on February 20, 2001, be amended as follows: The last paragraph of Part III, on page 17 of the typescript, is amended to read: These provisions clearly indicate that the EPA was directed by Congress to promulgate regulations necessary to implement the Clean Air Act. Consistent with our reasoning in Dia, as well as with Supreme Court jurisprudence and opinions in the Fourth, Sixth, and Seventh Circuit Court of Appeals, the EPA determination at issue in this case, interpreting New Source Performance Standards, involves the applicability of a "legislative rule," and therefore must be upheld unless plainly erroneous or inconsistent with Subpart I.

By the Court, /s/ Jane R. Roth Circuit Judge Dated: December 27, 2001 A True Copy: Teste: Clerk of the United States Court of Appeals for the Third Circuit

Case-law data current through December 31, 2025. Source: CourtListener bulk data.