On Friday, EPA
announced that it was reconsidering part of the Utility MACT
rule. As part of the reconsideration, EPA will stay the
effectiveness of the new source emission standards in the rule for
three months.
EPA stated that:
We anticipate that he focus of the reconsideration rulemaking
will be a review of issues that are largely technical in
nature. Our expectation is that under the reconsideration rule
new sources will be required to install the latest and most
effective pollution controls and will be able to monitor compliance
with the new standards with proven monitoring methods.
We intend to expedite this reconsideration rulemaking and
complete the rulemaking by March of 2013.
So, the burning (as it were) question in DC is how broad the
reconsideration will prove. Will it affect rules for existing
sources? Will it truly be technical in nature? Is it all
just intended to push this issue past the November
elections?
I'm guessing that the reconsideration will not have a
significant impact on the scope of the rule, but that it will
address issues necessary, in EPA's mind, to bulletproof the
rule against judicial review. It does happen to be mighty
convenient that proceedings on the rule will be deferred until
after November.
To view Foley Hoag's Law and the Environment Blog
please click
here
The content of this article is intended to provide a general
guide to the subject matter. Specialist advice should be sought
about your specific circumstances.
Specific Questions relating to this article should be addressed directly to the author.
On April 23, 2013, the D.C. Circuit ruled that the Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) has the power under the Clean Water Act (CWA) to retroactively veto a section 404 dredge and fill permit "whenever" it makes a determination about certain adverse effects, even years after the U.S. Army Corps of Engineers (Corps) has granted the permit to an applicant.
The D.C. Circuit Court of Appeals restored EPA's authority to withdraw the specification of streams for the disposal of mountaintop mining wastes – years after the Army Corps had issued the permit containing the specification.
After being taken to task by states and its own Inspector General for lack of final guidance on Vapor Intrusion, EPA has just released draft guidance documents for hazardous substances and petroleum products for comment.
California's cap-and-trade program mandates that certain covered entities acquire allowances for each metric ton of greenhouse gas (GHG) they emit during specified compliance periods.
Last week, the European Parliament rejected a proposal to reduce the quantity of greenhouse gas (GHG) emissions allowances in order to fix a supply-demand imbalance in the European Union Emissions Trading System (EU ETS).
Last Friday, EPA announced release of its draft proposal to revise the effluent guidelines and standards for the steam electric power generating industry, last revised in 1982.
On April 19, 2013, EPA released the proposed "Effluent Limitations Guidelines and Standards for the Steam Electric Power Generating Point Source Category" (Steam Electric ELG). The proposed Steam Electric ELG would revise the existing technology-based effluent limitations guidelines [40 CFR 423] for most steam electric power plants and their discharges to U.S. waters or POTWs.
In a decision that should not have come as a surprise to anyone, the 9th Circuit Court of Appeals ruled on Thursday, in "Conservation Northwest v. Sherman", that the Bureau of Land Management and other agencies implementing the Northwest Forest Plan could not amend the NFP.
Twitter
Facebook
Digg 
