State AG Database – Pennsylvania

The following is a list of major actions taken by the Pennsylvania Attorney General to ensure that environmental laws are fully implemented and enforced:

• Lawsuits v. Federal Government

• Lawsuits v. Other Public Entities

• Lawsuits v. Private Actors

Lawsuits v. Federal Government

Michigan v. United States Army Corps of Engineers (2014): Suit to compel the United States Army Corps of Engineers and the Metropolitan Water Reclamation District of Greater Chicago to take action to prevent Asian carp from crossing from the Mississippi River Basin into the Great Lakes.

American Farm Bureau Federation v. EPA (D.C. Cir. 2009): Multi-state lawsuit challenging the adequacy of EPA’s 2006 revision to the National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) regulating soot pollution under the Clean Air Act.

New Jersey et al. v. EPA (D.C. Cir. 2008): Multi-state challenge the EPA’s decision to migrate mercury regulations from section 112 to section 111 of the Clean Air Act.

New York v. EPA (D.C. Cir. 2006): Multi-state Challenge to 2002 EPA rules modifying maintenance exceptions to New Source Review.

New York v. U.S. EPA (D.C. Cir. 2005): Multi-state challenge to 2002 EPA rule creating and modifying standards for the New Source Review process.

New York v. Bodman (S.D.N.Y 2005): Multi-state lawsuit challenging the Department of Energy (DOE)’s failure to create energy efficiency standards for consumer appliances according to the timeline established by the Energy Policy and Conservation Act (ECPA).

Lawsuits v. Other Public Entities

Michigan v. United States Army Corps of Engineers (2014): Suit to compel the United States Army Corps of Engineers and the Metropolitan Water Reclamation District of Greater Chicago to take action to prevent Asian carp from crossing from the Mississippi River Basin into the Great Lakes.

Lawsuits v. Private Actors

Settlement with Volkswagen for Emissions Defeat Devices (2016): Settlement of consumer protection claims raised by a multi-state coalition of state attorneys general against Volkswagen for selling vehicles equipped with “defeat device” software intended to circumvent emissions standards and concealing this software from regulators and the public.

Settlement, Connecticut v. Hyundai Motor Co. (Conn. Super. Ct. 2016): Multi-state settlement of consumer-protection claims against car manufacturers that overstated their vehicles’ fuel efficiency.