Harry Blackmun

“ Because the statute does not reveal any congressional intent to bar enforcement of an existing SIP if EPA delays unreasonably in acting on a proposed SIP revision, we agree with the Court of Appeals that such an enforcement action is not barred.
The language of the Clean Air Act plainly states that EPA may bring an action for penalties or injunctive relief whenever a person is in violation of any requirement of an "applicable implementation plan." ”

“ We are not persuaded. The Administrator is to approve the proposed revision if he determines that "it"-that is, the revision meets the substantive requirements imposed on a SIP by § 110 (a) (2) . There is no requirement that "he"-that is, the Administrator-meet the deadline of that section. Petitioner's reading, moreover, makes nonsense of the further requirement in § 110 (a) (3) that the Administrator find that the proposed revision "has been adopted by the State after reasonable notice and public hearings." ”

“ For other examples of explicit deadlines in the Clean Air Act, see § 110 (c) (1) (6-month deadline for imposition of federal implementation "plan (or revision thereof) ") ; § 113 (d) (2) (90-day deadline for review of state-issued delayed compliance order) . Since the statutory language does not expressly impose a 4-month deadline and Congress expressly included other deadlines in the statute, it seems likely that Congress acted intentionally in omitting the 4-month deadline in § 110 (a) (3) (A) . ”