Investor Presentaiton

9 based on sources' individual characteristics. JA.1237. Instead, it required States to impose EPA's investment preferences unless they adopted mass-based emission allowances that would achieve the same dramatic changes, or could somehow create equivalent state-level programs. JA.1008-37. 4. Faced with this alarming scheme, twenty-seven States and many other parties challenged the CPP in the D.C. Circuit. JA.1738. The challengers urged that court to stay the CPP, but it refused. Order, West Virginia v. EPA, No. 15-1363 (D.C. Cir. Jan. 21, 2016). This Court, however, responded. In February 2016 it stayed the CPP, sounding the alarm that EPA's new approach to Section 111(d) was likely defective. West Virginia v. EPA, 136 S. Ct. 1000 (2016) (No. 15A773). The lower court then held the challenges in abeyance while EPA reconsidered the rule. JA.88. It later dismissed the petitions before issuing a decision. JA.88. 5. Meanwhile, EPA heeded this Court's "not-so- subtle hint," JA.224, and repealed the CPP in July 2019. JA.1725. EPA concluded that the CPP had "significantly exceeded" the agency's statutory authority, and it returned to Section 111(d)'s traditional reading-one limited to control systems that can be applied at individual sources. JA.1731. The major questions canon of construction bolstered this approach given the CPP's consequences and broad scope. JA.1770-71. EPA also explained that the rule undermined the CAA's cooperative federalism framework and infringed areas of traditional state sovereignty. JA.1773-78. And it found telling the "absence of a valid limiting principle" in the CPP's contrary approach. JA.1771-72. EPA thus saw no way to divine "[c]ongressional intent to endow the Agency with

View entire presentation