Davis v. EPA : A Review of the EPA’s Drunken Power Under the Ethanol Bias of the Clean Air Act
Aaron G. Fountain
Abstract
Aaron G. Fountain
Abstract
In April 1999, the EPA halted an existing cooperative relationship between federal and state environmental law when it denied California’s request to waive the applicability of a Clean Air Act (CAA) provision requiring the majority of California’s gasoline to contain at least two percent oxygen. In _Davis v. EPA_, the Ninth Circuit considered California’s challenge to the EPA’s denial and ultimately remanded the case to the EPA for further consideration. In doing so, the court focused on narrow technical and statutory grounds while largely ignoring the majority of substantive issues that should have influenced the EPA’s decision. This Note contends that examination of those issues offers significant insight into the federalism that characterizes the relationship between states and the federal government in the environmental arena and supports a devolution of policymaking power to those states with a proven track record of well-considered environmental controls.
A significance statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.
A contribution statement is not available in the OpenAlex record.
Method details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Findings are not separately available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Limitations are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
Application details are not available in the OpenAlex metadata.
In April 1999, the EPA halted an existing cooperative relationship between federal and state environmental law when it denied California’s request to waive the applicability of a Clean Air Act (CAA) provision requiring the majority of California’s gasoline to contain at least two percent oxygen. In _Davis v. EPA_, the Ninth Circuit considered California’s challenge to the EPA’s denial and ultimately remanded the case to the EPA for further consideration. In doing so, the court focused on narrow technical and statutory grounds while largely ignoring the majority of substantive issues that should have influenced the EPA’s decision. This Note contends that examination of those issues offers significant insight into the federalism that characterizes the relationship between states and the federal government in the environmental arena and supports a devolution of policymaking power to those states with a proven track record of well-considered environmental controls.
Key concepts: Clean Air Act, Denial, Statutory law, Federalism, Government (linguistics), Clean Water Act, Devolution (biology), State (computer science)