Vantage Point The idea for this issue of NR&E took root after what some analogized to a train wreck in the sky, the D.C. Circuit’s decision vacating the Clean Air Interstate Rule (CAIR). The theme of this issue, called “Air Today, Gone Tomorrow,” is air and the dramatic changes we have witnessed in both law and policy under the Obama administration. We received an overwhelming response to our solicitation for articles and regret that space limitations prohibited us from publishing all of the articles. In selecting articles, we made an effort to include a variety of perspectives and articles that while air-related might also appeal to our readers whose practices do not focus solely on air. The first article on unilateral agency action epitomizes the theme of this issue. The authors discuss efforts by the Obama EPA to pull back final rules and permits issued by the Bush EPA without following procedures prescribed in the Clean Air Act and Administrative Procedure Act. They explore the implications of such actions if courts fail to rule against EPA. The next two articles explore emissions trading in the aftermath of the D.C. Circuit’s vacatur of the Clean Air Mercury Rule and second CAIR decision remanding the rule. The first article discusses EPA’s authority to institute such programs and the interaction of trading programs with traditional command-and-control regulations. The second article focuses on the issues confronting EPA as it develops a transport rule to replace CAIR, including interstate trading and the role of cost effectiveness. Both articles provide insight for the design of market-based mechanisms as we debate alternative approaches for reducing greenhouse gases (GHGs) and other pollutants in the coming years. The trading articles are followed by a new source review article on the law that has been established as a result of EPA’s enforcement initiative against electric utilities. The issues discussed include fundamental regulatory issues such as the federal statute of limitations, fair notice, and the role of agency deference in enforcement actions as well as substantive issues such as the routine maintenance, repair, and replacement exclusion and the test for determining emissions increases. The authors explore the implications for electric utilities and other industries as EPA continues to file new complaints against utilities and expands its enforcement efforts to other industries. The next article reviews numerous regulatory developments that are shaping air quality regulation of oil and gas (O&G) production in the West. Topics discussed include implications of a more stringent ozone NAAQS, potential impacts of EPA reinstating its source aggregation policy for defining an O&G major stationary source, challenges to O&G activity on federal public lands, increased state regulation as well as regulation of sources not previously regulated, and potential GHG reporting and regulatory requirements for onshore O&G production. Following the O&G discussion, this issue presents an examination of the evolving regulatory requirements impacting the operation of industrial and commercial boilers, including the pending re-proposal of the Boiler MACT and area source boiler rule, developments concerning GHG monitoring and regulation, the prospect of revisions to the boiler new source Published in Natural Resources & Environment, Volume 24, Number 4, Spring 2010. © 2010 by the American Bar Association. Reproduced with permission. All rights reserved. This information or any portion thereof may not be copied or disseminated in any form or by any means or stored in an electronic database or retrieval system without the express written consent of the American Bar Association. performance standards to address GHG emissions, and the status of the startup, shutdown, and maintenance rules. The boiler article also discusses the new generation of control technology being designed to capture multiple air pollutants more cost-effectively than existing control systems. We have also included an international article that provides insight into implementation of air pollution control law in Europe. The authors explain how Europe fights particle pollution and discuss the deliberations that established new objectives on PM2.5, confirmed the existing PM10 standards, and the law that allows additional time for compliance with PM10 limit values. The next article looks at public nuisance, discusses the constitutional boundaries of this tort, and explores federal versus state common law public nuisance and the limits arising from federal statutory law and from state law. The article proposes limits on the role of public nuisance in today’s world and suggests judicial restraint so that courts are not making public policy. After the public nuisance article is a climate change article that explores the Clean Air Act as a tool to combat global warming. The authors discuss the Clean Air Act’s history of pollution control and consider how each of its provisions can be implemented to reduce GHG emissions. They also discuss GHG emissions targets to reduce carbon dioxide concentrations. Finally, in this issue, we are publishing a streamlined version of an award-winning article from last year’s ABA Section of Environment, Energy, and Resources Law Student Writing Competition. The article explores how the current framework of technology-based permitting imposes obstacles to achieving environmental justice goals and suggests changes to the current permitting system to achieve those goals. The publication of this article is part of our commitment announced in Why Species Matter, NR&E Fall 2007, to engage and support law student and young lawyer involvement in the Section. Gale Lea Rubrecht Issue Editor 2 NR&E Spring 2010 Published in Natural Resources & Environment, Volume 24, Number 4, Spring 2010. © 2010 by the American Bar Association. Reproduced with permission. All rights reserved. This information or any portion thereof may not be copied or disseminated in any form or by any means or stored in an electronic database or retrieval system without the express written consent of the American Bar Association.