Natural Resources Defense Council v. EPA
United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit
489 F.3d 1364 (2007)
The Natural Resources Defense Council, the Sierra Club, and the Environmental Integrity Project (plaintiffs) filed petitions in federal court seeking review of two rules promulgated by the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) (defendant) under § 112 of the Clean Air Act. The two rules created a low-risk subcategory for six harmful air pollutants (HAPs) released into the air during the processing of plywood and composite wood products. The EPA found that the HAPs in the low-risk subcategory did not emit carcinogens in excess of the statutory ceiling, namely in amounts resulting in a lifetime cancer risk to an individual exceeding one in one million. Plaintiffs alleged that the EPA lacked authority to create the low-risk subcategory under the Act.
Rule of Law
Holding and Reasoning (Rogers, J.)
What to do next…
Unlock this case brief with a free (no-commitment) trial membership of Quimbee.
You’ll be in good company: Quimbee is one of the most widely used and trusted sites for law students, serving more than 97,000 law students since 2011. Some law schools—such as Yale, Vanderbilt, Berkeley, and the University of Illinois—even subscribe directly to Quimbee for all their law students. Read our student testimonials.
Learn more about Quimbee’s unique (and proven) approach to achieving great grades at law school.
Quimbee is a company hell-bent on one thing: helping you get an “A” in every course you take in law school, so you can graduate at the top of your class and get a high-paying law job. We’re not just a study aid for law students; we’re the study aid for law students. Read more about Quimbee.
Here's why 174,000 law students have relied on our case briefs:
- Written by law professors and practitioners, not other law students. 14,000 briefs, keyed to 188 casebooks. Top-notch customer support.
- The right amount of information, includes the facts, issues, rule of law, holding and reasoning, and any concurrences and dissents.
- Access in your classes, works on your mobile and tablet. Massive library of related video lessons and high quality multiple-choice questions.
- Easy to use, uniform format for every case brief. Written in plain English, not in legalese. Our briefs summarize and simplify; they don’t just repeat the court’s language.