ENVS 2256 Lecture Notes - Lecture 30: Permission Slip, Antonin Scalia, Statutory Interpretation
16 May 2018
School
Department
Course
Professor
Prevention of Significant Deterioration Graph!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
!
doesn't mean that you produce less that you can rise up to meet that standard!•
not a permission slip!•
just because EPA sets the standard, it can't produce up to the level set!•
!
there is a PSD program -> prevention of significant deterioration!•
just because you are below, producing 200% less!◦
set a limit by which they can increase that is in between the standard they want and the current level!◦
!
!
!
American Trucking v. Whitman!
factual background !•
Question -> Does the EPA have authority to consider costs in setting NAAQs? (appropriate level of harm)!◦
Scalia addresses this !◦
!
EPA not consider costs standards cause harm •
set standards -> don't consider the burden -> leads to harm!‣
doesn't consider the cost !•
!
!
Why should the EPA consider costs!•
burden of meeting - variable - some can be hurt economically!◦
multiple, less burdensome options !◦
!
!
Why shouldn't the EPA consider costs!•
including costs -> harms public but [priority = public health]!◦
!
!
!
SCALIA!
what are some of the reasons he gives as to why the EPA can't consider costs!•
NO COSTS -> why?!◦
1) he is giving a plain reading of the statue -> does it look like it allows for cost considerations?!•
with a plain reading, the statute gives no reference to costs!◦
2) statutory construction -> looking at language and how we should read it!•
3) congress wanted to, it could have•
Document Summary
Question -> does the epa have authority to consider costs in setting naaqs? (appropriate level of harm) Epa not consider costs standards cause harm set standards -> don"t consider the burden -> leads to harm doesn"t consider the cost. Why should the epa consider costs burden of meeting - variable - some can be hurt economically multiple, less burdensome options. Why shouldn"t the epa consider costs including costs -> harms public but [priority = public health] Scalia what are some of the reasons he gives as to why the epa can"t consider costs.
