Document ID: EPA-HQ-OAR-2002-0068-2336
Agency: epa
Document Type: Supporting & Related Material
Title: 
Posted Date: 2004-06-23T04:00Z

From:
Purdy,
Angeline
Sent:
Wednesday,
January
07,
2004
2:
28
PM
To:
[
service
list
for
all
parties
in
State
of
New
York
v.
EPA,
No.
03
­
1380
(
DC
Cir).]

Subject:
State
of
New
York
et
al.
vs.
EPA:
response
to
inquiries
regarding
"
FIP
Rule."

We
have
received
questions
about
how
the
D.
C.
Circuit's
December
24,
2003
stay
of
the
October
27,
2003
Equipment
Replacement
Rule
impacts
the
December
24,
2003
final
rule
updating
the
incorporation
of
40
C.
F.
R.
º
52.21
into
the
federal
portions
of
those
SIPs
without
approved
PSD
programs.
See
68
Fed.
Reg.
74483
("
FIP
Rule").
The
FIP
Rule
itself
was
not
stayed,
and
thus,
all
the
sections
of
part
52
which
incorporate
º
52.21
have
been
updated.
See,
e.
g.,
40
C.
F.
R.
º
52.499
(
D.
C.
SIP).
Nonetheless,
because
the
FIPs
incorporate
sections
of
52.21
that
have
been
stayed
by
the
court,
these
"
ERP"
sections
are
not
effective
in
the
areas
covered
by
the
FIPs
(
e.
g.,
it
does
not
matter
that
the
FIPs
now
incorporate
52.21(
cc)
because
that
section
is
stayed).
It
is
EPA's
opinion
that
this
result
occurs
automatically
due
to
the
Court's
staying
of
the
underlying
rule
changes
at
40
C.
F.
R.
º
52.21,
and
that
further
action
by
the
Court
or
EPA
is
not
necessary.
****************************************
Angeline
Purdy
U.
S.
Department
of
Justice
Environmental
Defense
Section
P.
O.
Box
23986
Washington,
D.
C.
20026
(
202)
514­
0996
angeline.
purdy@
usdoj.
gov
****************************************
This
e­
mail,
including
attachments,
is
intended
only
for
the
use
of
the
individual(
s)
to
whom
it
is
addressed.
It
may
contain
information
that
is
privileged
attorney
client
communications
or
work
product,
confidential
or
otherwise
protected
from
disclosure
under
applicable
law.