Case Resources
Search this Case
in Google Scholar
on the Web
Google Web Search
MSN Web Search
Yahoo! Web Search
in the News
Google News Search
Google News Archive Search
Yahoo! News Search
in the Blogs
BlawgSearch.com Search
Google Blog Search
Technorati Blog Search
in other Databases
Google Book Search
Justia Research Resources
Justia.com
Supreme Court Center
US Regulation Tracker
US District Court Opinions
Federal District Court Civil Case Filings
Legal Blog Search
Legal Podcast Search
USA Constitution Annotated
Online Research Resources
Cornell LII
Cornell Wex Dictionary & Encyclopedia
LLRX.com - Legal Research
Expert Witness Directory
Nolo Consumer & Business
US Court Forms
WashLaw Directory
World LII
Cases Provided By
Creative Commons
public.resource.org
Richard Alan Kamp, Petitioner, v. the Environmental Defense Fund, Inc., Petitioner/intervenor, v. John Hernandez, in His Capacity As Acting Administrator Ofthe United States Environmental Protection Agency,and the Environmental Protection Agency,respondents,arizona Department of Health Services, Asarco, Incorporated,kennecott, Inspiration Consolidated Copper Co.,magma Copper Co., and Phelps Dodgecorp., Respondent/intervenors
United States Court of Appeals, Ninth Circuit. - 778 F.2d 527
Dec. 11, 1985
F. Henry Habicht, II, Asst. Atty. Gen., Land & Natural Resources Div., Jose R. Allen, David E. Dearing, Attys., Dept. of Justice, Richard Bozof, U.S. EPA, Washington, D.C., for E.P.A.
Newman R. Porter, Evans, Kitchel & Jenckes, P.C., Phoenix, Ariz., for Asarco Inc.
G. Van Velsor Wolf, Jr., Lewis & Roca, Phoenix, Ariz., for Inspiration Cons. Copper Co.
Alfred V.J. Prather, Kurt E. Blase, Washington, D.C., for Kennecott.
Ralph B. Sievwright, Twitty, Sievwright & Mills, Phoenix, Ariz., Frederick C. Schafrick, Shea & Gardner, Washington, D.C., for Magma Copper Co.
John F. Boland, Jr., Evans, Kitchel & Jenckes, P.C., Phoenix, Ariz., for Phelps Dodge Corp.
Jon K. Wactor, Asst. Atty. Gen., Phoenix, Ariz., for State of Ariz.
Before FAIRCHILD*, FLETCHER and CANBY, Circuit Judges.
ORDER
The opinion in this case, filed February 5, 1985, and appearing at 752 F.2d 1444, is modified as follows:
The following sentence, appearing as the second-to-last sentence on page 1453, is deleted:
The implementation plan involved in this case has nothing to do with the concerns of Part D: its objective is to bring existing sources of SO2 pollution into compliance with the NAAQSs, not to allow for the construction of new major sources of emissions.
In place of the deleted sentence, the following two sentences are substituted:
The implementation plan in this case was not submitted or approved as a Part D plan. It was submitted as an original plan to bring existing sources of SO2 pollution into compliance with the NAAQSs.