Rock Products

JAN 2013

Rock Products is the aggregates industry's leading source for market analysis and technology solutions, delivering critical content focusing on aggregates-processing equipment; operational efficiencies; management best practices; comprehensive market

Issue link:

Contents of this Issue


Page 42 of 67

serted that the decision not to regu‐ late smaller sources was inconsis‐ tent with the clear language of the CAA. However, the court did not consider this argument. Instead, the court ruled that the challengers lacked standing to challenge the de‐ cision not to regulate the smaller sources. Standing here means the ability to bring a court action because the party is injured or harmed by a particular act or, here, regulation. This is a basic tenet of federal litigation under Arti‐ cle III of the U.S. Constitution. The court concluded that regulating fewer industries than more does not harm the plaintiffs (one would think this would be a decision supported by many of the groups challenging the rules) so that the plaintiffs had no standing to challenge the decision. While one would think there could be some basis for such an argument of economic harm where larger indus‐ tries are regulated but smaller ones are not, but the parties had not ad‐ dressed this issue, at least in the court's opinion. Supreme Court? Ironically, industry had been attempt‐ ing in litigation to limit environmental groups' and other plaintiffs' ability to bring environmental suits under fed‐ eral statutes or tort claims as one means of limiting those cases. In this case, the federal courts tightening of standing requirements resulted in the courts refusing to hear the complaint that the EPA failed to follow the CAA. The case may ultimately be heard by the Supreme Court, but it would not be surprising if the case were upheld by that court. If the issue of standing were reversed, the issue of the Tailor‐ ing Rule itself could be remanded to the D.C. Circuit for review. At this point, the litigation from an overall perspective in the federal courts appears to have moved out of the tort realm. What may happen to cases filed in state courts remains to be seen. The federal litigation may now be focused on challenges of EPA regulations. So far those cases have favored the EPA's ability to regulate greenhouse gases. With the re‐election of Presi‐ dent Obama, it appears likely that the EPA will continue to pursue green‐ house gas regulation. The question is, will the regulations issued beyond the Tailoring Rule present better op‐ portunities for legal challenge than the Coalition for Responsible Regula‐ tion case. E High Capacity High Capacity HP3, creative performance creative performance a Quality End Product Shape Reduced Reduc Maintenance Maint Downtime Down Te echnologically unique, the new HP3 cone crusher offe unprecedented fers per formance. With an output and quality o of finished products markedly superior to other machines in its class, it also simplifies the flow and treatment of f materials. Its safe and easy maintenance ensures maximum reliability. HP3, the ultimate cone crusher. w w w. m e t s o. c o m ROCKproducts • JANUARY 2013 41

Articles in this issue

Links on this page

Archives of this issue

view archives of Rock Products - JAN 2013