40 C.F.R. § 50.15
National primary and secondary ambient air quality standards for ozone
(a) The level of the national 8-hour primary and secondary ambient air quality standards for ozone (O
(b) The 8-hour primary and secondary O
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 7
cases (3 in the last 5 years), 2012–2023 · leading case: Indiana v. Environmental Protection Agency
Indiana v. Environmental Protection Agency (2015)
“40 C.F.R. § 50.15 . The purpose of SIPs is to “provide! ] for implementation, maintenance, and enforcement of [the NAAQS] in each air quality *806 control region (or portion thereof) within” a state.”
WildEarth Guardians v. U.S. Bureau of Land Mgmt. (2018)
“" 40 C.F.R. § 50.15 (a). 3 Whether a region meets the standard is judged by asking whether "the 3-year average of the annual fourth-highest daily maximum 8-hour average [ozone] concentration is less than or equal to 0.”
Town of Superior v. United States Fish & Wildlife Service (2012)
“27, 2008) (to be codified at 40 C.F.R. § 50.15 ). Under the rule, the EPA was required to issue designations of non-attainment areas by March 2010 and states were required to submit State Implementation Plans by March 2011.”
Defend Colorado v. Governor Jared Polis (2021)
“40 C.F.R. § 50.15 (b) (2021). An area with a design value above the NAAQS is designated as being in “nonattainment” and given an “attainment date” by which it must attain the NAAQS.”
State of New York v. EPA (2020)
“40 C.F.R. § 50.15 . And in 2015, it promulgated an even more restrictive ozone standard of 70 parts per billion.”
WildEarth Guardians v. N.M. Env't Improvement Bd. (2023)
“” 40 C.F.R. § 50.15 (b). Estimating quantities 10 of ozone that a proposed facility will emit is complicated by the fact that ozone is 11 not a direct emission.”
WildEarth Guardians v. N.M. Env't Improvement Bd. (2023)
“” 40 C.F.R. § 50.15 (b). Estimating quantities of ozone that a proposed facility will emit is complicated by the fact that ozone is not a direct emission.”
Annotations are extracted automatically from the opinions in the
Syfert caselaw corpus and ranked by authority, recency, and
treatment. Dots show Syfertize treatment of the citing case itself.