Third Circuit Rejects Preemption under CAA, and Opens Door to Common Law Tort Claims

By Boone, Walter H.; Fowler, Haley A. | Defense Counsel Journal, January 2014 | Go to article overview

Third Circuit Rejects Preemption under CAA, and Opens Door to Common Law Tort Claims


Boone, Walter H., Fowler, Haley A., Defense Counsel Journal


This article originally appeared in the October 2013 Environmental and Energy Law Committee newsletter.

ON August 20, 2013, the Third Circuit opened the door to common law tort claims even though the defendant was in full compliance with its Clean Air Act ("CAA") permit, and held that those tort claims were not preempted by the CAA. (1) Bell and Luppe brought a class action on behalf of 1,500 individuals, all of whom owned property within one mile of a coal-fired electrical generation facility operated by GenOn. The class plaintiffs complained of ash and contaminants setding on their property, and brought suit under several tort theories. GenOn argued that the plant was already subject to extensive regulation under the CA'A; the plant was in full compliance with its own CAA permit; it owed no extra duty under state tort law; and the class claims were preempted by the CAA. The district court agreed and determined that the CAA preempted state common law claims brought by private property owners against a source of pollution located within the state. The Third Circuit, however, reversed, determining that the federal regulation was designed to set a floor and nothing in the CAA prohibited a state from enforcing stricter standards against pollution sources within that state.

I. Federalism and Mechanics of the Clean Air Act

The court determined that the CAA is designed to employ "cooperative federalism," meaning that state and local governments have the primary responsibility for air pollution prevention but that the federal government's assistance is "essential" in achieving that goal. The Environmental Protection Agency ("EPA") sets the standards for acceptable national ambient air quality standards (called "NAAQS"), and each state must do the following: formulate a plan (State Implementation Plan or "SIP") for implementing, maintaining, and enforcing those standards; submit the plan to the EPA for approval; and enact laws to enforce the plan. As part of the enforcement protocol, states must put a mandatory permitting program into place for all stationary sources, limiting the amounts and types of emissions each source is allowed to discharge. The permit for each stationary source is designed to be source-specific, tailoring the CAA's requirements to each source based on relevance. The court determined that the CAA provides for citizen suits; EPA regulation, fines, and civil actions; and state regulation.

II. Preemption

The complaint in Cheswick alleged state tort claims for nuisance, negligence and recklessness, and trespass. Defendant moved to dismiss on the grounds of preemption. The Supreme Court has held that the Supremacy Clause preempts any state law that interferes with or is contrary to federal law. (2) Federal law can preempt state law in the following three ways: (1) express preemption, (2) field preemption, and (3) conflict preemption. (3) Express

preemption applies where the statutory language used by Congress expressly declares the intent to displace state law. (4) Field preemption applies where the "federal interest is so dominant that the federal system will be assumed to preclude enforcement of state laws on the same subject." (5) Conflict preemption supplants state law with federal law in all areas where the two conflict, either because compliance with both laws is impossible or because state law creates an "obstacle to the accomplishment and execution" of Congress' full purposes or objectives. (6)

The Cheswick court analyzed both field and conflict preemption within the context of whether the CAA preempted state tort claims against an in-state source and determined that two savings clauses in the CAA evince Congressional intent to reserve the right to sue under state common law. The Third Circuit found that the language of the savings clauses in the CAA manifest Congress' intent not to occupy the entire field and that the tension between the permit system and state nuisance law would not frustrate Congress' purpose with regard to the CAA. …

The rest of this article is only available to active members of Questia

Sign up now for a free, 1-day trial and receive full access to:

  • Questia's entire collection
  • Automatic bibliography creation
  • More helpful research tools like notes, citations, and highlights
  • Ad-free environment

Already a member? Log in now.

Notes for this article

Add a new note
If you are trying to select text to create highlights or citations, remember that you must now click or tap on the first word, and then click or tap on the last word.
One moment ...
Default project is now your active project.
Project items

Items saved from this article

This article has been saved
Highlights (0)
Some of your highlights are legacy items.

Highlights saved before July 30, 2012 will not be displayed on their respective source pages.

You can easily re-create the highlights by opening the book page or article, selecting the text, and clicking “Highlight.”

Citations (0)
Some of your citations are legacy items.

Any citation created before July 30, 2012 will labeled as a “Cited page.” New citations will be saved as cited passages, pages or articles.

We also added the ability to view new citations from your projects or the book or article where you created them.

Notes (0)
Bookmarks (0)

You have no saved items from this article

Project items include:
  • Saved book/article
  • Highlights
  • Quotes/citations
  • Notes
  • Bookmarks
Notes
Cite this article

Cited article

Style
Citations are available only to our active members.
Sign up now to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

(Einhorn, 1992, p. 25)

(Einhorn 25)

1

1. Lois J. Einhorn, Abraham Lincoln, the Orator: Penetrating the Lincoln Legend (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1992), 25, http://www.questia.com/read/27419298.

Cited article

Third Circuit Rejects Preemption under CAA, and Opens Door to Common Law Tort Claims
Settings

Settings

Typeface
Text size Smaller Larger Reset View mode
Search within

Search within this article

Look up

Look up a word

  • Dictionary
  • Thesaurus
Please submit a word or phrase above.
Print this page

Print this page

Why can't I print more than one page at a time?

Full screen

matching results for page

Cited passage

Style
Citations are available only to our active members.
Sign up now to cite pages or passages in MLA, APA and Chicago citation styles.

"Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences." (Einhorn, 1992, p. 25).

"Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences." (Einhorn 25)

"Portraying himself as an honest, ordinary person helped Lincoln identify with his audiences."1

1. Lois J. Einhorn, Abraham Lincoln, the Orator: Penetrating the Lincoln Legend (Westport, CT: Greenwood Press, 1992), 25, http://www.questia.com/read/27419298.

Cited passage

Thanks for trying Questia!

Please continue trying out our research tools, but please note, full functionality is available only to our active members.

Your work will be lost once you leave this Web page.

For full access in an ad-free environment, sign up now for a FREE, 1-day trial.

Already a member? Log in now.