This site uses cookies to improve your experience. To help us insure we adhere to various privacy regulations, please select your country/region of residence. If you do not select a country, we will assume you are from the United States. Select your Cookie Settings or view our Privacy Policy and Terms of Use.
Cookie Settings
Cookies and similar technologies are used on this website for proper function of the website, for tracking performance analytics and for marketing purposes. We and some of our third-party providers may use cookie data for various purposes. Please review the cookie settings below and choose your preference.
Used for the proper function of the website
Used for monitoring website traffic and interactions
Cookie Settings
Cookies and similar technologies are used on this website for proper function of the website, for tracking performance analytics and for marketing purposes. We and some of our third-party providers may use cookie data for various purposes. Please review the cookie settings below and choose your preference.
Strictly Necessary: Used for the proper function of the website
Performance/Analytics: Used for monitoring website traffic and interactions
In 2011, in AEP v. CT , the Supreme Court said this: We hold that the CleanAirAct and the EPA actions it authorizes displace any federal common law right to seek abatement of carbon-dioxide emissions from fossil-fuel fired power plants. 410 (2011). Connecticut , 564 U. Post, at 20.
The bench trial took place last month in the state capitol, Helena, where 16 youth plaintiffs ages 5 to 22 made the case that Montana’s unwavering promotion of fossil fuels violates the state constitution’s guarantee to a “clean and healthful environment.” This is not supposed to be a town hall or a popularity contest,” he said.
497 (2007), the Supreme Court held that greenhouse gases are “pollutants” under the CleanAirAct but left open the specific question of whether greenhouse gases could be regulated under the PSD Program. EPA, 549 U.S. For more information on the announcement, see the EPA New Source Review.
Bedrock federal environmental, health, and safety laws have gaping loopholes and exemptions that allow radioactive oil and gas materials to go virtually unregulated, including the Resource Conservation and Recovery Act that governs waste management, the Atomic Energy Act, the Clean Water Act, the Safe Drinking Water Act, and the CleanAirAct.
By: Lesley Foxhall Pietras On August 8, 2011, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) published a far-reaching CleanAirAct rule intended to address the interstate transport of sulfur dioxide (SO2) and nitrogen oxides (NOx) from upwind to downwind states. See 76 Fed. 48208 (Aug. Tribune, Sept.
Moreno: On August 23, 2011, the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) published in the Federal Register a proposed rule that significantly expands the applicable air emissions standards for the Oil and Natural Gas Sector. The public comments period for the proposal ends on October 24, 2011. By Carlos J. See 76 Fed. 52738 (Aug.
However, these standards were vacated by the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit after the Court found EPA’s definition of “commercial or industrial waste” conflicted with the language of the CleanAirAct in NRDC v. 01-1537, 2011 U.S. 20, 2011). EPA , 489 F. 3d 1250 (D.C.
Moreno On May 3, 2011, the U.S. Under the CleanAirAct (CAA), states have authority to implement the federal National Ambient Air Quality Standards (NAAQS) if the state submits, and EPA approves, a State Implementation plan (SIP). The interim final rule was set to expire on April 30, 2011. by: Carlos J.
Wiegand On August 21, 2012, the United States Court of Appeals for the District of Columbia Circuit vacated EPA’s Cross-State Air Pollution Rule (CSAPR). EPA issued CSAPR in August 2011 pursuant to Sec.
This level of forced retirements is far in excess of any prior EPA projections of plant shutdowns resulting from implementation of a CleanAirAct rulemaking. For example, EPA projected a total of just 4,700 MW of coal capacity retirements under the 2012 Mercury and Air Toxics Standards rule.
By Jillian Marullo House Bill 788, signed into law on June 14, 2013, authorizes the Texas Commission on Environmental Quality (“TCEQ”) to regulate emissions of carbon dioxide and five other greenhouse gases (“GHG”) “[t]o the extent that greenhouse gas emissions require authorization under federal law.”
is a shift for this historically CleanAirAct-friendly Court. The Court has a history of groundbreaking decisions in the realm of environmental law and the lesser-publicized. EPA) is one for the CleanAirAct (CAA) record books. Mercury and Air Toxics or MATS rule. ,” the regulation at issue in the.
Background Section 112(n)(4) of the CleanAirAct, 42 U.S.C. § See Lesley Foxhall Pietras , Air Permitting: Sixth Circuit Vacates Single Stationary Source Aggregation Determination for E&P Facilities Due to EPA’s Unreasonable Interpretation of Adjacent , The Energy Law Blog, Aug. 16, 2012.
Each month, Arnold & Porter and the Sabin Center for Climate Change Law collect and summarize developments in climate-related litigation, which we also add to our U.S. The plan must specifically address how EPA will consider the effects of CleanAirAct regulation on the coal industry. and non-U.S. McCarthy , No.
Over the last 13 months, Texas and Florida have enacted laws that block localities from issuing heat protection rules for workers. Such smoke is not covered by the CleanAirAct , and there is growing evidence that it is eroding decades of gains in the nation’s air quality under the act. But the U.S.
Million For Drilling Violations In Greene, Clearfield Counties [January 2018] -- DEP Assesses CNX Gas Drilling $433,500 For Violations In Greene County [January 2018] -- DEP Issues Cabot Oil & Gas $99,000 Penalty For Numerous Well Site Air Quality Violations In Susquehanna County [December 2017] -- EHB Issues $1.1
VW Escapes Multiple Fines In EU Over Emissions Scandal Law 360 PaulaR Thu, 01/04/2024 - 17:26 Thursday, September 14, 2023 Read more Matthew Perlman Europe's top court ruled Wednesday that Volkswagen should not have to pay a €5 million ($5.3 Agrees to Pay Over $1 Million for CleanAirAct Violation U.S.
Oliver Schmidt had previously pleaded guilty to violating the CleanAirAct and conspiracy to defraud the US government in August for his role in Dieselgate, where VW was found to have used hidden software to hide the fact that many of its cars weren’t meeting emissions standards. Volkswagen of America, Inc.
Oliver Schmidt had previously pleaded guilty to violating the CleanAirAct and conspiracy to defraud the US government in August for his role in Dieselgate, where VW was found to have used hidden software to hide the fact that many of its cars weren’t meeting emissions standards. Volkswagen of America, Inc.
Oliver Schmidt had previously pleaded guilty to violating the CleanAirAct and conspiracy to defraud the US government in August for his role in Dieselgate, where VW was found to have used hidden software to hide the fact that many of its cars weren’t meeting emissions standards. Volkswagen of America, Inc.
Oliver Schmidt had previously pleaded guilty to violating the CleanAirAct and conspiracy to defraud the US government in August for his role in Dieselgate, where VW was found to have used hidden software to hide the fact that many of its cars weren’t meeting emissions standards. Volkswagen of America, Inc.
Oliver Schmidt had previously pleaded guilty to violating the CleanAirAct and conspiracy to defraud the US government in August for his role in Dieselgate, where VW was found to have used hidden software to hide the fact that many of its cars weren’t meeting emissions standards. Volkswagen of America, Inc.
Oliver Schmidt had previously pleaded guilty to violating the CleanAirAct and conspiracy to defraud the US government in August for his role in Dieselgate, where VW was found to have used hidden software to hide the fact that many of its cars weren’t meeting emissions standards. Volkswagen of America, Inc.
Oliver Schmidt had previously pleaded guilty to violating the CleanAirAct and conspiracy to defraud the US government in August for his role in Dieselgate, where VW was found to have used hidden software to hide the fact that many of its cars weren’t meeting emissions standards. Volkswagen of America, Inc.
Oliver Schmidt had previously pleaded guilty to violating the CleanAirAct and conspiracy to defraud the US government in August for his role in Dieselgate, where VW was found to have used hidden software to hide the fact that many of its cars weren’t meeting emissions standards. Volkswagen of America, Inc.
EPA proposed a rule in June of 2021 under its TSCA Section 8(a)(7) authority to collect information on any PFAS manufactured since 2011, including information on uses, production volumes, disposal, exposures, and hazards. Evaluate whether PFAS Compounds should be Designated “Hazardous Air Pollutants” under the CleanAirAct.
Critically, the California local jurisdictions filed their cases in state courts, relying on longstanding state common law principles such as public nuisance and trespass as the legal basis for their claims. In 2011, a unanimous Supreme Court held in American Electric Power Co.
This track record is even more troubling considering that the CleanAirAct requires that only science can be used when setting the standard for major ambient air pollutants, something I covered in depth in a previous blog post. The Obama administration continued this ugly tradition.
Those standards, which my UCLA Law colleague-turned Chief Counsel of NHTSA, Ann Carlson, wrote about in 2011 , were designed to have cars hitting an average fuel economy of 54.5 mpg by 2025. A total of ten lawsuits ended up as a consolidated action in the D.C.
He created the Marcellus Shale Advisory Commission in 2011. Released from a lot of federal oversight, it left this big, blank slate for states to regulate the industry in whatever manner suited them. Corbett, most simply created the appearance of taking a look at all the issues surrounding shale gas operations, including health.
The bill also would establish a grant program under the Safe Drinking Water Act for assistance to community water systems affected by PFAS to pay for capital costs associated with treatment technologies. The House bill ( H.R. 33926 (June 28, 2021).]] 31225 (June 11, 2021).]] The comment period on the ANPRM closed on July 26, 2021.
Each month, Arnold & Porter Kaye Scholer LLP (APKS) and the Sabin Center for Climate Change Law collect and summarize developments in climate-related litigation, which we also add to our U.S. and non-U.S. climate litigation charts. If you know of any cases we have missed, please email us at columbiaclimate at gmail dot com.
Each month, Arnold & Porter and the Sabin Center for Climate Change Law collect and summarize developments in climate-related litigation, which we also add to our U.S. Montana Federal Court Vacated Nationwide Permit Due to Corps of Engineers Failure to Initiate Consultation Under Endangered Species Act. and non-U.S. 120,436 (Kan.
Each month, Arnold & Porter and the Sabin Center for Climate Change Law collect and summarize developments in climate-related litigation, which we also add to our U.S. First, the court found that Exxon failed to show that federal common law justified removal, even if it might provide a defense. and non-U.S.
EPA’s 2024 Power Plant Rules EPA is required to regulate power plant emissions under Section 111 of the CleanAirAct. 410, 426 (2011)). In this case, EPA is doing exactly what the CleanAirAct directs it to do: regulating greenhouse gas emissions from individual sources using a technology-based approach.
According to the nonpartisan National Association of Attorneys General, a state attorney general’s job is to represent the public interest—not private, special interests—by, among other things, “enforcing federal and state environmental laws.” The case ultimately wound up in the US Supreme Court, which, in its controversial West Virginia v.
Each month, Arnold & Porter and the Sabin Center for Climate Change Law collect and summarize developments in climate-related litigation, which we also add to our U.S. First Circuit Certified State Law Preemption Questions in Case Challenging Local Ordinance Prohibiting Crude Oil Loading at Harbor. and non-U.S. 19-50178 (5th Cir.
Each month, Arnold & Porter and the Sabin Center for Climate Change Law collect and summarize developments in climate-related litigation, which we also add to our U.S. The cities also have filed a motion to amend their complaints to withdraw federal common law public nuisance claims that they added after the district court denied remand.
The risk evaluation’s conclusions that consumer uses do not present an unreasonable risk could preempt state-level restrictions on 1,4-dioxane in personal care, cosmetic, and cleaning products such as restrictions enacted by New York in 2019.[[N:N.Y. Law §§ 35-0105, 37-0115.]]. 116-92 , § 7351, 133 Stat.
In this scandal, the National Academies of Science found that Lubchenco violated its code of conduct by accepting an article into the Proceedings of the National Academies of Science that relied on outdated data and failing to recuse herself from reviewing the article because of the authors is her brother-in-law.
Try explaining that to your new Peruvian sister-in-law. as a pollutant at all to the Clean Power Plan, which has no chance of clemency before its swift execution at some point in 2017. [14]. that it should “Amend the CleanAirAct to clarify that it never delegated to the EPA the authority to enact climate policies through the Act.”.
We organize all of the trending information in your field so you don't have to. Join 12,000+ users and stay up to date on the latest articles your peers are reading.
You know about us, now we want to get to know you!
Let's personalize your content
Let's get even more personalized
We recognize your account from another site in our network, please click 'Send Email' below to continue with verifying your account and setting a password.
Let's personalize your content