神马作文网哪位仙人帮忙翻译下,谢了~~~
来源：学生作业帮 编辑：神马作文网作业帮 分类：英语作业 时间：2024/11/10 15:20:50
哪位仙人帮忙翻译下,谢了~~~
California has adopted regulations requiring new motor vehicles to reduce emissions of greenhouse gases (GHGs), beginning in model year 2009. The Clean Air Act (CAA) generally preempts states from adopting their own emission standards for mobile sources. However, the act allows such standards in California, if the state obtains a waiver of CAA preemption from EPA.
California requested this waiver in 2005, but EPA took until December 19, 2007, to decide that it would deny the request. On that day, EPA Administrator Stephen Johnson wrote California Governor Schwarzenegger to say, “I have decided that EPA will be denying the waiver and have instructed my staff to draft appropriate documents setting forth the rationale for this denial in further detail.” According to press reports, the decision was taken against the unanimous advice of the agency’s technical and legal staffs. On February 29, 2008, the Administrator issued a decision document denying the waiver that will be published in the Federal Register.
Following EPA’s December 19 letter, California and environmental groups petitioned for review in the Ninth Circuit, with multiple states intervening on California’s side. The interest of the intervening states derives from the fact that under the CAA, states other than California may adopt motor vehicle emission standards identical to California’s and avoid CAA preemption if California is granted a waiver. At least 14 states have adopted such regulations.
This report reviews the nature of EPA’s, California’s, and other states’ authority to regulate emissions from mobile sources, the applicability of that authority to GHGs, and issues related to the California waiver request. The conditions for granting or denying a waiver request under CAA are four: whether the state has determined that its standards will be, in the aggregate, at least as protective of public health and welfare as applicable federal standards; whether this determination was arbitrary and capricious; whether the state needs such standards to meet compelling and extraordinary conditions; and whether the standards and accompanying enforcement procedures are consistent with CAA Section 202(a). California appears to have a sound argument that it has met these tests; EPA, however, has decided that climate change is simply beyond the scope of its preemption waiver authority.
California has adopted regulations requiring new motor vehicles to reduce emissions of greenhouse gases (GHGs), beginning in model year 2009. The Clean Air Act (CAA) generally preempts states from adopting their own emission standards for mobile sources. However, the act allows such standards in California, if the state obtains a waiver of CAA preemption from EPA.
California requested this waiver in 2005, but EPA took until December 19, 2007, to decide that it would deny the request. On that day, EPA Administrator Stephen Johnson wrote California Governor Schwarzenegger to say, “I have decided that EPA will be denying the waiver and have instructed my staff to draft appropriate documents setting forth the rationale for this denial in further detail.” According to press reports, the decision was taken against the unanimous advice of the agency’s technical and legal staffs. On February 29, 2008, the Administrator issued a decision document denying the waiver that will be published in the Federal Register.
Following EPA’s December 19 letter, California and environmental groups petitioned for review in the Ninth Circuit, with multiple states intervening on California’s side. The interest of the intervening states derives from the fact that under the CAA, states other than California may adopt motor vehicle emission standards identical to California’s and avoid CAA preemption if California is granted a waiver. At least 14 states have adopted such regulations.
This report reviews the nature of EPA’s, California’s, and other states’ authority to regulate emissions from mobile sources, the applicability of that authority to GHGs, and issues related to the California waiver request. The conditions for granting or denying a waiver request under CAA are four: whether the state has determined that its standards will be, in the aggregate, at least as protective of public health and welfare as applicable federal standards; whether this determination was arbitrary and capricious; whether the state needs such standards to meet compelling and extraordinary conditions; and whether the standards and accompanying enforcement procedures are consistent with CAA Section 202(a). California appears to have a sound argument that it has met these tests; EPA, however, has decided that climate change is simply beyond the scope of its preemption waiver authority.
加利福尼亚采取了要求新的机动车的章程减少放射温室气体(GHGs),开始在式样年2009年.空气清洁法案(CAA)通常先占有从采取他们自己的排放标准的状态流动来源的.然而,如果状态得到CAA先买放弃从EPA的行动在加利福尼亚允许这样标准.
California在2005年请求这放弃,但是EPA采取直到2007年12月19日,决定它将否认请求.在那天,EPA管理员斯蒂芬・约翰逊写加利福尼亚州长Schwarzenegger说,“I决定EPA否认放弃和指示我的职员起草指出这否认的适当的文件理论基础在进一步细节….根据新闻报道的”,决定被采取了反对agency’s技术和法律工作人员的一致同意的忠告.在2008年2月29日,管理员发布了否认在联邦公报将被出版的放弃的一个决定文件.
Following EPA’s 12月19日信件、加利福尼亚和环境小组为在第九条电路的回顾诉请了,当多个状态干预在California’s边.干预的状态的兴趣从在CAA之下,除加利福尼亚之外的状态也许采取机动车排放标准相同与California’s和避免CAA先买的事实获得,如果授予加利福尼亚放弃.至少14个状态采取了这样章程.
This报告回顾调控从流动来源、那当局的适用性对GHGs和问题的放射的EPA’s、California’s和其他states’当局的本质与加利福尼亚放弃请求关连.同意或否认放弃请求的条件在CAA之下是四：状态是否确定了它的标准,在聚集体,至少一样防护公共卫生和福利象可适用的联邦标准; 这决心是否是任意和反复无常的; 状态是否需要这样标准符合强制和非凡情况; 并且标准和伴随执行做法是否与CAA第202部分(a)是一致的.加利福尼亚看上去有一个合理的论据它遇见了这些测试; EPA,然而,决定气候变化是超出它的先买放弃当局的范围之外.
California在2005年请求这放弃,但是EPA采取直到2007年12月19日,决定它将否认请求.在那天,EPA管理员斯蒂芬・约翰逊写加利福尼亚州长Schwarzenegger说,“I决定EPA否认放弃和指示我的职员起草指出这否认的适当的文件理论基础在进一步细节….根据新闻报道的”,决定被采取了反对agency’s技术和法律工作人员的一致同意的忠告.在2008年2月29日,管理员发布了否认在联邦公报将被出版的放弃的一个决定文件.
Following EPA’s 12月19日信件、加利福尼亚和环境小组为在第九条电路的回顾诉请了,当多个状态干预在California’s边.干预的状态的兴趣从在CAA之下,除加利福尼亚之外的状态也许采取机动车排放标准相同与California’s和避免CAA先买的事实获得,如果授予加利福尼亚放弃.至少14个状态采取了这样章程.
This报告回顾调控从流动来源、那当局的适用性对GHGs和问题的放射的EPA’s、California’s和其他states’当局的本质与加利福尼亚放弃请求关连.同意或否认放弃请求的条件在CAA之下是四：状态是否确定了它的标准,在聚集体,至少一样防护公共卫生和福利象可适用的联邦标准; 这决心是否是任意和反复无常的; 状态是否需要这样标准符合强制和非凡情况; 并且标准和伴随执行做法是否与CAA第202部分(a)是一致的.加利福尼亚看上去有一个合理的论据它遇见了这些测试; EPA,然而,决定气候变化是超出它的先买放弃当局的范围之外.