ELR Citation: 55 ELR 20126
No(s). 23-1267 (D.C. Cir. Sep 5, 2025)

The D.C. Circuit granted a coalition of trade groups' petition to review EPA's 2023 rescission of the Title V affirmative defense to liability for excess emissions caused by emergency events. EPA had concluded the defense was unlawful because it encroached on the judiciary's authority under the CAA to impose "appropriate civil penalties," and because it could be construed as an exemption rendering emission standards noncontinuous, in violation of the Act. The coalition argued the decision rested on erroneous legal justifications. The court found the affirmative defense was a complete defense to liability, not a limitation on judicial remedies, and thus EPA's primary rationale for its rescission was erroneous. It also held that a complete affirmative defense did not render an emission limitation noncontinuous and that the Agency could not justify rescission on that ground. Because EPA's reasoning could not be squared with the CAA or precedent, and because the Agency offered no independent policy rationale, its rescission was unreasonable and not in accordance with law. The court granted the petition and reversed the rescission.