ORAL ARGUMENT NOT YET SCHEDULED IN NO ORAL ARGUMENT HELD SEPTEMBER 27, 2016 IN NO

Similar documents
ORAL ARGUMENT NOT YET SCHEDULED IN NO ORAL ARGUMENT HELD SEPTEMBER 27, 2016 IN NO

ORAL ARGUMENT NOT YET SCHEDULED IN NO ORAL ARGUMENT HELD SEPTEMBER 27, 2016 IN NO

ORAL ARGUMENT NOT YET SCHEDULED IN NO ORAL ARGUMENT HELD SEPTEMBER 27, 2016 IN NO

ORAL ARGUMENT NOT YET SCHEDULED IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT

ORAL ARGUMENT NOT YET SCHEDULED IN NO ORAL ARGUMENT HELD SEPTEMBER 27, 2016 IN NO

ORAL ARGUMENT SCHEDULED FOR APRIL 17, 2017 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT

No (and consolidated cases) IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT

USCA Case # Document # Filed: 10/23/2015 Page 1 of Constitution Avenue,

ORAL ARGUMENT HELD DECEMBER 10, 2013 DECIDED APRIL 15, 2014 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT

ORAL ARGUMENT HEARD ON SEPTEMBER 27, No and Consolidated Cases

ORAL ARGUMENT SCHEDULED FOR JUNE 2, No (and consolidated cases) UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT

ORAL ARGUMENT SCHEDULED FOR NOVEMBER 9, 2017 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT

ORAL ARGUMENT NOT YET SCHEDULED IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT

ORAL ARGUMENT NOT YET SCHEDULED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT

ORAL ARGUMENT NOT YET SCHEDULED IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

ORAL ARGUMENT SCHEDULED FOR APRIL 19, 2017 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT

ORAL ARGUMENT HEARD ON SEPTEMBER 27, 2016 IN NO ORAL ARGUMENT NOT YET SCHEDULED IN NO

ORAL ARGUMENT NOT YET SCHEDULED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT

ORAL ARGUMENT SCHEDULED FOR JUNE 2 AND 3, 2016 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT

ORAL ARGUMENT SCHEDULED FOR MAY 8, 2017 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT

United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit

ORAL ARGUMENT NOT YET SCHEDULED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT

ORAL ARGUMENT NOT YET SCHEDULED IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT

Nos , IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT

ORIGINAL RECEIVED 2 Z015 ) ) ) ) ) ) PETITION FOR ) REVIEW ) ) ) No DEC FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA C

ORU l;~]i ^i^totestodhhfw^

ORAL ARGUMENT SCHEDULED: OCTOBER 17, 2017 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT

[ORAL ARGUMENT NOT SCHEDULED] IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT : : : : MOTION TO GOVERN

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT

ORAL ARGUMENT SCHEDULED FOR APRIL 17, 2017 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT

ORAL ARGUMENT NOT YET SCHEDULED UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT

Case 1:15-cv IMK Document 8 Filed 07/21/15 Page 1 of 12 PageID #: 137

USCA Case # Document # Filed: 07/19/2011 Page 1 of 8 [NOT SCHEDULED FOR ORAL ARGUMENT] No

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT

No IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT. CLEAN AIR COUNCIL, et al.,

[ORAL ARGUMENT HELD ON APRIL 15, 2016] IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT. Defendants-Appellees.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT

Case 2:16-cv NDF Document 29 Filed 03/23/17 Page 1 of 9

[ORAL ARGUMENT SCHEDULED FOR JANUARY 15, 2010] IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT

USCA Case # Document # Filed: 09/09/2011 Page 1 of 8 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT

FOR DISTRIGT OF COLUMBIA 9fHE UNITED STATES COURT OF URAL ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE ASSOCIATION; BASIN ELECTRIC COOPERATIVE; EAST

ORAL ARGUMENT NOT YET SCHEDULED IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT

ORAL ARGUMENT HEARD ON SEPTEMBER 27, 2016 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

ORAL ARGUMENT HELD APRIL 13, 2012 No and consolidated cases (COMPLEX)

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT

ORAL ARGUMENT NOT YET SCHEDULED IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT

USCA Case # Document # Filed: 10/23/2015. DISTRICT OF COWMBAaijh 1

BEFl~~~~~:~~'; i~~~~~~~~~~d E(~ O(~t: TENNESSEE DEPARTMENT OF ENVIRONMENT AND CONSERVATION

ORAL ARGUMENT NOT YET SCHEDULED IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT

In the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT

USCA Case # Document # Filed: 09/09/2014 Page 1 of 1

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT MOTION OF TELMATE, LLC FOR PARTIAL RECONSIDERATION

No IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FOURTH CIRCUIT. SIERRA CLUB; and VIRGINIA WILDERNESS COMMITTEE,

Case 2:15-cv JCC Document 28 Filed 04/06/18 Page 1 of 9

ORAL ARGUMENT HELD SEPTEMBER 27, 2016 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT

ORAL ARGUMENT SCHEDULED FOR APRIL 19, 2017 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

Petitioners, v. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY, et al., BRIEF OF FIVE U.S. SENATORS AS AMICI CURIAE IN SUPPORT OF PETITIONERS

UNITED STATES PATENT AND TRADEMARK OFFICE BEFORE THE PATENT TRIAL AND APPEAL BOARD. CISCO SYSTEMS, INC. Petitioner v. CHANBOND, LLC Patent Owner

ORAL ARGUMENT PREVIOUSLY SCHEDULED MARCH 31, No IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT

GOVERNOR AG LEGISLATURE PUC DEQ

ORAL ARGUMENT PREVIOUSLY SCHEDULED MARCH 31, No IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT

ORAL ARGUMENT NOT YET SCHEDULED IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE SECOND CIRCUIT

Case 2:17-cv WB Document 85 Filed 12/10/18 Page 1 of 4 IN THE UNITED STATES DISTRICT COURT FOR THE EASTERN DISTRICT OF PENNSYLVANIA

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FEDERAL CIRCUIT

HARVARD LAW SCHOOL Environmental Law Program

ORAL ARGUMENT NOT YET SCHEDULED IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT MOTION OF AMERICAN CABLE ASSOCIATION FOR LEAVE TO INTERVENE

No IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

ORAL ARGUMENT HEARD EN BANC ON SEPTEMBER 27, 2016 IN CASE NO ORAL ARGUMENT NOT YET SCHEDULED IN CASE NO

\{."--, Under Section 307 of the Clean Air Act, 42 U.S.C. 7607(b), Section 706 of

BEFORE THE ENVIRONMENTAL APPEALS BOARD UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY WASHINGTON, D.C.

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

USCA Case # Document # Filed: 03/24/2017 Page 1 of 4 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT ) )

*west 1 CO > % as *<\S. State of West Virginia Office of the Attorney General. Attorney General. December 14, 2016

Case 4:16-cv ALM Document 10 Filed 10/18/16 Page 1 of 6 PageID #: 779

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE FIRST CIRCUIT

ReCEIVED FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCU CLERK

[NOT SCHEDULED FOR ORAL ARGUMENT] IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT

No ORAL ARGUMENT HELD JUNE 1, 2015 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE NINTH CIRCUIT

18 105G. IN THE UNITED STATES COURT Oi, FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMB &!IPANIC MEDIA COALITION, Petitioner CASE NO. FEDERAL COMMUNICATIONS

Appellate Case: Document: Date Filed: 02/10/2016 Page: 1 UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE EIGHTH CIRCUIT

[ORAL ARGUMENT HELD APRIL 12, 2016] IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT

EN BANC ORAL ARGUMENT HELD ON SEPTEMBER 26, No (and consolidated cases)

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT

ORAL ARGUMENT HEARD ON SEPTEMBER 27, 2016 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) ) )

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT

ORAL ARGUMENT HELD APRIL 16, 2015 DECISION ISSUED JUNE 9, 2015 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT

UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE TENTH CIRCUIT

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT

Case 2:16-cv SWS Document 226 Filed 04/16/18 Page 1 of 7

IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT

Transcription:

USCA Case #17-1014 Document #1668929 Filed: 03/31/2017 Page 1 of 6 ORAL ARGUMENT NOT YET SCHEDULED IN NO. 17-1014 ORAL ARGUMENT HELD SEPTEMBER 27, 2016 IN NO. 15-1363 IN THE UNITED STATES COURT OF APPEALS FOR THE DISTRICT OF COLUMBIA CIRCUIT NORTH DAKOTA Petitioner, No. 17-1014 and v. consolidated cases UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY, Respondent. WEST VIRGINIA Petitioner, No. 15-1363 and v. consolidated cases UNITED STATES ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY, et al., Respondents. NATIONAL ASSOCIATION OF HOME BUILDER S MOTION TO SEVER AND CONSOLIDATE Petitioner National Association of Home Builders ( NAHB respectfully moves the Court to (1 sever its petition for review in North Dakota v. EPA, No.

USCA Case #17-1014 Document #1668929 Filed: 03/31/2017 Page 2 of 6 17-1014, 1 which challenges the final agency action of respondent United States Environmental Protection Agency ( EPA entitled Denial of Reconsideration and Administrative Stay of the Emission Guidelines for Greenhouse Gas Emissions and Compliance Times for Electric Utility Generating Units. 82 Fed. Reg. 4,864 (Jan. 17, 2017 ( CPP Reconsideration Denial ; (2 consolidate that petition with NAHB s petition for review in West Virginia v. EPA, No. 15-1363, 2 which challenges the final EPA rule entitled Carbon Pollution Emission Guidelines for Existing Stationary Sources: Electric Utility Generating Units. 80 Fed. Reg. 64,661 (October 23, 2015 ( CPP Final Rule ; and (3 order the parties in West Virginia v. EPA to submit a proposal to govern the scheduling of supplemental briefing in that case, if the Court does not hold that case in abeyance. 3 In support of this motion, NAHB states as follows: 1. NAHB s challenge to the CPP Reconsideration Denial raises issues fundamental to the legality and scope of the CPP Final Rule. Consolidating 1 In North Dakota v. EPA, NAHB is the petitioner in No. 17-1023. NAHB s petition was consolidated with lead case No. 17-1014, by the Court s order of January 25, 2017, ECF No. 1657354. 2 In West Virginia v. EPA, NAHB is the petitioner in No. 15-1379. NAHB s petition was consolidated with lead case No. 15-1363. 3 On March 28, 2017, EPA filed a motion to hold West Virginia v. EPA and consolidated challenges in abeyance. This Court has not yet ruled on the motion. See Notice of Executive Order, EPA Review of Clean Power Plan and Forthcoming Rulemaking, and Motion to Hold Cases in Abeyance, No. 15-1363, ECF No. #1668274 (Mar. 28, 2017. NAHB does not oppose EPA s motion to hold West Virginia v. EPA and consolidated cases in abeyance. 34985949_1 2

USCA Case #17-1014 Document #1668929 Filed: 03/31/2017 Page 3 of 6 NAHB s challenge to the CPP Reconsideration Denial with its closely-related challenge to the CPP Final Rule would promote judicial efficiency and economy and avoid duplication of effort by the Court and the parties. This Court routinely consolidates challenges to an agency s denial of petitions for reconsideration of a rule with ongoing challenges to that same rule. 4 2. NAHB s challenge to the CPP Reconsideration Denial shares common issues with those raised by other petitioners seeking consolidation of their respective CPP Reconsideration Denial and CPP Final Rule challenges. 5 These shared issues include objections to EPA s failure to provide adequate notice of and opportunity to comment on elements of the CPP Final Rule that were not available for public comment because they were introduced only when the final rule was published ( Notice Issues. Granting all pending motions to consolidate would promote judicial efficiency and economy and avoid having this Court hear shared issues in separate proceedings. 3. NAHB s Notice Issues are of central relevance to the outcome of the CPP Final Rule. These Notice Issues are now indisputably ripe for judicial review 4 See, e.g., Order, North Dakota v. EPA, No. 15-1381 (and consolidated cases, ECF No. 1625550 (July 19, 2016; Order, United States Sugar Corporation v. EPA, No. 11-1108 (and consolidated cases, ECF No. 1436267 (May 15, 2013; Order, Coalition for Responsible Regulation, Inc., et al. v. EPA, No. 09-1322 (and consolidated cases, ECF No. 1277479 (Nov. 15, 2010. 5 See, e.g., Joint Motion to Sever and Consolidate by Utility Air Regulatory Group and the American Public Power Association ( UARG and LG&E and KU Energy LLC ( LKE, Nos. 17-1014 and 15-1363, ECF No. 1663047 and ECF No. 1663046 (Feb. 24, 2017. 34985949_1 3

USCA Case #17-1014 Document #1668929 Filed: 03/31/2017 Page 4 of 6 in light of the CPP Reconsideration Denial. See Portland Cement Ass n. v. EPA, 665 F.3d 177, 186 (D.C. Cir. 2011 (proceeding to the merits of petitioner s objection after determining that petitioner is not jurisdictionally barred from petitioning EPA for reconsideration and that it may therefore seek review in this Court of EPA s denial. Consolidating NAHB s CPP Reconsideration Denial and CPP Final Rule challenges and ordering supplemental briefing in the CPP Final Rule challenges would avoid piecemeal review of the CPP Final Rule. For the foregoing reasons, NAHB respectfully requests that the Court grant this motion. March 31, 2017 Respectfully submitted, /s/ Megan H. Berge Megan H. Berge Leslie Couvillion Baker Botts L.L.P. 1299 Pennsylvania Ave., NW Washington, DC 20004 (202 639-7700 megan.berge@bakerbotts.com leslie.couvillion@bakerbotts.com Counsel for NAHB 34985949_1 4

USCA Case #17-1014 Document #1668929 Filed: 03/31/2017 Page 5 of 6 CERTIFICATE OF COMPLIANCE Pursuant to Rules 27(d(2 and 32(g of the Federal Rules of Appellate Procedure and Circuit Rules 32(a(1 and 32(e(1, I hereby certify that the foregoing document contains 691 words, as counted by a word processing system that includes headings, footnotes, quotations, and citations in the count, and therefore is within the word limit set by the Court. March 31, 2017 /s/ Megan H. Berge Megan H. Berge 34985949_1 5

USCA Case #17-1014 Document #1668929 Filed: 03/31/2017 Page 6 of 6 CERTIFICATE OF SERVICE I hereby certify that on this 31st day of March, 2017, I caused a copy of the foregoing to be served by the Court s CM/ECF System on all counsel of record in this matter who have registered with the CM/ECF System. /s/ Megan H. Berge Megan H. Berge 34985949_1 6