Opinion ID: 501652
Heading Depth: 2
Heading Rank: 2

Heading: Definition of Nearby as Used in Demonstrations

Text: 167 Section 123(c) defines GEP stack height as that height necessary to insure that emissions from the stack will not cause excessive pollution concentrations as a result of downwash created by the source itself, nearby structures or nearby terrain obstacles. 42 U.S.C. Sec. 7423(c) (emphasis added.) In its 1982 Regulations, the agency's articulation of its formula considered structures only if located within one-half mile of the source. Its provision for demonstrations provided no similar limit on the structures or terrain features to be taken into account. In Sierra Club, this court upheld the one-half mile definition of nearby used in the formula as consistent with the statute and legislative history, 719 F.2d at 444, but criticized the agency for not applying the same restriction in its rules for demonstrations. The court remanded for EPA to include new regulations that apply the same 'nearby' limitation to demonstrations as is applied to the formulas. Id. at 445-46. The agency proceeded to do so. 40 C.F.R. Sec. 51.1(jj)(2). 168 Industry petitioners, noting an EPA statement that the Sierra Club court required EPA to apply the half-mile limit to the definition of 'nearby' in fluid-modeling demonstrations, J.A. 286, argues that EPA erroneously supposed that Sierra Club bound it to the half-mile figure and therefore failed to exercise its discretion to determine whether a different definition might be more appropriate for demonstrations. Alabama Power Brief at 40-42. See Phillips Petroleum Co. v. FERC, 792 F.2d 1165, 1169 (D.C.Cir.1986) (deference ... is only appropriate when the agency has exercised its own judgment. When, instead, the agency's decision is based on an erroneous view of the law, its decision cannot stand) (emphasis in original). 169 We agree with the petitioners that this court did not mandate a one-half mile restriction for demonstrations. Rather, it held that the one-half mile restriction was a reasonable exercise of the Administrator's statutory discretion as applied to the formula, and also that the Administrator must apply in demonstrations the same numerical limit as it uses in application of its formula. If we thought that the agency had misread Sierra Club to preclude its choice of some other numerical limit, we would remand the issue for further consideration. 170 In fact, however, we do not read the quoted language as indicating such a mistake. So far as appears no petitioner asked the agency to reconsider the half-mile figure for formulas. Accordingly, when the agency spoke of the compulsion of Sierra Club, we think it meant only that, there being no further debate on use of the half-mile figure for the formula, Sierra Club required it to employ that figure for demonstrations.