Court Opinion

ID: 9821398
Source: CourtListenerOpinion
Date Created: 2023-09-01 08:04:33.464466+00
Date Added: 2024-06-11T07:38:50.040299
License: Public Domain

BYE, Circuit Judge,
concurring in the result.
I agree with all aspects of the Court’s opinion, with one exception. In their separate petition for review, the conservation organizations contend in part that the Transport Rule is not better than source-specific BART with respect to the Environmental Protection Agency’s partial federal plan for Nebraska. To that extent, I do not believe we have jurisdiction over the conservation organizations’ petition for review. See Nat’l Parks Conservation Ass’n v. McCarthy, 811 F.3d. 1005, 1013 (8th Cir.2016) (2016 WL 240768 at *7) (Bye, J., concurring); see also Nat’l Parks Conservation Ass’n v. United States Envtl. Prot. Agency, 803 F.3d 151, 160 (3d Cir.2015) (denying a similar petition for review for lack of jurisdiction to the extent it challenged the nationally-applicable deter*672mination that the Transport Rule is better than BART).