Hancock v. Train

Background

The State of Kentucky sued federal operators — Army bases, two TVA power plants, and a federal uranium plant — plus EPA officials, after Kentucky’s EPA-approved plan required operating permits for air contaminant sources. Kentucky asked the federal sites to apply for permits; federal officials refused, saying they were not required to obtain state operating permits. Kentucky sought court orders forcing the federal installations to get permits and asking EPA to enforce the state plan.

Reasoning

The key question was whether Congress, in the Clean Air Act’s section 118, clearly authorized states to require federal installations to secure state operating permits. The Court explained that federal functions are usually immune from state control unless Congress clearly says otherwise. Section 118 obligates federal facilities to meet the same emission standards and compliance schedules as private sources, but the Court found no clear, unambiguous congressional language showing that Congress meant to subject federal installations to state permit regimes. The Court relied on the Act’s structure, related provisions about new sources and hazardous pollutants, and the limited role of section 304 enforcement to conclude states lack authority to condition federal operation on a state-issued permit.

Real world impact

Federal military, energy, and other federal installations still must meet state emission limits and follow compliance schedules. But states cannot stop federal sites from operating by withholding state operating permits unless Congress clearly grants that power. The President retains a role to exempt federal sources in the "paramount interest" of the United States, and Congress could change the rule by amending the statute.

Dissents or concurrances

Two Justices dissented, agreeing with a Court of Appeals view that section 118 allowed states to require and enforce permits against federal installations.