U.S. Code » Title 42 » Chapter CHAPTER 85— AIR POLLUTION PREVENTION AND CONTROL › Subchapter SUBCHAPTER V— PERMITS

42 U.S.C. § 7661

Definitions

Read at: OLRCuscode.house.gov CornellLII GovInfogovinfo.gov JustiaTitle 42 CasesGoogle Scholar
As used in this subchapter—(1) Affected source

The term “affected source” shall have the meaning given such term in subchapter IV–A.

(2) Major sourceThe term “major source” means any stationary source (or any group of stationary sources located within a contiguous area and under common control) that is either of the following:(A) A major source as defined in section 7412 of this title.(B) A major stationary source as defined in section 7602 of this title or part D of subchapter I.(3) Schedule of compliance

The term “schedule of compliance” means a schedule of remedial measures, including an enforceable sequence of actions or operations, leading to compliance with an applicable implementation plan, emission standard, emission limitation, or emission prohibition.

(4) Permitting authority

The term “permitting authority” means the Administrator or the air pollution control agency authorized by the Administrator to carry out a permit program under this subchapter.

(July 14, 1955, ch. 360, title V, § 501, as added Pub. L. 101–549, title V, § 501, Nov. 15, 1990, 104 Stat. 2635.)
Notes of Decisions
Cited in 87 cases (9 in the last 5 years), 1995–2026 · leading case: Romoland Sch. Dist. v. Inland Empire Energy Ctr., LLC, 548 F.3d 738 (9th Cir. 2008).
Sort: Relevance Newest Treatment
Romoland Sch. Dist. v. Inland Empire Energy Ctr., LLC, 548 F.3d 738 (9th Cir. 2008). · cites it 4× “IEEC's motion to dismiss contended, among other things, that the district court lacked jurisdiction over the suit because IEEC had been granted a permit under Title V of the CAA, 42 U.S.C. §§ 7661 -7661f, and such permits may not be challenged in civil or criminal enforcement…”
Cal. Cmty. Against Toxics v. Envtl. Prot. Agency, 934 F.3d 627 (D.C. Cir. 2019). · cites it 2× “Presumably in recognition of this, Congress enacted Title V of the CAA, 42 U.S.C. § 7661 et seq., which makes it unlawful for a source subject to regulations under the Act – including GACT or MACT standards under § 112 – to operate without a permit, see id.”
New York v. Niagara Mohawk Power Corp., 263 F. Supp. 2d 650 (W.D.N.Y. 2003). · cites it 3× “§ 7475 , with 42 U.S.C. § 7661 et seq.; see Illinois Power, at 955-56 (recognizing the importance of the Act’s separate requirements for preconstruction permits and operating permits).”
Griffin Indus., Inc. v. Irvin, 496 F.3d 1189 (11th Cir. 2007). “On August 6, 2002, the EPD issued a draft permit for the Griffin facility pursuant to Title V of the Clean Air Act, 42 U.S.C. §§ 7661 -7661Í. 1 Griffin objected to certain aspects of the draft Title V permit, *1195 and EPD and Griffin negotiated over the permit that fall.”
United States Sugar Corp. v. Env't Prot. Agency, 830 F.3d 579 (D.C. Cir. 2016). “42 U.S.C. §§ 7661 et seq.— “Title V Permits” Finally, the 1990 CAA Amendments added a provision to Title V of the Act that requires all owners and operators of HAP sources to obtain operating permits.”
Pub. Citizen, Inc. v. United States Env't Prot. Agency, 343 F.3d 449 (5th Cir. 2003). · cites it 2× “RHESA HAWKINS BARKSDALE, Circuit Judge: Primarily at issue is whether, pursuant to Title V of the Clean Air Act, 42 U.S.C. §§ 7661 -7661Í, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) had authority to grant full approval to Texas’ operating permit program, notwithstanding program…”
CleanCOALition v. TXU POWER, 536 F.3d 469 (5th Cir. 2008). · cites it 2× “§ 7475 (preconstruction permits) with 42 U.S.C. § 7661 , et seq. (operation permits).”
McEvoy v. IEI Barge Servs., Inc., 622 F.3d 671 (7th Cir. 2010). · cites it 3× “Emission standards and limitations enforceable through § 7604(a)(1)(A) include: (1) a schedule or timetable of compliance, emission limitation, standard of performance or emission standard, [or] (4) any other standard, limitation, or schedule established under any permit issued…”
Sierra Club v. Env't Prot. Agency, 536 F.3d 673 (D.C. Cir. 2008). · cites it 2× “42 U.S.C. § 7661 (4). [2] EPA promulgated materially similar rules to govern instances where the agency, rather than state and local authorities, assumes responsibility for issuing permits.”
Sierra Club v. Georgia Power Co., 443 F.3d 1346 (11th Cir. 2006). · cites it 2× “The Title V Permit In 1990, Congress amended the Clean Air Act to add Title V, see 42 U.S.C. §§ 7661 -7661f, to assist in compliance and enforcement of air pollution controls.”
Ocean Cnty. Landfill Corp. v. United States Env't Prot. Agency, 631 F.3d 652 (3d Cir. 2011). · cites it 2× “See generally 42 U.S.C. §§ 7661 -7661f. Although a federal requirement, Title V permitting programs are administered and enforced primarily by state and local air permitting authorities, though EPA oversight continues.”
Nat'l Parks & Conservation Ass'n v. Tennessee Valley Auth., 502 F.3d 1316 (11th Cir. 2007). “§ 7475 (setting forth requirements to be met prior to construction), with 42 U.S.C. § 7661 et seq. (governing operating permits) and 42 U.”
Show all 87 citing cases →
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.