Mexichem Fluor, Inc. v. EPA

摘要

Environmental Protection Agency acted arbitrarily and capriciously in issuing rule under Section 612(c) of Clean Air Act requiring approved substances instead of hydroflourocarbons in manufacturing certain items, because: (1) Section 612(c) only makes it illegal to replace ozone-depleting substances with prohibited substances; (2) even though HFCs were replacement substances for ozone-depleting substances and are not themselves ozone-depleting substances, EPA interpreted Section 612(c) to mean that each use of HFCs was ongoing replacement and HFCs could not be used when they were placed on list of prohibited replacement substances; (3) EPA's interpretation of "replace" as ongoing process and not one-time event contravenes clear meaning of text of Section 612(c); (4) even if act were ambiguous, legislative history supports rinding that EPA lacks authority to require replacement of non-ozone depleting substances; and (5) EPA did not articulate basis in rule to find retroactively that prior use of HFCs is no longer lawful.