In a previous post, we reported on the Climate Risk Disclosure Act of 2021 (the “Act’) being placed on list of all bills reported from committee and eligible for House floor action, some sweeping changes required by that Act, and the Act’s uncertain future in the Senate.
This Part II focuses on the effect
On July 13, 2021, the Pennsylvania Environmental Quality Board approved a rulemaking to establish a program to limit the CO2 emissions from fossil fuel-fired electric generating units (EGU) located in the Commonwealth.
The stated purpose of the final-form rulemaking is “to reduce anthropogenic emissions of CO2, a greenhouse gas (GHG) and major contributor to climate
On Wednesday, April 28, the U.S. Senate voted to effectively reinstate Obama-era methane regulations by approving a resolution nullifying the Trump-era methane emission rule “Oil and Natural Gas Sector: Emission Standards for New, Reconstructed, and Modified Sources Review.” The September 2020 Trump Administration rule rolled back Obama-era oil and gas emission rules by rescinding methane
On Earth Day, April 22, 2021, President Biden announced that the U.S. will aim to cut carbon emissions in half by the year 2030 compared to 2005 levels. This is significantly higher even than goals established by President Obama during his tenure. The virtual Leaders Summit on Climate where the announcement was made took place on Thursday and Friday and was attended by 40 other world leaders. The U.S. rejoined the Paris climate agreement in Biden’s early days in office, and this announcement drives towards addressing its goals.
The administration has not yet rolled out a specific plan for how the U.S. will meet this goal. However, we can expect that the reduction efforts will touch almost every industry in one way or another with terminology such as “economy-wide” and “multiple pathways” used to describe reaching the target. Additionally, a Fact Sheet released by the administration describes various ambitious initiatives across many sectors including:Continue Reading Biden’s pledge to cut U.S. emissions signals increased climate change regulation and other implications for industry
Federal agencies aren’t required to hand over draft documents related to the harm an EPA rule would pose to endangered plants and animals, the Supreme Court ruled in U.S. Fish and Wildlife Serv. v. Sierra Club , U.S., No. 19-547.
In a 7-2 decision, and the first majority ruling led by Justice Amy Coney
The EPA is moving towards establishing a drinking water standard for PFOA and PFOS, and has stated that it is considering avenues for regulating additional groups of PFAS under the Safe Drinking Water Act (SDWA) as well. On February 22, 2021, the EPA announced two actions under SDWA to address PFAS.
First, the agency reissued the final regulatory determination to implement a National Primary Drinking Water Regulation (NPDWR) for PFOS and PFOA (the “Determination”). This Determination is a continuation of an intended action under the Trump administration, but indicates the Biden administration intends to continue to move forward. The Determination also states that the EPA is considering the regulation of additional PFAS chemicals.Continue Reading EPA indicates intention to regulate certain PFAS in drinking water
On January 19, 2021, in a 2-1 decision, the D.C. Circuit Court vacated the Trump administration’s 2019 Affordable Clean Energy (ACE) Rule and remanded it to the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA). The decision offers a strong statement about EPA’s breadth of authority to regulate greenhouse gases (GHGs) under the Clean Air Act (CAA) and, if its position is upheld, clears the way for the Biden administration to regulate power plants.
The Affordable Clean Energy Rule
The EPA promulgated the ACE Rule in 2019 under the CAA, replacing the Obama administration’s 2015 Clean Power Plan (CPP). Both rules sought to reduce GHG emissions from the power sector; but where the CPP implemented broader industry-wide mechanisms, the ACE Rule limited reduction efforts to the actual source power plants.
The 2015 CPP offered “beyond the fenceline” tools for states to reduce emissions by replacing fossil fuels with renewable energy sources and participating in emissions credit-trading programs; however, in February 2016 the U.S. Supreme Court stayed the implementation of the CPP pending litigation in the D.C. Circuit. During the stay and subsequent freeze of litigation, the Trump administration rescinded the CPP and promulgated the ACE Rule.
In promulgating the ACE Rule, the Trump EPA took an alternative view of the CAA than the Obama EPA and reasoned that the CAA expressly limited the EPA’s power to only “at the source” emissions reduction options, such as heat rate improvement technologies. As a result, the Trump administration removed all of the CPP’s “beyond the fenceline” options and limited emissions restrictions to those applied directly to power plants.Continue Reading The fall of Trump’s Affordable Clean Energy Rule and the strengthened EPA authority to regulate greenhouse gases
On January 5, 2021, the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (the Corps) released the final version of a rule revamping certain nationwide permits (NWPs) under the Clean Water Act (CWA). The CWA authorizes the Corps to issue general permits authorizing categories of activities that have minimal individual and cumulative adverse environmental effects. These permits remain in effect for no more than five years, at which point the Corps must renew the permits.
This rule reissues and modifies 12 nationwide permits (NWPs) and issues four new NWPs. Of these 16 NWPs, the most impactful changes are to NWP 12.Continue Reading U.S. Army Corps of Engineers revamps Clean Water Act Nationwide Permit 12
Reed Smith’s U.S. based environmental team recently held a CLE webinar on what US environmental, health and safety legal and regulatory changes we can expect in 2021. The webinar provided an insightful discussion on environmental policy and topics including:
Organizations closely scrutinizing PFAS, like the Environmental Working Group, are touting loudly that the Biden administration will address PFAS and speculating on how the Biden Administration might approach the chemicals by setting enforceable drinking water limits, designating the substances as hazardous and finding PFAS substitutes for consumer items.
Under President Trump, EPA touted its