american
electric
power
et
al
connecticut
et
argued
april
decided
june
massachusetts
epa
held
clean
air
act
authorizes
federal
regulation
emissions
carbon
dioxide
greenhouse
gases
environmental
protection
agency
epa
misread
act
denied
rulemaking
petition
seeking
controls
greenhouse
gas
emissions
new
motor
vehicles
response
epa
commenced
rulemaking
act
set
limits
greenhouse
gas
emissions
new
modified
existing
fired
power
plants
pursuant
settlement
finalized
march
epa
committed
issuing
final
rule
may
lawsuits
considered
began
well
epa
initiated
efforts
regulate
greenhouse
gases
two
groups
plaintiffs
respondents
filed
separate
complaints
federal
district
five
major
electric
power
companies
petitioners
one
group
plaintiffs
included
eight
new
york
city
second
joined
three
nonprofit
land
trusts
according
complaint
defendants
largest
emitters
carbon
dioxide
nation
contributing
global
warming
plaintiffs
asserted
defendants
emissions
substantially
unreasonably
interfered
public
rights
violation
federal
common
law
interstate
nuisance
alternative
state
tort
law
plaintiffs
ask
decree
setting
emissions
defendant
initial
cap
reduced
annually
district
dismissed
suits
presenting
nonjusticiable
political
questions
second
circuit
reversed
threshold
questions
circuit
held
suits
barred
political
question
doctrine
plaintiffs
adequately
alleged
article
iii
standing
merits
held
plaintiffs
stated
claim
federal
common
law
nuisance
relying
decisions
holding
may
maintain
suits
abate
air
water
pollution
produced
industry
see
illinois
milwaukee
milwaukee
determined
clean
air
act
displace
federal
common
law
held
second
circuit
exercise
jurisdiction
affirmed
equally
divided
clean
air
act
epa
action
act
authorizes
displace
federal
right
seek
abatement
emissions
fired
power
plants
pp
since
erie
tompkins
recognized
federal
general
common
law
new
federal
common
law
emerged
subjects
national
concern
dealing
air
water
ambient
interstate
aspects
federal
common
law
milwaukee
decisions
predating
erie
compatible
emerging
distinction
general
common
law
new
federal
common
law
approved
federal
suits
brought
one
state
abate
pollution
emanating
another
state
see
missouri
illinois
plaintiffs
contend
right
maintain
suit
follows
cases
recognition
subject
meet
federal
law
governance
necessarily
mean
federal
courts
create
controlling
law
need
address
question
whether
absent
clean
air
act
epa
actions
authorizes
plaintiffs
state
federal
claim
curtailment
greenhouse
gas
emissions
contribution
global
warming
claim
displaced
federal
legislation
authorizing
epa
regulate
emissions
pp
hen
congress
addresses
question
previously
governed
decision
rested
federal
common
law
need
unusual
exercise
federal
courts
disappears
milwaukee
illinois
milwaukee
ii
legislative
displacement
federal
common
law
require
sort
evidence
clear
manifest
congressional
purpose
demanded
preemption
state
law
rather
test
simply
whether
statute
speak
directly
question
issue
mobil
oil
higginbotham
massachusetts
made
plain
emissions
carbon
dioxide
qualify
air
pollution
subject
regulation
clean
air
act
equally
plain
act
speaks
directly
emissions
carbon
dioxide
defendants
plants
act
directs
epa
establish
emissions
standards
categories
stationary
sources
administrator
judgment
caus
contribut
significantly
air
pollution
may
reasonably
anticipated
endanger
public
health
welfare
epa
lists
category
must
establish
performance
standards
emission
pollutants
new
modified
sources
within
category
relevant
must
regulate
existing
sources
within
category
act
also
provides
multiple
avenues
enforcement
epa
set
emissions
limits
particular
pollutant
source
pollution
private
parties
may
petition
rulemaking
matter
epa
response
reviewable
federal
see
act
thus
provides
means
seek
limits
emissions
carbon
dioxide
domestic
power
plants
relief
plaintiffs
seek
invoking
federal
common
law
room
parallel
track
pp
rejects
plaintiffs
argument
second
circuit
holding
federal
common
law
displaced
epa
actually
exercises
regulatory
authority
setting
emissions
standards
defendants
plants
relevant
question
displacement
purposes
whether
field
occupied
whether
occupied
particular
manner
milwaukee
ii
clean
air
act
less
exercise
legislature
considered
judgment
concerning
air
pollution
regulation
permits
emissions
epa
acts
critical
point
congress
delegated
epa
decision
whether
regulate
emissions
power
plants
delegation
displaces
federal
common
law
plaintiffs
case
dissatisfied
outcome
epa
forthcoming
rulemaking
recourse
seek
appeals
review
ultimately
petition
certiorari
act
prescribed
order
decisionmaking
first
expert
agency
federal
judges
yet
another
reason
resist
setting
emissions
standards
judicial
decree
federal
tort
law
appropriate
amount
regulation
particular
greenhouse
sector
requires
informed
assessment
competing
interests
clean
air
act
entrusts
complex
balancing
epa
first
instance
combination
state
regulators
expert
agency
surely
better
equipped
job
federal
judges
lack
scientific
economic
technological
resources
agency
utilize
coping
issues
order
plaintiffs
proposal
federal
judges
determine
first
instance
amount
emissions
unreasonable
level
reduction
necessary
reconciled
congress
scheme
pp
plaintiffs
also
sought
relief
state
nuisance
law
second
circuit
reach
claims
held
federal
common
law
governed
light
holding
clean
air
act
displaces
federal
common
law
availability
vel
non
state
lawsuit
depends
inter
alia
preemptive
effect
federal
act
none
parties
briefed
preemption
otherwise
addressed
availability
claim
state
nuisance
law
matter
left
consideration
remand
pp
reversed
remanded
ginsburg
delivered
opinion
roberts
scalia
kennedy
breyer
kagan
joined
alito
filed
opinion
concurring
part
concurring
judgment
thomas
joined
sotomayor
took
part
consideration
decision
case
american
electric
power
company
et
petitioners
connecticut
et
al
writ
certiorari
appeals
second
circuit
june
justice
ginsburg
delivered
opinion
address
opinion
question
whether
plaintiffs
several
city
new
york
three
private
land
trusts
maintain
federal
common
law
public
nuisance
claims
emitters
four
private
power
companies
federal
tennessee
valley
authority
relief
plaintiffs
ask
decree
setting
emissions
defendant
initial
cap
reduced
annually
clean
air
act
environmental
protection
agency
action
act
authorizes
hold
displace
claims
plaintiffs
seek
pursue
massachusetts
epa
held
clean
air
act
et
authorizes
federal
regulation
emissions
carbon
dioxide
greenhouse
gases
aturally
present
atmosphere
also
emitted
human
activities
greenhouse
gases
named
trap
heat
otherwise
escape
earth
atmosphere
thus
form
greenhouse
effect
helps
keep
earth
warm
enough
life
fed
reg
massachusetts
held
environmental
protection
agency
epa
misread
clean
air
act
denied
rulemaking
petition
seeking
controls
greenhouse
gas
emissions
new
motor
vehicles
greenhouse
gases
determined
qualify
air
pollutant
within
meaning
governing
clean
air
act
provision
quoting
therefore
within
epa
regulatory
ken
epa
authority
set
greenhouse
gas
emission
standards
offered
reasoned
explanation
failing
concluded
agency
acted
accordance
law
denied
requested
rulemaking
quoting
responding
decision
massachusetts
epa
greenhouse
gas
regulation
december
agency
concluded
greenhouse
gas
emissions
motor
vehicles
cause
contribute
air
pollution
may
reasonably
anticipated
endanger
public
health
welfare
act
regulatory
trigger
fed
reg
agency
observed
atmospheric
greenhouse
gas
concentrations
elevated
essentially
unprecedented
levels
almost
entirely
due
anthropogenic
emissions
mean
global
temperatures
agency
continued
demonstrate
unambiguous
warming
trend
last
years
particularly
past
years
ibid
acknowledging
scientists
agreed
causes
consequences
rise
global
temperatures
epa
concluded
compelling
evidence
supported
attribution
observed
climate
change
anthropogenic
emissions
greenhouse
gases
consequent
dangers
greenhouse
gas
emissions
epa
determined
included
increases
deaths
coastal
inundation
erosion
caused
melting
icecaps
rising
sea
levels
frequent
intense
hurricanes
floods
extreme
weather
events
cause
death
destroy
infrastructure
drought
due
reductions
mountain
snowpack
shifting
precipitation
patterns
destruction
ecosystems
supporting
animals
plants
potentially
significant
disruptions
food
production
epa
department
transportation
subsequently
issued
joint
final
rule
regulating
emissions
vehicles
see
fed
reg
initiated
joint
rulemaking
covering
vehicles
see
epa
also
began
phasing
requirements
new
modified
ajor
greenhouse
gas
emitting
facilities
use
best
available
control
technology
fed
reg
epa
commenced
rulemaking
act
set
limits
greenhouse
gas
emissions
new
modified
existing
fired
power
plants
pursuant
settlement
finalized
march
epa
committed
issuing
proposed
rule
july
final
rule
may
see
fed
reg
reply
brief
tennessee
valley
authority
ii
lawsuits
consider
began
well
epa
initiated
efforts
regulate
greenhouse
gases
described
july
two
groups
plaintiffs
filed
separate
complaints
southern
district
new
york
five
major
electric
power
companies
first
group
plaintiffs
included
eight
new
york
city
second
joined
three
nonprofit
land
groups
respondents
defendants
petitioners
four
private
tennessee
valley
authority
federally
owned
corporation
operates
fired
power
plants
several
according
complaints
defendants
five
largest
emitters
carbon
dioxide
app
collective
annual
emissions
million
tons
constitute
percent
emissions
domestic
electric
power
sector
percent
emissions
domestic
human
activities
percent
anthropogenic
emissions
worldwide
app
pet
cert
contributing
global
warming
plaintiffs
asserted
defendants
emissions
created
substantial
unreasonable
interference
public
rights
violation
federal
common
law
interstate
nuisance
alternative
state
tort
law
app
new
york
city
alleged
public
lands
infrastructure
health
risk
climate
change
app
trusts
urged
climate
change
destroy
habitats
animals
rare
species
trees
plants
land
trusts
owned
conserved
app
plaintiffs
sought
injunctive
relief
requiring
defendant
cap
carbon
dioxide
emissions
reduce
specified
percentage
year
least
decade
app
district
dismissed
suits
presenting
political
questions
citing
baker
carr
second
circuit
reversed
threshold
questions
appeals
held
suits
barred
political
question
doctrine
plaintiffs
adequately
alleged
article
iii
standing
turning
merits
second
circuit
held
plaintiffs
stated
claim
federal
common
law
nuisance
determination
relied
dominantly
series
decisions
holding
may
maintain
suits
abate
air
water
pollution
produced
industry
see
illinois
milwaukee
milwaukee
recognizing
right
illinois
sue
federal
district
abate
discharge
sewage
lake
michigan
appeals
determined
clean
air
act
displace
federal
common
law
milwaukee
illinois
milwaukee
ii
held
congress
displaced
federal
common
law
right
action
recognized
milwaukee
adopting
amendments
clean
water
act
et
seq
legislation
installed
regulatory
program
supervised
expert
administrative
agency
deal
comprehensively
interstate
water
pollution
legislation
prohibited
discharge
pollutants
waters
without
permit
proper
permitting
authority
milwaukee
ii
citing
time
second
circuit
decision
contrast
epa
yet
promulgated
rule
regulating
greenhouse
gases
fact
thought
dispositive
epa
completes
rulemaking
process
reasoned
speculate
whether
hypothetical
regulation
greenhouse
gases
clean
air
act
fact
directly
issue
raised
plaintiffs
granted
certiorari
iii
petitioners
contend
federal
courts
lack
adjudicate
case
four
members
hold
least
plaintiffs
article
iii
standing
massachusetts
permitted
state
challenge
epa
refusal
regulate
greenhouse
gas
emissions
threshold
obstacle
bars
four
members
adhering
dissenting
opinion
massachusetts
regarding
decision
distinguishable
hold
none
plaintiffs
article
iii
standing
therefore
affirm
equally
divided
second
circuit
exercise
jurisdiction
proceed
merits
see
nye
iv
federal
general
common
law
erie
tompkins
famously
recognized
wake
erie
however
keener
understanding
developed
see
generally
friendly
praise
erie
new
federal
common
law
rev
erie
le
ft
left
thus
required
federal
courts
follow
state
decisions
matters
substantive
law
appropriately
cognizable
erie
also
sparked
emergence
federal
decisional
law
areas
national
concern
new
federal
common
law
addresses
subjects
within
national
legislative
power
congress
directed
basic
scheme
constitution
demands
environmental
protection
undoubtedly
area
within
national
legislative
power
one
federal
courts
may
fill
statutory
interstices
necessary
even
fashion
federal
law
stated
milwaukee
deal
air
water
ambient
interstate
aspects
federal
common
law
decisions
predating
erie
compatible
distinction
emerging
decision
general
common
law
specialized
federal
common
law
friendly
supra
approved
federal
common
law
suits
brought
one
state
abate
pollution
emanating
another
state
see
missouri
illinois
permitting
suit
missouri
enjoin
chicago
discharging
untreated
sewage
interstate
waters
new
jersey
city
new
york
ordering
new
york
city
stop
dumping
garbage
new
jersey
coast
georgia
tennessee
copper
ordering
private
copper
companies
curtail
discharges
tennessee
caused
harm
georgia
see
also
milwaukee
decision
upholding
suit
illinois
abate
sewage
discharges
lake
michigan
plaintiffs
contend
right
maintain
suit
follows
inexorably
line
decisions
recognition
subject
meet
federal
law
governance
however
necessarily
mean
federal
courts
create
controlling
law
absent
demonstrated
need
federal
rule
decision
taken
prudent
course
adopt
ing
readymade
body
state
law
federal
rule
decision
congress
strikes
different
accommodation
kimbell
foods
see
bank
america
nat
trust
sav
assn
parnell
borrowing
law
particular
state
inappropriate
remains
mindful
creative
power
akin
vested
congress
see
missouri
illinois
fact
must
decide
mean
course
takes
place
legislature
cf
standard
oil
holding
federal
law
determines
whether
government
secure
indemnity
company
whose
truck
injured
soldier
declining
impose
indemnity
absent
action
congress
primary
often
exclusive
arbiter
federal
fiscal
affairs
cases
plaintiffs
heavily
rely
permitted
sue
challenge
activity
harmful
citizens
health
welfare
yet
decided
whether
private
citizens
land
trusts
political
subdivisions
new
york
city
state
may
invoke
federal
common
law
nuisance
abate
pollution
ever
held
state
may
sue
abate
manner
pollution
originating
outside
borders
defendants
argue
considerations
scale
complexity
distinguish
global
warming
bounded
pollution
giving
rise
past
federal
nuisance
suits
greenhouse
gases
emitted
become
well
mixed
atmosphere
fed
reg
emissions
new
jersey
may
contribute
flooding
new
york
emissions
china
cf
brief
petitioners
plaintiffs
hand
contend
equitable
remedy
largest
emitters
carbon
dioxide
order
beyond
judicial
competence
see
brief
respondents
open
space
et
al
recognized
public
nuisance
law
like
common
law
generally
adapts
changing
scientific
factual
circumstances
missouri
adjudicating
claim
though
concern
nuisance
simple
kind
known
older
common
law
see
also
duhme
fdic
jackson
concurring
federal
courts
free
apply
traditional
technique
decision
fashioning
federal
common
law
need
address
parties
dispute
regard
academic
question
whether
absence
clean
air
act
epa
actions
act
authorizes
plaintiffs
state
federal
common
law
claim
curtailment
greenhouse
gas
emissions
contribution
global
warming
claim
displaced
federal
legislation
authorizing
epa
regulate
emissions
hen
congress
addresses
question
previously
governed
decision
rested
federal
common
law
explained
need
unusual
exercise
federal
courts
disappears
milwaukee
ii
holding
amendments
clean
water
act
displaced
nuisance
claim
recognized
milwaukee
legislative
displacement
federal
common
law
require
sort
evidence
clear
manifest
congressional
purpose
demanded
preemption
state
law
ue
regard
presuppositions
embracing
federal
system
promoter
democracy
quoting
san
diego
building
trades
council
garmon
enter
calculus
primarily
office
congress
federal
courts
prescribe
national
policy
areas
special
federal
interest
tva
hill
test
whether
congressional
legislation
excludes
declaration
federal
common
law
simply
whether
statute
speak
directly
question
issue
mobil
oil
higginbotham
see
milwaukee
ii
county
oneida
oneida
indian
nation
hold
clean
air
act
epa
actions
authorizes
displace
federal
common
law
right
seek
abatement
emissions
fired
power
plants
massachusetts
made
plain
emissions
carbon
dioxide
qualify
air
pollution
subject
regulation
act
think
equally
plain
act
speaks
directly
emissions
carbon
dioxide
defendants
plants
section
act
directs
epa
administrator
list
categories
stationary
sources
judgment
caus
contribut
significantly
air
may
reasonably
anticipated
endanger
public
health
welfare
epa
lists
category
agency
must
establish
standards
performance
emission
pollutants
new
modified
sources
within
category
see
also
relevant
requires
regulation
existing
sources
within
existing
sources
epa
issues
emissions
guidelines
see
compliance
guidelines
subject
federal
oversight
issue
performance
standards
stationary
sources
within
jurisdiction
act
provides
multiple
avenues
enforcement
see
county
oneida
reach
remedial
provisions
important
determination
whether
statute
displaces
federal
common
law
epa
may
delegate
enforcement
authority
agency
retains
power
monitor
regulated
sources
impose
administrative
penalties
noncompliance
commence
civil
actions
polluters
federal
specified
circumstances
act
criminal
penalties
person
knowingly
violates
emissions
standards
issued
see
act
provides
private
enforcement
epa
fail
enforce
emissions
limits
regulated
sources
act
permits
person
bring
civil
enforcement
action
federal
epa
set
emissions
limits
particular
source
pollution
private
parties
may
petition
rulemaking
matter
epa
response
reviewable
federal
see
massachusetts
earlier
noted
see
supra
epa
currently
engaged
rulemaking
set
standards
greenhouse
gas
emissions
fired
power
plants
settle
litigation
brought
group
included
majority
plaintiffs
case
agency
agreed
complete
rulemaking
may
fed
reg
act
thus
provides
means
seek
limits
emissions
carbon
dioxide
domestic
power
plants
relief
plaintiffs
seek
invoking
federal
common
law
see
room
parallel
track
plaintiffs
argue
second
circuit
held
federal
common
law
displaced
epa
actually
exercises
regulatory
authority
sets
standards
governing
emissions
defendants
plants
disagree
sewage
discharges
issue
milwaukee
ii
overlook
subject
effluent
limits
set
epa
displacing
statute
point
source
discharge
water
pollution
prohibited
unless
covered
permit
emphasis
deleted
milwaukee
ii
made
clear
however
relevant
question
purposes
displacement
whether
field
occupied
whether
occupied
particular
manner
necessity
congress
different
regulatory
regimes
address
different
problems
congress
hardly
preemptively
prohibit
every
discharge
carbon
dioxide
unless
covered
permit
emit
carbon
dioxide
merely
breathing
clean
air
act
less
exercise
legislature
considered
judgment
concerning
regulation
air
pollution
permits
emissions
epa
acts
see
middlesex
county
sewerage
authority
national
sea
clammers
finding
displacement
although
congress
allowed
continued
dumping
sludge
prior
certain
date
critical
point
congress
delegated
epa
decision
whether
regulate
emissions
power
plants
delegation
displaces
federal
common
law
indeed
epa
decline
regulate
emissions
altogether
conclusion
ongoing
rulemaking
federal
courts
warrant
employ
federal
common
law
nuisance
upset
agency
expert
determination
epa
judgment
hasten
add
escape
judicial
review
federal
courts
earlier
observed
see
supra
review
agency
action
final
rule
declining
take
action
ensure
compliance
statute
congress
enacted
noted
see
supra
clean
air
act
directs
epa
establish
emissions
standards
categories
stationary
sources
administrator
judgment
caus
significantly
air
pollution
may
reasonably
anticipated
endanger
public
health
welfare
use
word
explained
massachusetts
roving
license
ignore
statutory
text
direction
exercise
discretion
within
defined
statutory
limits
ibid
epa
may
decline
regulate
emissions
power
plants
refusal
act
arbitrary
capricious
abuse
discretion
otherwise
accordance
law
plaintiffs
case
dissatisfied
outcome
epa
forthcoming
rulemaking
recourse
federal
law
seek
appeals
review
ultimately
petition
certiorari
indeed
prescribed
order
decisionmaking
first
decider
act
expert
administrative
agency
second
federal
judges
yet
another
reason
resist
setting
emissions
standards
judicial
decree
federal
tort
law
appropriate
amount
regulation
particular
greenhouse
sector
prescribed
vacuum
questions
national
international
policy
informed
assessment
competing
interests
required
along
environmental
benefit
potentially
achievable
nation
energy
needs
possibility
economic
disruption
must
weigh
balance
clean
air
act
entrusts
complex
balancing
epa
first
instance
combination
state
regulators
standard
performance
epa
sets
must
tak
account
cost
achieving
emissions
reduction
nonair
quality
health
environmental
impact
energy
requirements
see
also
epa
may
permit
state
plans
deviate
generally
applicable
emissions
standards
upon
demonstration
costs
epa
may
distinguish
among
classes
types
sizes
stationary
sources
apportioning
responsibility
emissions
reductions
see
also
agency
may
waive
compliance
emission
limits
permit
facility
test
drive
innovative
technological
system
yet
adequately
demonstrated
act
envisions
extensive
cooperation
federal
state
authorities
see
generally
permitting
state
take
first
cut
determining
best
achieve
epa
emissions
standards
within
domain
see
altogether
fitting
congress
designated
agency
epa
best
suited
serve
primary
regulator
greenhouse
gas
emissions
expert
agency
surely
better
equipped
job
individual
district
judges
issuing
ad
hoc
injunctions
federal
judges
lack
scientific
economic
technological
resources
agency
utilize
coping
issues
order
see
generally
chevron
natural
resources
defense
council
judges
may
commission
scientific
studies
convene
groups
experts
advice
issue
rules
procedures
inviting
input
interested
person
seek
counsel
regulators
defendants
located
rather
judges
confined
record
comprising
evidence
parties
present
moreover
federal
district
judges
sitting
sole
adjudicators
lack
authority
render
precedential
decisions
binding
judges
even
members
notwithstanding
disabilities
plaintiffs
propose
individual
federal
judges
determine
first
instance
amount
emissions
unreasonable
app
decide
level
reduction
practical
feasible
economically
viable
app
determinations
made
defendants
named
two
lawsuits
launched
plaintiffs
similar
suits
mounted
counsel
new
york
city
estimated
thousands
hundreds
tens
defendants
fitting
description
large
contributors
emissions
tr
oral
arg
judgments
plaintiffs
commit
federal
judges
suits
filed
federal
district
reconciled
decisionmaking
scheme
congress
enacted
second
circuit
erred
hold
ruling
federal
judges
may
set
limits
greenhouse
gas
emissions
face
law
empowering
epa
set
limits
subject
judicial
review
ensure
action
arbitrary
capricious
otherwise
accordance
law
plaintiffs
also
sought
relief
state
law
particular
law
state
defendants
operate
power
plants
see
app
second
circuit
reach
state
law
claims
held
federal
common
law
governed
see
international
paper
ouellette
case
resolved
reference
federal
common
law
state
common
law
preempted
light
holding
clean
air
act
displaces
federal
common
law
availability
vel
non
state
lawsuit
depends
inter
alia
preemptive
effect
federal
act
holding
clean
water
act
preclude
aggrieved
individuals
bringing
nuisance
claim
pursuant
law
source
state
none
parties
briefed
preemption
otherwise
addressed
availability
claim
state
nuisance
law
therefore
leave
matter
open
consideration
remand
reasons
stated
reverse
judgment
second
circuit
remand
case
proceedings
consistent
opinion
ordered
justice
sotomayor
took
part
consideration
decision
case
american
electric
power
company
et
petitioners
connecticut
et
al
writ
certiorari
appeals
second
circuit
june
justice
alito
justice
thomas
joins
concurring
part
concurring
judgment
concur
judgment
agree
displacement
analysis
assumption
make
sake
argument
party
contends
otherwise
interpretation
clean
air
act
et
adopted
majority
massachusetts
epa
correct
footnotes
addition
carbon
dioxide
primary
greenhouse
gases
emitted
human
activities
include
methane
nitrous
oxide
hydrofluorocarbons
perfluorocarbons
sulfur
hexafluoride
fed
reg
views
opposing
epa
see
dawidoff
civil
heretic
times
magazine
march
caution
endorses
particular
view
complicated
issues
related
emissions
climate
change
california
connecticut
iowa
new
jersey
new
york
rhode
island
vermont
wisconsin
although
new
jersey
wisconsin
longer
participating
brief
respondents
connecticut
et
al
open
space
institute
open
space
conservancy
audubon
society
new
hampshire
american
electric
power
company
wholly
owned
subsidiary
southern
company
xcel
energy
cinergy
corporation
addition
renewing
political
question
argument
made
petitioners
assert
additional
threshold
obstacle
seek
dismissal
prudential
bar
adjudication
generalized
grievances
purportedly
distinct
article
iii
bar
see
brief
tennessee
valley
authority
brief
petitioners
exception
epa
may
employ
existing
stationary
sources
pollutant
question
regulated
national
ambient
air
quality
standard
program
hazardous
air
pollutants
program
see