On December 22, 2006, the Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia invalidated major sections of U.S. EPA’s 2004 rule governing the transition from a 1-hour to an 8-hour ozone standard. In particular, the Court held that the anti-backsliding provisions of Section 172(e) apply and that traditional ozone non-attainment programs (such as new source review, rate of progress milestones, transportation and contingency plans) all are controls that are required to remain in place. The Court’s decision will likely result in a significant change in the regulation of ozone precursors in ozone nonattainment areas and may put back in place many of the burdensome restrictions imposed under the 1990 Amendments to the Clean Air Act.
点击下方链接阅读全文。
作者
相关见解
December 12, 2025
Health Care Law Today
Eleventh Circuit Hears Oral Argument in Landmark Constitutional Challenge to False Claims Act’s Qui Tam Provisions
On December 12, the U.S. Court of Appeals for the Eleventh Circuit heard oral argument in U.S. ex rel. Zafirov v. Florida Medical…
2025年12月11日
福莱观点
知识产权组合管理中的反垄断风险与合规策略
本文分析了知识产权组合管理如何在促进创新的同时,也可能带来潜在风险……
2025年12月11日
福莱观点
加州空气资源委员会发布SB 261和SB 253法案的拟议法规
2025年12月9日,加州空气资源委员会(CARB)发布了其针对初始法规的拟议监管文本……