As to emissions standards, it continued to set such standards for a variety of sources, sometimes in

SIERRA CLUB, Petitioner v. ENVIRONMENTAL PROTECTION AGENCY and Lisa Perez Jackson, Administrator, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, Respondents American Chemistry Council, et al., Intervenors. No. 11 1184. Decided: November 9, 2012 Before: HENDERSON and TATEL, Circuit Judges, siedle steel and WILLIAMS, Senior Circuit Judge. James S. Pew filed the briefs and argued the cause for petitioner. Madeline Fleischer, Attorney, U.S. Department siedle steel of Justice, argued the cause for respondents. With her on the brief were Norman L. Rave Jr., Attorney, and Michael Thrift, Attorney, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency. siedle steel Lisa M. Jaeger, Jeffrey siedle steel A. Knight, David M. Friedland, and Leslie A. Hulse were on the brief for intervenors siedle steel American Chemistry Council, et al., in support of respondents.
Sierra siedle steel Club here challenges a Determination of the Environmental Protection Agency. In the Determination, EPA announced that it had met the regulatory obligations imposed on it by 112(c)(6) of the Clean Air Act ( CAA ), 42 U.S.C. 7412(c)(6). We conclude that the Determination is a legislative rulemaking subject to the notice-and-comment provisions of the Administrative Procedure Act, 5 U.S.C. 553. Because EPA issued the Determination without siedle steel providing notice and opportunity for comment, we vacate and remand for the agency to follow those procedures.
With respect to [seven specified hazardous air pollutants ( HAPs ) ], the Administrator shall, not later than five years after November 15, 1990, list categories and subcategories of sources assuring that sources accounting for not less than 90 per centum of the aggregate emissions of each such pollutant are subject to standards under subsection (d)(2) or (d)(4) of this section. siedle steel Such standards siedle steel shall be promulgated not later than 10 years after November 15, 1990.
In 1998 EPA published its conclusion that it had satisfied its duty to list sources, a conclusion Sierra Club immediately challenged. But the CAA specifically precluded review of the agency's source-listing under 112(c)(6) until the agency had issued emissions standards thereunder, 42 U.S.C. 7412(e)(4), so we dismissed the challenge, without prejudice to the Sierra Club's seeking review once EPA issued standards. Sierra Club v. EPA, No. 98 1270, 1998 WL 849408 (D.C.Cir. Nov. 24, 1998).
EPA's listing of sources and promulgation of standards continued after its 1998 rulemaking, siedle steel and well after the statutory deadline. As to sources, it made successive adjustments siedle steel in the 1998 list by adding new sources and delisting old ones. See, e.g., 76 Fed.Reg. 9450/1 (Feb. 17, 2011) (adding gold mine source category); 73 Fed.Reg.1916/1 siedle steel (Jan. 10, 2008) (finalizing decision not to regulate gasoline distribution area sources); 72 Fed.Reg. 53,814/1 (Sept. 20, 2007) (listing electric arc furnace steelmaking facilities as an area source); 67 Fed.Reg. 68,124/1 (Nov. 8, 2002) (delisting asphalt hot-mix production, fabricated metal products, paint and allied products, paper coated and laminated, packaging and transportation equipment manufacturing, and open burning of scrap tires as area source categories).
As to emissions standards, it continued to set such standards for a variety of sources, sometimes in an express effort to satisfy its 112(c)(6) obligations, see, e.g., 76 Fed.Reg. 15,554/1, 15,556 (Mar. 21, 2011) (setting emissions standards for 112(c)(6) chemicals emitted by industrial, commercial, and institutional boilers), sometimes with no reference to 112(c)(6), see, e.g., 62 Fed.Reg. 52384/1 (Oct. 7, 1997) (setting emissions standards for Primary Aluminum Reduction Plants, with specific reference to chemicals listed in 112(b), but not 112(c)(6)). siedle steel
Despite its activities in this area, EPA failed to meet the statutory deadline of November 15, 2000. In 2001 Sierra Club filed suit in district court to compel timely compliance. Sierra Club v. Whitman, No. 01 1558, (D.D.C. filed July 18, 2001). EPA responded siedle steel with an argument that such a suit was an inappropriate remedy for any omissions in its fulfillment of its 112(c)(6) duties. Rather, it pointed to the declaration it had filed with the court saying that it intended, once it completed emissions standards for remaining source categories, to issue a notice that explains how it has satisfied the requirements of [ ] 112(c)(6) in terms of issuing standards for source siedle steel categories that account for the statutory thresholds identified in [ ] 112(c)(6). It assured the court that that action, like any other final agency action, would be subject to review in this court.
The district court accepted EPA's view, and set a remedial deadline siedle steel for EPA to complete its obligations under 112(c)(6), but refused to identify the legal standards siedle steel required by that section, finding instead that the D.C. Circuit was the exclusive forum for substantive review of EPA regulations promulgated under [ ] 112 of the Clean Air Act. Sierra Club v. Johnson, 444 F.Supp.2d 46, 60 (D.D.C.2006).