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
The issue was whether state plans under the CleanAirAct only need to prevent violation of national air quality standards, or whether they must prevent deterioration in areas where the air is already cleaner than the standards. EPA (2012 ). International Harvester Co. Ruckelshaus (1973). This is a D.C.
“We commend Pennsylvania’s efforts to meet their goals and remain committed to working alongside our partners by promoting and delivering practices that provide healthy, cleanair to all Americans." This action does not redesignate the Allegheny County Area to attainment for the 2012 annual PM2.5 standard through 2035.
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
EPA Supreme Court ruling which held that greenhouse gas emissions are unambiguously air pollutants covered by the CleanAirAct. Attacks on the Endangerment Finding and EPAs CleanAirAct authority from industry interests are nothing new. Court of AppealsD.C.
The 2009 endangerment finding has played a foundational role in CleanAirAct regulation of GHG emissions from both mobile and stationary sources. EPA (2012). As the court noted, the CleanAirAct only requires a finding that the air pollution at issue may reasonably be anticipated to endanger public health or welfare.
Understanding the Endangerment Finding Two requirements must be met before a substance can be regulated under the CleanAirAct. First, it has to qualify as an air pollutant. Circuit in a 2012 decision, Citizens for Responsible Regulation [CARE] v. EPA reversed the Bush EPAs interpretation of the CleanAirAct.
This long struggle to get cleaner air in California is one of necessity; pollution from Californias millions of cars and trucks, combined with its unique climate and geography have led to the state having consistently the worst air pollution in the nation.
The passage of the 1970 CleanAirAct and its major 1990 Amendments don’t show up at all in a graph of coal use. Coal began to really plunge in 2012, three years before Obama’s Clean Power Plan was issued. By 2012 about half of 1980 employment had already been lost, nearly all in Appalachia.
As earlier as 2012, studies evaluated the applicability of greenhouse gas emissions trading programs to agriculture. In the United States, we already have a model for regulating emissions under 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.
On August 21, 2012, in a 2-1 decision, the D.C. The CSAPR sets limits on sulfur dioxide and nitrogen oxides from power plants in 28 upwind states in the eastern part of the country. The two consolidated cases the Supreme Court agreed to hear are EPA v.
By Lesley Foxhall Pietras On October 5, 2012, EPA filed a petition for en banc rehearing of the D.C. Circuit’s August 21, 2012 panel decision vacating EPA’s Cross-State Air Pollution Rule (CSAPR).
By Lesley Foxhall Pietras On August 7, 2012, in a 2-1 decision in Summit Petroleum Corp. When making single stationary source determinations without the protection of the non-aggregation provision in Section 112 of the CleanAirAct, 42 U.S.C. See Summit Petroleum Corp. Environmental Protection Agency, No. at 15 (6th Cir.
One of the most significant air quality challenges in the Basin is reducing emissions of the ozone precursor nitrogen oxides (NO x ) to meet the ozone standard attainment deadlines. According to the 2016 AQMP, mobile sources contributed about 88% of total NO x emissions in the Basin in 2012.
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). By Stephen W. EPA issued CSAPR in August 2011 pursuant to Sec.
Moreno On August 16, 2012, EPA published a new rule that revises the NESHAP Subpart HH standards for the oil and gas industry. The Final Rule wassigned on April 17, 2012, but publication in the Federal Register did not occur until August 16, 2012, making the rule effective on October 15, 2012. 16, 2012.
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.
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. EPA , 489 F. 3d 1250 (D.C. Johnson , 444 F. 2d 46 (D.D.C.
Moreno On August 13, 2012, the United States Court of Appeals for the Fifth Circuit vacated the Environmental Protection Agency’s (“EPA”) disapproval of revisions to the Texas State Implementation Plan (“SIP”) dealing with the state’s Flexible Permits program. 13, 2012) ( quoting in part from 42 U.S.C. State of Texas v. 7410(a)(1).
Circuit also rejected EPA’s argument that the court did not have authority to review stays issued under Section 307(d)(7)(D) of the CleanAirAct. Fourth Circuit Said West Virginia District Court Lacked Jurisdiction to Consider Coal Companies’ CleanAirAct Jobs Study Lawsuit. DECISIONS AND SETTLEMENTS.
The federal CleanAirAct (CAA) was enacted in 1970 and amended in 1977 and 1990. EPA regulations under the CleanAirAct for controlling mercury, sulfur dioxide, ozone and other pollutants have contributed to the employment decline. Source: US DOE/EIA.
In what may be considered a warning shot to overzealous federal prosecutors looking to obtain criminal convictions under the CleanAirAct (“CAA”) or the Migratory Bird Treaty Act (“MBTA”), the Court of Appeals reversed criminal convictions against Citgo related to violations of both Acts at its Corpus Christi refinery.
with violating the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA) by paying $60 million in bribes to intermediaries of an Iranian government official who then exercised his influence to help the company obtain valuable contracts to develop significant oil and gas fields in Iran. SEC Charges Total S.A. Total to pay $2.9 agreed to pay $2.9
with violating the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA) by paying $60 million in bribes to intermediaries of an Iranian government official who then exercised his influence to help the company obtain valuable contracts to develop significant oil and gas fields in Iran. SEC Charges Total S.A. Total to pay $2.9 agreed to pay $2.9
with violating the Foreign Corrupt Practices Act (FCPA) by paying $60 million in bribes to intermediaries of an Iranian government official who then exercised his influence to help the company obtain valuable contracts to develop significant oil and gas fields in Iran. SEC Charges Total S.A. Total to pay $2.9 agreed to pay $2.9
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